REPORT FOR I906. 
227 
Diotis candidissima, Desf., D. maritima (L.), Cass. In 
plenty on shingley bar south of Lady’s Island Lake, Co. Wexford. 
In good flower, Sept. 1906. — G. Claridge Druce. 
Anthanis iinctoria, L. This plant grows in great abundance 
on the railway embankment at Collingham Bridge, Yorkshire, 
5th July 1906. — John Cryer. “ Beautifully prepared specimeiis.” 
— W. R. L. Var. discoidea. Rodshrone Farm, Preston, v.-c. 14, 
June 1906. — T. Hilton. “Is, I believe, A. tmcloria^vsix. discoidea 
= A. discoidea, All.” — G, C. Druce. 
Matricaria discoidea, DC. Abundant in a rough road, Repton 
to Bretby, Derbs., 26th July 1906. — Mrs. Foord-Kelcey. 
Artemisia vulgaris, L., var. coarctata, Forsell. I have not been 
able to have these specimens verified, and I do not know the 
var. myself Mr. Newbold is recorded in ‘ Bagnall’s Flora of 
Warwickshire ’ to have seen the var. in the same neighbourhood 
where these were got.” — C. H. Waddell. “ Good coarctata .” — 
A. Ley and W. R. L. “ This, I believe, is the plant of Forselles.” 
— E. S. Marshall. “ Yes, this is what I take the plant to be. 
Corbiere (‘FI. Normandie,’ p. 326) also separates a var. vestita, 
which has the leaves covered on the under side with a dull-greyish 
{c^risdtre) pubescence. These have the silvery-white pubescence 
characteristic of the typical plant.”— G. Claridge Druce. 
Petasites albus, Gaertn. In the wood under Belfield, near 
Ferry Nab, Windermere Lake, Lancashire, 12th April 1906. — 
C. Bailey. 
Senecio vulgaris, var. radiatus, Koch. Cardiff Docks, Glamor- 
gan, v.-c. 41, in plenty; with A. squalidus, S. squalidus x vulgaris 
(in small quantity), and other senecios, nth April and 15th May 
1906. This gathering is sent for purposes of comparison with other 
gatherings sent herewith, on which I should be glad to have light 
thrown. I have not sent the hybrid x A. squalidus X vulgaris, as I 
could only satisfactorily place here quite a few plants. — H. J. Rid- 
delsdell. “ No, the ligules are much too large. The foliage 
resembles S. vulgaris ; perhaps it may be S. squalidus x vulgaris, if 
not a distinct species.” — E. S. Marshall. “ Correct so far as the 
two smaller specimens are concerned, but the larger may have a strain 
of sqicalidus, since the ligules are much longer and broader.” — G. C. 
Druce. 
Senecio, sp. (A.) Cardiff Docks, Glamorgan, v.-c., 41, 15th 
May 1906. I believe this is very near S. vernalis, Waldst and Kit. 
PI. Hung. I. 23, t. 24 : which is described as follows : Stem pilose- 
