— 37 — 



to have been collected by Austin. The most northerly station for which I find 

 a report is Buffalo, N. Y., where it was obtained by Judge George W. Clinton, 

 and is given as "rare" in David F. Day's "Catalogue of the Plants of Buffalo and 

 Vicinity," published at Buffalo in 1883. As I have not come upon it again any- 

 where in the Chicago region, it must be considered rare also for this locality. 

 Chicago, Illinois. 



TWO EXTENSIONS OF RANGE 



A. LeRoy Andrews 



Since the appearance of the first two parts of Volume 15 of North American 

 Flora (1913) the two following cases of extension of range have come to my 

 notice : 



1. Sphagnum Dusenii Jensen. A specimen was recently received from A. 

 Brinkman collected in a "boggy meadow" at Tetachuk Lake in British Colum- 

 bia, September i, 191 1. It represents a very considerable extension of range 

 to the westward, though one that might have been expected. The species is a 

 fairly well marked one, but of uncommon occurrence. Its tendencies are north- 

 ern and it is one of the lesser number that appear to thrive rather better inland 

 than along the coast. The finding of it by Nichols at Salisbury, Connecticut, 

 in 1907^ sets a remarkable southern record. In New York State the southern 

 outpost seems to be Sand Lake not far from Albany, where it was collected at an 

 early date by Peck.^ This was in fact its first discovery in America, but its 

 identity remained a puzzle to our older bryologists.^ As its southern limits 

 figure next northern Michigan, also Wisconsin as reported by Cheney,"* while 

 further stations to the westward may be looked for. 



2. Rhahdovjeisia crispata (Dickson) Kindberg. Mr. W'illiams gives as the 

 southern limit of this species in the Alleghanies, Virginia. Professor Atkinson's 

 collections of 1901 from North Carolina show it however from two localities in 

 that state: Blowing Rock (No. 10983) and Grandfather Mountain (No. I1606). 

 Such extension was of course probable and it will very likely be found still further 

 south in the mountains. It is in fact apparently not the first time that the plant 

 has been collected in North Carolina, as I note Evans and Nichols in their Bryo- 

 phytes of Connecticut^ give its range southward to North CaroHna. Dr. Nichols 

 informs me that this record was based upon the label of No. 56 of the second 

 edition of SulHvant and Lesquereux' Musci bor. Amer., which reads: Hab. in 

 Novae Angliae Montibus Albis (Oakes) ; etiam in summo cacumine Black mentis 

 Carolinae Sept.,^ meaning then either that this number was made up partly of 



1 Evans and Nichols, Bryophytes of Connecticut, 83. 1908. 



2 A duplicate from the State Museum at Albany bears the date, July, 1867. 

 ' It was not clearly recognized as a separate species in Europe until 1890. 



< Transactions of the Wisconsin Acad, of Sc., Arts and Lett., X, 68. 1895. 

 ' P. 99. 1908. 



6 No. 43 of the first edition bore the same label. 



