1898-1902. No. 16.] FLOW. PLANTS AND FERNS OF N.-W. GREENLAND. 91 



by N. H. NILSSON-EHLE to L. arctica, BL., and I am entirely in accord 

 with him in transferring the plants to the following species. 



In WETHERILL, List 1894, several localities are enumerated for L. 

 arcuata, which must doubtless go to the present species. 



Mr. TH. HOLM, in his list of the STEIN .collection, enumerates two 

 localities for L. multiflora var. congesta, which I feel justified in trans- 

 ferring to the species here in question. 



At Foulke Fjord, L. arcuata var. confusa is, according to my own 

 observations, a common plant in different localities. In my collection 

 I have also the f. subspicata, LANGE. 



It may perhaps seem as if I had taken to great liberties with the 

 statements of the different authors, in referring so many of the plants 

 to this species, and especially by not including L. multiflora in the list; 

 but I think that I am justified by the following facts: I have seen no 

 other species from the area except L. arcuata var. confusa and L. ni- 

 valis, and NATHORST has made the same arrangement (for L. spicata see 

 below!); several of the authors whom I have criticized have, in many 

 instances, shown that their identifications are not to be implicitly relied 

 upon; and lastly L. multiflora is nowhere high-arctic, since the wrong 

 statements of HART are excluded. Indeed, LANGE gives it a range all 

 over Danish Greenland, but as he mentions no special localities, it can- 

 not be seen where its limit really is; and there are some facts which 

 make a limit within the borderline of Danish Greenland rather probable. 

 L. multiflora does not go north of Scoresby Sound (70) on the east 

 coast, and the variety congesta, which alone is reported from N. W. 

 Greenland has, according to LANGE, a decidedly southern distribution 

 in Danish Greenland, where it is not found north of Ritenbenk about 

 70 in the Disco region. Perhaps the main form also hat its limit 

 thereabouts. 



There is still a Luzula-iovm left about which a notice must be given. 

 NATHORST, 1. c., has given a description of a plant which he calls L. spi- 

 cata var. Kjellmani. He mentions that at first he took it for a small 

 form of L. arcuata var. confusa, but afterwards KJELLMAN induced him 

 to transfer it to L. spicata. In examining his specimens in the Stock- 

 holm herbarium, I soon found that the stunted state of the plant was 

 owing to infection by a parasitic fungus which had infested every flower. 

 At my request, Mr. T. WESTERGREN of Stockholm, the well-known my- 

 cologist, kindly undertook to determine the parasite, and he has since 

 informed me that it was Ustilago hyperborea, BLYTT, a fungus known 

 previously only from Norway. Mr. WESTERGREN found it afterwards 



