Bulletin - United States National Museum - Smithsonian Institution
Bulletin - United States National Museum - Smithsonian Institution
Bulletin - United States National Museum - Smithsonian Institution
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
42 FLOKA OF WASHINGTON AND VICINITY.<br />
the second place, if it should be thought that from its intermediate<br />
location between the southern and the northern sections of the country<br />
our flora should naturally be the more rich in species, it may be satis-<br />
factorily urged on the other hand that while we have only an inland<br />
territory, Essex County has both an inland and a maritime territory.<br />
Could our range be extended to embrace even a small extent of sea-<br />
coast, the number would thereby be very largely increased.<br />
As a final statistical exhibit more comprehensive in its scope, and<br />
from a difierent point of view, I give below a table in which our local<br />
flora is compared not only with the floras above named, but with sev-<br />
eral others in America. As these several floras not only overlap to<br />
considerable extent, but also differ widely in the total number of plants<br />
embraced by each, it is evident that a numerical comparison would con-<br />
vey a very imperfect idea of the variety in their essential characteristics.<br />
It is therefore necessary to reduce them to a common standard of com-<br />
parison, which has been done by disregarding the actual numbers and<br />
employing only the percentage which each group compared bears to the<br />
total for each respective flora. The relation of the several groups to<br />
the total vegetation of each flora is thus clearly brought out, and a<br />
comi^arison of the percentages of the same group in the different areas<br />
displays in the clearest manner i)ossible the relative predominance or<br />
scantiness of the grouj) in each flora. Upon this must depend, in so far<br />
as botanical statistics can indicate it, the fades of each flora—its pecu-<br />
liarities and its characteristics. As in previous comparisons, the table<br />
is restricted to Phoenogamous and vascular Cryptogamous plants, and<br />
the same groups are employed, except that the large genera are omit-<br />
ted, while the number of orders is increased to the 23 largest of this<br />
flora, which is taken as the basis of comparison, and they are arranged<br />
in the order of rank with reference to it.<br />
The several floras compared, with the total number of plants em-<br />
braced in each, are as follows<br />
:<br />
1. Flora of Washington and vicinity 1,249<br />
2. Flora of Essex County, Mass 1, 324<br />
3. Flora of the State of Illinois 1,542<br />
4. Flora of the Northeastern <strong>United</strong> <strong>States</strong> 2, 365<br />
5. Flora of the Southeastern <strong>United</strong> <strong>States</strong> 2, 696<br />
6. Flora of the Eastern <strong>United</strong> <strong>States</strong> (= 4 -f 5) ,<br />
4, 034<br />
7. Plants collected by the Fortieth Parallel Survey 1, 254<br />
8. Plants collected by Lieutenant Wheeler's Survey 1,535<br />
For the flora of Illinois (No. 3), and also for that of the Northern<br />
<strong>United</strong> <strong>States</strong> east of the Mississippi (No. 4), I have used without veri-