DR. HOOKER ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF ARCTIC PLANTS. 317 



pods short, elliptical, sharp at both ends, and few seeds. It is, on the other hand, very 

 near muricella and rupestris, and to small forms of Jdrta. I have it both from the Rocky 

 Mountains and Lapland. 



D. corijmbosa, Br. Durand doubtfully refers this to his var. corymhosa of alpirw 

 (= alpina S, Hook.). The iigure of the Greenland plant in 'Flora Danica' appears to 

 belong to a common arctic form of androsacea. 



Deaj3A muricella, Wahl. This Mr. Ball distinguishes from D. stellata, Jacq., which is 

 nowhere found in the arctic regions. _D. muricella, "VVahl., on the other hand, has not 

 been found in Middle or Southern Europe. It is the D. nivalis, Lilj., non DC. Durand 

 (Kane's Voyage) refers the D. rupestris, var. j3, of Torrey and Gray to nivalis, Willd., 

 apparently from description only. 



Deaba stellata, Jacq., non DC. Mr. Ball is my authority for including D. Joliannis, 

 Host. 



Draba Jiirta, L. I have Mr. Ball's authority for including Dovrensis, Fr., and 

 arctica, Vahl, under this plant. I have no confidence in its permanent distinction from 

 D. incana. It is usually a much less leafy plant, with longer pedicels in comparison to 

 the pods. 



D. oblongata, Br., is apparently founded on a small specimen of D. hirta. 



Draba incana, L. D. contorta, Ehr., and confusa, Ehr., are now generally considered 

 to be forms of this ; and I find them to be scarcely distinguishable as varieties. 



D. Magellanica, Lamk. I have already (' Flor. Antarct.' ii. p. 233) referred this to 

 incana ; and a fresh series of specimens, received since that time, not only confirm 

 this opinion, but incline me to regard D. Falklandica, mihi, as a mere stunted form. 



J), borealis, DC. I have examined two specimens of this, communicated by Prof. 

 Fischer ; and it appears to be nothing but a rather luxuriantly leafy form of D. 

 incana ; the specimens have not ripe fruit, however. 



Dbaba rupestris, Br. It is extremely difficult to distinguish this from small states of 

 lactea, hirta, and incana, and in some cases from D. muricella. D. Altaica, Bunge, is clearly 

 a synonym. Durand refers here the D. hirta, E. Bot., and hirta, var. 4, of Fl. Bor.-Am. 

 Bentham refers the British rupestris to hirta. 



Draba aurea, Vahl. This is a very puzzling plant, so like in its normal state to 1). 

 incana, that I do not see how these plants can be distinguished, except by the colour of the 

 flower, which, again, apparently varies to white. I am not aware of any yellow-flowered 

 Draba with the habit of incana being found, except in Labrador, Greenland, and the 

 Bocky Mountains. 



CocHLEARiA. This has always proved to me to be one of the most intractable boreal 

 genera ; and I do not believe that the common littoral forms are always defineable speci- 

 fically. Habit, pods, and leaves afford the characters hitherto made use of; and all 

 are equally fallacious, as far as affording permanent distinctions. 



Buprecht, speaking of the Samoied forms (Flor. Samojed. p. 21) says of C. JFahlen- 

 bergii, Bup. {anglica, Wahl., non L.), C. oblongifolia, DC, C. arctica, DC, C. fetiestrata, 

 Br., C. Danica, L., " Quod reliquum est, vereor, ne Cochlearice onines hie enumerataj ad 



2u 2 



