EEPORT FOR 1913. 



495 



peaty upland tarn. — W. H. Pearsall. " Rather young, but I think 

 under P. minus Huds." — Ed. " Dr Moss has marked my specimen 

 var. elatiimr — G. C. Druce. 



Rumex crisjms L., var. '? Clover fields, Walton, S. Lanes., 



July 15, 1913. Ripe fruit collected three weeks later. This has the 

 habit and colour of var. trigranulatus Syme, but differs in only two 

 sepals being tuberculate. From the type it differs in its larger 

 perianths, causing the panicle to look thicker, its assumption of a deep 

 purple colour very early, sometimes before the flowers are all open, 

 and in flowering at least a fortnight earlier, the fruits being half 

 grown when R. crispus, which grew with it, was only just commencing 

 to flower. — J. A. Wheldon. " Probably R. crispusJ' — A. Thellung. 



R. crispus var. trigra7iulatus Syme. Shingle, Calshot Spit, S. 

 Hants, Aug. 1913. — J. Comber. "Yes, a common littoral plant." — 

 G. C. Druce. 



Rumex nemorosus x pulcher. [Ref. ISTo. 2934.] Ashton, 

 Northants, July 1911, with both the assumed parents. Opportunity 

 did not present itself for obtaining it later in the season.— G. C. 

 Druce. " The habit and foliage look favourable ; not far enough 

 advanced to show fruit-character."— -E. S. Marshall. " Mr Druce's 

 specimens strongly suggest R. nemorosus as one of the parents." — 

 J. A. Wheldon. 



Rumex ohtusifolius x sanguineus, var. viridis ( x R. Duffti 

 Hausskn.). [Ref. No. 1061.] Littleworth Common, Surrey, July 27, 

 1913. With parent species at above locality. All examples distri- 

 buted taken from one large plant. — C. E. Britton. 



Rumex conglomeratus x pulcher ( x R. Mureti Hausskn.). [Ref. 

 No. 1062.] Littleworth Common, Surrey, July 27, 1913. Though 

 R. pulcher is quite plentiful at this locality, I could detect only one 

 plant that seemed to indicate a crossing with some other species. 

 This I have named as above. The affinity with R. jmlcher is very 

 great, but my specimens are certainly not this species, pure and 

 simple, and are, I believe, representative of the hybrid I name. — C. E. 

 Britton. " Matches well my examples of this hybrid from Corfe 

 and Chedzoy. Not, I think, reported before from v.-c. 17, in which 

 county R. pulcher is quite a scarce plant." — C. E. Salmon. "Why 

 not R pulcher 1 My example has quite the usual pulcher habit and 

 well developed nuts. I fail to see any indication of hybridity." — 

 J. A. Wheldon. 



Rumex salicifolius Weinn. Alien in clover field near Walton, 

 S. Lanes., v.-c. 59, July 10, 1913. First seen in 1912, and then new 



