NOTES ON POTAMOGETON 951 
nitens f. latifolia Tis. herb.” a synonym of the above. Anyhow, it 
is the same as my var. imus, which must be expunged. Mr. 
Scully’s specimens from River Laune, near Lakes of Killarney, 
: 0 
on Ben Oss, at 2084 ft. (Ben Oss, 3374 ft.), Mid-Perth, W. H. 
he Flora of Perth “above 1000 ft. in Highland 
very short, and towards the apex the leaves are closely imbricated, 
subrotund, with the margins deeply crenated, the crenations re- 
1 * ‘ 
P. saticirotius Wolfgang. Dr. Hagstrom notes on the Here- 
fordshire Wey plant :—‘ This cannot be regarded as an independent 
spec 
We may perhaps label the plant from Wey ‘ P. gramineus L. x per- 
foliatus L. (P. nitens Web.), subperfoliata f. salicifolia (Wolfg.).’” 
Mr ’s plant to be “a hybrid of unknown 
re nl 
nor are they to me decipiens Nolte (sensu stricto). I think 
that Wolfgang’s plant is lucens x alpinus (see Journ. Bot. 1903, 
165), that is, those specimens that are referable to lithwanicus. 
Dr. Tiselius places these with his P. upsaliensis, which is variable, 
and probably contains among the specimens two (if not three) 
hybrids. 
P. HETEROPHYLLUS X NITENS (P. gramineus x mtens Aschers. 
& Graeb.) = P. intermedius Tis. ex Fryer in Journ. Bot. 1890, 178. 
In the Basingstoke Canal between Frimley and Woking occur 
in considerable quantity specimens that can be referred neither to 
ty; both 
proximity, and they seem to be the chee nea hybrid. If Dr. 
Graebner is right in putting under it P. nitens var. merloensis Tis. 
and var. innominata Tis., as well as his intermedius, the hybrid has 
a somewhat wide range. My specimens were gathered in August, 
1888, and have remained since without a name. 
(To be continued.) 
