A siirvey of the Phytogeography of the Arctic American Archipelago 69 
collector lias written the name wrongly, or perhaps Andersson has read an indi- 
stinctly written »sc» for »x». But under such circumstances the name doubtless 
ought to be corrected as 1 liave done above. 
I have only seen a single specimeii in the Kew herbarium, and it was in a 
rather young state, but I thiiik it must l)e referred to this beautiful and well 
defined species. 
71. Salix myrtilloides, L. 
Distribution. Banks Land, Anderson (ex Akmstrong, Narrat., Hookek, Coll.). 
Geographic area. Northern parts of America, Asia, and Europé. 
As no specimens from Arctic America were to be found in the London coUec- 
tions, I have been very much in doubt about giving it a place in the hst, the more 
so as there certainly exists a great confusion about the occurrence of this species 
and its allies in the arctic parts of America and Asia. As, however, Andersson in 
DE Candolle, Prodr. XVI, p. 229, who speaks of this confusion, asserts, notwith- 
standing, that it is found in Arctic America, and as Macoun, Cat., p. 451, enume- 
rates a great many locaUties for it, I have decided upon foUowing Hooker and 
entering it for Banks l^and. 
72. Salix glauca, L. 
S. arctica, Taylor, Pl. Baff. (ex parte); S. desertorum, Hooker, Coll., Akmsteong, Narrat. 
Distribution. Banks Land, M'Clure (KH); Victoria Land: Minto Inlet 
Anderson (KH), south coast, Rae (KH); Baffin Land: Kingnait, Taylor (KH), 
Cumberland Gulf, Kumlien (Plants), Giese, Boas (ex Ambronn, Kingua), Signuia, 
Cape Haven, Schuchert & White (ex Holm, Cat.); Melville Island, M'Millan 
(ex Macoun, App. Arctic). 
Geographic area. Greeuland, northern parts of America, Asia, and Europé, 
and mountains to the south. 
To the above synonymics I raight perhaps have added the S. desertorum of 
Taylor 1. c. also, as it most probably appHes to the present species, which is 
then found at Scotts Bay besides. On the other hand, I am somewhat doubtful 
about the S. glauca of Holm. As 1 have mentioned previously (Plants NW Greenl., 
p. 86), I beheve Mr. Holm has, as many American botanists certainly have, another 
conception of S. glauca and S. arctica with their difterent forms than that which 
I have arrived at. About the records in Bebnier'8 Report there is the curious fact 
that in the list in Appendix B, containing Macoun'8 identifications, are enumerated 
S. groenlandica, Lundstr., and S. glauca, hut in a little list from Winter Harbour 
(p. 513) in the zoological report of F. Henxessky only one is named, viz., S. arctica 
var. Brownii. Now this is the most common form of S. arctica all over the Archi- 
pelago, and as it is rather often missing in the lists, I think it is taken to be the 
var. groenlandica, the latter again hiding under the name of S. glauca. What S. 
