SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, SEPTEMBER 24. 



cxliii 



are growing in the neighbourhood of the diseased tree, such, for instance, 

 as Collyhia fusijjes. Berkeley often directed attention to these ' root 

 fungi,' and commented upon their injurious influence. It may be true 

 that they are originally saprophytes, or the mycelium of saprophytes, but 

 they may become parasitic under certain conditions. I expressed this 

 opinion some years since in connection with Conifers in the neighbour- 

 hood of Edinburgh, in a case brought for trial in the High Court, but an 

 opposing witness declared the mycelium to be only a saprophyte, and 

 unable to cause an injury. Subsequent investigations in Germany and 

 elsewhere have confirmed my opinion." 



Helianthus hybrid. — Mr. Buffham sent flowers of a supposed hybrid 

 between the perennial and annual species of this genus. He observes : — 

 " The seed-bearing parent w^as an annual variety (this I have no doubt 

 about), and therefore am able to send a flower of it ; but I send also the 

 HariKilmm and Helianthus multiflorus, with blossoms of the two 

 seedlings, one of which grew to a height of seven, the other to that 

 of four feet. For years I have been crossing varieties of the annual 

 Sunflower. I then began to cross the annual with any of the perennial 

 species, and I have no doubt, from the results, about some of them being 

 true crosses ; the seed parent being the annual species. The offspring 

 never stood the winter, so I was unable to perpetuate them. Two years 

 ago I fertilised the annual species with HarpaUum, and possibly Helian- 

 thus multiflorus (this I am not quite certain about). I sowed the seed, 

 and the result was three plants, two which grew about seven feet high, 

 one about four feet. All flowered, but they are not likely to ripen seed. 

 I dug up one plant, and potted it when in full bloom, placing it in a cold 

 greenhouse to ripen seed ; it did not do so, but it lived and is still in 

 the same pot. It is different in foliage and growth from any other I 

 possess. The other two plants I left in the open ground ; one, a Sun- 

 flower, has come up, and I enclose a blossom. It is about seven feet 

 high, growing very erect. It may be one of the three, but I cannot feel 

 certain." With regard to the differences between HarpaliiLm and Heli- 

 antlius : Bentham and Hooker describe the former as having two 

 paleaceous awns dilated at the base, and sometimes cleft, but mthout 

 any intermediate smaller scales noticed by Desfontaines. In the flower 

 of Harpalium sent by Mr. Buffham there were the two opposite lateral, 

 and often cleft, very elongated scales ; but these were connected with 

 numerous shorter and pointed scales, all being coherent into a caducous 

 ring. The receptacular scales terminate in a blunt end, which is coloured 

 green. Helianthus multiflorus differs from HariKilium in having no 

 intermediate scales. In this it agrees w^ith the H. anmius, var., sent by 

 Mr. Buffham, w^hile the receptacular scales have acute points, also green. 

 In Helianthus annuus the receptacular scales are markedly different, 

 being excessively elongated into awn-like terminations of a dark purple 

 colour. With regard to the (?) hybrids, they both agree in having lanceolate 

 sub-scabrid leaves, similar to those of Harpalium. The florets have the 

 two longer scales, with a few short ones intervening, but not coherent. 

 The receptacular scales terminate in acute (not acuminate) points, and 

 are thus intermediate between Harpalium and H. multiflorus. Com- 

 paring these supposed hybrids with the hybrid " H. G. Moon " — i.e. 



c c 2 



