ROSA RUBIGINOSA VAR. ROTUNDIFOLIA 107 
a character in the group that I venture to rea the specimen 
belonging thereto, but to that of micrantha. I can find no mention 
of any glabrous-styled form of the group Eglanteria, and only one 
(R. spino-urceolata Crép., a Belgian form) that is described as 
te) 
styles are common enough. r. Baker’s No. 52, from Hill of 
Kinnoul, Perth, has normal stem-prickles, with many acicles below 
the inflorescence. The leaflets are small, oval or broadly so, 
lan- 
) r 
Sop 21st), a good deal pinnate, glandular and acic 
es. 
ROsA RUBIGINOSA var. ROTUNDIFOLIA 
Rau, Enum. Rosar. 4 136 (1816). 
canes in the other varieties. Prickles of 
branchlets mostly geminate, slender, straightish. flets sub- 
rotund, 4 in. long, sarcly longer than the prickles of the Saitushlata: 
Cal alyx-tube subglobose, gla Lael a appendiculate, glandular. 
Corolla small, deep r an Flowers soli 
This variety is ranged by Keller side those with similar stem- 
prickles, 7.¢. similar in shape, not in size. It is dis ee 
from F&. comosa and R. apricorum by its prickles being much more 
arte slender, and straight or only slightly parted, also 
h er suborbicular leaflets. It would a , how 
ever eine “seers in Déséglise’s herbarium, that that Gabo 
did not regard the straightness and slenderness of the prickles 
as of great importance, as there is a considerable ixture 0 
specimens therein having ‘them 1 rather stout and — I doubt 
=f 
ie jo} 
3 
oF 
ae 
ia?) 
mM 
os 
specimens are na with abt. " He has none u, and 
only one collected by himself. Aoiem a very numerous gan 
straight prickles of size, but 
acic aad small, not longer than the longer prickles, 
hairy above, more so and sca’ 
glabrous, rather thinly glandular, wits or fine pris 
