REPORT FOR 1 906. 
225 
obviously rising sepals and soft fruit I might be disposed to suggest 
the name of R. Blondcsana, Rip. {= R. marginata, Bak. non Wallr.) 
for this rose on account of the presence of very fine glands on the 
back of some of the leaves, but they are usually more conspicuous in 
R. Blondceana^ which belongs to the Tomentella group, — A. H. 
Wolley-Dod. 
R. vnplexa, Grenier ? Hedge near Shepperton, Middlesex, 
nth Sept. 1880. — J. Groves. “ This is a form intermediate between 
urbica and hnplexa, corresponding to the suhcanhia form of dumalisP 
— A. Ley. The same plant was sent to the Club in 1878. The 
sepals are subpersistent, but it is doubtful whether it would come 
under R. glauca. — H. and J. Groves. 
Pyrus rotundifolia, Bechst., var. decipiens, N. E. Brown. Mine- 
head, Somerset, iith June, and Watersmeet, N. Devon, 14th June 
1906. The latter station may be a New County Record. The station 
at Minehead might if it stood by itself be possibly non-native : that 
at Watersmeet, where the tree grows abundantly in the limestone 
cliffs, is clearly native. The white felt on the underside of the leaves 
brings this remarkable plant near P. Aria, Ehrh., while the form of 
leaf cutting, and especially the berry, brown when ripe, deservedly 
unite it to P. rotundifolia, Bechst. — Augustin Ley. Also from the 
Somerset locality. — S. H. Bickham. “ I agree.” — E. F. L. Pyrus 
latifolia, Syme, var. decipiens, Elvves and Henry. — G. C. Druce. 
Sedum reflcxum, L., var. albescens, (Haw.) Origin, Babbacombe, 
near Torquay, Devon, 20th July 1906. — S. H, Bickham. 
Bupleiirmn opaciim, Lange. = B. aristatum, Bartl. The 
Quenvais and sand dunes of St. Ouens Bay, Jersey, June 1906. 
The English plants usually belong to the var. nanum (Koch), but 
these are fairly typical, although a few small plants are also included. 
In Guernsey and Alderney the var. nanum is the prevalent form. — 
G. Claridge Druce. 
Apium nodiflorum, Reichb. f., var. Growing on the muddy 
margins of a small stream in Port Meadow on ground usually sub- 
merged, Sept. 1906. — G. Claridge Druce._ “ No statement 
accompanies the specimens of the features which are supposed to 
constitute the variety. I have not infrequently noticed states of 
A. nodifiorum similar to this, which have been produced simply 
by situation,” — W. R. L. “ A mere ‘ state,’ I believe, not a true 
variety. I think that the same can be said about the var. ochreatum, 
DC,, from the same locality, though it may be rightly named.”— 
E. S. Marshall. “Not distinguishable from type: one or two 
umbels are very shortly stalked, but habit, size and shape of leaves, 
absence of rooting upper nodes, &c,, place it to type { = vulgare, F. 
