119 



ADDITIONAL NOTES. 



Agrostis frigicla, F.v.M., first g-eneral report, 1853, p. 20. 

 'New Norfolk, Guiiii, (according to Bentli. flor. Austr. YII. 

 583. 



Agrostis Gunniana 



Dejeuxia G-uuniana, Bentli. 1. c. 584. Sent by Mr. Grunn 

 along with A. scabra 



Distichlis maritima, Eafinescjiie in Jonrn. cle Pliysicjue, 

 rLXXXIX. 104. 

 It escaped notice until it was pointed by Mr. Bentliam that 

 the Festuca disticliophylla of Sir Jas. Hooker (and seem- 

 ingly also of Michaux and Pursch) constitutes a separate 

 genus, established already in 1819, and remarkable for 

 unisexual spikelets on distinct plants (as mentioned be- 

 fore by Asa Gray) and further singular for the spongy 

 testa noticed previously by Kuuth. Tims the Tasmanian 

 grass is identical with an American seashore species of 

 great frecruency. 



Poa Billardieri, Hen del gluniac, I. 262. 



Eestricted to the coast. Eegarded by Bentham as distinct 

 from P. caespitosa on account of the inner upper bract 

 adnate to the seed. The celebrated phytographer above 

 mentioned, acknowledges several other giumaceae as 

 specifically distinct, which to me appear mere varieties of 

 sj^ecies, already enumerated in the census. 



[Note. — While the foregoing paper was passing through 

 the press the following note was received from the Author : — ] 



Among several Tasmanian phanerogamic plants, of which 

 their generic position renipdned uncertain, is Pultenaea diffusa 

 of Sir Joseph Hooker ; that leading phytograj^her gave the 

 first record of this rare plant in his celebrated Flora Tasmanica 

 I, 91, and Mr. Fitch added t. 14, an excellent lithographic 

 illustration. As, however, the fruit remained unknown, the 

 place of this plant in the genus Pultenaea continued doubtful. 

 To myself the plant appeared exceptional as a Pultenaea, its 

 stipules being mostly suppressed, while the bractiole are 

 almost foliaceous and thus do not share in the scarious 

 consistence of those typical for Pultenaea. These reasons 

 induced me to assign to this j^lant a ]3lace in the genus 

 Phyllota, one not otherwise represented in the Tasmanian 

 flora. Thus the plant appeared as Phyllota diffusa, fully 20 

 years ago in my Fragmenta PhytograpJiice Australke I, p. 8. 

 Mr. Bentham, the most experienced of all writers on 

 leguminous plants since the last forty years, when issuing 

 under my co-operation the second volume of the Flora 



