Harper : Some plants from Georgia 237 



figured in a recent number of the Bulletin.* Here again it was 

 accompanied by the two species suspected of being its parents, as 

 well as by S.flava. There were only a few specimens of the new 

 hybrid, but being now convinced that I could find it elsewhere, 

 I did not take any of them, but determined to look for it 

 around Fitzgerald, in Irwin County, where I was going the same 

 evening. On the morning of my departure from Fitzgerald, the 

 1 8th, my search was rewarded by finding about a dozen specimens 

 of the hybrid about a mile east of the city, in company with the two 

 parents, as usual. The specimens collected at that time, five in 

 number, are'numbered 2211. On the afternoon of the same day 

 I saw the same thing, with its parents, about five miles southeast 

 of Rochelle, in Wilcox County. 



There can be no reasonable doubt as to the hybrid origin of 

 this plant, and I will not attempt to characterize it, for words are 

 almost inadequate for describing such curiously shaped organs as 



t 



If 



the reader can imagine a plant exactly intermediate in appearance 



form in question. 



psittacina 



/< 



An artificial hybrid between the same two species is called 5. 





for I have seen several specimens bearing old capsules. I have 

 no information as to the color of its flowers, however. 



Amelanchier sp. 



j 



in a sandy bog near Graymont, 



Emanuel County, some fruiting specimens of an Amelanchier {no. 

 Sig) which seems to differ from all described species. It is a 

 shrub with horizontal subterranean stems, sending up slender 



*32 : 462./. 4. 1905. At this particular spot, which I have often visited, there 

 are within an area not over 50 feet square about 50 species of moist pine-barren plants, 

 including such things as laxodium imbricariu?ti^ Sporobolus tereiifolms y Eriouiidon 

 Iinea?'e and Baldwinia atropnrpurea> which are of particular interest to me for obvious 



reasons. 



t It is probably for this reason more than any other that some of the most distinct 

 species o( this genus were confused by botanists of the first half of the 19th century. 



