3 



Ruppia rostellata, Koch. Pool at Mare de Carteret, Guernsey, 

 June, 1894. New Record for Guernsey. — J. D. Gray. 



ZannichelUa pedunculata, Reichb. Hunstanton, Norfolk, Sept., 

 1894. Sir Henry Collett. — H. C. Levinge. Most authors seem 

 to consider that this name and Z. pedicillata, Fries., Nov. Fl. 

 Snec. Mant., p. 18 (1832) represent the same plant. But 

 Fries himself evidently did not think so (Mant 3, p. 133)- W. 

 Schumann in Fl. Brasiliensis places all the names under Z. 

 palustris and then has a var. pedicillata, Wahl., in which he gives 

 characters that will fit Reichenbach's plant but hardly Fries ! 

 Fries says distinctly '^fructihus umhellatis pedunculatisy Mr. 

 Levinge's specimens have the fruit itself pedicelled, but the 

 umbel itself is nearly sessile and it may be the plant intended 

 by Reichenbach, it is not that meant by Fries, I believe. — A. B. 



Carex paniculata, L., form or state ? Near Shirley, Derbyshire, 

 15th July, 1887. So imperfect in fructification as to be supposed 

 at first to be of hybrid origin ; growing with typical C. paniculata 

 that tormed its fruits perfectly. The sterility might be supposed 

 due to late spring frosts, but that the few sterile plants appeared 

 to be almost if not quite entirely sterile, and the generality of the 

 plants wholly fertile. — E. F. Linton. The plant is perhaps less 

 robust than usual, but in all else the suggestion of hybridity 

 seems to me hardly borne out. Perhaps the collector has sent 

 some particulars of situation, plants associated with, &c., &c. — 

 A. B. 



Sesleria coerulea, Scrp., v. flavescens. More. Castle Taly, Co. 

 Galway, 16th May, 1892.— H. C. Levinge, I suppose this is 

 what is called v. alha^ Camus Cat. des PI. de France, p. 292 

 (i888); but it was named P. lutea by Opiz. But several nice 

 points arise over this ; Opiz described it in his Fl. 16h supt. 

 Cent. 6, n. 560, under Sesleria coerulea^ Arducino animado, sp. 

 2, 18 (1764), not Schpuli ed. 2 (1772), while Derchtold and 

 Opiz in the Fl. Boh. (part 2, 1836) p. 491, place it under Sesleria 

 calcaria, Persom (1805), Syn., pi. i, 72. They also quote 



Sesleria coerulea variet. flor. luteo albo Knaf in litt." I have 

 not seen Andrews' work so do not know whether there is any 

 reason if his name is untenable } I see that Nyman quotes 



S coerulea, Ard., 1763," so it seems that it will have to bear his 

 name. In the Exchange Club Report for 1892, p. 392 (1893) I 

 quoted this plant as S. co$rulea, Arduin, var. luteo alba, Opiz, 

 Boh. Gen., p. 14, 1823. — A. B. 



