MONOIIYHIUI) SEGREGATION IN MALVA SPECIES 53 



also been found in extra-European countries, for example in South- 

 America. This species may therefore he considered cosmopolitan at 

 present. The name M. jxirvi fiord has, further, the priority. 



The differences as to the f,'e()},Mai)hical distrihution of these s|)('cics 

 may he due to the better vitality of the recessive, viz. M. parviflord. 

 Although the differences as to stature and f^'ermination-powcr are rather 

 insignificant under cultural conditions it seems very probable that these 

 characteristics govern the geographical distribution of the two types. 



M. parvijlora, as a denomination of a species including both these 

 forms, should probably also be accepted by the ecologist, although from 

 an ecological ])oint of view either of these names may Ix' used as a 

 species-denomination. A species growing under rather different ecolo- 

 gical conditions will be differentiated in types of different appearance 

 and, as a rule, in different genotypes. The sum of these different geno- 

 types developed through the i)lay of ecological factors, or the sum of the 

 ecotypes to follow the appropriate terminology of Turesson(1922), is the 

 species in nature (the ecospecies of Tuhesson). If the ecotypes have 

 once been denominated the name to be applied as species name is im- 

 material, as all of them might be considered equivalent. On the present 

 stage of the experiments I have, however, no reason for my i)art to take 

 up a position as to the denomination of these species. 



I have also made crossings between se^('ral other species of Malva, 

 and I have this year grown the Fi-generations of some. The hybrid 

 M. neyh'cta. Wallr. X piisilld, With, corresponds fairly well with the 

 description in the flora of Neuman-Ahlfvengren (1901). It seems, 

 however, to be quite fertile. M. piisilla X parvijlora resembled most the 

 latter species. The Fj-generation of .V. nc(jlccta X oxyloba showed do- 

 minance as to the larger flowers of the former species and the serration 

 of the leaves of the latter. It resembled the hybrid M. oxyloba X parvi- 

 jlora with regard to this character. M . oxyloba was very damaged by 

 frost in the beginning of November: M. ncylccta, on the contrary, was 

 quite undamaged. 1\ resembled mostly M. neglecta as to this charac- 

 ter. The good resistance is consequently a dominant character, though 

 not a complete one. These hybrids were all quite fertile. Fi of the 

 cross M. neglecta X crispa. L. had the crisp leaves of M. crispa and 

 the characters of this species in the vegetative parts (incl. the sepals) 

 on the whole. The petals were of about the same size as those of 

 M. neglecta; M. crispa has rather small flowers of about the same size 



