pdf 31 MB - BSBI Archive

ON FESTUCA HETEROPHYLLA. 47
Polypodiuvi vulgare L. Grew on Ben Lawers at 2800 ft.
Lycopoclium alpinum L., var. decipiens Syme. Ben Lawers, 88.
Ben Eay, 105. — L. Selago L., var. recurvum Desvaux. Another
instance where Syme's name is given in error. Kinlochewe, 105.
Equisetum sylvaticum L., var. capillare Hoffm. Lawers, 88.
Kinlochewe, 105.
ON FESTUCA HETEROPHYLLA, &c. Lam.
By the Eev. E. S. Mabshall, M.A., F.L.S.
On page 217 of this Journal for 1889, Mr. Carruthers gave his
reasons for doubting the occurrence of this grass as indigenous in
Britain. I have already (pp. 249, 250), made some answer to
these, with reference to the question of climate and geographical
distribution; and an examination of the works and i^lates to
which he refers has led me to attempt a review of the evidence.
It appeared desirable to have Dr. Hackel's opinion on the
probabiUties of the case, and the following is a translation of his
reply to my question :—
" I have read Mr. Carruthers' article in ' Journal of Botany,'
but am not at all of his opinion. I most decidedly dispute [the
assertion] that this species has ever been cultivated on any large
scale for agricultural purposes ; nor do I believe that its seeds are
to be obtained anywhere in the trade. What is, and has been,
taken for it has probably always been merely F. rubra, vav./allax,
which has, indeed, continually been confused with heterophylla.
F. heteroph]/lla is a regular wood-grass (ein achtes TFa/(/-gras), quite
unsuited for agricultural purposes ; for, if it is cultivated in a
sunny spot (as, for example, a meadow), at the flowering season it
has no living offshoots (Innovations-blatter) left, since they then
quickly die off and turn brown. Thus the yield Avould be very
small. This grass is also not pleasant to cattle, on account of the
roughness of its leaves." The concluding remark quite tallies
with my own observation of this harsh-textured plant.
Mr. Carruthers states that " it was known to George Sinclair in
the beginning of this century." I submit that this assertion is not
tenable, on Sinclair's own showing. The specimen inserted m the
folio edition (1816) as '' Fcstuca uvina honli/oDnis," is very incomplete,
but is most certainly not F. heterophylla Lam. In my
opinion, the flower-head is that of a rubra-iovin, approaching var.
J'allax, and perhaps identical with it. Of his plant he says :— " Its
nutritive qualities are nearly the same as those of the Festuca durluscula
[probably what we now call rubra, gemiina] . It is superior
to that species, and to most others, in the produce of early herbage
in the spring ; the herbage is very fine, tender, and succulent. It
is highly superior to the Featuca ovina, of which it is considered a
variety .... It flowers the last week of May, and ripens the
seed in June." I had F. heterophylla constantly under observation
from February to July last, and can aflirm that neither in the