474 
have called it var. insignis, but now think spuria is a better 
name, since the true insignis Desegl. et Rip. should have very 
decidedly biserrate leaflets ; thus spuria is a new name only, 
not a new variety for Britain. The specimens sent are from a 
very slightly prickly form, which is not a normal feature of the 
variety ; its very slight biserration and absence of glands 
take Mr. Lousley’s gathering very much towards the 
Lutetianae, spuria being ranked under the Transitoriae. — 
A. H. Wolley-Dod. 
Rosa canina L. var. verticillacantha Baker. Dolley’s Farm, 
Chobham, Surrey, July, Aug., 1928. — W. Biddiscombe. 
This is very good verticillacantha in most respects, even the 
tendency of the prickles to aggregate around the base of the 
leaf, but its strongly rising sepals are most unusual. I feel 
sure that Keller, and even some of our older botanists would 
refer it to the Subcaninae, but I should not do so myself. 
If it can go under R. glauca at all, from which, in my opinion 
its styles exclude it, it must be as var. subcristata f. adenophora 
W.-Dod ( R.fugax Gren.), but I should want stronger evidence 
than these show before I passed this as a glauca variety, that 
species being very rare in Surrey. — A. H. Wolley-Dod. Mr. 
Biddiscombe writes later that specimens were taken from the 
same bush for three or four years, and the glandular acicles 
on the peduncles and fruits were weaker last summer than 
usual, on some pieces they may be almost absent. Though 
an abnormal form Col. Wolley-Dod has decided it is as named. 
Rosa dumetorum Thuill., var. urbica Baker. By pond, 
Filton Meads, Bristol, W. Gloucester., v.c 34, July 8, Sept. 11,. 
1928. Flowers pale pink. — Ida M. Roper. I agree with the 
name, but there is plenty of room for doubt whether the earlier 
and later gathered specimens came from the same bush. The 
earlier ones all have much larger clusters of flowers, and their 
prevailing form of terminal leaflet has a more narrowed 
base and somewhat more acuminate apex than the later ones. 
The differences will be obvious on most, but not all of the sheets. 
Both may go under var. urbica. — A. H. Wolley-Dod. 
Rosa dumetorum, Thuill var. calophylla Rouy. This seems 
nearer to calophylla than Gabrielis, though it is difficult to 
decide. Dolley’s Farm, Chobham, Surrey, Aug. 1928. — 
W. Biddiscombe. Towards var. calophylla certainly, from 
its small size, but I doubt it. The fruit of that variety should 
be very decidedly globose, and its leaflets much less pubescent. 
