262 
The Ohio Naturalist. 
LVol. XI, No. 3, 
One is surprised that such a conspicuous plant as the present 
could have eluded the botanists so long. The reason is probably 
two-fold. The plant grows only in the wildest ravines in the most 
inaccessible part of the state. The place where it was first found 
has never been entirely denuded of its virgin timber. Moreover, 
it appears to flower rather infrequently as may be seen from the 
circumstances attending the discovery. The writer in company 
with Mr. B. B. Fulton had spent four days camping in the hills 
and had been tramping continuously through exactly similar 
country but it was not seen until the afternoon of the last day 
when two patches, the first flowering and the second not, were 
found. Later in the summer, however, after the vegetative stage 
of the plant had become familiar it was found to be common in 
similar situations all through the region traversed on the earlier 
trip. Had blossoms been abundant it could hardly have been 
overlooked, for on account of its stolonit'erous habit, it everywhere 
grows in large beds. It must be remarked, however, that the 
spring of 1910 was marked by very severe frosts which destroyed 
the fruit crop, and may have adversely affected the buds of this 
plant so that further observations will be necessary to determine 
whether the lack of flowers was a usual or an accidental phe- 
nomenon. 
Except for the Ohio station the species seems to be narrowly 
limited to the mountains. It also appears to be rare throughout 
most of its range, unless perhaps in Pennslyvania where it is cited 
by Porter without comment from five of the mountain counties. 
It does not extend into New York, however, but becomes rare 
before the northern boundary of Pennsylvania is reached. Dud- 
ley in the Lackawanna Flora knew of but two stations, Kingston 
and Forty Fort, from the first of which he cites a single plant and 
from the second a single bed. It occurs in the mountains which 
form the boundary between Kentucky and Virginia, being reported 
from near the line in both states. In Tennessee, Gattinger cites 
but one locality, Ducktown, Polk Co., and significantly adds 
another in southwestern Virginia. There are several stations in 
the mottntains of western North Carolina. It reaches its south- 
ernmost limit in Alabama where it is reported from only one county 
Cullman, by Mohr, with the notation, “rare.” If the species is 
as rare through its whole range as these citations would seem to 
indicate, it is a noteworthy exception to the general rule. In 
nearly all cases the “rare plants” of any region are merely on the 
edges of their ranges and in the proper places are common enough. 
