62 H. G. SIMMONS. [SEC. ARCT. EXP. FRAM 
Groenl.; Kruuse, List E. Greenl. and List Angmags.; Hart, Bot. Br. 
Pol. Exp., ex p.?; Naruorst, N. W. Gronl., ex p.?; Wetueritt, List 
1894, ex p.; Hooker, Fl. Bor. Amer.; Brirron & Browy, Ill. Fl.; Lepe- 
sour, Fl. Ross.; Fempen, FI. Pl. Nov. Zeml.; Anpersson & HeEsseEt- 
MAN, Spetsb. Karly. 
Fig. Fl. Dan., T. 1035. 
As this species is rather common, or at least widely spread in the 
northern parts of Danish Greenland, it would seem probable that it 
should also grow in the region to the north-west. Indeed it is recorded 
by almost every traveller who has visited our area, yet notwithstanding, 
I have no doubt about my right to cancel most of their statements. 
As I have discussed in my Fl. Ellesm. and above, most of them are 
quite useless on account of the confusion of different species. Hart 
(Il. c.), for instance, notes it as “common everywhere”, but all his speci- 
mens in the London collections belong to other species, Duranp has 
certainly used the name in a wrong sense both in Pl. Kan. and in Enum. 
pl. Smith S., and as far as I can see, there is only the record of Wetu- 
ERILL from Whale Sound which is most probably right, which may be 
used. For my part I have only found it within a small area in Foulke 
Fjord. P. nivea also after the removal of the falsely included species, 
such as P. Vahliana, P. rubricaulis, and others, is yet a rather vari- 
able plant. Even at the Foulke Fjord locality three forms of it can be 
distinguished. The rarest of them is the form with rather broad, rounded 
leaflets, having short teeth (205, 4270), as the plant generally appears 
in Europe. Somewhat less sparingly found was the form that is the 
most common in the arctic regions, especially in Greenland, which has 
longer and narrower leaflets that are more deeply incised (1460). This 
form corresponds to the variety 6 pinnatifida of LeHmann, whose ¢ 
pentaphylla again includes the most luxuriant forms with 5-digitate 
leaves occurring in greater abundance. However, none of my specimens 
can be referred to the latter. But in another respect they are somewhat 
different. Some of them show the typical dense white woolly clothing 
of the lower surface of the leaflets, but others are almost entirely quite 
green (or reddish). They do not, however, quite agree with the « swb- 
viridis of LenMann, nor are they referable to var. pallidior, Swartz, 
Sum. Veg. Scand. The plant in this state indeed shows a rather close 
resemblance to the P. Hookeriana, Leum., such as it is figured in Rev. 
Potent., T. 55, but that species of which specimens are entirely lacking 
in all collections to which I have had access, is said to have the leaves 
white-tomentose on bolh sides. Such specimens are distributed under 
