355 
C. muricata L. Embankment of Thames, Putney, Surrey, 
June 7, 1924.— D. G. Catcheside. By the long-beaked fruits, etc., 
this is clearly C. contigua Hoppe. — C. E. Salmon. C. contigua 
Hoppe. — J. E. Little. 
G. contigua x vulpina. Side of lane near Whitchurch Halt, 
N. Somerset, June 18, 1925. Both species there in considerable 
variety, as in 1922, and it seems impossible to separate some of 
these variable plants from others believed to be hybrids. — H. S. 
Thompson. A very interesting gathering. Collectors have 
always the best opportunities of naming hybrids correctly, and 
Mr. Thompson appears to have good grounds for naming his 
plant vulpina x contigua. Whilst no doubt nearer vulpina , the 
narrower based perigynia point to contigua , and the majority of 
them contain barren nuts. Some examples mimic, very closely, 
C. vulpina , var. nemorosa (Rebent.). — C. E. Salmon. Comparing 
the two sheets gathered in 1922 and 1925 distinct difference is 
evident between them. That of 1925 has stems moderately 
stout, apparently sharply angled ; the perigynia (immature) up 
to 4'5 mm. are plainly nerved on both faces from base to tip, and 
are somewhat abruptly contracted into the beak, which has 
divergent points and is distinctly serrulate. The ligule is very 
long, up to 12 mm., of vulpina type. The 1922 specimen has 
more slender, less acutely angled stems ; narrower, more rigid 
leaves ; the perigynia relatively broader, more faintly nerved 
externally and scarcely at all internally, the points of the beak 
less divergent, only obscurely serrulate. The ligule is about 
4 mm. long, and of contigua type. — J. E. Little. 
Mr. Little has given much critical attention to these gather- 
ings. Though I retained none of the 1925 supposed hybrid, and 
only one exceptional sheet gathered in 1922, I agree (and 
observed last winter) that the 1922 gathering is nearer contigua , 
and that of 1925 nearer vulpina. I still hope to dig up some 
plants for Mr. Salmon to grow and watch. I also find that my 
own sheet of G. vulpina , var. nemorosa Rebent. (4422) of 1922 is 
only vulpina ■ but note that Mr. Salmon says some of the 1925 
examples under contigua x vulpina mimic very closely var. 
nemorosa. — H. S. Thompson. 
C. Pairaei. Dartford Heath, W. Kent, June 1925. — St.John 
Marriott and W. R. Sherrin. Correct, I believe; excellent 
material. — C. E. Salmon. Although the perigynia are somewhat 
longer than the measurements usually given (3‘5 mm. Kiikenthall 
Coste), their proportions are those of C. Pairaei, and not of 
C. contigua. — J. E. Little. 
