20 
H. O. JUEL 
The description of P. canadensis given by Linn, from Kalm’s specimens contains 
these words: »habitus Fragarige», »caulis digitalis», and »similis P. vernae». These charac¬ 
teristics suit the plant called P. pumila PoiR. far better than the P. canadensis of the Ame¬ 
rican floras, for the latter is a much taller plant with little resemblance to P. verna L. I 
therefore think that P. pumila PoiR.-is what LlNN. meant by his P. canadensis, and that it 
ought accordingly to be called by the latter name. The »P. canadensis» of modern authors 
should then be re-named. 
*Rubus Dalibarda L. One specimen, correctly determined by Tiiunb. Kalm has 
only written the number »484». 
(.Rubus occidentalis L.) There is a specimen to which KALM has given this name, 
but in my opinion it seems to agree better with R. frondosus Bigel. 
Spircea tomentosa L. One specimen, on which nothing is written by Kalm. It is 
correctly determined by Tiiunb., who has mentioned it in the catalogue. 
*Etiphorbia portulacoides L. There is a specimen which Kalm has indicated as E. 
portulacoides, and as growing on the plains around Philadelphia. It is young and sterile 
and can hardly be identified. 
9 Ilex glabra (L.) A. Gr. One specimen, correctly determined by Kalm. 
*Acer pensylvanicum L. To this species belongs a specimen consisting of a single 
leaf. Nothing is written on the sheet- 
'‘■''Acer saccharinum L.? There is one specimen, on which Kalm has written the dia¬ 
gnosis and number of A. saccharinum L., and also the following information: »Sugar-Maple 
by Englishmen. Rinnträ by Swedes, also Såcker-Lönn. Grows in abundance in the forests 
of Canada.» Then follows a reference to the account of the use of the Sugar-maple which 
he had given in his »En kårt berättelse», Stockh. 1751, and in Vetensk. Akad. Handlingar 
of the same year. It is a sterile specimen of the Sugar-maple, A. saccharum Marsh. 
It is commonly assumed that by his A. saccharinum, which he described from sterile 
specimens of Kalm’s, Linn, meant the plant which is also known as A. dasycarpum EiiRH. 
And A. Gray in his Synopt. Flora, asserts that the specimen of A. saccharinum in Lin¬ 
naeus’ herb, belongs to that species. But from the name he gave it we must infer that 
Linn, believed A. dasycarpum to be the true Sugar-maple, the use of which he knew from 
Kalm’s account. From Kalm’s specimen we can see that for his part he believed that 
Linnaeus’ description indicated the Sugar-maple. Kai.m’s collection in Upsala contains no 
specimen of A. dasycarpum. I think that Linnaeus’ A. saccharinum is based on a con¬ 
fusion of two different plants, and that we had therefore better drop that name and adopt 
Ehrhart’s name again. 
\Helianthemum canadense L.). There is a specimen on which Kalm has written this 
name by mistake. Thunb. has written »Oenothera fruticosa». It is actually a Kneiffia. 
Lechea minor L. One specimen is so determined by Kai.m. It cannot be L. minor 
as this species is conceived by modern authors, but seems rather to be L. intermedia 1 .EGG. 
* Viola canadefisis L. One specimen, correctly determined by Kai.m. 
* Viola laneeolata L. One specimen, correctly determined by Kalm. 
Dirca palustris L. One specimen, correctly determined by Kai.m. 
Nyssa silvatica Marsh. One specimen, which Kalm has identified with N. aquatica L. 
He also says that it is called Sour Gum, or Bitter Gum by the English, and Fiskareträ by 
the Swedes in America, and that it grows in the woods and plains in Pennsylvania, New 
Jersey and the southern part of New York, but not farther towards the north. Probably it 
was this species on which Linn, principally based his N. aquatica. 
*Hydrocotyle americana L. To this species belongs a specimen on which Kai.m has 
written »450», and Tiiunb. the erroneous determination »II. vulgaris». 
Kalmia angustifolia L. and K. latifolia L. One specimen of each, correctly determi¬ 
ned by Kalm. 
