SHORT NOTES 65 



had to rest for a time. Some years later I was in Jersey during 

 the flowering season, and Mr. Piquet. took me to the habitat of 

 A. spkceroceplialum in St. Aubin's Bay. I collected several of the 

 large flower-heads with the bulbs, and planted them in my garden 

 in quite a different part to the Martigny plants, which had died 

 out. In the flower-heads when collected there were no bulbils. 

 They behaved exactly as the Martigny plants had acted. I 

 sent specimens to Mr. E. F. Linton, and he, with quite proper 

 caution, refused to accept them as sufficient proof that this Allium 

 is bulbiferous. I then wrote to Mr. Piquet, who replied that he 

 was quite satisfied that A. sphcerocephalum is both bulbiferous 

 and viviparous, and he sent me a series of specimens in every 

 stage. I sent part of these to Mr. Linton, and he thought that 

 I had made out a strong case. It will be noticed that the weak 

 link in the evidence from Mr. Linton's point of view would be 

 that Mr. Piquet might have collected the flower-heads where 

 A, sphcerocephalum and A. vineale grew together. To eliminate 

 this objection I again, on a recent visit to Jersey during the 

 flowering season, collected some of the large flowering-heads with 

 the bulbs, and planted them in another garden. They behaved 

 in exactly the same way as before, being bulbiferous and vivi- 

 parous, with here and there a flower but no flower-heads. It 

 would seem, therefore, that when A. sphcBrocephalum is grown on 

 a rocky slope, as at Martigny, or in blown sand, as in St. Aubin's 

 Bay, there is a decided predominance of pure flower-heads ; but 

 that when grown in rich loam, as in my two gardens, there are 

 practically no pure flower-heads and only rarely a few odd flowers. 

 I must not let it be supposed that I have been destroying a rare 

 plant. I have not taken from St. Aubin's Bay more than a dozen 

 bulbs. As great changes are taking place in the bay very de^ 

 structive to the flora, it is probable that in a few years A. sphcero- 

 cephalum will be extinct there (Mr. Lester-Garland considers it 

 is doomed), I felt I was doing no harm therefore in collecting a 

 large quantity of seed and sowing it in the blown sand of the 

 Quenvais. For fear, however, of causing confusion in the future, 

 1 want to put it on record that I sowed the seed on a spot where 

 A. vineale was plentiful. Since writing the above, the Eev. E. S. 

 Marshall has drawn my attention that Eouy {Flore de France, 

 vol. xii. p. 353) mentions under A. sphcerocephaUwi a var. ^ hulhi- 

 f.erum. — E. W. Hunnybun. 



Dorset Plants (p. 27). — I think my recent brief paper on 

 Lyme Eegis plants has been misread by Mr. Linton. My records 

 are stated to refer to the district near Lyme, and this being on the 

 confines of Dorset and Devon, two lists are given showing in 

 which vice-county the plants were observed. No allusion is made 

 to District A of Mansel-Pleydell's Flora of Dorset, but as Lyme 

 is at its extreme south-west corner, the Dorset localities must 

 perforce fall within it. The specific habitat for Foeniculmn vulgare 

 was intended to supplement the general station "Lyme Eegis" of 

 the Flora (ed. 2) ; and Sleeck Wood, near Uplyme, for which 



Journal of Botany. — Vol. 50. [Feb. 1912.] f 



