8 
arranged as varieties. These three plants differ from R. pellatm in 
their narrower non-contignous petals, which give a star-like appear- 
ance to the expanded flowers, and have the nectariferous pore with a 
nearly straight, not horseshoe-shaped border. I have seen no British 
specimens of the plant called R. trichophyllus by the Belgian botanists, 
which has short rigid leaf-segments, somewhat resembling in the dried 
state those of R. circinatus , Sibth. Probably R. Bandotii , Godr., 
ought to be added as a third subspecies of R. aquatilis, as I have 
observed transition states closely connecting it with R. stenopetalus, 
var. paucistamineus. 
Ranunculus Flammula, Linn., var. Pseudo-reptans. Isle of Wight, 
Mr. F. Stratton; and Coniston Lake, Cumberland, Mr. A. G.More. 
The Isle of Wight plant is intermediate between the ordinary form of 
R. Flammula and the slender plant sent by Mr. A. G. More. The 
latter is precisely similar to examples which I possess from Brauuton 
Burrow's, Devon, collected by Mr. G. Maw, but is certainly not the 
same as my specimens of the Loch Leven plant. The latter locality 
still continues to be the only British station known to me for the sub- 
species R. replans. I hope in the ensuing summer to procure this 
plant, and try if, by cultivation, it will pass into R. Flammula. 
R. Steveni, Keich. In the list of desiderata for 1869 I have 
entered the name of this plant, and should be much obliged if any of 
our members who should meet with a form of R. acris with an 
elongate, oblique or horizontal creeping rhizome would send speci- 
mens. I believe that R. acris consists of tw r o very distinct subspecies, 
or possibly, ver-species. 1st, R. Steveni, “ Andr.” lleich., with a 
horizontal or oblique elongated creeping rootstock ; and, 2nd, R. Bu- 
rreanus , Jord., with a very short perpendicular and usually premorse 
rootstock. Of the first of these subspecies I have no certainty that it 
occurs in England, though it is that represented in Sowerby’s ‘ En- 
glish Botany,’ if the rootstock was drawn from a British specimen. 
About London, Edinburgh, and in the south of Fife, the only form of 
R. acris is R. JBorwanus, Jord. The typical R. Borceanus I have not seen 
in Britain, but my R. acris, var. vulgatus is a variety of R. Borwanus. 
It is the R. tomophyllus of Jordan (‘Diagnose d’Especes nouvelles on 
meconnues,’ p. 71), not the R. vulgatus of Jordan ; and my R. acris, var. 
rectus is not the R. rectus of Boreau, but apparently R. tomophyllus, 
growing in a shady place. I fell into these errors from not having 
