6 B Canadian Arctic Expedition, 1913-18 



"5 atroviolacea Lge. Spithamaea, rigida, fol. planis, caulino superiore patulo 

 basin inflorescentiae sub-attingente, ligula elongata, panicula virginea dense 

 coarctata, spiculis subbifloris, glumis longe acuminatis, atroviolaceis, giuma 

 florente et palea basi viridibus albomarginatis, apice purpureo-marginatis." 



The spikelets (Fig. A: 1-2) are from a typical specimen collected on Wollaston 

 land. 



In P. abbreviata the broad empty glumes as well as the flowering glume, 

 the latter being puberulent on the sides and along the keel, constitute a good 

 distinction, when compared with P. glauca, in which the glumes are much 

 narrower, and the flowering glume hairy only on the keel. 



P. arctica R. Br. 



There is no doubt about this being the same as P. flexuosa Wahlenb., but 

 it is debatable whether it is to be considered identical with P. cenisia All. 

 Lange (I.e. p. 178) states for instance: "Nomen P. cenisia AH., quod a pluribus 

 autt. hue relatum est, non ad hanc speciem spectare videtur, si cum Gren. et 

 Godr. ad P- distichophyllam Gaud., a nostra bene distinctam, P. cenisia ut 

 synonymon ducitur. 



"P arctica R. Br. vero ex consensu plur. autt. omnino eadem cum nostra; 

 utrum horum nominum praeferri debet, incertum videtur, cum uno eodemque 

 anno (1824) publicata sunt." 



As pointed out by Lange, (I.e. p. 178) P. arctica is readily distinguished by 

 the spreading, flexuose branches of the short panicle ; by the ovate, 2-4- flowered 

 spikelets of which the glumes are purplish and of which the flowering glume is 

 obtuse or roundish at apex, with a broad, hyaline margin, villous at the base, 

 and pilose along the veins. The rhizome is stoloniferous. 



Arctophila Rupr. 



The old genus Colpodium of Trinius ^ was founded upon two species: vton- 

 andrum and Steveni, which by Trinius himself were considered as "species facie 

 dissimiles," and they are indeed so unlike that Robert Brown ^ a few years later 

 segregated the former as Phippsia algida R. Br. and retained the latter only as 

 a Colpodium. To the latter genus was furthermore referred C. latifoliiim R. Br. 

 although Robert Brown was not certain about the real affinity of this species 

 to those of Trinius and especially not to C. Steveni and compressuni. At present 

 Robert Brown's species latifolium is generally placed under Grisebach's genus 

 Arctagrostis as A. latifolia (R. Br.) Griseb. 



While Colpodium of Trinius was adopted by Grisebach ^ with the omission 

 of C. monandrum (Phippsid), the genus was nevertheless augmented with certain 

 species placed as a section "Arctophila" in contrast to C. Steveni and its natural 

 allies representing the section "Eucolp odium." By including the species of Arcto- 

 phila Rupr., the genus Colpodium became actually an aggregate of incongruities, 

 as it had been before with Phippsia and Arctagrostis included. By Bentham the 

 genus was finally restricted to the section Eucolpodium, while Arctophila became 

 transferred to Graphephorum Desv., next to Glyceria R. Br.; another disposition 

 was made by Hackel who followed Grisebach by placing both Eucolpodium and 

 Arctophila as sections of the original genus Colpodium, characterizing them as 

 having the "spikelets one- to two-flowered, etc." This same classification is 

 also followed by Beal * in his Monograph of North American Grasses, with the 

 same erroneous characterization; erroneous, because it was originally intended 

 for Colpodium alone in the sense of Trinius. 



' Trinius: Fundamenta Agrostographia. 1820. p. 118. 



2 Brown, Robert: Chloris Melvilliana. 1823. (Miscell. bot. workis, I, p. 221). 



» Ledebour: Flora Rcssica. IV. 1853, p. 384. 



* Beal, W. J.: Grasses of North America, II. New York, 1896, p. 556. 



