T. Holm — Studies in the Cyperacece. 419 



overlooked or neglected bj descriptive authors ; as a matter of 

 fact it constitutes one of the principal differences between C. 

 Tolmiei Boott and our C. seopidorum^ and the confusion 

 would have been avoided had this particular point been duly 

 considered. 



In respect to the utricle, the peculiar dull, brown color 

 noticeable in C. stylosa from Greenland and Alaska seems very 

 rare, but is, nevertheless, also common to C. SGopulovurn,^ and 

 constitutes, thus, an excellent distinction, and appears to be 

 constant. A very prominent character may, also, be derived 

 from the outline and direction of this same organ, the utricle, 

 but it is very important to study this from life or from mate- 

 rial preserved in alcohol. The utricle in C. scopidorum is 

 turgid with the beak abruptly bent to the horizontal, a feature 

 that makes the plant at once distinct from any of those to 

 which it was formerly referred. But in regard to the other 

 characters, such as the relative development of the spikes, their 

 length, thickness, the peduncles, distribution of sexes, etc., 

 several of these prove less constant and are, as we remember, 

 often the principal foundation for the establishment of varie- 

 ties, viz: isogyna {C. cUoica), ejpigejos {C. aquatilis)^ simpli- 

 Gior {C. paniciolata\ ramosa {(J. teretiicscida)^ acrogyna {C. 

 Pseudocyperiis\ reinotifiova (C. vidpina), pendida {O. stricta), 

 spinosa {C. hirta\ anomala {C. acutd)^ etc. 



It, thus, appears as if there were a number of reliable points 

 to be observed and by which one might determine obscure or 

 imperfectly known species of the genus Carex^ so as to place 

 them in the sections where they naturally belong; but it is, 

 nevertheless, a very difficult task to draw such distinction in so 

 large a genus as that of Cavex^ when the supposed nearest 

 related species are not at hand, but must be studied from the 

 diagnosis alone. And in regard to Carex Tolmiei Boott it 

 would seem absolutely fruitless to gather any knowledge about 

 this particular plant from the latest descriptions published in 

 this country, where the species is said, for instance, " to repre- 

 sent C. vulgaris Fr. on the western side of our continent," 

 where the true C. vidgavis Fr. is amply represented and occurs 

 with much the same variable habit as in the old world ! 

 Moreover the diagnosis of C. Tolmiei as reproduced in recent 

 systematic works is so as to make it "specifically distinct" 

 from the one established by Boott ; in other words, the mate- 

 rial has not been correctly identified, nor has the original diag- 

 nosis been carefully compared. Yery little comfort is gained 

 from consulting the larger herbaria, w^iere we found, for 

 instance, C. cUrata^ Parryana^ Raynoldsii^ macroclimta^ etc., 

 identified as Boott's C. Tolmiei. 



Under such circumstances one feels obliged to consult the 



