pdf 31 MB - BSBI Archive

CAREX RIGIDA AND ITS VARIETIES. 171
Lastrmi FiUx-mm Presl., var. abbreviata Bab. Grey Mare's
Tail, Moffat Water (72).
Lycopodiiaii annotimuii L. On Little Craigindal (92), where it
fruits freely. Elsewhere we have found it generally barren, or
nearly so.
Cham, frar/ilis Desv., var. barbata Gant. Peaty pools, Braemar
(92). Name determined for us by Messrs. Groves.
CAREX RIGIDA Gooden. AND ITS VAKIETIES.
By Prof. L. H. Bailey.
Mr. Arthur Bennett's appreciative review of my paper on the
" Types of Carex " in this Journal for 1889 (p. 330), calls for some
remarks and explanations concerning C. hyperborca, C. vuhjdvis, C.
rvjida, &c. Mr. Bennett is puzzled to know what becomes of the
Scottish plant which has been called C. rigida var. wferalpina
Laest., inasmuch as I referred the var. inferaJpina of Laestadius to
C. vulgaris var. hyperborea. I am unable to throAv any light upon
the question, as I have not seen the Scottish plant ; but the C.
riyida var. inferalpina at Copenhagen, which I saw, is the same as
Drejer's C. hyperborea. It is evident, however, that the plant
which I examined at Copenhagen is not Laestadius's type, for
Laestadius described his plant as C. saxatilis var. inferalpina. But
the specimen is undoubtedly authentic.
Mr. Bennett writes:— "The confusion with C. hyperborea has
been great ;
by Nyman ;
the true plant is only given
but Urejer, in his
as Faroen and Icelandic
' Revisio ' (1841), says, * Lapponia,
Laestad. ! in herb. Hornem.' " But Drejer says more than this.
He credits the plant to Greenland, Faroes, and Lapland. I have
seen Drejer's types at Copenhagen, and they are the same as the
American plants from Mt. Washington and northward, which have
been referred to the same species. In fact, I have before me, as I
write, a good sheet of Vahl's collection in Greenland, in 1830, a
part, as I suppose, of the very specimens upon which Drejer
founded
('. hyjierborea, and I also have specimens obtained in
Greenland by Piosenvinge in 1888 ; all of these are clearly the
same as the American plant. My object in comparing these plants
with the American is to confirm the correctness of Boott's refer-
ence of Drejer's C. hyperborea to the species represented by the
name
( '. vnlyaris. There is so gradual a blending of types from
the top of Mt. Washington, where C. hyperborea grows, to the
adjacent sea-coast, where C. vnlyaris is common, that tliere can bo
no doubt as to tlie specific identity of tlie two plants. But the
same thing may be observed in Northern Europe.
" In one instance Prof. Bailey is not consistent, i. e., in retain-
ing C. vuJyari,i Fr., for C Goodrnovii Gay, which name is certainly
three years anterior to that of Fries." This criticism is perfectly
just ; but the difficulty extends beyond these two names, and if
reform is to be undertaken it nnist begin fifty years farther back.