ROSA STYLOSA VAR, PSEUDO-RUSTICANA 15 
label, “flowers yellowish white,” which is the only apparent 
difference from Rf. systyla. 
is species has been mistaken for R. collina Jacq. Much of 
that so labelled from Devonshire belongs here, and Mr. Baker's 
descriptions of R. collina, Seeman’s Journ. Bot. iii. p. 52, and in 
Monog. p. 232, refer to it. It has also been mistaken for R. Dese- 
r. Rogers has very kindly lent me his series of this species, 
and has given me some valuable notes thereon. His series 
m e ical R. systyla, but with white 
flowers, short styles, flattish disc, and usually less stout and more 
uniformly hooked prickles. 
aking everything into consideration, it seems to me that 
Desvaux intended his species to be restricted to typical Rf. systyla 
Bast., but with white flowers, and sometimes, t ough by no means 
necessarily, shorter styles. He makes no mention of Hatter disc. 
his idea is borne out by Desvaux’s description, specimens, and 
rs to go a d 
deal 
consider it to be nearer to the Hu-canine, but rs does 
not agree with this, though he considers it to make a long step in 
that direction. Crépin remarks on one o rs’s specimens 
Rosa sTYLOsa var. PSEUDO-RUSTICANA 
Crépin ex Rogers in Journ. Bot. 1889, p. 24. 
“ Bush strong, with very elongate arcuate-prostrate branches. 
Prickles few (quite wanting on some stems), systyla-like, but 
