By Joseph Sabine, Esq. 



441 



at the top of the tube, very imperfectly so, but sufficiently to 

 prevent its being described as entirely yellow. The roots 

 were purchased some years since at Messrs. Whitley and 

 and Co.'s Nursery at Fulham, under the name of Isabella- 

 Yellow Crocus. It flowers rather later than the other vari- 

 eties, and is weak like the preceding. 



4. C. sulphureus concolor. (See Plate 11. Fig, h) In 

 this every appearance of the brown colour is obliterated, and 

 the uniformity of the yellow is not disturbed by any markings 

 on any part of the flower above the tube, which is white ; 

 with this exception, it corresponds with the three preceding. 

 It was figured in the Botanical Magazine,* in 1811, having 

 been previously noticed with the first variety, when that was 

 published in the same work. The representation is good, 

 except that it has the appearance of yellow featherings on the 

 petals, which is not correct; and the stigmas are yellow, not 

 white. It is the " Spring Crocus, with small pale yellow 

 flowers," N°. 7 of the first Edition (quoting C. Bauhin's 

 " Crocus vermis latifolius flavus, flore minore et pallidiore" 

 as a synonym), and " the broad-leaved Spring Crocus, with a 

 smaller, and paler yellow flower," N°. 9 of the 7th Edition of 

 Miller's Dictionary. • 



The petals of this variety, as well as those of the first, from 

 luxuriance, are occasionally divided, and so assume the appear- 

 ance of being more than six; but this circumstance is not 

 constant, nor is it at all times observable even among a large 

 number of blossoms. I have marked the- roots which pro- 

 duced these apparently luxuriant blossoms, and planted them 

 separate from the others, in hopes of obtaining the variety 



• Botanical Magazine, tab. 1384. 

 vol. vii. 3 M 



