DR. HOOKER ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF ARCTIC PLANTS. 337 



distinct from it than either arctica or latifoUa. Torrey at first considered it a variety ; 

 but both he and Asa Gray have since regarded it as a species. 



Androsace triflora, Adams. This, which is unkno^vn to Ledebour, Duby, and myself, 

 appears, from the description, not to differ from ChamcBJasme. A. Chamcejasme, though 

 more properly a West Arctic American plant, extends eastward to Victoria Land. 



Ledebovu' (Flor. Eoss. iii.18) gives Kotzebue Sound as a habitat for villosa, quoting, 

 erroneously, Beechey's ' Voyage.' I do not think it is anywhere an arctic plant. 



Primula strlcta, Horn. I find it difiicult to distinguish some arctic forms of this from 

 others of farinosa, but think I have given its distribution correctly. P. Hornemannimia 

 is now generally admitted to be a synonym. P. Mistasslnica, C. & S. (non Mich.), is referred 

 by Ledebour to P. strict a ; and P. Mistassinica, Mich., was united with the same plant in 

 the 'Elora Boreali- Americana,' with probably good reason according to Duby. 



P. borealis, Duby. Ledebour says of this, " planta mire varians." Ruprecht suggests 

 that it is only a var. of strlcta, and rightly, I have no doubt. 



P. nivalis. Pall. The distribution of this plant is peculiar. It is found nowhere in 

 Europe, except the Caucasian provinces be considered such ; it is, however, a native of 

 all Siberia and N. W. America. 



P. saxlfragcBfolia , Lehm. Ledebour reduces this to cimeifolia, and no doubt correctly. 



P. Scotica, Hook. This is a form distinct enough in many places, but graduates into 

 P. farinosa, with which Bentham joins it. Pries keeps it distinct, as does Watson, who 

 remarks that its characters depend chiefly on its larger purple corolla. JP. farinosa itself, 

 though a native of Pinland, scarcely extends into Lapland. 



P. Finmarchica, Willd. Fries says the flowers are purple, and distinguishes it from 

 Sibirica, observing that it is arctic, and not alpine. Ruprecht, Ledebour, and Duby make 

 of it Sibirica (3. 



Armeeia vulgaris, L. I do not see how the distribution of the plants named under 

 this can be treated apart. Of these A. alpina is an inland form found in the Alps of 

 various parts of Europe, though not Scandinavian according to Pries ; it is the uilriiieria 

 7 alpina of DeCandoUe. A. elongata, Hoffm., is the only one entered as Lapponian 

 by Pries ; it is referred to Armeria a by Ledebour. A. Labradorica, Wallr., is vulgaris 

 s of Meyen's Labrador plants. A. arctica, Rtipr., is A. vulgaris of Nyman, and vulgaris 

 /3. arctica of Ledebour. A. Macloviana, Cham., is the same with Andina, which Torrey 

 (who has a var. Californica) refers to vulgaris, observing tliat many of the species broken 

 off from vulgaris had better be referred back (Bot. Whipple's Exped. p. 62). 



RuMEX Rippolapathu7n, Pr., is reduced to aquaticus by Meisner in DC. Prod., and in 

 part by Ledebour. 



R. arcticus, Trautv. I am unacquainted with this plant, which would seem not to differ 

 from R. aqti.aticus in any important character, or in distribution. Trautvetter (Plant. 

 Taimyr.) observes that it is perhaps GhMnisso'sYariety oi do))iestic us with a simple whorled 

 raceme. 



R. domesticus, Hartmn., is aquaticus j3 of Wahlenberg. Pries i^educes aquaticus, L., 

 to a var. of domesticus. Both are Lapponian. Koch separates them, but by characters 



