118 THE JOURNAL O^ BOTANY 



Sandy cart ruts, Shouldham, W.Norfolk, v.c. 28, June 24th, 1914.— 

 J. E. Little. A forma, I believe. Dr. E. J. Salisbury tells me he 

 has grown this under careful cultural conditions, and that the 

 offspring from seeds are quite large plants. — C. E. Moss. 



Orobanche minor Sm. On clover, near Great Wymondley, 

 Herts., v.c. 20, June 22nd, 1913. In 1913 the plant was in great 

 abundance in a number of clover fields near Hitchin. In one 

 locality on the G.N.Ey. it appears year after year on T. ijratense, 

 Crepis virens and other plants. One w^as growing on Picris 

 hieracioides, which is plentiful at this spot. In Norfolk, near 

 Cockley Cley, in light sandy soil, I was able last year to get up 

 uninjured two plants with their hosts — Eroclium cicutarmm, and 

 Echium vulgare. — J. E. Little. 



Polygonum Convolvulus L., var. subalatum V. Hall. Weed in 

 Eectory garden, Grey Abbey, Co. Down, September, 1914. It 

 seems to be the common form here; leaves longer and narrower 

 than in the type. — C. H. Waddell. Yes, this is var. subalatum 

 Lejeune & Courtois Comp. Fl. Belg. ii. 59 (1831), which is an 

 earlier name for var. 'pseudo-dumetorum H. C. Wats. It is the 

 P. Convolvulus L. /3. of Bromfield's Fl. Vect., p. 435 (1856), and is 

 mentioned in the Phytologist, iii., p. 765 (1818). — E. G. Baker. 



Populus alba x tremula ^ [ = P. canescens Sm.). Clack Mill, 

 Westbury-on-Trym, W. Glos., v.c. 34, February 27th & July 24th, 

 1914. — Ida M.Koper. This is certainly P. canescens Sm., but there 

 is no evidence of its being a hybrid between P.aZ6aandP. ^7'e?7m/(X, 

 and it occurs frequently in localities where the other species are 

 not found. The leaves on the long shoots are tomentose beneath 

 like these, the lower leaves being glabrous beneath. — A. B. Jackson. 



Ceratophyllum submersum L. Pond, Castlemorton, Worcs., v.c. 

 37, September 22nd, 1914. — A. J. Crosfield. Yes ; fruit very typical. 

 Near tidal waters, where alone I have seen it, the habit is stouter 

 and denser than in these specimens. — E. S. Marshall. By the 

 name Dr. Moss gives this, I suppose he places it under C. demersicm; 

 continental authors, on the other hand, place it under C. submersum. 

 C. submersitm L., var. apiculatum Garcke = C. apicidatitm Cham, 

 in LinncBa, iv., ex Schumann Fl. Brasil. iii. 3, 719 (1891). But 

 this plant must be placed under submersum (if the two species 

 submersum and demersum are kept separate). It has not the fruit of 

 C.demersum. . . . — A.Bennett. C.demersumIj.,\'M. apiculatum 

 (Chamisso). There are (so far as my observations go) three distinct 

 British forms of Ceratophyllum, namely, (1) C.demersum L. (sensu 

 str.), (2) C. submersum L. (sensu str.), and (3) an intermediate form, 

 C. apiculatum Chamisso. Though intermediate, the distribution 

 of this last is against its being considered a hybrid. Authorities 

 differ as to how these three plants should be arranged. Some 

 reduce all three forms to a single species, C. demersum L. emend. 

 Others retain two species, C. demersum and C. sicbmersum. Of 

 these, some place the intermediate plant under C. demersum, whilst 

 others place it under C. submersum. Still others retain each as a 

 species. I follow the majority of authors of recent continental 

 floras in placing the intermediate plant as a variety of C demersum. 

 — C. E. Moss. 



