MOUNTAIN FLORA OF GREAT ATLAS. 

 Tabulae View op the Mountain Flora — continued. 



435 



Before discussing the inferences to be derived from this list, 

 it may be well to notice some sources of error that, to a slight 

 extent, affect the results. Although. the season of our visit — • 

 the second half of May — was probably the best as regards the 

 middle zone, it was too early to find the vegetation fully de- 

 veloped ux the superior zone, especially on the highest ridges. It is 

 probable that on this account the proportion of Umbelliferce and 

 GraminecB found in the higher region is smaller than it would 

 have been at a later season. At first sight it would appear that 

 the shorter time that we were able to devote to an examination 

 of the upper region, and the snow-storm which we encountered 

 in the ascent to the Tagherot Pass, make the proportion of 

 species found there, as shown by our lists, unduly small. There 

 can be no doubt that we must have lost several species owing 

 to these causes, but not enough to vitiate the results to a serious 

 extent. In confirmation of this opinion it may be mentioned 

 that although a native employed by M. Cosson has since made 

 a large collection in the same part of the Great Atlas, and two 

 German naturalists — MM. Eein and Fritsch — have visited the 

 head of the Ait Mesan valley, very few species have been added 

 to the Flora of the higher mountain region. 



The first conclusion that strikes a botanist on examining the 

 foregoing list is that the general type of the vegetation clearly 

 marks this as belonging to the great Mediterranean Flora, which 



IT F 2 



