142 



3falus Mai us (Ij.) Britton. Apple. 



"Along Wabash and White Eivers " (J. Schneck, M. D.). This form was 

 excluded because regarded as an escape. The history of its persistence 

 for many years in several different parts of the State has come into my 

 hands since the publication of the catalogue. It should in all probability 

 be included in the State flora. 

 Pauloivnia tomentosa (Thunb.) Baill. (P. imperialis S. and Z.) 



Gibson County (.J. Schneck, M. D.). 

 Tragopogon porrifolius L. Oyster Plant. Salsify. 



Wells County (C. C. Deam). 

 Koelreuteria paniculata Laxm. 



Gibson County (J. Schneck, M. D. ). 



These plants have undoubtedly escaped from cultivation in the loca- 

 tions cited. Whether or not they should be included in the State flora Is a 

 matter of personal judgment. Evidently fugitive plants which appear 

 but for a single season in a single station can scarcely be regarded as 

 entitled to place. That a plant escaped from cultivation should be listed 

 as a member of the State flora in my judgment should require evidence, 

 first, that it had maintained itself for at least three years; second, that 

 in these years it was more than holding its own, in other words was 

 making gains, however slight, in its new situation. For these reasons, 

 in my opinion, the above plants, with perhaps the exception of the apple, 

 should not be included in the flora. The list, however, is given for the 

 benefit of those whose judgment would add them to the Catalogue list. 



A few critical notes may perhaps find a proper discussion in this paper. 



Quercus pagoda folia Elliott. 



Reported by Dr. Schneck as belonging to the flora of the southwestern coun- 

 ties. The question turns upon the point as to whether the form is to be 

 regarded as a distinct species or merely as a variety. This form origin- 

 ally appeared as Q. faleata Michx., var. pagodcefolia Elliott, being sepa- 

 rated from the type by "larger leaves, 11-13 nearly opposite and spread- 

 ing lobes." Sargent includes it under Q. faleata Michx., and Britton and 

 Brown under Q. digitata (Marsh) Sudw. In neither of these cases is it 

 given even varietal rank. The form in our area is so well marked that it 

 certainly seems entitled to varietal, if not, indeed, to specific rank. In 

 my judgment, the form should be written Q. digitata pagodcefolia Ell., and 

 given a place in the flora. 



