oe ‘Shortly after, 
cena 
406 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 
Plectranthus fruticosus L’Hérit. No. 1158. 
MHolanthus sericeus Giirke, Nos. 1239, 1240. 
Pycnostachys reticulata Benth. var. angustifolia. Nos. 1288, 1291. 
Micromeria biflora Benth. No. 881. 
Salvia runcinata Linn. fil. No. 1017. 
Leonotis malacophylla Girke. No. 878. By an oversight this 
was given (ante, p. 194) as Leonotis Leonurus. : 
Teucrium capense Thunb. . OF, 
Ajuga Ophrydis Burch. No. 970. 
Note on Senecio corpirouius Linn. fil. 
This plant was first described in Linn. fil. Suppl. p. 872, the 
type being a specimen from Sparmann. The eighteenth century 
specimens in the British Museum of what is certainly this, for they 
agree in every way with the type in Linnzus’s herbarium, were 
collected by Masson & Nelson. The sheet containing these has 
Suppl 
Cineraria mitellefolia (Sert. Angl. p. 25). This latter name Solan- 
er did not enter upon the Museum ing, in 
all probability, that L’Héritier intended publishing the plant as 
ineraria cordifolia, and did not discover his oversight until after 
i 
returning to Paris. 
tained in Senecio by De Candolle and by Harvey, this plant 
is nevertheless a true Cineraria, haying the extremely flattened 
achenes characteristic of that genus. It should therefore be 
known in future as Cineraria mitellefolia L’Hérit. 
SHORT NOTES. 
variety so 
Neagh, Ireland, by David Moore in 1836. In the year 1888 I had 
e i } 
2 } . 
magrostis borealis Laestad. in Fl. Torn. p. 44 (1860), which I placed 
as a variety of D. neglecta (see Scottish Naturalist, 1888, 350). 
ortly after, the a ee it grew, which was of very limited 
_ extent, was filled up with sawdust from the neighbouring saw-mills, 
ores 1 had been erected soon after to saw up the trees which the 
