﻿COCHLEABIA FROM SCOTLAND. 291 



young fruit, usually 2-3 in. In a garden-border it naturally tend3 

 to become more luxuriant; but the dark green, glossy foliage and 

 the perfectly smooth fruits mark it off from all other British mem- 

 bers of this family. Tho differences from arujlica, officia, an- 1 

 groenlandica are so evident as to scarcely need definition. Dr. 

 Lange, to whom part of the 1891 gathering from Ben Lawers 

 was sent, replied: — "Forsan distincta, ob radicem perennem, sed 

 proximo affinis G. danica." The points of divergence in living 

 plants are, however, sufficiently obvious. In micacea the root-leaves 

 are more entire, coriaceous, ascending; the inflorescence is less 

 terminal, the flowers being very much larger, with a long claw to 

 the petals, the pods smooth when ripe, the seeds much larger and 

 fewer (I have observed as many as twelve in a pod of danica). 



The only recognised British species with which confusion seems 

 likely to arise is C. alpina Watson, which I believe should retain 

 specific (or subspecific) rank. Dried flowering- specimens of the 

 two are not always readily separable ; but the living material may 

 be differentiated by the following characters : — Root-leaves of alpina 

 larger and coarser, with a deeper basal sinus, light green, more flaccid 



gradually narrowed into a shorter claw, not rarely pinkish. Upper 

 stem-leaves with conspicuous auricles. Sepals light green. Pods reti- 

 culate-veined when thoroughly ripe. Stems usually more procumbent. 



There remain to be dealt with two smooth-podded boreal species, 

 viz., C. arctica Schlecht. and G. fenestrata R. Brown. The latter 

 is clearly quite different, somewhat resembling anylica in leaf- 

 characters, with its fruits mostly terminal and crowded; seeds 

 small, numerous, much like those of danica in appearance. Some 

 of the specimens so labelled at S. Kensington look more like states 

 of (jroenlandka or arctica, and can hardly belong to fenestrata. 



With C. arctica (which I have somewhere seen suggested as the 

 true name for a peculiar Ben Lawers form, probably that under 

 consideration) there is, however, much affinity. I have examined 

 the plant of Fries' Herb. Normal* at Kew, as well as additional 

 specimens from Tromsoe gathered by Th. M. Fries in 1864, and by 

 Lsestadius (as "officinalis L.") in 1832 and (as "officinalis var. al- 

 pestris La3stad. in herb.") 1833. There are at Brit. Mus. other 

 Finmark examples (from Nyborg and from the shores of the 

 Warengerfjord, collected by Th. Fries and (from Tromsdal) by 

 I. Carroll ; so that a fair amount of material has been available. 

 Though individuals, of course, vary somewhat, these evidently 

 belong to one and the same species ; and my conclusion is that, 

 although nearly allied to G. micacea, they are distinct from it. 

 The pods scarcely seem to differ ; but the few seeds which I have 

 seen are decidedly smaller in arctica. The stem-leaves are all 

 sessile (except the very lowest on some plants), much longer, 

 narrower, more numerous and regularly scattered up the stem, 

 nearly or quite entire, the root-leaves withering early, generally 

 ovate, gradually narrowed into the petiole ; petals small, broadest 

 at the tips, tapering uniformly to their base, instead of being 

 abruptly clawed. The rootstock is more slender, and the general 

 u 2 



