389 
R.  [omissa  Desegl.].  (No.  161).  Scraptoft,  Leics., 
v.c.  55,  Aug.  9,  1910.  This  is  near  to,  and  probably 
identical  with,  a  form  I  have  labelled  R.  omissa. — W.  Bell. 
I  do  not  think  this  belongs  to  the  omissa  group,  but  to 
that  which  is  intermediate  between  it  and  the  scabriuscula, 
sylvestris  group,  and  which  I  should  call  group  tomentosa 
proper.— W.B.  Certainly  not  R.  omissa ,  but  an  obscure 
form  of  the  sub-group  Tomentosae  ;  best  under  R.  pseudo- 
cuspidata  Crep. — A.H.W.-D. 
-R- - •  (No.  160).  Fox  Covert,  near  Scraptoft, 
Leics.,  v.c.  55,  Aug.  9,  1910.  This  rose  was  growing  in 
the  hedgerow  and  spreading  its  branches  into  No.  161, 
which  I  take  to  belong  to  the  omissa  group.  The  leaves, 
however,  in  160,  are  not  so  “  downy,”  and  the  stalked 
glands  are  absent  from  the  peduncle.  — W.  Bell.  This  is 
R.  tomentella  Lem. — A.H.W.-D.,  E.S.M.  and  W.B. 
R- - •  (No.  168).  Several  large  bushes  by  the 
brook,  Thurnby  Court,  Leics.,  v.c.  55,  Aug.,  1910.— W.  Bell. 
R.  canina  L.,  variation  of  the  group  Transitoriae. — W.B. 
R.  insignis  Desegl.  &  Rip.,  but  not  very  tvpical _ 
A.H.W.-D. 
R.  canina  L.,  var.  sphcerica  (Gren.).  Sandy  banks, 
Bally  holme  Bay,  Co.  Down,  Aug.,  1911.— C.  H.  Waddell. 
Fruit  not  truly  globose;  it  can  hardly  be  sphcerica ,  I 
think.  E.S.M.  This  belongs  to  group  lutetiana  Lem. 
The  fruit  is  not  spherical,  so  that  it  can  hardly  be  var. 
sphcerica. — W.B.  Probably  R.  sphcerica  Gren.,  though, 
from  my  specimen,  the  habit  appears  to  be  rather  the 
compact  one  of  R.  globularis  Franch.  But  the  flowering 
shoot  has  no  lower  leaves,  so  I  cannot  judge  of  the 
biserration. — A.H.W.-D. 
R.  glauca  Till.,  var.  suberistata  (Baker).  Wooded 
banks  of  Coniston  Lake,  N.  Lancs.,  v.c.  69,  Aug.,  1911.— 
J.  Comber.  This  looks  right  (R.  Reuteri  Godet).— E.S.M. 
R.  suberistata  (Baker),  apparently  shade-grown.— 
A.H.W.-D.  This  is  correct.  Care  should  be  taken  to 
gather  specimens  from  the  same  bush,  or  at  least  if  this 
is  not  done,  to  say  so,  and  keep  those  from  each  bush 
separate.  In  this  bundle  one  specimen  was  R.  dumetorum 
Thuill.,  another— though  perhaps  a  form  of  R.  glauca — 
was  not  quite  the  same  as  the  rest. — W.B, 
