302 BOTANICAL GAZETTE [OCTOBER 
The various associations of the marshland, named according 
to their dominant forms, together with their formations to which 
they belong, are shown by the following synopsis. 
Clements lays much stress upon the formation, but gives the association a subordinate 
place, designating it as “patch.” Cowles recognizes formations (under the name of 
society) but gives no separate importance to the association. Smith recognizes the 
aisisnietie the formation (calling it Verein), but hardly the association as a distinct 
group; and the usage is similar in Schim mper and Drude. In all these cases, where the - 
one is Aistiowsitied and not the other, the facts are of course ee though the two 
ideas are consolidated as it were into one. In such cases the idea of the 
association is often brought out as a “facies,”-etc. The com bene history of the 
of these terms may be traced in the works of Smith and Flahault cited in the 
Shitagcaphe The words formation and association as here used seem to me good 
terms, and should be adopted. The word society could better be restricted to those 
ecological groups of another kind, such as epiphytes, ar oni etc. Clements has 
recently made a carefully considered cae for nomenclatur formations, and I 
have given some of his names later in this paper. The associations are best distin- 
guished by their dominant forms with the termination etum. 
[Zo be continued.| 
