171 
the style clothing and shape of fruit, which constitute the two 
main points of difference from var. submitis, which I make the 
type of the species, are indeterminable, but they have the 
appearance of var. urbica. — A.H.W.-D. Yes ; var. urbica Lem. 
There is a considerable difference in the amount of hairiness on 
different leaflets. In some the hairiness is all over the under- 
side, in others it is confined to the midrib, and very thin on that. 
On leaf specimens it is thickest, on fruit specimens it is thinnest, 
seemingly depending on age. — W. Barclay. 
E. stylosa, var. evanida. Hallen Marsh, W. Glouc., July 2, 
Sept. 27, 1921. — I. M. Roper. B. stylosa , var. virginea Rouy 
{E. stylosa , var. evanida Christ). I have now dropped the name 
evanida , being satisfied that the differences between it and 
virginea exist on paper only. This gathering, by its large 
leaflets, shows an approach to var. Garroutei Rouy, already on 
record for West .Gloucestershire, but that should have somewhat 
biserrate leaflets and rose petals. These are apparently white. — 
A.H.W.-D. There is surely some mistake here. These speci- 
mens cannot be either var. virginea or var. evanida , since both of 
these have the leaflets and the peduncles glabrous. Here we 
have on the twigs in flower the leaflets with quite thickly hairy 
midribs and some of the nerves hairy, and also the peduncles, in 
some thinly, in others quite thickly, glandular. In the older 
specimens in fruit the hairs on the leaflets seem to wear off, but 
i.i very few cases can they be classed as glabrous In these the 
peduncles occasionally, but not often, lose all their glands. 
E. stylosa Desv., var. systyla Bast., or as the flowers are white 
var. leucothroa Desv. — W. Barclay. 
E. systyla Bast. Folly Alder Swamp, Hitchin, Herts., v.c. 20, 
Sept. 21, 1921. — J. E. Little. E. arvensis Huds. — A.H.W.-D. 
Yes, E. arvensis Huds. — W.B. 
E. dumalis Bechst. ? Purwell, Hitchin, Herts., v.c. 20, Sept. 
18, 1921. — J. E. Little. E canina, var. Carioti Rouy. Leaflets 
much too small and styles too glabrous for dumalis — A.H.W.-D. 
A small leaved bare styled member of the group dumalis Bechst. 
There are no glandular hairs on the pedicels so far as I can see 
with the microscope. Possibly pedicels is a mistake for petioles. 
I suppose var. Carioti Rouy is the same as Carioti Keller (E. Carioti 
Chabert, etc ) on p. 1 7 of the Rosa vol. of Ascherson and 
Graebner’s “ Synopsis.” If so it may be put to that or to any 
one of several others. — W. Barclay. 
