Remarks on the Floristic Results. 63 
POLYGONACEE. 
Rumex acetosella L. 
The northern form (var. acetoselloides Balansa) was found: at 
Foulshaw Moss near Grange (North Lancashire) and in a sloping 
grass-field near Greenfield (West Yorkshire), while the plant from 
near the reservoir of Greenfield was var. angiocarpus (Murb.) as were 
specimens from Perranwell (Cornwall) and Potter Heigham 
(Norfolk). A plant from the riverside of the Tay at Perth is an 
angiocarpus which verges somewhat into acetoselloides. 
Rumex obtusifolius L. X sanguineus L. (nemorosus Schrad.) 
This hybrid was also found on the riverbank along the Tay at 
Perth, as well as in Cressbrook Dale (Derbyshire). 
JUNCACEE. 
Funcus bufonius L. var. ranarius (Song. & Perrier). 
Druce (l.c. New Phyt., pp. 321 and 327) on the authority of 
Professor P. Graebner has taken the form growing in the sand- 
dunes of Southport as a separate species Juncus ranarius Song. & 
Perrier, and he adds that the “ monographer of the genus,” the late 
Professor F. Buchenau, held the same view. The latter supposition 
is hardly correct; in Buchenau’s last work, his monograph of the 
Juncacez in Engler’s Das Pflanzenreich (published 1906) we do not 
find $. ranarius as a species, nor even as a variety. He has a var. 
halophilus Fernald & Buchenau (Rhodora VI, 1904, p. 39) of which 
the diagnosis in Das Pflanzenreich, Juncace (p. 106) runs as 
follows: Flores ultimi sepe approximati. Tepala externa acuta, 
acutata vel subulato-acutata, fructu fere semper longiora, interna 
breviora obtusa vel rotundato-obtusa, interdum mucronata, fructum 
subzquantia; semina truncata (the localities given are Quebec, 
north-eastern part of U.S., Sicilia and Catania); and under this 
variety he says: forms intermediz var. halophili et genuini haud 
raro occurrunt, pracipue in locis salsis. Pro exemplo: ¥. ranarius 
Songeon & Perrier: tepala interna fructum subzequantia vel paullo 
superantia, acuta vel obtusa et semina ovoidea praebet (Ascherson 
u. Graebner, Synopsis II, 2, 1904, p. 423 [spec.]) From this we 
must draw the conclusion that the best authority on Juncacee, 
Professor Buchenau, did not consider the salt-marsh and sea-coast 
form of ¥. bufonius as a separate species. And I think he was 
quite right in his view; the differences between the typical $. 
bufonius and the $. ranarius are only very minute, and it is easy to 
find specimens in which some characters are of ranarius and others 
of bufonius proper. I do not doubt that it will be possible to keep 
the form true by breeding, but this argument does not satisfy me, 
as I am sure that in Func, bufonius, as in most of the common and 
widely distributed species, there are numerous “ elementary species” 
which will all keep true when cultivated. In the present stage of 
our knowledge we must not use the elementary species as species 
in the floristic and phytogeographic sense; we are forced to use 
higher units as species and to treat elementary species as varieties 
or perhaps even sub-varieties. We can no more give specific rank 
to the saline form of ¥. bufonius than we can make a separate 
species of a glabrate form of an ordinarily hairy species (e.g., 
Melandrium album). The highest value we can give to this form 
