78 NOTES ON SOME BRITISH SEDGES. 



C. pelia 0. F. Lang. On an Altnaharra sheet of mine, so named 

 by Mr. Bennett in 1887 (though I beUeve that he has since altered 

 his opinion) and endorsed by Mr. Beeby, Herr Kiikenthal writes : — 

 " Carex jjelia is a hybrid between C. livida and C. panicea. I possess 

 original specimens, which differ widely from the present plant. 

 This decidedly belongs to C. panicea L. ; it is true that the fruit 

 shows a certain amount of resemblance to C. lie Ida.'' Prof. 

 Babiugton had written to me, in 1888: "I think your plant is 

 far too near panicea.'" The Flora Danica plate of C. pelia suggests 

 a hybrid origin ; but the only Scandinavian specimen that I have 

 yet seen, labelled " C. pelia — panicea var. prope Cljristiania, 1852 in 

 palude, J. Andersson," looks fertile, and is not very far removed, 

 I think, from the Sutherlandshire form. C. livida should certainly 

 occur in the north or north-east of Scotland. 



C. FRiGiDA Syme (non AUiooi). " Possibly a distinct species, 

 between Carex frigida and Carex hinervis, of which latter it has the 

 rhizome, leaves, and colour. It further differs from C. frigida by 

 the large S' spikelet, and by the margins of the utricle not being 

 toothed." — G. K. This is a valuable independent confirmation of 

 the view taken by Rev. E. F. Linton (see Journ. Bot. 1898, 

 pp. 41-44). My sheet is derived from Dr. Boswell's garden at 

 Bahnuto. 



C. DisTANs L. A dwarf plant, parallel to C. extensa var. pumila 

 Andersson, which occurred (the type being absent) on the coast of 

 Inver Bay, near Tain, E. Ross, in 1891, is identified by Herr 

 Kiikenthal as var. litoralis Andersson. 



C. FULVA Good. Whatever opinion may be held as to the 

 proper name for the species which we have lately been so calling 

 in this country, it is, I think, evident that 1714 and 1714 b of the 

 London Catalogue, ed. 9, really represent only one plant, viz. the 

 C. Hornschuchiana of Hoppe. I sent the whole of my mounted 

 specimens to Herr Kiikenthal, who replied as follows : — *' Good- 

 enough's figure represents a Carex fiava x Hornschuchiana; his 

 descLiption gives only a single station for C.fulva. This leads me 

 to express the supposition that C. fulva Good, is, after all, not 

 identical with Carex Hornschuchiana, frequent in England as well 

 [as with us] , but represents the hybrid /^m x Horiisch. Possibly 

 Goodenougli combined C. Hornsch. with C. distans, a confusion 

 which might easily take place." I have consulted Goodenough's 

 original description in Trans. Linn. Soc. ii. (1791), pp. 177-8 and 

 210, tab. 20. Two specimens are there figured; the smaller (right- 

 hand) one is C. fiava x Hornschuchiana for certain, the larger 

 being probably that hybrid, but open to some doubt. Goodenough 

 quotes for his plant Flora Danica, tab. 1049 (" C\ distans"), which 

 Lange, in the Nomenclator Flora Danica;, refers to HornscJiuchiana ; 

 if so, it is a very indifferent representation, the colouring being 

 much too fulvous, as in C. xanthocarpa Degland. The very name 

 '^ fulva" suggests fiava X Hornschuchiana, and is by no means apt 

 for the true species, which has brown, not tawny or reddish glumes. 

 The following extract from Goodenough's paper decidedly supports 



