aor Hi Siics bass if = iis ja, = atte Wererctiel, oe: tor, RE st i i332} ‘2 it re byh Dit ae RETURN TO LIBRARY OF MARINE BIOLOGICAL LABORATORY WOODS HOLE, MASS. LOANED BY AMERICAN MUSEUM OF NATURAL HiIstoRY The Annals OF Scottish Natural History A QUARTERLY MAGAZINE WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED “Che Scottish Naturalist” EDITED BY J; A; HARVIE-BROWINS PR SsHe.Z.s: MEMBER OF THE BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS UNION aM We Hi. ERAT, MA MSDS RES] bass. PROFESSOR OF BOTANY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN AND WILLIAM EAGLE CLARKE, F.L.S., Mem. Brit. Orn. Union NATURAL HISTORY DEPARTMENT, MUSEUM OF SCIENCE AND ART, EDINBURGH I qo2 EDINBURGH DAVID DOUGLAS, CASTLE STREET LONDON: R. H. PORTER, 7 PRINCES ST., CAVENDISH SQUARE 4, ) )0 LIST OFPS2EAGES Centrolophus niger, Gmelin. . Philodina brevipes, n.sp.; Philodina acuticornis, n.sp.; Philodina decurvicornis, n.sp.; Philodina obesa, n.sp. . Philodina hexodonta, Bergendal; Callidina ornata, n.sp.; Rotifer quadrioculatus, n.sp.; Rotifer spicatus, n.sp. . Raia circularis, R. radula, R. radiata. . Spinulation, etc., of 2. cexcularis and R. radula. Ais19 The Annals of Scottish Natural History No. 41] hO'G@zZ [JANUARY DHE SeATE REV. HUGHOARBXANDER MACPHERSON. IT is with extreme regret that we have to record the decease of our old and much-valued contributor, the Rev. Hugh Alexander Macpherson, which took place, after a few days’ illness, at the Rectory, Pitlochry, on the 28th of November last. We had seen him in Edinburgh only a few days previous to the sad event, and had received his note on Ssiskins) in) Perthshire” for the present) number of (the “ Annals,” along with an interesting letter touching upon many subjects, as late as the 22nd, so that his untimely and wholly unexpected death came as a painful surprise. The grandson of Dr. Macpherson, Professor of Greek at King’s College, Aberdeen, and the eldest son of Mr. Wm. Macpherson, the editor of the “ Quarterly Review,” he was born at Calcutta forty-three years ago, and was educated at Haileybury and at Oxford. Soon after leaving Oxford, where he graduated with honours in 1881, Mr. Macpherson took up his residence in Carlisle, as curate of St. James’ Church, and commenced those studies in the fauna of the Lake Country with which his name will always be associated. Thus, in 1886, he published, along with Mr. William Duckworth, “The Birds of Cumberland,” to be followed, 41 B 2 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY in 1892, by his more important work on the “ Vertebrate Fauna of Lakeland ”——one of the best books of its kind ever written. Nor were these his only labours of love in connection with science in the county of Cumberland, for he was one of the moving spirits in the founding of the Carlisle Museum, an institution in which he took a most lively and practical interest down to the very last, and which owes much to his enthusiasm, ability, technical knowledge, and donations. In 1897 he became vicar of Allonby, near Maryport, and contributed to this Journal a number of interesting observations on the natural history of the southern shores of the Solway Firth. In 1899 he came to live among us as Rector of Holy Trinity Church, Pitlochry, and from time to time sent us many valued records on the animals of interest that came under his notice in that district of Perthshire. Mr. Macpherson was the proprietor of an estate in Skye, and it is well known to his friends and fellow-workers that he had for many years been engaged on a book on the Vertebrata of that island, a work that we trust will see the light, for in it we should have a most valuable con- tribution to the Natural History of Scotland. Mr. Macpherson was interred at Carlisle, in accordance with his expressed wishes. He thus rests amidst the chief scenes of his labours both as a clergyman and a naturalist, and where he made many friends, and raised memorials to his worth and usefulness that will long survive him. In Scotland we expected to reap much from his presence as a worker in our midst, but, alas! he has been taken from among us in the prime of life, and we have to mourn the loss of an enthusiastic, scholarly, and accomplished naturalist. THE STARLING ROOST ON CRAMOND ISLAND. By CHARLES CAMPBELL. CRAMOND ISLAND is situated in the Firth of Forth about a mile from the mouth of the river Almond. It extends to nearly 19 acres, and is accessible on foot at low water. On THE STARLING ROOST ON CRAMOND ISLAND 3 the southern slope of the island is a small plantation of dwarf Scotch firs surrounded by a stone wall. For some years back this plantation has been the roosting-place of great flocks of Starlings. It was not, however, until the autumn of 1899 that they began to excite general attention and interest in the neighbourhood. Quite as remarkable as the large number of Starlings frequenting the island is the regularity with which they perform their daily journey. They seem to have some gathering-place farther inland, and often pass overhead in one large flock, when the beat of their wings causes quite a commotion in the air. No matter what the weather may be, they regularly perform their journeys across the water of the Forth. I have watched them battling against an easterly gale, when they had to fly so low as almost to touch the waves, and when some of the weaker birds were driven back to the shore. Sometimes, on a calm night, they fly high overhead, but seldom so high that the beat of their wings cannot be heard. One would naturally have expected that with the approach of the breeding season the colony would disperse ; but this was not so, and quite large flocks continued to roost on the island. Mr. W. Evans estimates the proportion of non-breeding birds at about ten per cent, but the proportion which travelled daily to and from the island seemed to exceed that number. No nests have been found on the island, and during the day it is quite deserted, not a Starling remaining on it. I have not been able to trace how far inland the Starlings travel. I am of opinion, however, that each band has its own particular feeding-ground which it regularly frequents. What confirms me in this belief is the fact that every morning I have watched the Starlings passing over Longgreen, Dalmeny Park, about a dozen birds regularly detach them- selves from the flock and settle on an ivy-clad tree close by. It was most interesting to watch for this little group of birds, which afforded a striking example of the orderly manner in which the movements of the whole colony are regulated. The following is a record of their migrations during the different months :— 4 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY May, 1900.—On the 7th inst. the Starlings left the island at 5 A.M. and were seen returning in large numbers at 7.15 PM. Mr. Hogg saw them leave the island at 20 minutes past 3 A.M. on the 29th inst. The latest hour at which I saw them cross was at 9.15 on the 31st inst. June—During this month the flocks were not so large, and generally crossed over to the island at 8.30 P.M. July—On the 3rd of this month the Starlings were seen to leave at 4.50 AM. A flock of Starlings flew against the telegraph wires at Cramond Brig on the 6th inst., and about a score were killed. On the 7th I noticed flocks of Starlings crossing over from 8 to 9.30 P.M. Their manner of flight was very varied, some moving slowly and with an undulating motion, and others straight and swift without deviation. These I took to be old and young birds. On the 14th inst. a flock again struck the wires at Cramond Brig, and I counted 47 dead birds, all of which were young ones. From the nature of their injuries, they must have been travelling at a great speed when they struck the wires. On the 20th the morning flight was timed at 5.30, and in the evening at 7.30. Weather cold and stormy. On the 30th July a large flock crossed over at 8.45 P.M. During this month there was an appreciable increase in the number of Starlings frequenting the island. August and September—On the 2nd August the evening flight was at 8.40 P.M. and on the 1ith at 7.30. On the 13th the morning flight was timed at 5:30. From this date on to the middle of September the Starlings crossed more to the east, over Cramond village, and did not come under observation so often. On the 13th September the Starlings crossed at 6.30 P.M. From the 16th to the 30th the evening flight was at 6 P.M., and they returned about the same hour in the morning, October.—F rom the tst to the 7th of this month the Starlings crossed at 5.30 P.M. and returned in the morning at 6.30 AM. On the 7th the evening flight was as early THE STARLING ROOST ON CRAMOND ISLAND 5 as 4 P.M. Weather very dull. On the 20th great numbers of Starlings assembled on the trees at Cramond at 4.40 prior to crossing to the island. 23rd—At ten minutes past seven an immense flock of Starlings came over: west wind and rain, and the birds flying very low. The Starlings have now resumed their old route, that is, crossing directly over Longgreen, The morning flight on the 27th is timed at 7.5 and in the evening at 4.45. On this day, for the first time, they are noted to go through some extraordinary evolutions prior to settling down. On the morning of the 29th a great rush of Starlings came over at 7.5, flying very low. I am of opinion that during this month the colony attained its numerical maximum. November.—On the ist of this month the morning flight was at 7.5 A.M., and in the evening at 4.30 P.M. On the 20th they are noted as passing at 7.30 A.M. and 4.5 P.M. An immense flock extending right across Longgreen Bay from Barnbougle to the Snib came across on the morning of the 12th at 7.25. They were followed a few minutes later by another flock. The morning of the 20th was dull and hazy, and the Starlings did not leave the island till 8.50. Watching on the morning of the 22nd with my field-glasses, I saw the Starlings rise in a cloud from their roost. In 2 minutes 25 seconds they were overhead, flying leisurely against a south-west wind. On the 28th the Starlings came over at 7.50 A.M. and returned at 3.45, flying low, and in great numbers. During this month the most interesting feature observed has been the extraordinary manceuvres performed before settling to roost. It would be no easy task, were it desirable here to do so, to describe the graceful evolutions of the birds on these occasions, or to guess at what mysterious influence controls their movements. December.—On the ist of this month I went over to the island to watch the Starlings arrive. At 3.25 the first few dropped down, followed in about 5 minutes by another small lot. At 3.45 four distinct flocks were 6 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY manceuvring at a great height. At 3.55 they all settled down. At 4 P.M. the Longgreen flock commenced to arrive, and settled to roost at once. The whole flock were now chattering in their char- acteristic fashion. Bands of them continued to arrive till I left the island at 4.15. Mr. Hogg says they seem to keep up their talking all night long. If he goes into the plantation at night with a lantern the birds flutter round the light in great numbers. During the month there was little variation shown in the times of flight. On the 2nd the morning flight was at 8 A.M., and the evening 3.45. On the 15th the Starlings crossed at.8.15, and. returned vat 2.30 to 4 IPM eat the end of the month the morning flight was timed at 8.30, and in the evening 3.45 to 4 P.M. January, 1901.—On the Ist of the month the morning flight was at 8.15. In the evening there was an unusual commotion among the Starlings. It was bright moon- light, and, instead of crossing to the island, they settled for a time in Longgreen woods, breaking up into small flocks and flying about in a state of great excite- ment. On the 2nd they seemed to have the same hesitation in going to the island. About the middle of the month the morning flight was at 8.15, and in the evening at 4.30. On the 30th the morning flight was at 8.10, and in the evening 4.45 to5 P.M. During the mild weather prevailing during this month the flocks of Starlings seemed to decrease in size. Numbers of pairs could be seen about the woods, as if preparing to nest. With the return of colder weather the colony seemed to increase again. February—In the beginning of this month the morning flight was at 8 A.M., and the evening flight about 5 P.M. On the 13th the Starlings left the island at 7.35 and returned at 5.30. During the calm frosty weather which occurred at this time the flight of the Starlings was so high that the birds were almost invisible. On the 12th I saw them rise from the island at 7.40 A.M., but lost sight of them, and I believe they passed THE STARLING ROOST ON CRAMOND ISLAND 7 overhead! iquitesjout, of sight: At the end of the month the morning flight was timed at 7.10, and the evening at 5.15. March. On the 2nd of this month the morning flight was at. 7.15. On therzthythesStarlines| came over ati6:40, and returned in the evening at 5.45. Professor J. Arthur Thomson of Aberdeen University, who was at Cramond on the 10th inst., saw a flock manoeuvring at Cramond Island and estimated their numbers at not less than 10,000. On the 25th inst. I have noted in my diary “the Starlings seem to be gradually getting less in numbers.” April—On the 13th of this month I have noted that the Starlings still cross to Cramond Island in considerable numbers, but I also noticed that in different parts of Dalmeny woods, especially in rhododendron bushes, small flocks of Starlings are to be found roosting. May.—On the ist of this month the Starlings are timed as crossing at 7.40 P.M. Small flocks of Starlings were seen passing in the evenings from 7.15 onwards. On the 26th they were seen in larger numbers, probably owing to a strong east wind and rain causing them to fly low. I noticed that by the 31st most of the young Starlings reared in Dalmeny woods had “ flown.” June——Broods of young Starlings were noticed feeding on the grass lawn in front of Dalmeny House on the 2nd inst. On the 12th inst. I have noted that the Starlings are now crossing regularly from 7 P.M. On the 16th a very decided increase in the number of Starlings crossing to Cramond Island was noticeable. The first flock was seen at 6.30, and for an hour afterwards flocks of a considerable size continued to go over. On the 17th they were seen coming from the island at 4.5 A.M. “just as in winter.” Up to the end of the month they crossed from 7 A.M. in flocks of varying size. From the beginning of July and on to the end. of November the daily observations of the Starlings were prac- tically identical with those of the corresponding period of 1900. 8 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY There was a gradual increase in the number of birds frequenting the island from the middle of July onwards, and by the end of September the colony was again very large. During the month of October the numbers still increased, and at the end of the month I think the Starlings were more numerous than in any previous season. On the 12th of November a very severe gale blew from the east. As the woods of Dalmeny abound in sheltered nooks where the rhododendron bushes offered a secure re- treat, it would naturally be supposed that the Starlings would not have left the mainland to face the storm. The homing instinct, however, proved too strong, and though they were forced to rest for a time on a strip of bent grass near Long- green, the Starlings crossed to the island as usual. On the morning of the 13th the gale had somewhat moderated, but it was still blowing very strong. I was out along the sea- shore and kept a watch for the Starlings. They rose from the island at 7.35 A.M., and with the wind at their back they came across at a record speed, travelling, according to my estimate, at 98.18 miles per hour. On the morning of the 19th November the wind blew almost a gale from the west, and I had an opportunity of ascertaining the rate of flight of the Starlings under adverse conditions, ze. a head wind. They took 3 minutes Io seconds to cross, equal to the rate of 28.47 miles per hour. Flying low, almost touching the water, they glided upwards when they reached the shore, passing directly over my head almost within reach of my hands. On Saturday the 23rd November I visited the roost with Mr. Hogg, the farmer tenant. He confirmed my opinion that the number of Starlings frequenting the island this year was larger than at any time previous. It was about 4.30 when I reached the edge of the wood and the birds had nearly all arrived, but small flocks still continued to drop down. The entire plantation was simply alive with birds, and in the bright moonlight I could see them clustered close together on the trees. The whole body of Starlings kept up a continuous chatter, very pleasant to listen to, and which could be heard a long way off. From the hamlet of Longgreen, which has been my OCCURRENCE OF THE CAROLINA CRAKE IN TIREE 9 post of observation, Cramond Island lies to the east, and, measured on the Ordnance Survey maps, is distant almost exactly a mile and a half. This knowledge has enabled me to calculate with some approach to accuracy the speed attained by the Starlings in their morning flight on those occasions on which I have been so fortunate as to see them rise from the island. SPEED OF FLIGHT OF STARLINGS. Date. Rate of Flight. 1900 Actual Time. Miles per Hour. Direction of Wind. Nov. 22 ZMie 25SEC: 22a South-west Dec; 23 2 aii: « 20) SEC: 36 Calm ALL 3c Peiti see SeSEC: 43.20 Slight Easterly , 3’) 30 2m. 45 99 39 Igot jan, i 2 is 45 Almost Calm i; 5 2etile 2OuSeG: 28.57 South-west - 6 mam) 70 See! 60 East es 2eti. «101 SEC. AIG Variable (Southerly) Feb. 2 Tm. 45 Sec: 51.42 North-easterly = 5 2m. 45 Calm <5 7 2. Tie 3'5) SCC: 34.83 West eee Zein, 20) SEC: 38.57 North Oct 17 Zui, 55) SEC. AZo No wind. wr 2S 225 SEC: yeaa West. Nov. 13 55 sec. 98.18 Gale from East. sae PIC) Se Til. 1. SEC. 28.42 West (very strong). ON DHE OCCURRENCE OF THE VECAROLINA CRAKE [PORZANA CAROLINA (LINN.)] IN THE ISLAND OF TIREE. By Francis G. GUNNIS. ON the 25th of October last my brother-in-law, Mr. E. Lort Philipps, while shooting snipe with me in Ronnach bog, at the west end of the Island of Tiree, Inner Hebrides, obtained a specimen of the Carolina Crake. This bird was examined by Dr. Bowdler Sharpe, and was exhibited by Mr. Lort Philipps at the meeting of the British Ornithologists’ Club on the 26th November last. It was a young male which 10 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY had completed its first autumn moult, and was very fat— indeed I have seldom seen a bird in better condition, show- ing that it had been for some time either on the Island, or in some other locality well suited for its feeding habits. When on the wing it resembled a diminutive Landrail, with its laboured flight and hanging legs. I believe this Crake has not hitherto been recorded for Scotland. As far as I can make out, it has been captured once near Newbury, in Berkshire, in October 1864 [Newton, “Pp. Z. S.,” 1865, p. 196]; and again at Cardiff in the spring of 1888 (“ Birds of Glamorganshire,” p. 113). [It is not at all improbable that this species has occurred on other occasions in the British Isles, but has hitherto escaped detection. It has a high northern breeding range in North America, moving south in the autumn as far as the West Indies and northern South America. In summer it is most abundant in the eastern portion of its range, and, according to Richardson (“ Fauna Boreali Americana,” “Birds, p. 403), it is .common fas dae (north vas slaritude 62°. In connection with its occurrence in Britain it is important to know that it has on several occasions been known to visit Greenland. Herr Winge, in his most useful contribution to the “Conspectus Faunz Grcenlandice” (‘Aves, p. 146) records three occurrences—two for the autumn and one during summer. It is not necessary, therefore, to conclude that an extraordinary flight has been performed to reach our islands, for the passage to and from Greenland is annually made, probably by way of Iceland, by a consider- able number of migratory species.—EDSs.] ON A ‘SCOTTISH ‘SPECIMEN OF THE bei FISH [CENTROLOPAUS NIGER (GMEEIS): By R: H. TraquainM DD Lib oR PLATE we. DURING my absence from Edinburgh in August last, a fish, caught on the 21st of that month in a salmon net at Largo Bay, Firth of Forth, and presented to the Museum by Messrs. ANN. Scot. NAT. HIST. 1902. PLATE CENTROLOPHUS NIGER (GMELIN). - 7 ~ ae iad) Oe vane rid » s fF ON A SCOTTISH SPECIMEN OF THE BLACKFISH II Anderson and Sons, was identified by Mr. Eagle Clarke as a specimen of the Blackfish [Centrolophus niger (Gm.), C. pompilus, Cuv. and Val.]. The specimen was sent to be stuffed, so I did not have an opportunity of seeing it in a moist condition ; but as the taxidermist who mounted it (Mr. V. Knight), when dealing with fishes, always makes a plaster mould from his subject before skinning it, into which mould the skin is fitted for stuffing, the proportions, as given in Plate I., may be relied on as accurate. This figure represents the specimen on a scale of rather less than one-third natural size, and, to ensure accuracy, the outline has been traced from a photograph. The entire length is 205 inches, the greatest depth at about the junction of the first and second thirds of the body is 5 inches, the general shape is elegantly fusiform, and tapering posteriorly. The length of the head from the tip of the rounded snout to the posterior margin of the operculum is contained more than five and a half times, the greatest depth of the body slightly over four times, in the total. The pos- terior extremity of the maxilla extends to just below the anterior margin of the orbit; the teeth visible on the pre- maxilla are small, styliform, and in one row. The pectoral fin measures 1 inch, and is therefore only half as long as the head; the length of the ventral is 14 inch. The length of the furcate caudal fin is contained six times in the total. The long dorsal fin, commencing above the middle of the pectoral, contains 40 rays; the anal, 23; the right pectoral, 21; and the left pectoral, 22. This ‘formula corresponds with that given by Giinther (“ Cat. Fishes,” Brit. Mus. vol. ii. p. 403), which is as follows :—D., 39-41; A., D2 t,o. The colour of the stuffed fish is a uniform dark brown, which most probably was nearly black when the specimen was fresh. The lateral line makes a wide curve over the region of the pectoral fin, and then passes gently down till it reaches the middle of the side in the caudal region ; the scales are very small in proporton to the size of the fish. 12 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY Although I entertain no doubt that the fish before us is the Pompzlus of older writers, the Blackfish of Jago and Borlase, the Perca nigra of Gmelin, the Centrolophus pompilus of Cuvier and Valenciennes, it shows in its proportions some differences from the current descriptions and figures, which it may be as well to note. The proportion of the length of the head to the total is given by Giinther, Day,! and Jordan and Everman,” as one in five; here it is rather less than one in five and a half. The length of the pectoral fin is only half that of the head, while Day gives the proportion as two-thirds to one, and in his figure it is as much as three-fourths to one. The caudal is also shorter and smaller than in the figures given by Cuvier and Valenciennes, Day, and Jordan and Everman; in the last-mentioned figure, for instance, the length of the fin is nearly one-fourth of the total, while in our specimen it is only one-sixth. The rays of the dorsal and anal fins are also represented in Day’s, as well as in Cuvier and Valenciennes’ figure, as being proportionally much longer than in the present case. The genus Cenxtrolophus of Lacépede belongs to the family Stromateide, and of its species only two occur in British waters, namely, C. xzger (Gmelin), and C. Britannicus (Gunther). The habitat of the former, or Blackfish, the subject of the present notice, is given by Giinther as“ Mediterranean, coasts of France, and south coasts of England.” It has also occurred in Ireland, and Jordan and Everman mention one specimen as having been obtained at Dennis, Massachusetts. As a British fish it is undoubtedly very rare, and I know only of one previous record of its occurrence in Scotland, namely, a brief notice by the late Rev. Dr. Gordon of Birnie, in the ‘“Zoologist” for 1852,» affine, G. O. Sars . ; : 2 eG jfimbriatus, Fischer . : * ke: ec? gad, eons littoralis, Poppe ' (os ! Males and females were obtained. I counted twenty-one or twenty-two ova in one of these females. * The male only of this species was observed. 26 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY CopEPODA—continued. tst Visit, 2nd Visit, 3rd Visit, July 6. July13. Aug. 24. * Delavalia palustris, Brady : : ; n.c. Canthocamptus staphylinus (Jurine) . 2 piles G eC; " minutus, Claus. ‘ 2 Hee: Hc: ise. es znornatus, TY. Scott ; | nc: Mc; = hirticornis, T. Scott . 4 S , crassus, G. O. Sars : > pani: c n.G, 5 pygmeus, G. O. Sars. SMCs c mc ws zschokket, Schmeil . : 1g, ne Moraria anderson-smitht, T. and A. Scott . fc. » poppet (Urazek) . ; : : n.c. * Laophonte curticauda, Boeck . : : TC. * Mannopus palustris, Brady : : : n.c. * Platychelipus littoralis, Brady . : : n.c. * Dactylopus tisboides, Claus : : : nc. The species marked thus (*), though occasionally found in the open sea, are usually more frequent in pools and estuaries where there is a large admixture of fresh water. The following remarks on some of the species may be of interest :— Tachidius littoralis was described and figured in part iii. of the “Tenth Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland,” 1892, as a new species under the name of Zachidius crassicornis, but I sub- sequently learned that it had been described by Dr. S. A. Poppe in 1881 under the name which it now bears. It is readily dis- tinguished from TZachidius brevicornis (Miill.) by the short stout antennules, which terminate so abruptly that they look as if their ends had been snipped off; the fifth thoracic feet are also narrow and quite unlike the two big, almost semicircular plates that form the fifth feet of Z. drevicornis. Canthocamptus minutus is a small species, and apparently widely distributed. When viewed laterally, the principal! tail setz seem to spring from beneath the overlapping short furcal joints ; from above, the minute bristles that fringe the anal oper- culum are bifid, and by these two characters alone the species may be distinguished. Canthocamptus tnornatus was first observed in Rescobie Loch, Forfarshire, and has since been found in various other parts of Scotland and also in England. ‘This species may be distinguished by the moderately long and tapering furcal stylets. Canthocamptus hirticornis is found most frequently in pools and lochans near the sea coast, but not necessarily in brackish water. NOTES ON FRESH AND BRACKISH-WATER ENTOMOSTRACA 27 Canthocamptus zschokket1—This so closely resembles C. pys- meus, that it may easily be mistaken for that species. There are two characters, however, by which the females of both may usually be distinguished ; in the former the long setze of the first four pairs of thoracic feet are straight ; in the latter the long sete of the fourth pair are distinctly curved at the ends ; in the first the anal operculum projects upwards at an acute angle; in the latter the-operculum is depressed. These peculiarities are best seen when the specimens are viewed laterally. C. zschokket was described and figured in part ili, of the “Eleventh Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland,” 1893, under the name of AZtheyella propinqua. Moraria poppet.—This is one of the rarer fresh-water Harpactids of Scotland. Hitherto I have observed it in only two localities, namely, in pools by the side of Loch Fad in Bute, and near the shore at Hunterston, Ayrshire; this is therefore the first time it has been recorded for the east of Scotland. It is a very small species and requires careful examination. A third species of Moraria—M. brevipes, G. O. Sars—has been recorded from several places in Scotland, and among others in Rescobie Loch, Forfar- shire. Laophonte curticauda.—This Laophonte is not so frequently met with in brackish water as one or two others of the same genus, such as Laophonte mohammed, Richard, which was discovered in brackish- water pools near Langbank, Renfrewshire, in 1897,” but which had previously been observed by Mr. Scourfield in a marsh at Barmouth Junction, North Wales, in November 1895. Laophonte “ittorale, T. and A. Scott, another brackish-water species, has been found near Aberlady, Firth of Forth, and at the mouth of the river Alness, Cromarty Firth.? Nannopus palustris and Platychelipus littoralis are two curious brackish and estuarine species described by Dr. G. S. Brady in his “ Monograph of British Copepoda.” Formerly they were considered to be moderately rare, but the extended research of recent years has shown their distribution to be fairly extensive. Dactylopus tisboides.—As pointed out by Dr. Brady, there appear to be two forms (or races) of this species—a brackish-water and a marine; that found in the Ythan belongs to the first, and is not 1 The two species mentioned here (C. zschokket and C. pygmea) should perhaps be more correctly referred to the genus Aztheyella of Dr. G. S. Brady, as they differ from the typical Cazthocamptus in the structure of the first pair of thoracic feet. 2 Part iii. of the ‘‘ Fifteenth Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland,” p. 317. 3 «Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist.” (6), vol. xii. p. 238, pl. xi. figs. 7-14 (October 1893). 28 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY uncommon between tide-marks, and I have found it in rock pools above high water. In the study of these, as of many other organisms, it is found that when one tries to limit his observations to the so-called “ fresh- water” or to the ‘‘ marine” species, the barrier set up between the two has to be more or less an arbitrary one, it being practically impossible to draw a line that will enable him to say “all on this side belong to the freshwater group and all on that to the marine.” We have in these brackish waters a kind of ‘‘no man’s land,” where the organisms of the sea and of the fresh water appear as if engaged in a perpetual struggle for the invasion of each other’s domain. Take, for example, the /Veomyss already referred to. This Schizopod is found in the Firth of Forth, in the Moray Firth, and elsewhere in water that differs little from typical sea-water, and it belongs to a group of crustacea whose habitat is decidedly marine, yet this species has been found in lochs such as Loch Wester in Caithness- shire, and Sinclair Loch in the Island of Barra in water which was quite fresh. On the other hand, we have Cyclops bicusptdatus—a typical fresh-water Copepod with 17-jointed antennules—trepresented in brackish-water pools by a form whose only apparent difference is that its antennules are 14-jointed, the difference being brought about by three joints having become coalescent with those next to them. This variety (var. /ubbockii, Brady) is found associated with Cyclops bisetosus (another fresh-water Cyclops), Delavalia palustris, Canthocamptus palustris, Eurytemora velox, and others. Then again we have Cyclocypris serena, and Candona candida, so common in our fresh-water lochs and ponds, sharing the same pools with Cythere pellucida, Cythere gibbosa, and Cytheridea torosa, which are all more or less typical brackish-water species. It will thus be seen that this ‘‘borderland” presents a most interesting field for investigation. For the following species I am indebted to Mr. R. M. Clark, B.Sc., F.L.S., who obtained them in a shallow pool near Millden, about six or seven miles north of Aberdeen, and not far from the sea. The names of the species are as follows :— DiapTomus castor (/urine).—Mr. Clark found this large and well-marked species moderately common in the pool referred to, and its occurrence there is all the more interesting from the fact that, so far as known to me, this is only the third time the species has with certainty been recorded from Scotland. In the “ Annals of Scottish Natural History” for July 1892, p. 202, I have a note on its occur- rence in the Braid Ponds near Edinburgh, but the place where these ponds existed has in recent years been greatly altered, and this Diaptomid is now probably extinct. The second was observed in a gathering of fresh-water Entomostraca collected in Helliers Water, Unst, Shetland, on 22nd June 1897, and sent to me by Mr. Robert SAGINA NIVALIS 29 Duthie, Fishery Officer.1 Déaptomus castor has been recorded from several parts of England.” CYPRIS RETICULATA (Zaddach).—This species, which was also moderately common, has not before been recorded for Aberdeen- shire. Considerable numbers of the same species have also been obtained by Mr. Clark in Corbie Loch. CYPRIS VIRENS (_/wrine).—A few fine specimens of this species were observed in the same pool with the other two. It may be noted in conclusion that in the present paper over a dozen species of Entomostraca, exclusive of brackish- water forms, are apparently new records for the county. SHGINA. NIVALTS COUN) rik: By P. Ewine, F.L.S. Sagina nivalis (Lindbl.) Fries, “Nov. Fl. Suec. Mant.,” iii p. 31 (1842). Spergula saginotdes, b. nivalis, Lindbl., in “ Physiogr. Sallisk, Didskr.” p. 328 (1837-38), et im “ Flora MIM 5O7 (1847). S.ntermecaia, Kenzi, in “Ledeby WI ross,7 "i, p.3 39 of) (1842). S. nivalis, b. laxa, Lindblom, in “ Bot. Notis.,” 1845, P00: b. cespitosa (J. Vahl), Nordst., in “ Bot. Notis.,’ 1880, p: £51. Avenana cespiosa, J. Wahl, in) “Rian? sehase: XxkiIx., tab, 2289 (1840). Spergula cespitosa, J. Vahl, Zc, in corrig. (1840). Sagina nivalis, a. congesta, Lindblom, in “ Bot. Notis.,” 1845, p. 66. Sagina cespitosa, Lange, “ Pl. Greenl.,” p. 138; “ Consp. ES Groene ps. 22. Mr. Bennett’s note regarding this plant in the October issue is very interesting ; and now that he has taken up the 1 «Sixteenth Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland,” part iii. p. 259 (1898). ; : 2 Revision of the British species of Cyclopidz and Calanidz, by Dr. G. S. Brady, ‘‘ Nat. Hist. Trans. Northumb. and Durham,” vol. xi. p. 94 (1891). 30 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY subject, it is to be hoped that the place of these hill-forms of Sagina will be put on a more satisfactory basis. As my name has been mentioned by Mr. Bennett in his note, will you kindly allow me to add a few observations as a slight contribution to the subject under discussion ? With reference to the plant mentioned as having been gathered by Mr. J. Backhouse on Glas Mhol in 1847, I am not at all sure that it is not a form of S. zzvalzs. There iss a specimen in the British Herbarium, Edinburgh, collected by Mr. F. M. Webb on Ben Lawers, 20th July 1877, apparently from the station for dAvenaria rubella in the western ravine, which specimen, judging from its loose habit and the broad leaves forming the barren rosette, has very much the appearance of a plant that has been growing on loose soil, such as that at the edge of the stream on Glas Mhol, where, indeed, a plant almost identical in appearance to this is to be found. Professor Babington, in the “ Journal of Botany,” vol. 2, pp. 340-342, describes the plant (.S. zzvalzs) ; but it is quite apparent that the material at his command was too scanty to form the basis for a satisfactory definition. Had he examined the six specimens gathered by Professor Balfour in 1864, now in the Brit. Herb., Edinburgh, I am convinced he would have modified his description considerably. In the case of plants grown on the Breadalbane range, and also on specimens from Norway, there appears to be a central stem or rosette of larger leaves, and this is clearly seen on some of the plants on the sheets of the Brit. Herb., Edin., on my own specimens from Perthshire, and on about a dozen of those I brought from the Dovrefjeld this year. As to whether the plant is of lax or czspitose habit seems to depend entirely on its stage of developement and age, and on the situation in which it is found. This is very clearly shown on the six specimens above referred to as having been collected by Professor Balfour in 1864. The peduncles are always very short and curved before flowering (S. cespitosa, Vahl (?)); but, as in most other Arctic species, the peduncle develops rapidly and stands erect after flowering. Pentamerous flowers may be found, but the great majority of those I have examined are 4-partite. In other respects SAGINA NIVALIS 31 Professor Babington’s remarks agree with my own observa- tions. I note that M. N. and A. Blytt, in “ Norges Flora,” state “ Blomsterne 5-delelige,” also that in Hooker’s ‘Students’ Flora,’ Ed. 3, 1884, it is made a sub-species of Lzwnu@z, with flowers 5-rarely 4-merous. All appear to have followed Fries, who seems to have described a 5-partite flower. I have over forty specimens before me as I write, half of which (from the Brit. Herb, Edin.) were very kindly shown me for purposes of comparison by Professor Bayley Balfour, M.D., to whom I feel much indebted for the privilege ; the others are from various stations in our own Highlands, as well as from the Dovrefjeld, Norway, and I cannot detect a hair of any kind on one of them. Professor Babington remarks that, in Norway and on Ben Lawers, S. zzvalis seems to grow at great elevations. In my experience the various heights for the Scottish plants vary from 2500 feet on Craig-an-Lochain to 3250 feet on Ben Lawers; while near Kongsvold on the Dovrefjeld it occurred at an elevation of about 4000 feet. I think Mr. Bennett, in asking botanists to re-gather this plant, was quite justified in saying “if possible,” as this is one of the rarest of our alpine plants, though I have gathered it all along the Breadalbane range from Ben Lawers to Chreag Mhor at the head of Glen Lochay. For obvious reasons I do not care to state distinctly the stations for it presently known to me; but as it may interest many botanists to know where Professor Balfour first found it, and where small plants are to be got even now, I may say it was about 50 feet above the saddle-back between Ben Lawers and Meal Garbh, as you ascend Ben Lawers from the Lochain-a- Chait side—the only station, so far as I am aware, known to Dr. Buchanan White for it. The plant, like many more of our Arctic species, is dying out, and only very small plants are to be seen now. I do not think there is the least chance of collecting one of these large plants that were often met with twenty years ago. The subject is one which merits some attention ; and it seems to me that, if Mr. Bennett can afford the time, he would find it interesting to study the various forms of Sagina occurring in the Breadalbane district, more especially those 32 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY found in the western ravine of Ben Lawers. For instance, I am not aware that any definite statement has been made in recent years as to whether that long-peduncled form of S. Linne@i is S. subulata, Presl., as Professor Balfour suspected, or not. RECORDS OF SCOTTISH. PLANTS “BOR argo ADDITIONAL EO WATSON’S TORO: GRAPHIGAL BOTANY: 2nd Bdy(1683): By ARTHUR BENNETT, F.L.S. THE abbreviations, etc., are the same as in former records, viz. “Ann: 16; one; April ao, in large numbers to P.M. to 4 A.M., thirty killed; April 20-21, about twenty at lantern; May 22, one; Oct. 8, first; Oct. 16, a great rush all night with Ring Ousels and Woodcock, thirty killed ; Tay—Bell Rock, Oct. 15, several on lantern, one killed. Outer Flebrides—Flannans, April 19, numerous; 21st, four; Oct. 23, great numbers, stayed for ten days. Argyll and Isles—Tiree, April 15, several; Oct. 8, flock. Skerryvore, Nov. 4, rush of Turdide, several killed; Nov. 8, three on lantern remained till daylight. Dhuheartach, Oct. 23, rush of Thrushes, Blackbirds, Redwings, and MOVEMENTS OF BIRDS IN SCOTLAND DURING toor 73 Larks; Oct. 31, with Fieldfares; Nov. 2 to 5, great numbers Redwings, Fieldfares, and Skylarks. C/Zyde—Queen’s Park, Glasgow, March 30, twelve. Carmichael, Oct. 23, arrived. So/way—Port- patrick, Oct. 30, a small flock. Principal movements, April 19-20, Oct. 14-16, Oct. 23, Nov. 4-5. TURDUS PILARIS (Fieldfare). Orkney—Noup Head, Oct 14, great rush, numbers on lantern all night; Nov. ro, one. Sule Skerry, April 30, two; May 7, five; Noy. 1, all night, with Blackbirds, etc. M/oray—Glen Cannich, Oct. 17. Zay—Auchinblae, May 4, last seen. Bell Rock, Jan. 3, three at lantern; May 1, on rock; Nov. 8-9, flying round light and striking; Nov. 11, one killed. orth—lIsle of May, Oct. 27, a few; Nov. 25, midnight, with Thrushes at lantern. Zzweed— Broughton, May 2, large flock. Outer Hebrides—F¥lannans, Oct. 30, great numbers; Nov. 3, numbers round light, with Black- birds, etc.; Nov. 11, fresh rush, with Starlings and Black- birds. Monach, Jan. 6, flying round light with Blackbirds, ete. ; Jan. 15, at light with Starlings and Larks. Island Glass, Oct. 6, at light, with Thrushes. Argyl and /sles—Tiree, Jan. 18; Dec. 25, flock. Skerryvore, Nov. 4-5, in rush of Turdidze, several killed. Dhuheartach, Oct. 29, numbers flying round light with other birds ; Nov. 4-5, great numbers, Redwings, Skylarks, etc.; Nov. 7, ten at lantern. Clyde— Carmichael, April 22, large flock; Oct. 19. Carmunnock, small flock. So/zway—Closeburn, April 28, a flock of 150, a similar lot at Black Linn went eastwards. Portpatrick, April 16, a small flock; Nov. 7, a flock. Principal movements, Oct. 14-16, Nov. 1-8-9, Nov. 27. TURDUS MERULA (Blackbird). Shetland—North* Unst, Oct. 15, on rock. Lerwick, Mayfield, May 5; nested at Helendale in 1901. Scousburgh, Oct. 15, one. Orkney—Noup Head, Jan. 22, killed on lantern. Sule Skerry, May 13, a 2 caught; Nov. 1, all night, with Fieldfares, etc. Zay— Bell Rock, March 12, flying in rays; April 6, on lantern. /orth— Isle of May, Nov. 9, a few all night. Outer Hebrides—Flannans, March g, a 2; March 15, numbers flying round light; Nov. 3, numbers flying round, several rested on lantern; Nov. 11, great many on Island; Nov. 20-23, many passing with Thrushes ; Dec. 3, several ¢’s; Dec. 22, plentiful. Monach, Jan. 6, with Fieldfares, Thrushes, etc; Jan. 15, with small birds in large numbers flying in rays; Oct. 13-15, with Thrushes, Starlings, Larks, and small birds. Island Glass, Oct. 26, numbers all day, left about 4 pms; Oct, 23; three flocks between to A.M. and 2 p.m.; Nov. 2, at lantern, some striking ; Nov. 9, a few with Thrushes. Smith, Lett. 1,.441-3; Dict. Nat Biogiiv.23.” The greater part of this refers not to the correspondent of Sir James Edward Smith but to the much better known Professor James Beattie, the author of “ An Essay on Truth” and other philosophical works, which like his poems, especially the “ Minstrel,’ enjoyed a very high reputation about the end of the eighteenth and beginning of the nineteenth centuries. The Life by Sir W. Forbes and the notices in the biographical collections, so far as I am aware, all refer to the poet. He was born in 1735 in Laurencekirk, and studied in Aberdeen in Marischal College and University,— then a keen rival of King’s College and University, though the two universities were only about a mile apart. (Since 1860 they have happily been united as parts of the University. of, Aberdeen:)) “hi 1753) her became MiAs tor Marischal College and University, where in 1760 he received the chair of Moral Philosophy. In 1787 his eldest son, James Hay Beattie, was appointed his colleague and successor in the chair, but died in 1790. In 1797 Professor Beattie ceased to lecture (a colleague and successor, George Glennie, having been appointed in 1796); and he died in 1803. The botanist, James Beattie, junior, was a nephew of the poet. He also was born in Laurencekirk, but the date of his birth is uncertain, and little is known about his private life. He studied in Marischal College and University ; graduated M.A. in 1783, and became Professor of Civil and Natural History in that university on 22nd October 1788. He married in 1794, and had a family of four sons and two daughters. He died on 5th October 1810. The scope of the subjects taught in the class of Civil and Natural History by his successor, Dr. James Davidson, is detailed somewhat fully in existing documents, and ranged over astronomy, light, electricity, galvanism, magnetism, gravitation, chemical union, the atmosphere, meteorology, geology, ‘mineralogy, constituent principles of vegetables, physiology of plants, outlines of the Linnean system, animal chemistry and physiology, and the natural and civil history of man. Two hours daily in a winter session were devoted to the above, A NEARLY FORGOTTEN SCOTTISH BOTANIST 169 and an hour daily, “for four months, to the study of the Latin language, in which the students generally read the ‘Georgics’ of Virgil, as being not only models of the most perfect Latin composition, but as affording grounds for illustrating the knowledge of the ancients with regard to natural history.” We have no information as to Professor Beattie’s course; but we may infer that he was a botanist by preference, and had a knowledge of the science much superior to that of his successor. It is on record that he taught classes of Botany numbering between ten and twenty students between 1801 and 1810, and that after his death Botany was taught by lecturers, with occasional intervals, until the chair was founded on the union of the universities in 1860. But a still more clear evidence of his interest in and successful study of the flora of Scotland is afforded by the earliest volumes of the “ Transactions of the Linnean Society” and the “ Flora Britannica” of Sir James E. Smith, to whom plants were sent by Professor Beattie from “ Mearnsshire ” (Kincardine) and from near Aberdeen. He is usually named as the first discoverer in Britain of Lzzz@a borealis, at Inglismadie in Mearnsshire. He also forwarded examples of Carices, referred to by Sir J. E. Smith in his original descriptions (“ Trans. L. S.” v. pp. 266-273, read 3rd December 1799) of the species as previously unknown. Among these were :— C. binervis, very common on the driest moors about Aberdeen. C. levigata, marshes near Aberdeen. C. Micheliana, near Aberdeen. First described as a new species, but afterwards referred by its author to C. recurva (=C. flacca). C. Davalliana, A specimen “discovered in marshy ground in Mearnsshire by Professor James Beattie, junior, of Aberdeen,” sent by him as a form of C. azozca, but confidently determined by Smith to be distinct, though not confirmed by other botanists, and now usually regarded as due to error. C. teretiuscula, Good., is another scarce and local sedge detected by Professor Beattie near Aberdeen. 170 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY SCOTTISH, RUBE By Prof. James W. H. Trait, A.M., M.D., F.R.S. THE genus Rubus has within recent years been the subject of careful revision (especially in England and Wales), with the aim of determining the relations of the forms that exist in Britain to these of the continent of Europe. Many changes have had to be accepted in the nomenclature ; and several new forms have been recognised as distinct from those already named or known as British. Foremost among British students of Rubi is the Rev. W. Moyle Rogers, F.L.S., to whose papers in the “Journal of Botany,” followed by the “ Handbook of British Rubi” in 1900, we owe most of the great recent advance in this study. Mr. Rogers has added to the debt under which these publications has laid ‘us by his readiness to examine and name the collections of other botanists, who have frequently benefited by his kind- ness. We in Scotland have to thank Mr. Rogers also for the great additions he has made to our records of Rubi in Perthshire and in several counties of the west and south- west of Scotland, the lists for those counties alone approach- ing fulness. In a recent paper in the “ Journal of Botany” Mr. Rogers has summed up our present knowledge of the distribution of the genus in Great Britain and Ireland. Though the Scottish lists are much extended since those in the second edition of Watson’s “ Topographical Botany,” published in 1883, they are still very meagre, and prove that there is yet much to be done. We cannot expect that many forms will be found in the islands and the northern counties, yet even in them additions should reward a careful search. Mr. Rogers has shown how much richer in forms the counties visited by him are than might have been anticipated from previous records; and no doubt in all the other southern and midland counties many unrecorded forms occur. Of the 169 forms of Rubi that have been distinguished in the British Islands, only 65 are known with certainty from Scotland, in marked contrast to the 164 that have been met with in the southern half of England (121 of SCOMDISH RUB 171 these in the county of Hereford alone), with a general average of 40. The average of forms as yet recorded with certainty from Scottish counties is but little above 11, while the highest number (for West Perth and Mid Perth) is only 32. Several vice-counties are almost unrepresented. Omit- ting those counties in which fruticose Rubi are known to be scarce, Mr. Rogers states that (besides FR. zd@us, which has been found in all the vice-counties) of forms accurately and clearly determined, Peebles and Haddington yield I each, Selkirk and Edinburgh 3 each, Roxburgh 4, Lanark and Forfar 6 each, Berwick 7, Dumfries, Fife, and Elgin 8 each, while the records for most of the other counties are evidently very defective. Owing to the numerous changes in nomenclature result- ing from recent researches in the genus, the older floras and lists cannot now be relied on except for &. zdeus, R. saxatilis, and R. chamemorus, and possibly for 2. corylifolius in the collective sense. “Rubus suberectus” and “R. rhamntfolius” of these lists may each represent any one of several forms now distinguished from each other. Even the lists of “ Topographical Botany,” ed. 2, cannot be implicitly followed. Yet I have thought it may help towards a more accurate and full investigation of the Rubi in Scotland if what is already on record for each vice-county and for each form is brought together and placed at the service of those interested in the Flora of Scotland. In what follows I have endeavoured to do so, drawing the information from numerous sources, and indicating briefly for most forms the name of the observer, and where the record may be found. Most of these indications are given in full when first mentioned, and abbreviated in later references. Some works and papers refer to several vice-counties or to the whole country, and are frequently referred to. These are H. C. Watson’s “ New Botanist’s Guide” (issued for Scot- land ‘in 1837), hiss“@opographical Botany,’ ed. 2, 13383; a list by Mr. Rogers in the “Journal of Botany” in 1895, his “Handbook of British Rubi,’ published in 1900, in which the earlier records were revised and corrected, and a paper by him “On the Distribution of Rubi in Great Britain,” in the “ Journal of Botany” (April 1902), and the 172 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY continuous series of “Records” by Mr. Bennett additional to “ Topographical Botany.” These are abbreviated respectively as “N.B. Guide,” “ Top. Bot.,” “ Handbook,” and “1895 List,” or W. WM. R., and “ Add. Rec.” followed by the year. In the county lists R denotes forms accepted by Mr. Rogers as correct, (R) denotes records regarded by him as probably correct, and [R] those ‘requiring investigation. After the several county lists follows a systematic list of the forms, and after each an abstract by numbers of the districts in which it has been noted. These numbers are grouped thus: those that are in ordinary figures not inclosed in brackets are accepted by Mr. Rogers as absolutely trust- worthy, in the “ Handbook” or in subsequent communications. Those in similar figures but in round brackets, thus (88), are regarded by him as practically trustworthy, though not seen by him in or from the district; similar figures in square brackets show that he regards the records as much in need of confirmation ; and zfa/zcs denote districts not included for the several forms in Mr. Rogers’ book or papers, though mentioned elsewhere, as stated under the several vice- counties. Some of these records are probably correct, while others are certainly erroneous; but the uncertainty that attaches to them renders them of use chiefly as sug- gesting queries for investigation in the districts referred to. After the systematic list follows an abstract of the records in Hennedy’s “ Clydesdale Flora,” Sonntag’s “ Flora of Edin- burgh,” and Ewing’s “ Glasgow Catalogue” of certain forms mentioned in these works as occurring in districts not else- where noted. These also may be regarded as subjects for further investigation. 72. DUMFRIES. R. idzeus.—R. var. obtusifolius. A. Craig-\Christte, 1887, “Add: (Ree: 1387."—R. R. fissus. ‘‘Top. Bot.” ; “ Near Moffat, C. Bazley, 1898.”—R. R. suberectus. “Top. Bot.”—[R]. R. plicatus. “Top. Bot.”—[R]. R. affinis. ‘Top. Bot.”; ‘ Upper Nithsdale,” /ingland, 1895. R. carpinifolius. “J. Sadler, 1858,” “ Flora of Dumfries.” R. Lindleianus. “E. F. Linton, 18go,” ‘ Fl. D.”—(R). R. rhamnifolius, Scott Zdliott, 1893, “Fl. D.” SCOTTISH RUBI 173 R. pulcherrimus (as cordifolius). Fingland, ‘Add. Rec. 1891,” Loos. ble Dy R. villicaulis (as var. zzszdaris).—R. R. macrophyllus. “Fl. D.”; Az. Bennett, “ Add. Rec. 1887.”—R. subsp. Schlechtendalii. var. amplificatus. 1891, /ingland, ‘Add. Rec. 1891”; near Closeburn Castle, Fizgland, 1895.—(R). R. infestus. /ingland, “ Add. Rec. 1891”; Drumlanrig Bridge, Fingland, 1895.—|R]. R. radula (s. Zaz). “Top. Bot.” ; near Thornhill, Azzg/and.—|R]. [R. humifusus. ‘ Top. Bot.” (=. pallidus, W. and N.)]. R. Koehleri. Auldgirth, 1887, /ingdand, “ Add. Rec. 1887.” subsp. dasyphyllus (as var. pallidus). ‘Top. Bot.” ; by Moffat Water, Zzutons, 1890.—(R). R. corylifolius. 1900.—R. R. saxatilis. “J. Sadler, 1858,” “‘ Fl. D.”—R. Re Chameemornis, “Rey. W. Singer, 1843,” “El DY; Add Rees 13362” 73. KIRKCUDBRIGHT. R. idaeus.—R. R. fissus. “/. A‘Andrew,” “ Add. Rec. 1887.”—[R]. R. suberectus. ‘‘ Galloway” in J. Ball’s Herbarium at Kew.—(R). R. affinis. Borgue, C. Bailey, 1890. R. rhamnifolius. “F. R. Coles, 1893,” Fl. D.—(R). R. Scheutzii. Near Dalbeattie, Batley, 1899.—R. R. pulcherrimus.—R. R. villicaulis, swdsf. Selmeri. “ Dalbeattie to Urr, Zazley, 1899.—R. [R. macrophyllus. “/. Af‘Andrew, 1882,” “ Fl. D.”] R. Sprengelii. 1889, C. Bazley.—R. R. radula. G. C. Druce, 1883.—[R]. R. Koehleri. J/‘Andrew, ‘“‘ Add. Rec. 1887.” subsp. dasyphyllus. Dalbeattie to Urr, Bazley, 1899.—R. R. plinthostylus. A specimen gathered by C. Gatley near Borgue was so named by C. C. Babington, but the record greatly needs confirmation.—| R]. .hirtus. “7. W‘Andrew,” “ Add. Rec. 1887.”—[R]. . corylifolius (s. Zaz). ‘“P. Gray, 1848,” “Fl. D.”—R. var. sublustris.—(R). . Balfourianus. ~ **Fieldi€lub, 1393.7 “EI D.” . czesius. Coast in Colvend, /. Fraser, 1883. . saxatilis, lV. B. G. 1837; “Gray Catalogue,” “‘ Top. Bot.”—R. ARF FA 74. WIGTON. . ideus. G. C. Druce, 1883.—R. . suberectus. G. C. D. 1883.—[R]. . plicatus. ‘Top. Bot.” ; near Stranraer, 1901, / A. Rogers.—R. Are 174 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY Won pre wo Pp we Ww . affinis. ‘‘ Balfour,” “Top. Bot.” . incurvatus. 1900.—R. . Lindleianus. C. Bazley, ‘Add. Rec. 1890.”—(R). . thamnifolius. C. Bazley, 1883 ; near Stranraer, 1901, W. WZ. R. —R. Scheutzii. Near Stranraer, 1900, W. AZ. R.—R. . pulcherrimus (as polyanthemus). C. Bailey, “ Add. Rec. 1890.” —R. . villicaulis, swbsp. Selmeri. G. C. Druce, 1896; generally common, 1901, W. MW. R.—R. . argentatus. I900.—R. rusticanus. Coast, N. of Stranraer, t901, W. WZ. R.—R. . macrophyllus, szdsp. Schlechtendalii. Near Stranraer, 1go1, W. M. R.—R. Sprengelii. 1889, C. Bazley.—R. . hirtifolius, vav. danicus, 1g900.—R. pyramidalis. Near Stranraer, 1901, W. AZ. R.—R. anglosaxonicus, swbsp. raduloides. Stranraer, 1901, W. AZ. R. —R. infestus. 1900.—R. Borreri.—|R]. radula.—R. rosaceus, vay. hystrix. Stranraer, 1901. IV. AZ. R.—R. Koehleri, swbsp. dasyphyllus. Borgue, Bazley.—R. hirtus. Borgue, 1889, Baziey. . corylifolius. Whithorn, 1883, Bazley.—R. var. sublustris.—(R). var. cyclophyllus.—(R). R. cesius. G. C. D. 1883.—R. R. saxatilis, G. C. D., “Add. Rec. 1887.”—R. 75 S\N RS R. idzeus.—R. R. fissus. In W. AZ Rs list in 1895, but omitted from ‘ Hand- book” as not properly authenticated.—R. R. Rogersil. Colmonell, t901, W. AZ, R.—R. R. plicatus. Pinwherry, Colmonell, r901, W. AZ. R—R. R. Lindleianus. Frequent, 1901, W. A. R.—R. R. rhamnifolius. Colmonell and Glen App, 1901, W. JZ R.—R. R. Scheutzii. Ballantrae, 1901, W. AZ. R.—R. R. pulcherrimus. Very common, 1901, W, AZ. R.—R. R. Lindebergii. Colmonell, r901, WY. AZ R.—R. R. villicaulis, swésp. Selmeri. ‘“‘ Very common,” 1901, W. AZ. R.—R. R. rusticanus. “Balfour” (as dscolor), “‘Top. Bot.” ; Ballantrae, 1901, W. M. R.—R. R. pyramidalis. Skelmorlie, r901, W. AZ. R.—R. me We bd id bd nm pre Popp PAPA PPP Pp pp SCOTTISH RUBI 175 melanoxylon. Skelmorlie, rg01, W. 7. &.—R. infestus. Colmonell, r901, W. AZ. R.—R. radula. Ballantrae, 1901, W. MW. R.—R. . Koehleri, szbsf. dasyphyllus. Skelmorlie, etc., 1901, W. AZ. R. —R. . corylifolius. Locally abundant, 1901, W. JZ. R.—R. var. sublustris. Colmonell, 1901, W. AZ. R.—R. var. cyclophyllus. Colmonell, 1901, W. JZ. R.—R. cesius. Pinwherry to Ballantrae, 1901, W. AZ. R.—R. saxatilis. ‘ Duncan’s Catalogue,” ‘‘ Top. Bot.”—R. Chameemorus. Cairntable. 76. RENFREW. idzeus.—R. suberectus. ‘‘ Top. Bot.”—[R]. plicatus. Kilmalcolm, rgo1, Il. MZ. Rogers.—R. Rogersil. Kilmalcolm, tg901, W. AZ. R.—R. affnis. ‘‘Top. Bot.” incurvatus. ‘‘ Balfour,” “Top. Bot.”—(R). Lindleianus. “Top. Bot.” ; ‘‘ Frequent,” 1901, W. AZ. R.—R. . rhamnifolius. «901, W. AZ, R.—R. Scheutzii. Langbank, 1901, W. JZ. R.—R. pulcherrimus. ‘Very common,” 1901, WW. AZ R.—R. villicaulis, swbsp. Selmeri. ‘‘ Very common,” 1got, IV. JZ. R.—R. macrophyllus. Ashton, r901, W. AZ. R.—R. melanoxylon. Kilmalcolm, etc., tg901, W. AZ. R.—R. infestus. Ashton, 1901, W. AZ. R.—R. radula, swbsp. sertiflorus. Kilmalcolm and Ashton, 1gor1, W. M. R.—R. echinatus (as vwd7s). “Top. Bot.”—(R). Koehleri, ssp. dasyphyllus. On hill above Ashton, 1902, W. M. R.—R. . corylifolius. Locally abundant, 17. JZ, &.—R. var. cyclophyllus (as var. conjungens). ‘Top. Bot.” : Ashton, tgo1, W. M. R.—R. cesius. Ashton, 1go1, WV. JZ. R.—R. saxatilis. ‘ Hennedy’s Catalogue,” ‘‘ Top. Bot.”—R. 77, LANARK. .ideus. Hopkirk, in “ FI. Glott.” 1813.—R. .fissus. C. H Waddell, “ Add. Rec. 1899.”—R. . plicatus.—[R ]. affinis. ‘“ Add. Rec. 1887,” “‘M‘Kay, des¢e Ar. Bennett,” but no authentic specimen seen from north of Anglesey ; probably the plant was Se/mert;, W. M. R. 176 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY R. villicaulis, swésp. Selmeri.—[R]. R. hirtifolius. C. A. Waddell, “ Add. Rec. 1899.” var. danicus.—R. R. corylifolius. AHopkirk, in “FI. Glott,” 1813; C. H Waddell, “Add. Rec. 1899.7—R: var. sublustris.—(R). R. saxatilis. AHopkirk, in ‘Fl. Glott.” 1813; “Hennedy, Cata- logue,” ‘‘ Top. Bot.”—R. R. Chamemorus. Hopkirk, in “ Fl. Glott.” 1813 ; “Top. Bot.”—R. (Zo be continued.) ERICA YS LUA Ka, NOVATHYBR, By E. F. Linton, M.A. IN a notice of the late Dr. C. Stuart in the last number (p. 65), Eveca Tetrahx Stuartz is said to commemorate “his discovery of a very distinct subspecies of heath in Connemara.” I understand that this view obtained at first ; but when I received specimens nearly two years ago from Mr. W. B. Boyd, I learnt that he and Dr. Macfarlane con- sidered the Evca to be a hybrid of £. Tetralix and some other. On examination I was convinced that the new heath was a hybrid between £. mediterranea, L. (E, hibernica, Syme) and #. Mackazz, Hook.; and Dr. Stuart, on seeing my opinion and comments, wrote to me at once that he was disposed to consider it the correct one. But it does not appear that this opinion or any description of the plant has been put on record. Unlikely as this combination would be, on account of the difference in the flowering season, the dark brown anthers, distinctly though slightly exserted in #. Stuartz, can only be accounted for by descent from £. mediterranea ; the narrow corolla and its pale colour in the lower part afford strong confirmation ; and though the species is normally a spring- flowering one, the flowers are apt to linger on, or else the plant flowers again, as. I have witnessed in my own garden. Then £. Mackait seems to be required as the other parent rather than &. Tetralix by the hairy stem or at least young twigs, by the broad leaves, which are almost identical with those of 4. MWackaz in shape and clothing, and perhaps as well by the colouring of the upper part of the corolla and A NEW FORM OF EUPHRASIA CURTA, FR. 177 the compact clusters of flowers. In #. Tetrahx the twigs are tomentose, not hairy, and the leaves lanceolate or linear, pubescent above and mealy all over beneath. The following may serve as a description :— Erica Stuart, nov. hybr.—Leaves in whorls of four, or irregularly scattered, ovate-oblong or lanceolate, ciliate, clabrous above, puberulous (mealy) beneath except on the glabrous midrib, margins revolute; young twigs hairy ; sepals ovate-acuminate ciliate, puberulous towards the tip ; corolla cylindric-urceolate, nearly white below, shading upwards to deep rose-purple ; stamens and styles somewhat exserted ; ovary nearly glabrous with a few hairs upwards. ANEW “FORM-OF BOPHRASIA CORTPA, ER By Prof. James W. H. Trait, A.M., M.D., F.R.S. AMONG numerous gatherings of HEuphrastce made by me during 1900 and 1901, which Mr. Frederick Townsend, F.L.S., very kindly examined and named for me, there was one form of especial interest which he identified as previously known to him only from the Shetland Islands, where it had been found by Mr. W. H. Beeby on Serpentine hills about 200 feet above Baltasound in 1897, and from Wales, where it had been found by Rev. W. R. Linton at about 1500 feet altitude, on silurian and trap hills, near Bethesda, Carnarvon- shire, in 1900. The specimens gathered by myself, on gth September 1901, were growing plentifully on the side of a turf bank near the loch of Loirston in Kincardineshire, on poor granite soil, at about 270 feet above the sea. This form Mr. Townsend regards as belonging to #. curta, Fr., but as very distinct from any named form of that plant. He has therefore given to it the name of fzccola, as a new variety, and has permitted me to make what use I please of his manuscript. Of this permission advantage is now taken to give his description and diagnosis below, as pre- pared from the specimens brought from Shetland by Mr. Beeby. “ Euphrasia curta, Fr., forma piccola,’ Townsend, in MS., “caulis tenuis erectus, 24-3 cm. altus, simplex sed infra 43 E 178 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY medium ramis curtissimis flores non gerentibus instructis, setis crispulis albidis reversis pubescens, rubescens vel fuscescens ? Folia numerosa, internodiis plerumque brevibus, obtusa cuneato-ovata, inferiora opposita dentibus utrinque I-2 obtusis, superiora subopposita vel alternantia dentibus utringue 3 obtusis. Bractee alternantes, in tertia parte inferiore latissima, inferiores obtuse vel acute dentibus utringue 3 acutis, superiores acute, dentibus 2-3 acutis. Folia omnia planiuscula, sicca nigricantia, 2 pagina superiore et infertore setis sublongis crispults albidis obsita. Flores pauct subsessiles iz spica brevi, fructu paululum elongata. Calyx indumento ei foliorum et bractearum similis, dentibus triangularibus acutis. Corolla parva 3-4 mm. longa alba labiis zequilongis striis (coeruleis ?) notata ; lobi labii inferioris subeequales, emarginati, macula flava picti; lobi_ labii superioris integri. Stigma curvatum. Capsula superne lata truncata Vix emarginata, basin versus angustata, longitudine latitudinem circa duplo-superans, calyces dentes non superans plerumque subequans superne pilosa margine longe ciliata. “Euphrasia piccola is a remarkably elegant plant; its slender unbranched stem (though doubtless the short branches or buds in the axils of the lower leaves would occa- sionally become developed), its numerous leaves and short inter- nodes, its few and small flowers, and comparatively abundant long white pubescence are very noticeable characters. Our plant differs from &. mzcrantha, Brenner, by its flowers, which exceed the bracts, the latter being acutely, not obtusely toothed, by the entire lobes of the upper lip of the corolla, and by the pubescence just alluded to. From dwarf un- branched specimens of the usual type of curta, Fr., it differs by its much smaller flowers, smaller and obtusely toothed leaves, smaller bracts, and much more slender habit ; from E. mollis by its more numerous leaves and short internodes, its fewer-toothed bracts, and the entire lobes of the upper lip of the corolla; from £. gracilis by its smaller corolla, the upper and lower lobes of which are equal, by its obtusely- toothed leaves, and by the presence of the almost shaggy white pubescence ; from small specimens of &. scotzca by the last-named character, and by the much smaller ovate (not cuneate-oblong) leaves and bracts.” THE HERBARIUM OF THE LATE MR. JOHN SIM 179 THE HERBARIUM (HEPATIC4) OF THE LATE Mr. JOHN SIM. By Symers M. Macvicar. I HAVE recently had the opportunity of examining this herbarium through the kindness of Mrs. J. Sim and the instrumentality of Professor Trail. It is composed of several hundreds of specimens from Scotland, with a few from other parts. I shall refer here only to some of the Scottish plants gathered by Sim, but there is also in the herbarium a large number of plants which were gathered by the Rev. Dr. Fergusson, Fearn, mostly from the counties of Forfar and Perth. The packets are partly mounted on sheets, and partly loose. There are 106 species from Scotland represented, the large majority having been gathered by Sim in Kincardine and Aberdeen, with some collected in various parts of Shetland during a visit in 1878. Some of the specimens are of much interest, either for their rarity, or for their distribution in our country. Among these are the following. When the locality is not definitely stated it is to be understood to be in the northern part of Kincardineshire, in which district Sim resided. Frullania fragilifolia, Tay\.—In several localities, and in Unst and at Busta in Shetland. / germana, Tayl.—In two stations near Lerwick. This Atlantic species, hitherto only known from the British Isles, has recently been identified from the Fezrdes by Herr C. Jensen. F. dzlatata (L.).— This widely-spread species of our sheltered low ground is rare in exposed northern parts of Scotland. It has only been found in small quantity by the Rev. D. Lillie in Caith- ness, where it appears to be confined to planted trees ; and it has not been found on the Feroes, which have a very similar hepatic flora to our own. It was therefore interest- ing to see two specimens of the species in Sim’s herbarium from rocks near Lerwick. Herberta adunca (Dicks.)—From Unst, Shetland, there is a minute black form with leaves which are not secund. I have seen a somewhat similar plant from the summit of Craig Chailleach, Killin. 180 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY Chandonanthus setiformis (Ehrh.).—The var. alpina from Slack of Birnie in Kincardine. I have not been able to trace this station with absolute certainty, but Mr. J. W. Fordyce, Inchmarlo, who has kindly supplied me with information on the topography of the district, points out that this almost certainly refers to Birnie Hill on Cairn-o’- Mount. The interest of the station lies in its low altitude (900 ft.) for the plant. The next lowest that I know of is on Carn Dearg, Aviemore, at 1200 ft. Lepidozia cupressina (Sw.).—Yell, Shetland. This is the most northern locality, so far, for this Atlantic species. . trichoclados, C. Miill.—Kerloch, Kincardine, with female inflorescence, 1878. First described as a British species distinct from Z. setacea in “ Journal of Botany” for April of present year. Sim’s plant is the earliest: Scottish one, so far as yet known. Cephalozia Lammersiana (Hiiben.).—F rom two localities, 1879. C. Francisct (Hook.)—There is a specimen of this rare species, with perianths, from Peters Hill, Birse, Aberdeen. Pleuroclada tslandica (Nees).—Lochnagar, 1876. The only other locality in Scotland for this high alpine plant, from which I have seen a specimen, is the rather unexpected one of Goatfell in Arran. This was gathered by Mr. Adamson in 1840, and is in Professor Dickie’s herbarium, the hepaticee of which I have had the opportunity of examining through the kindness of Professor Trail. Hygrobiella laxifolia (Hook.).—Several localities near the borders of Kincardine and Aberdeen ; also from three places in Shetland. Scapania subalpina (Nees).— From several localities. This species is frequent in subalpine parts of Scotland. S. nemorosa (L.).—One locality, also from Lochnagar. An uncommon plant in Scotland. What is found under this name in the older herbaria is generally S. vesupinata, Dum. or S. purpurascens. S. rosacea (Corda).— Kerloch. S. umbrosa (Schrad.).—An interesting locality for this species is Shetland. It has not been found on the Fer6es, and it appears to be rare on the less sheltered parts of the west coast of Norway. THE HERBARIUM OF THE LATE MR. JOHN SIM 181 Diplophyllum obtusifolium (Hook.)—A specimen of this rare species from Gateside, Strachan, 1878. It is accom- panied with D. albicans, as has been usually the case in the few Scottish plants which I have seen; but it can be distinguished from that common species by the absence of the white line of cells in centre of leaf, and by its paroicous inflorescence. D. Dickson¢ (Hook.).—From several places in Kincardine and Aberdeen, frequently with /umg. mznuta. Plagtochila spinuwlosa (Dicks.).— One specimen from Crathes wood, Kincardine. This common western species is very rare towards the east coast. There is a specimen from St. Andrews in the late Charles Howie’s herbarium. Jungermannia atrovirens, Schleich.— Northmavin, Shet- land, with perianths, associated with Ceph. becuspidata, Scap. purpurascens, Nardia scalaris, and Aneura ambrosiotdes. J. spherocarpa, Hook.—Kerloch, 1879. This species, which is given as being generally distributed in England, is rare in Scotland according to my experience. /. autumnalis, DC. —Den of Lathers, Kincardine, 1878. This plant has been recorded from few places in Scotland. It is probably uncommon, but should be looked for on half-buried stones and boulders in places shaded by trees. There is a specimen of the very rare var. Schraderz, a plant of wet ground among Sphagnum, in the Edinburgh Herbarium, labelled from “ Scotch Alps,” gathered by Drummond about the year 1847. It does not appear to have been found in Scotland since then. /. Flerkiz, Web. and Mohr.—A_ specimen of var, Baueriana, Schiffn., from Invery, Kincardine, 1879. This variety, which has not, I think, been previously mentioned as British, is described by Professor Schiffner in his paper on /uzg. collaris in “ Oesterr. bot. Zeit.” 1900, No. 8. It is an inter- mediate plant between /. /lerkii and /. lycopodiordes. The leaves are generally four-lobed, the middle lobe being the largest, and the dorsal lobe the smallest ; they are all usually pointed, with one or more ending in a long cilium. There are also frequently long cilia at the base of postical margin of leaf. I have seen specimens of this variety from several localities on the east side of Scotland, usually from places at a small elevation above sea-level, but I have not, so far, seen it from the west coast. It is liable to be mistaken for /. ycopodotdes, 182 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY but this latter is, I think, solely an alpine plant with us. //. capitata, Hook.—Two localities, 1880. /. decrenata, Schmid. —From three localities, and from one in Shetland. Although recorded from few places in Scotland, I expect that this species will be found to occur in most counties. The small size of the plant has probably led to its being overlooked ; but it is easily known by the reddish brown colour of the nearly erect, rather acutely-lobed leaves, and the upper half of perianth deeply plicate, with the apex hyaline. The usual locality for it is on a dry thin layer of soil among rocks or stones. /. alpestris, Schleich.—Lochnagar, 1876. /. bantriensis, Hook.—The typical plant from Balham bog, Kincardine, 1875. Marsupella aquatica (Lindenb.) Schiffn.—Lochnagar and Mavisgrind, Shetland. This has usually been described as a variety of J. emarginata, but Schiffner, Stephani, and others consider it a good species. It is the Mardia robusta of Lindberg, and is a frequent plant in subalpine districts of Scotland. Principally distinguished from 7. emarginata by its generally larger size, often elongate when in streams, leaves widely patent, almost circular when flattened out, instead of quadrate-rotund, very shortly emarginate with the lobes rotundate. Acolea obtusa (Lindb.)—Mount Shade and Slack of Birnie, Kincardine; Peters Hill near Birse, rocks above Powlair, and Lochnagar, Aberdeen. 4. concinnata (Lightf.). —tThis more alpine species is represented by specimens from Mount Shade, a hill of low elevation (1662 ft.) for the plant; also from Lochnagar. Saccogyna viticulosa (Mich.).—There are a few stems of this species from Den of Lathers, 1868. It is a very rare plant towards the east coast, though common on the west side of the country. ZOOLOGICAL NOTES. Harp Seal in the Tay.—The note on this species in the last number of the ‘‘ Annals” (p. 117) leads me to remark that the Harp Seal (Phoca grenlandica) has been observed on more than one occasion in the Tay. A handsome male of about five years ZOOLOGICAL NOTES 183 was captured in Invergowrie Bay, Tay, on the 6th of September 1895. Itisnow inthe Museum of the Perthshire Society of Natural Science, and was duly recorded in the “ Proceedings ” of the Society. A member of the Tay Salmon Syndicate saw one in the autumn of last year, but was unable to get a shot at it—ALEXANDER M. RopceER, Perth. Bird Notes from Southern Shetland.—We had a great storm from the north during the last week of January, and for a few days afterwards I saw a great many Little Auks in Spiggie Bay. On 14th February I started a Woodcock quite near to the house. The cold was then intense, and I am afraid that it will prove very bad for the Grouse in Shetland. I saw a King Eider in March; I have never seen this bird before, but I am certain as to its identity. The Black-headed Gulls and Oystercatchers returned from their winter quarters at the end of March, and I saw a pair of Chaffinches on the 29th of that month. On the 13th of April I saw the first Wheatear and Wagtail; on the r4th there were many Redbreasts all over the district ; on the 15th a few Redwings and many Field- fares. A Hedge Sparrow appeared on 17th April. I sawa Kestrel on the wall near the house on the 2oth; it is strange that we see one or two about this date and during May, but at no other time.— THOMAS HENDERSON, Jun., Dunrossness. Snow Bunting in Argyllshire in Summer.—When sheltering under the lee side of the summit of Ben Cruachan (alt. 3689 feet) from the strong breeze blowing on tst July last, a brilliant pied bird, accompanied by one much duller in colour, came across the ridge, and hovered around for a short time. It was the first time I had seen the Snow Bunting (Péectrophenax nivalis) in summer, and the distinct black and white plumage of the male was very con- spicuous. The birds returned to the north-east face of the hill, and appeared to settle down amongst the rocks and stones. I heard the song, rising through the breeze, but had to leave without being able to trace the birds further.—Hucu Boyp Watt, Glasgow. Fulmar, Rough-legged Buzzard, and Stock-Dove in Ayrshire. —Mr. Charles Berry of Lendalfoot informs me that in July rg00 he saw a Fulmar (/i/marus glacialis) on two or three separate days, in his neighbourhood, flying about with a few gulls; and about a week thereafter he found one dead on the shore, possibly the same individual. ‘This is an addition to the British Association Hand- book list of Clyde birds. My friend Captain Walter Baxter, of the Anchor Line s.s. Columbia, having informed me that Alec Robson, the Marquis of Ailsa’s keeper, had in his possession a Rough-legged Buzzard (Luteo lagopus), trapped on Mochrum Hill, Maybole, about 1898, I called on Robson in May last year, and had the pleasure of seeing the bird. Another shot at a later date, 184 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY but badly damaged by falling on a rock, was not preserved. In May this year, my friend Robert Wilson found a nest of the Stock- Dove (Columba enas) on the Changue Burn, near Darvel. None of the species above named is included in Gray and Anderson’s “ Birds of Ayrshire, etc.” (“‘ Proc. Nat. Hist. Soc. Glasgow,” vol. i.), but it may be mentioned that Procellaria glacialis is included in the list of birds of Kilbirnie parish in the New Statistical Account (1840-41).—JOHN PaTERSon, Glasgow. Osprey in the Outer Hebrides.—I have seen an Osprey (Pandion halietus) which was shot in April of this year in the island of Lewis. This is, I believe, the first established record of the species in the Outer Hebrides.—T’. E. BuckLey, Thurso. Curious Experience with a Heron.—When I came to Loch- maddy, I was told what I thought was a strange story, viz. that it was possible to stalk the Heron, and when close upon him, by making a noise, to render him so stupid or helpless that he would be unable to take wing, and could be caught by the hand. I was told of several occasions on which this had been done, and, incredulous, resolved to try the experiment. On one occasion | had been at Ushenish, and was returning to Jochskipport in an open boat along with a policeman and several others. Shortly after we turned into the loch one of the crew drew my attention to a Heron standing on the shore, 50 or 60 yards off. I immediately set up a loud shouting, in which all the others who were in the boat joined, and the Heron became stupid, and instead of taking wing, ran backwards and forwards on the shore in a confused manner. I had a retriever with me, and stopped shouting for the purpose of directing her to go for the Heron. The whole crew stopped shout- ing also, and the Heron took to wing. She had, however, to cross the loch not far from us, and we all resumed shouting and bawling, and suddenly in the midst of the row the Heron collapsed and fell into the sea. The dog retrieved, and the policeman tied its legs and beak and took it ashore, killed it, carried it home, and ate it.— ANDREW M‘ELFrisH, Lochmaddy. [Other experiences of this nature have been related to me, and I once witnessed something similar myself.—J. A. H.-B.] Pintail in Caithness-shire.—On the ist of August 1901 an adult female Pintail (4zas acuta) was shot near Thurso. It was in full moult, but from its appearance had evidently nested in the vicinity.—T. E. BuckLry, Thurso. Pintail in Perth and in Fife.—During the latter half of April I repeatedly observed a pair of Pintails (Azas acu¢a) on a small loch in the Rannoch district of Perthshire ; the birds were still there on the last day on which I passed the loch, 28th April, and were very probably remaining to nest. On 2oth May I saw another pair of ZOOLOGICAL NOTES 185 Pintails on a loch in Fifeshire ; this latter pair may have broken off from the main colony on Loch Leven.—RosBert GoprRey, Edin- burgh. Black Terns on the Tay.—Two specimens of the Black Tern (Hydrochelidon nigra) were obtained on the Tay near Mugdrum island at the end of September 1901. One of these was acquired for the Perth Museum.—ALEXANDER M. RopceEr, Perth. Tameness of the Iceland Gull in Mull. —TI had the unique experience of feeding Iceland Gulls (Larus /eucopterus) in front of my house on the 2nd of February last. I had put down some food for the Thrushes, Blackbirds, etc., when some Black-headed Gulls espied it. The screechings and scramblings of these birds drew around a number of other Gulls from the bay, and among others two Iceland Gulls came on the scene, and were most confiding, and came within five yards of where I was standing. ‘There are at least four of these Gulls in the bay at the present time, all in immature plumage, and were first noted on the 27th of February. —D. Macponatp, Tobermory. Black Adder in Kineardineshire.—On 20th May 1goo I had brought to me a living Black Adder which was taken on the moors a little to the north of the village of Auchinblae. It measured about two feet in length, and was black all over, and the darkest one I have ever seen, although not the first of a black colour. These Black Adders are very scarce here. I have only seen two or three. —JoHN MILNeE, Auchinblae. Bass on the West Coast of Inverness-shire.—A Bass (Labrax lupus), estimated to weigh 1} lb., was taken by my friend Mr. Alex. Grant on a small salmon fly while fishing in the tidal water at the mouth of the Arbort River on the 16th of July last. This is a rare fish so far north, and the occurrence is worthy of record. The specimen is now in my possession.—J. A. HARvIE-BRown. Capnia atra, J/orton, in Inverness-shire.—When passing Loch Eunaich on his way up the Cairngorms on 29th March last, after a heavy snowstorm, Mr. H. Raeburn was surprised to see a black fly in countless thousands crawling on the snow by the loch-side ; and, knowing my interest in matters entomological, he kindly secured a few specimens for me. On opening the packet I found, as I anticipated, from having previously heard the facts, a species of Perlide, so 1 submitted them to Mr. Morton, to whom I am indebted for their identification and much interesting information regarding the species and its allies. He has examples taken at Loch Rannoch in the beginning of April, but the Loch Eunaich insects differ from these in having much shorter wings, a suggestive fact when the stormy nature of the weather they must frequently experience on their emergence from the water in such a wild 186 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY locality so early in the year is borne in mind. The loch is 1700 feet above sea-level, and a high wind—a gale, indeed—was sweeping over it at the time of Mr. Raeburn’s visit. Phenomena similar to that witnessed by Mr. Raeburn have been recorded, Mr. Morton tells me, in the case of allied species inhabiting the Hudson’s Bay country and the Alps.—WiIL.LIAM Evans, Edinburgh. Andrena angustior (A7réy) in Seotland.—I have pleasure in recording, on behalf of Mr. B. M‘Gowan, Dumfries, a female of this Bee taken by him at New Abbey, Kirkcudbrightshire, on 3rd June 1900. It is an addition to the Scottish list. I detected the specimen in a local collection of Aculeates which Mr. M‘Gowan asked me to name for him a few months ago. Identification confirmed by Mr. Saunders.—WIL.L1AM Evans, Edinburgh. Andrena rufierus, /Vy/, in Perthshire.—Referring to my record (“ Annals,” 1899, p. 158) of the capture of three males of this addition to the list of British Bees at Aberfoyle in April 1896, I have now to record a female taken in the same locality on 7th May of the present year. Mr. Saunders has examined the specimen, and confirms my identification —WILLIAM Evans, Edinburgh. Meta menardi (Za/r.) in Midlothian.—On 6th June I visited the excavations, known as Bruce’s cave, under Hawthornden House with the object of looking for this large cavernicolous Spider, and was not disappointed —two adult females being obtained from crevices in the roof. I have already recorded in this magazine the occurrence of the species in “ Upper Forth” and other parts of Scotland, but it has not, so far as I know, been previously taken in this district—WIL.L1AM Evans, Edinburgh. BOTANICAL NOTES AND NEWS. Scottish Algze.—In the “Catalogue of the British Marine Algze,” by E. A. L. Batters, F.L.S., now appearing as a Supplement - to the “Journal of Botany,” the following are recorded from the Scottish coasts :— MyxopuycE®.— Gleocapsa crepidinum, Thur., S. Connel, Argyll- shire ; AZerismopedia glauca, Kiitz., Cumbrae ; Dermocarpa Schous- bei, Born. Cumbrae and S. Connel; D. Letbleim@a, Born., Cumbrae; D. violacea, Crn., Cumbrae, Oban, and Dunbar; JD. rosea, Batt, Dunbar; D. zucrustans, Batt., Arbroath; Ayella cespitosa, Born. and Flah., Cumbrae, Gare Loch, etc. ; Spzrulina major, Kiitz., Cumbrae; S. subsalsa, CErsted, S. Scotland ; Osct//a- toria Bonnemaisonit, Crn., S.E. Scotland; O. margaritifera, Kiutz., Cumbrae ; O. nigroviridis, Thw., Cumbrae and Berwick ; O. Cora/- BOTANICAL NOTES AND NEWS 187 line, Gom., Appin; O. subuliformis, Thw., Cumbrae; O. drevzs, Kutz., 2, neapolitana, Gom., Cumbrae; Phormidium papyraceum, Gom., Appin and Cumbrae; P. ambiguum, Gom., Cumbrae; P. Lctocarpi, Gom., Cumbrae; Lyngbya (Leibletnia) Agardhit, Gom., Cumbrae and near Edinburgh; Z. (Ludyngbya) e@stuarit, Liebm., J. ferruginea, Gom., Appin, Cumbrae, Fife, and Aberdeen; Z. majuscuda, Harv., Hunterston, Girvan, Orkney; Z. /utea, Gom., Cumbrae ; Z. Rivulariarum, Gom., Cumbrae; Symploca hypnoides, Ktz., genuina, Gom., Dunbar, FEarlsferry, and Arran; forma fasciculata, Gom., Cumbrae ; Plectonema Nostocorum, Born., Cum- brae ; P. terebvans, Born. and Flah., Cumbrae ; AZicrocoleus chthono- Plastes, Thur., Firth of Clyde, Montrose, Dunbar; Schzzothrix vaginata, Gom., Cumbrae; Amphithrix violacea, Born. and Flah., coast of Scotland; Calothrix confervicola, Ag., S. Scotland; C. scopulorum, Ag., and C. pulvinata, Ag., not uncommon ; C. eruginea, Thur., Earlsferry in Fife; C. fasciculata, Ag., Cumbrae, Lismore, Elie ; C. wvipara, Harv., Arbroath ; Rivularia Biasolettiana, Meneg,., Cumbrae ; 2. zitida, Ag., Appin, Ballantrae, Eyemouth ; A/astigo- coleus testarum, Vagerh., S. Scotland ; Wostoc entophytum, Born. and Flah., Cumbrae ; V. Zinckia, Born., Cumbrae ; Anxabena variabilis, Ktz., Cumbrae ; A. forulosa, Lagerh., Appin; odularia spumigena, Mert., 8, “¢orea, Born. and Flah., Cumbrae. CHLOROSPERME®.—Cyhlorochytrium tnclusum, Kjellm., S. Scot- land; C. dermatocolax, Reinke, Cumbrae; Charactum marinum, Kjellm., Cumbrae; Codzolum pustllum, Foslie, N. Ronaldshay, Orkney ; C. Petrocelidis, Kuck., Firth of Clyde, ete. ; Prasiola stipi- tata, Suhr, Dunoon, Cumbrae, near Edinburgh, and Dunbar ; Pringsheimia scutata, Rke., Cumbrae and Ardrossan; Protoderma marinum, Rke., Cumbrae ; Monostroma Wittrockii, Born., Tayport ; M. undulatum, Wittr., Rousay, Orkney ; AZ. fuscum, Wittr., Cumbrae and Orkney; var. 4/y¢ti7, Batt., Tayport and Cumbrae ; JZ. Grevillet, Wittr., Bute and Firth of Forth; var. arctica, Rosenv., Cromarty ; var. Cornucopia, Batt., Appin and Orkney ; Capsosiphon aureolus, Gobi, Tayport and Cumbrae; fercursaria percursa, Rosenvy., S. Scotland and Orkney; L£xteromorpha clathrata, J. Ag., coast of Scotland ; var. Zzwkiana, Batt., Appin and Cumbrae; var. prostrata (Le Jol.), Orkney; £. paradoxa, Ktz.; var. tenuissima (Ktz.), Orkney ; var. evecta, Batt., 5. Scotland and Orkney ; £. éor¢a, Reinb., Arran, Bute, Appin, etc. ; 2. marginata, J. Ag., Bute and Cumbrae; £. prolifera, J. Ag., near Edinburgh ; £. crinita, J. Ag., near Edinburgh ; EL. lingulata, J. Ag., Orkney ; £. compressa, Grev., var. complanata, J. Ag., Orkney; &. Zinza, J. Ag., coasts of Scotland, var. angusta, Ktz., Cumbrae; 2. ¢néestinalis, Link, var. ventricosa (Le Jol.), Orkney ; var. fagelliformis (Le Jol.), Orkney ; var. du/losa (Le Jol.), Orkney ; var. Cornucopia, Ktz., on coast of Scotland ; 2. micrococca, Ktz., var. ¢ortwosa, J. Ag., Arran and Cumbrae; £. usneotdes, J. Ag., 188 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY Cumbrae; U/va Lactuca, L., var. nana, Suhr, Arbroath; UWlothrix implexa, Ktz., Cumbrae; U. flacca, Thur., S. Scotland; UW. spectosa, Ktz., Appin, Dunbar, and near Aberdeen; Ochlochete ferox, Huber, Cumbrae; Acrocheta repens, Pringsh., Cumbrae; Lodlbocoleon pilt- ferum, Pringsh., Cumbrae and Dunbar; Alastophysa rhizopus, Rke., Cumbrae; Lxdoderma viride, Lagerh., Cumbrae and Arran; £. Wittrock, Wille, Arran and Cumbrae; £. Flusire, Batt., S. Scot- land; Zelamnia contorta, Batt., Cumbrae; TZ. inéricata, Batt., Cumbrae ; Uvospora tsogona, Batt., near Edinburgh, Dunbar, Elie, Arbroath, Montrose, Cumbrae, Oban, etc.; U. bangtoides, Holm. and Batt., Oban, Port Ballantrae, Bay of Nigg, Montrose Ness ; U. collabens, Holm. and Batt., Cumbrae; Chetomorpha tortuosa, Ktz., from numerous localities; C. /zforea, Cook, Appin, Arran, Cumbrae, and Orkney; C. “num, Ktz., Cumbrae, Oban, Orkney, etc.; C. @rea, Ktz., Dunbar, Cumbrae, Arran, Orkney; C. MJeda- gonium, Ktz., many localities; Ahzzoclonium Kochianum, Ktz., Elie and Cumbrae ; &. zmplexum, Batt., several localities ; R. arenosum, Ktz., several localities; A. ripartwm, Harv., common ; Cladophora pellucida, Ktz., Cumbrae and Orkney; C. Autchinsie, Harv., not uncommon ; var. dstans,.Ktz., Bute; C. rectangularis, Harv., var. horrida, Ktz., Arran; C. JVeestorum, Ktz., var. humilis, Batt., Cum- brae; C. rupestris, Ktz.,common; C. utriculosa, Ktz., Cumbrae and Loch Etive; C. ¢trichocoma, Ktz., Cumbrae; C. gracilis, Ktz., and C. sericea, Ktz., Cumbrae, Ardrossan, Peterhead, and Orkney, etc. ; C. glaucescens, Harv., Elie, Aberdeen, Orkney, etc.; C. /fexuosa, Harv., Aberdeen, and near Montrose; C. vefracta, Aresch., Orkney ; C. albtda, Ktz., and var. refracta, Thur., various localities; C. Balliana, Harv., Firth of Clyde; C. Rudolphiana, Harv., Cumbrae ; C. fracta, Ktz., var. marina, Hauck, common; C. arcta, Ktz., not uncommon ; var. vaucherieformis, Harv., Dunbar; var. radians, Batt., Orkney; var. centralis, Harv., Orkney; C. Zrailli, Batt., Joppa, near Edinburgh; C. Sonderi, Ktz., Orkney; C. arctiuscula, Ktz., Dunbar, Joppa, Arbroath; C. stolonifera, Batt., Cumbrae ; C. pallida, Batt., Cumbrae; C. wzcialis, Ktz., Dunbar, Elie, Lismore, Orkney; C. dombycina, Batt., Bute and Orkney; C. lanosa, Ktz., various localities ; var. Zostere (Dillw.), Forres ; Gomontia polyrhiza, Born. and Flah., Dunbar and Cumbrae ; Os¢reobium Quekettit, Born. and Fiah., Firth of Clyde ; Afalicystis ovalis, Aresch., Firth of Clyde ; Bryopsis hypnoides, Lamour., Appin, Ayrshire, etc. ; B. plumosa, Ag., not uncommon ; Derbesia tenuissima, Crn., Appin; Vaucherta dicho- toma, Appin; V. Thuretit, Woron., Firth of Clyde and Appin; V. spherospora, Nordst., Appin; f. dioica, Roseny., not uncommon ; V. coronata, Nordst., Arbroath; V. d:¢orea, Bang and Ag., Inverness ; Codium tomentosum, Stackh., Cumbrae, Peterhead, Orkney. FucoIpE&.—Desmarestia viridis, Lamour., not uncommon ; D. aculeata, Lamour., common; YD. “gulata, Lamour., Firth of BOTANICAL NOTES AND NEWS 189 Clyde, Firth of Forth, Aberdeen, Orkney; var. angustior, (Turn.), Orkney ; var. dilatata (Turn.), Orkney; Dictyosiphon feniculaceus, Grev., various localities; var. flaccida, Kjellm., Haddington; D. hispidus, Kjellm., Firth of Forth; D. /Aippuroides, Ktz., not un- common; var. fragilis, Kjellm., Orkney; D. Ekmani, Aresch., Kinghorn in Fife; D. Chordaria, Aresch., Firth of Clyde and Arbroath; D. mesogloia, Aresch., Firths of Clyde and Forth, Cromarty, very rare; Gobia baltica, Rke., Firth of Clyde and Haddington; Phaostroma pustulosum, Kck., Cumbrae; 2. fros- tratum, Kck., Cumbrae ; Symphyocarpus strangulans, Rosenv., Cum- brae ; Litosiphon pusillus, Harv., various localities; LZ. Laminaric, Harv., on East Coast and Appin; JZ. jiliformis, Batt, Gare Loch and Cumbrae; var. gracilis, Batt., Gare Loch ; Pheospora brachiata, Born., various localities; Stictyostphon subarticulatum, Hauck, Burnmouth, Dunbar, Orkney, Clyde; S. /ortilts, Rke., several localities, from Borders to Orkney; Séaria attenuata, Grev., Clyde, Appin, Orkney ; Pheosaccion Collinsit, Farlow, S.W. coast and Cumbrae ; Punctaria plantaginea, Grev., not uncommon ; var. Crouani, Thur., Cumbrae ; var. rudescens, Batt., Cumbrae, and Skaill in Orkney; P. /atzfolia, Grev., genuina, Batt., Joppa, Peter- head, Arran, Islay, Orkney, not common ; var. /aminariotdes, Holm. and Batt., Cumbrae; P. ¢enuissima, Grev., widespread and locally abundant ; P. wzdulata, J. Ag., Clyde, Orkney ; Phydlitis zostertfolia, Rke., Firth of Forth and Ayrshire; ?. Fascia, Ktz., genuina, wide- spread, but not common; var. éenuzss¢ma, Batt., Skaill; var. dedilis, Hauck, Joppa, Arbroath, Cumbrae, Hebrides, rare; Scytosiphon lomentarius, J. Ag., common ; var. zostericola, Thur., Cumbrae and Orkney ; Asferococcus scaber, Kck., Cumbrae ; A. fistulosus, Hooker, abundant: A. duZosus, Lamour., Clyde, Appin, and Orkney; 4. compressus, Griff., Orkney ; Streblonema sphericum, Thur., Clyde ; S. fasciculatum, Thur., Clyde; var. simplex, Batt., Cumbrae;_ 5. eguale, Oltm., Cumbrae; S. Zanardinit, Batt., Cumbrae ; SS. ? helo- phorus, Batt., Cumbrae; L£ctocarpus parasiticus, Sauv., Cumbrae ; E. tomentosiotdes, Farlow, Cumbrae ; var. punctiformis, Batt., Cum- brae, Arbroath, Stonehaven; £. ve/utinus, Ktz., not uncommon ; E. simplex, Crn., Arran; E. terminalis, Ktz., Clyde, Loch Etive, Orkney ; £. globifer, Ktz., Clyde and Dunbar ; var. rufestris, Batt., Dunbar; £. irregularis, Ktz., Ayrshire; &. Sandrianus, Zan., Clyde, very rare; 4. Crowant, Thur., Cumbrae; £. confervoides, Le Jol., abundant; var. avctus, Kjellm., Clyde; £. sziculosus, Ktz., typica, Kjellm., abundant ; var. Azemalis, Kck., Dunbar ; 2. fenzcel- /atus, Ag., Cumbrae; £. fasciculatus, Harv., typica, not uncommon ; var. congesta (Crn.), Orkney ; var. Draparnaldioides, Crn., Orkney ; var. pygmaeus, Batt., Bute. The British Capreolate Fumitories.—Under this heading Mr. H. W. Pugsley (“ Journ. Bot.” 1902, April-May) discusses very 190 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY fully the forms seen by him from British localities, and compares them with those of the Continent of Europe. He briefly describes and distinguishes the forms recognised by him as British, and (for most) names localities from which he has seen examples. His list is as follows :— Subsection 1, Eu-eapreolate. 1. £. capreolata, L. Subspecies 1, capreolata (sensu stricto =F. pallidifiora, Jord.) Subspecies 2, sfeczosa, Jord. 2. F. purpurea, n. sp. (=. Boret, auct. angl., zon Jord.). Subsection 2, Murales. 3. & murals, Sond. Subspecies 1, mwradis (sensu stricto). Subspecies 2, Lore?, Jord. Var. verna, Clavaud. Var. nov., ambigua. Var. serotina, Clavaud (=F. muralis, auct. angl., pro parte). Var. muraliformis, Clavaud (=F: muralis, auct. angl., p.7.). 4. £. confusa, Jord. Of the forms distinguished as species and subspecies, plate 436 figures flowers and fruiting pedicels and their bracts. New British Hepatie.—In the “‘ Revue Bryologique” of the present year, pp. 26-32, there is a paper by Dr. W. Arnell with descriptions and figures of three new species of Kantia from Sweden. One of them, Aantia suecica, Arn. and Pers., found on decaying wood in the province of Herjedalen by Herr J. Persson in 1899, seemed to be similar to a plant which I had found in a similar position in the ravine of Resipol burn, West Inverness, in the same year, and which had been named A. ¢rvechomants by an authority. I recently sent a specimen to Dr. Arnell as his A. swecica, and he replied that “it appeared to be perfectly identical” with the Swedish plant. In the latter station the plant occurs with Lvepharostoma trichophyllum, Cephalozia lunulefolia, Jung. guttulata, and J, Helleriana. The Resi- pol plant is accompanied with Ceph. curvifolia. It is a very slender plant, about the size of Ceph. dunulefolia, and is distinguished from Kantia trichomants not only by its small size, but by its dicecious inflorescence. Is is also of a paler colour, not glaucous, with cell- walls of leaf somewhat distinctly thickened at the angles, and stipules more deeply incised, with the lobes triangular and rather acute.— Symers M. Macvicar. British Moss-Flora, by Dr. R. Braithwaite.—Of this important work part xxi. (Vol. III. pp. 129-168, plates cix.-cxiv.), appeared in CURRENT LITERATURE IQI April. It describes and figures thirty-five species, two of which are Hypnee and the rest Stereodontee. As usual, localities of the rarer species are enumerated. It is anticipated that two more parts will complete this standard monograph. Diecranum strictum, Sc/ecch., in Seotland.—This rare British Moss is not uncommon on trees in Roslin and Hawthornden Woods, Midlothian. I first gathered it there on 30th April 1898, and sent a specimen to Mr. H. N. Dixon, Northampton, who kindly named it for me. The few previously known habitats for it in this country appear to be confined to Staffordshire. Dr. Braithwaite, in whose “British Moss-Flora” (Vol. I.) the Staffordshire plant is erroneously referred to D. viride (Sull.), has also seen some of my Roslin speci- mens.—WILLIAM Evans, Edinburgh. CURRENT LITERATURE. The Titles and Purport of Papers and Notes relating to Scottish Natural History which have appeared during the Quarter—April-June 1902. [The Editors desire assistance to enable them to make this Section as complete as possible. Contributions on the lines indicated will be most acceptable and will bear the initials of the Contributor. The Editors will have access to the sources of information undermentioned. ] ZOOLOGY. CAPTURE OF A MARTEN IN Ross-SHIRE. John Morley. Zo0/o- gist, May 1902, p. 192.—A Pine Marten over 30 inches in length trapped on 21st April. The same note is given in Zhe Meld, 7th June 1902, p. 893. A Buack Hare. D. A.M. Zhe Field, 31st May 1902, p. 842. —Refers toa melanic specimen of Lepus variabilis killed near Braemar. NOTES FROM ABERDEEN. W. Wilson. Zoologist, May 1902, p. 197.—These refer to eleven species of birds. GREY SHRIKE IN SCOTLAND IN APRIL. E, J. Roy. Zhe Field, 7th June 1902, p. 893.—Specimen observed near St. Boswells on oth April. FoRMER HAUNTS OF THE OSPREY IN SCOTLAND. D. A. M. The Field, 31st May 1902, p. 842. ADDITIONS TO “ BRITISH ConcHOoLoGy.” By J. T. Marshall. Journ. of Conchology, April 1902, pp. 190-192.—Several Scottish records are given in this paper. List OF SPECIES, VARIETIES, AND ABERRATIONS OF LEPIDO- PTERA SO FAR ONLY RECORDED FROM THE BritisH ISLANDS. By J. W. 192 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY Tutt, F.E.S. xz Record, May 1902, pp. 113-118, and June 1902, pp. 147-149.—Several Scottish forms alluded to. LEPIDOPTERA IN ROSS-SHIRE IN 1901. W.M. Christy. Zto- mologist, May 1902, p. 145.—Twenty-six species captured ‘about the head-waters of the river Carron. DISTRIBUTION OF HEMARIS FUCIFORMIS AND H. TITYUS. Various authors. zt. Record, June 1902, pp. 161 and 162,— Scottish localities referred to. PHLOGOPHORA METICULOSA, L., IN DECEMBER. A. E. J. Carter. nt. Mo. Mag. May 1902, p. 113.—Refers to a specimen captured on gth December at Musselburgh. NOTODONTA CARMELITA IN SOUTH OF SCOTLAND. J. C. Haggart. Entomologist, June 1902, p. 172.—A female bred from larve obtained near Galashiels. The same note also given in £x¢. Record, June 1902, p. 164. BOTANY. THE BRITISH CAPREOLATE FumIToRIEs. By H. W. Pugsley, B.A. Journ. Bot. 1902, pp. 129-136, 173-181, 4 436). Discusses the various forms fully, with localities. Rapicuta, Hitt. By H.and J. Groves... Journ Bot. 1902, p. 200. Points out that by the law of priority Radzcu/a, Hill, must supersede Vasturtium, R. Br., as a generic name, and gives the British species as &. officinalis, H. and J. Groves, FR. pinnata, Moench (=. sylvestre, Ait.), R. palustris, Moench (= LV. cerrestre, Ait.), 2. dancifolia, Moench (= 1. amphibium, Ait.). ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF RUBI IN GREAT BriTAIN. By the Rev. W. Moyle Rogers, F.L.S. Journ. Bot. 1902, pp. 150-157, and p. 201). Contains numerous additions to the county records in the author’s “‘ Handbook of British Rubi.” New BritisH Hepatic®. By Symers M. Macvicar. /eurn. Bot. 1902, pp. 157-159. Notes Lepidozia trichoclados, C. Mill., from Moidart ; /ungermania heterocolpos, Thed., from Craig-an-Lochain, Killin; 7. atlantica, Kaalaas, from Dirlot, Caithness; JdZarsupella condensata (Angstr.), on Ben Lawers, at 3200 feet; and —from the place where Selby reported having seen the old and young upon the previous occasion (vide “Ann. Scot. Nat. Hist.” October 1899). So far as 1am aware, no one has hitherto recorded the nesting of this duck anywhere among the islands of either the Outer Hebrides or the “Inner” group of islands. I can now give an authentic statement of its appearance as a nesting species in one of the Outer Hebrides south of the Sound of Harris. The same correspondent already referred to under “ Lesser Tern,” and other headings in this paper, tells me as follows: ‘‘Scaup Ducks are also not infrequently found, though these were not so common formerly”; and, indeed, he adds the statement, “and they are numerous in ——,, and have bred for the last four years—two pairs, to my knowledge, in 1897, 1898, 1899, and three pairs in the past season, 7.ée. 1900.” It is also believed that they bred again in rgo1, and in June 1902 a young bird still in the down was (as a “ dernier resort”) shot by my correspondent, and was sent in the flesh to me. Considerable care has been expended on the identification of this ten days-old specimen, and I am now perfectly satisfied that it is nothing else. One had been observed in Barra in February 1892, and another is reported from the same island on November 1, 1897; whilst Mr. C. V. A. Peel records (zz “it.) that he shot one “this season” (ze. rgo1) in Benbecula, and he adds, “seen occasionally in South Wist’, ‘Hie considers if “rare.” Mr. M‘Elfrish informs me that he “never saw one in North Uist nor Benbecula, nor between these islands, nor between Grimisay and Balelone.” But they are regular visitors to South Uist. These ducks are still rarer north of the Sound of Harris (as, indeed, almost every species of duck appears to be). During the six years that Mr. Radclyffe Waters had the winter shooting of Gress and Garson in The Lews, he only obtained one bird which he shot on the farm of Coll on October 9, 1896. Since the above was communicated by Mr. M‘Elfrish, however, he shot a Scaup, when in company with Major C. Anstruther, on the Mill Loch of Barra on November 16, rgot. The Pocuarp (/ fevina), p. 105.—This duck is now far from uncommon, and is often seen in Benbecula, South Uist, and else- where among the isles, but more to the south of the Sound of Harris than to the north of that waterway. 212 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY It may be remembered that Eagle Clarke and I identified Pochards—old and young—in Tiree in 18913; and no doubt they had bred there on previous occasions ; and they do so still. Of its increase elsewhere in Scotland it is unnecessary here to speak ; it is sufficient merely to refer back to what is generally known by Scottish naturalists, and to what has been recorded since the publication of the different volumes of our Scottish Series, in the “Annals of Scottish Natural History,” and in a few other periodicals. Dr. C. Gordon has the marginal note in his copy of MacGillivray’s “British Birds,” that they—Pochards—“ are constant winter visitors, in small flocks, on the lakes of South Uist.” Two were shot in Barra, early in September 1894, by Mr. Peel, who tells me these two birds were only just able to fly, and “that their beaks were easily broken, showing that they were young birds, and had (probably.—J. A. H.-B.) been bred on the loch, the parents escaping when I fired.” I think this may yet come to be accepted as the first instance of the Pochard found nesting in Barra, or, for that part, anywhere in the Outer Hebrides. Immediately south of the Sound of Harris, however, Mr. M‘Elfrish did obtain one a few years ago. In reply to special inquiry, Mr. J. Finlayson, speaking of the breeding of this duck in South Harris, writes as follows: ‘As regards Pochards breeding in Harris, they may have been ‘escapes’ from Lord Dunmore’s Wild-fowl introductions, or they might have been the young of them (as the old birds were all pinioned, whilst the young were quite strong on the wing). They could not have been any of the two pairs of Pochards that Lord Dunmore put down. Also, on Loch Osigarry, that same season, there were lots of Pochards all winter.” Since the above was written I have heard of one Pochard shot as far to the north as Coll Farm, near Stornoway, by Mr. Radclyffe Waters. (All this shows the abomina- tion of unrecorded introductions and random acclimatisations. ) TurteD Duck (fuligula cristata), p. 105.—Even as early as 1851, when C. Gordon wrote his marginal notes in the fifth volume of his copy of MacGillivray’s “British Birds,” he spoke of the Tufted Duck as “common and plentiful in South Uist during winter.” I have little additional to relate regarding this species, now so abundant in many parts of Scotland, since the issue of our volume in 1888. Bisshopp of Oban did not find Tufted Ducks at all common until the winter of 1894-95, and before then he had obtained a few from the Outer Hebrides—sent as rarities. Nor do I now find any records of its having nested in any of the islands of the group. The information given in an article by the present writer, upon “The Tufted Duck and its Dispersal in Scotland,” at that time brought its history fairly well up-to-date (‘‘ Ann. Scot. Nat. Hist.” 1896, with a map showing the distribution, pp. 3-22). ON THE AVIFAUNA OF THE OUTER HEBRIDES 213 A somewhat curious statement, however, is made by my corre- spondent in South Uist, that “it is less common now than formerly” ; and his experience dates back some eighteen years (to date of 1902), This negative account deserves notice in this place, and it appears to be supported by the experiences of Mr. C. V. A. Peel, who mentions it as ‘seen occasionally in Benbecula,” whilst Sir Arthur Campbell Orde tells me he shot nine on February 15, 1897, in North Uist, mentioning it as uncommon. FPrevious to this Mr. M‘Elfrish had killed one bird, the first record of its occurrence there. GOLDEN-EYE Duck (C/angula glaucion), p. 106.—This is another species of duck which a correspondent describes as less abundant than formerly, z.c. in his experience of some eighteen years of one locality. I have one record only of its occurrence in Barra, viz. on October 11, 1897, Dr. M‘Rury being the recorder. But Mr. Radclyffe Waters tells me that “‘a few are generally seen in the late autumn. One was killed on October 22, 1892; two on October 6, 1893; these had evidently just arrived, and we had to fire at them to drive them off a loch on which they were just out of shot. One drake, in very good plumage, was killed on October 21,7 18.93.” On the other hand, Mr. M‘Elfrish considers this bird to be a regular winter visitor, frequenting both the fresh and the salt water, and common; and Mr. Abel Chapman found a “ bunch” of seven on Loch Scatavagh on October 15, and other single birds on other lochs in 1900. Ewer Duck (Somateria mollissima), p. 107.—Mr. C. V. A. Peel, in his account of Sport in the Outer Hebrides, considers the Eider to be less abundant in The Lews than they are in the islands south of the Sound of Harris (p. 7). I think this has always been the case, and in Harris also, unless possibly on outlying islands such as Rona, and the Flannan Isles, and otherwise south-west of Harris. It is interesting in this connection to know that a very great increase of the species has taken place since Buckley and I wrote upon the Fauna of these isles, and also since we published the “Fauna of Sutherland, Caithness, and West Cromarty ” (1887), along the mainland coast of Scotland to the north of Skye. I was some- what surprised (in 1gor) to find the Eider Ducks abundant at many places on the West Ross and West Sutherland coast, where, never in our previous experiences, were they found nesting at all. “The Eider Duck at present, 1902, does not nest on the Minch or east side of The Lews, but does so on the west side, from Loch Roag southwards. The rocks north of Loch Roag are probably too high above sea-level for it to land, and where the land is low it is inhabited by crofters.” The above passage within quotation marks is by Mr. D. Mackenzie, and I cordially agree with all he relates, 214 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY VELVET SCOTER (@demia fusca), p. 109.—A Velvet Scoter was found dead on the Luscantire shore in South Harris in spring 1896. It was sent to Mr. W. L. MacGillivray by Mr. Wilson, solicitor and factor for South Harris. As long ago as 1890 I received a letter from Mr. George Stoddart—long-time shepherd at Newton—in which he told me of “ Black Ducks with bright orange bills” seen in the western part of the Sound of Harris. I have not to date ascertained whether there has been any increase in the numbers seen now or not, but expect to hear before long. Since the above was penned, Sir Arthur Campbell Orde informs me that seven or eight were seen on January 22, 1892, “near Boreray.” 4 RED-BREASTED MERGANSER (d/ergus serrator), p. 111.—In connection with the remarks in our “ Fauna of the Outer Hebrides ” on the rare occurrence of this bird in St. Kilda, notice is taken in Mr. Young’s note-books. These notes tell me that Mr. Mackenzie, the factor, is most positive that it has never been found breeding there, and only one or two specimens have ever been seen or obtained ; and one obtained by a native was looked upon as a great curiosity (Journals of the late Mr. J. Young ; and C. Dixon in “ Ibis,” 1885, p. 87). GOOSANDER (Mergus merganser), p. 110.—It may now be recorded as an addition to the Fauna of the Outer Hebrides. Mr. Radclyffe Waters mentions ‘‘a young male, just assuming full plumage, shot on October 26, 1895, while fishing in a burn, and with four or five small trout in its gullet. This was at the end of a week of very bad weather—northerly wind with rain, hail, and snow every day. Apparently the first specimen actually obtained in The Lews or the Outer Hebrides. The bird has been preserved.” Mr. M‘Elfrish writes me as follows: ‘‘Since I saw your book, for the first time, I have been on the look-out for this bird all the year round, but I have not seen one in these islands. I know the bird quite well, having seen it on the River Forth, and having handled specimens shot by my father.” I may add it is extremely unlikely that Goosanders would breed in a treeless land like the Outer Hebrides before the great areas of far more suitable country on the mainland were fully occupied. Mr. C. V. A. Peel considers it ‘‘comparatively rare,” speaking of it generally. [SMew (Mergus albellus), p. 112.—Though hitherto holding a somewhat precarious position in the Fauna of the Outer Hebrides, on the strength of a single record, I think the following account deserving of being included. Mr. C. V. A. Peel writes: “ Mr. C. B. Poulton, my shooting companion, called my attention to two ducks 1 Boreray of the Sound of Harris; not to be confounded with the island of the same name of the St, Kilda groups. ON THE AVIFAUNA OF THE OUTER HEBRIDES 215 near the island of Vallay, North Uist. On looking at them on several days with a powerful glass, I made them out, with no hesitation, to be Smews.” Mr. Herbert Langton saw a female Smew near Little Bernera of The Lews in May 1899. | Woop PIGEon (Columba palumbus), p. 112.—On April 23, 1900, Mr. M‘Elfrish shot a Wood Pigeon “below my garden at Loch- maddy. This one I had stuffed and sent to the collection at Kilmory. On June 4, when cycling up the north side of Blashval, I flushed another. It got up quite close to me, and only flew a short distance into the moor, where it pitched. These are all I have seen in the Long Island.” TurTLE Dove (Columba turtur), p. 114.—This species has now been added to the Fauna of the group by “‘our indefatigable corre- spondent,” so. often mentioned before as! resident observer in Barra for many years—Dr. M‘Rury. The date was September 27, 1895 (“ Ann. Scot. Nat. Hist.” 1896, p. 23), and it is believed to have been reared in the Outer Hebrides as it was not considered strong enough for a long flight. Another one, a young bird, in North Uist in August 1896, is in the collection of Sir Arthur Orde, Kilmory (“ Ann. Scot. Nat. Elist.2 1806, p: 255): Yet another is reported from the Flannan Isles, October 28, tg00 (“ Ann. Scot. Nat. Hist.” 1901, p. 140). Mr. W. L. MacGillivray writes me that a young male Turtle Dove appeared at Eoligary on August 18, 1901, ‘and was caught by one of our servants on September 29.” Mr. MacGillivray has had it in a cage since then, and he says “‘it makes a very interesting pet; is perfectly tame now.” He goes on to say, ‘‘ Another older Turtle Dove appeared here on September 25, and remained with the young bird only for two days, whereafter it took its departure. I have another Turtle Dove, a male, in my collection,” continues Mr. MacGillivray, ‘which I shot in May 1897, and a female appeared same month, but a week later, which left in a few days.” PHEASANT (Phasianus colchicus), p. 116.—Mr. M‘Elfrish informs me that “ta few pairs have just been introduced to North Uist by Sir Arthur ‘Campbell Orde at Newton, 1901.” PALLAS SAND GROUSE (Syrrhaptes paradoxus), p. 254.—In con- tinuation of our remarks in the Appendix to the “‘ Fauna of the Outer Hebrides,” Mr. Radclyffe Waters is able to record that two or three out of that flock were shot by the keeper. ' One set up by him is now in the lodge. PARTRIDGE (erdix cinerea), p. 117.—Previous introductions, as we have seen (‘‘ Fauna of the Outer Hebrides” p. 117) have not proved successful. Subsequent attempts, as yet, have met with not much better results, as will be gathered from the following notes by Mr. 216 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY M‘Elfrish: “A few pairs were introduced by Sir Arthur Campbell Orde at Newton a few years ago. For the first year or two they did fairly well, a covey or two having been reared ; but latterly these have disappeared. This season a fresh introduction has been made.” These remarks apply to North Uist. QualL (Coturnix communis), p. 117.—Dr. M‘Rury heard at least four or five different birds in the minister’s glebe in Barra in June to September 1893, and he tells us that he failed to flush any of them; but that the Rev. J. W. Macdonald, who had frequently accompanied him in his searches, was more fortunate, and succeeded in raising one on wing (‘‘Ann. Scot. Nat. Hist.” 1894, p. 246). (The Migration Reports announce the unusual numbers of quails in Scotland that year, and the fact of their breeding not uncommonly in Shetland, even in North Unst.) PTARMIGAN (Lagofus mutus), p. 118.—That Ptarmigan are rare in the Outer Hebrides there can scarcely be room for doubt, but it seems difficult to gather positive data as to their numbers and as to whether they are really decreasing. Referring to 1866, I have the note that a covey was seen upon the old haunt, viz. Cleisham, in North Harris, on September 2 (auct. A. Burn-Murdoch, zz 47, December 5, 1901). And in 1893, as I am informed by Mr. C. V. A. Peel, that gentleman saw three flying round Sobhal, near Uig, Lewis, in September, but he failed to see them again when he went especially to look for them. From South Harris all information is negative, unless a bird seen upon the Luscantire hills, and reported to Mr. J. Finlayson, gamekeeper in South Harris, was one. It was described as “like a grouse, but white and grey,” and his informant adds, ‘‘I suppose it was a Ptarmigan from North Harris. ‘There were a few there at that time, viz. about 1890 or 1891.” Mr. D. Mackenzie, writing from Stornoway, says: “The last I have seen was in the Park of Lewis in 1884 or 1885, but I have not been on the higher hills in The Lews since those years. There never were very many of them, but I think it most likely that there are still a few of them thereabout.” But later, I have received the statement from the head game- keeper and forester in ‘The Park,” that a decided zucrease has taken place there since he came to the place some twenty years ago, and he speaks of at least twelve Aazrs on one hill. GrRousE (Lagopus scoticus), p. 118.—In continuation of our previous remarks under this species I have not much to add, except that proprietors and shooting tenants have become much more alive to facts. The proprietor of the Long Island has realised that it has become advisable to introduce fresh blood, and has put down NOTES ON THE SCOTTISH ADDER 217 “some imported Red Grouse this last season (1901) with the object of improving and strengthening the breed.” ‘This is an example which ought to be followed by others. Mr. C. V. A. Peel speaks of it as “(on the decrease,’ ‘larger and redder than those of the mainland.” ? and as WatTeER-RAIL (Rallus aquaticus), p. 121.—Since our “Fauna of the Outer Hebrides ” was issued, several more records of Water-rails have reached me, and the farthest south records are again from Monach Isles. But its status can scarcely yet be fully valuated. Mr. M‘Elfrish sends me the following instructive notes on their occur- rences in North Uist : ‘‘ In my opinion,” he says, “it is most decidedly rare. In the past fifteen years I suppose I must have searched almost every likely place in North Uist and Benbecula with setters, pointers, retrievers, and spaniels; and have only found two. The first was in November in Benbecula, in a ditch by the roadside, near Grogary, and the other was on Ben Lee, in North Uist. I also remember Sheriff Webster shooting one about ten years ago, and I understood from him that it was the only one he had seen.” One is recorded by Mr. Radclyffe Waters from Lewis, October 1, 1891. (Zo be continued.) NOTES ON THE SCOTTISH ADDER: By SuRGEON-GENERAL Bip1g, C.1E. IN the interesting notice in the April number of the “ Annals,” by Dr. Leighton, on the Serpents of Scotland, he propounds various questions regarding the habits, varieties, etc. of Vipera berus, which no doubt will in due course find copious replies now that attention has been directed to these points. Although widely distributed in Scotland, there are various districts in which the Adder is rare or unknown, and this, coupled with its retiring habits and often remote haunts, has prevented much attention being paid to it by naturalists and others. As a matter of fact, the first impulse of the ordinary man on the moor, on seeing a Viper, is to kill and throw it aside, and instead of making notes on it, he congratulates himself on having put a dangerous creature out of the way of doing mischief. As regards the other indigenous snakes of Great Britain, it may be stated with almost absolute con- 218 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY fidence that they are never found in Scotland, except as fugitives from captivity. During the earlier years of my life in a hilly part of Banffshire, I never saw a living Adder there, although there was abundance of the sort of cover which seems to attract the creature in other localities. In 1896 I spent the summer months on the western shore of Loch Lomond, near Luss, and in that locality had frequent oppor- tunities of observing the habits and haunts of the Adder, as it is common on the mainland and on at least two of the islands. One of these is Inchlonaig, the deer-park or: Sir James Colquhoun of Luss, on which no one, as a rule, is allowed to land except the keeper and his family, who have a house on it. The vegetation of the island consists chiefly ot heather, coarse grass, and a few clumps of stunted trees. The keeper’s wife told me that in summer Adders can be seen in various parts of the island basking in the sun, and this information was confirmed by some of the Luss boatmen who had been allowed to land on Inchlonaig. The other island in that quarter of Loch Lomond which has an evil repute for Vipers is Inchconnachan, which is covered with tall trees and rank heather. The local population on the main- land have a wholesome dread of the Adders in this locality. In some parts near the shore the Bilberry is common, and on a very bright day I sent a lad (who acted as my boatman) and a girl to collect some of the berries, but they returned in a short time declaring that they were afraid to land, as the serpents were so numerous and menacing. The important question now is, How did the Adders get to these two islands? and to this it will be possible to give, in a very few words, a satisfactory reply. Ata part of the loch near the Free Kirk of Luss there is a narrow promontory which runs out in the loch to within a short distance of the island called Inch- tavannach, and in the strait between the two I have on two or three occasions seen an Adder swimming towards the island. Once there it could easily pass on to Inchconnachan, as there is only a very narrow strip of water between the two islands. The island of Inchlonaig is more isolated, but not to such an extent as would prevent an Adder reaching it by swimming. It may be mentioned incidentally that while fishing some years ago from a boat in Loch Shin, near Overscaig, an NOTES ON THE SCOTTISH ADDER 219 Adder crossing the loch came quite near the boat. It after- wards passed within a short distance of another boat, and the gentleman in it proposed, by way of a joke, to cast his flies over and catch it, on which the old gillie got very excited, and threatened to jump overboard if the “Serpent” was brought into the boat! I cannot say whether or not the Adder swallows its young when alarmed, but I am able to state that in India a large snake sometimes swallows a smaller one of the same species. On one occasion the writer got together in Madras a collection of Cobras, to be sent to the Zoo in London, but unfortunately they never got there, as it was found impossible to get the captain of any ship persuaded to carry them, although they were secured in such a way as to render escape from the cage in which they were confined impossible. While the Cobras were in confinement near my quarters, the gardeners who looked after them several times told me that a big Cobra was in the habit of swallowing a small one, and that as the latter made itself disagreeable to its captor, it was speedily ejected again and was apparently none the worse of the adventure. This story I refused to believe, until on a Sunday afternoon, when sitting quietly at home, a gardener came and reported that the big Cobra had been at its old trick again, and that if I came quickly I would see the tail of the prisoner protruding out of the mouth of its ravenous neighbour. On reaching the cage the report was found to be correct, and sure enough in due course the smaller Cobra was restored to light and liberty. There is no desire to found any theory on this occurrence, but merely to record the plain facts. In catching a venomous snake, the professional Indian “ Snake-charmer ” plants the end of a stick on its head, and then instantly seizes its neck close to the head and lifts the snake bodily off the ground. This accomplished, it is usually confined in a small circular basket. If it is to be kept for display or conjuring tricks, the poison-fangs are at once extracted, but as they soon grow again, this operation has to be repeated from time to time. The Canarese gardeners in western Mysore are fond of eating snakes, and they catch them by seizing the tail. This done, the man begins to run swinging the snake round his head with such velocity that it cannot 220 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY double back to bite. Meanwhile he makes for the nearest suitable tree or wall, and dashes the head of the snake against it with such force that it is instantly killed. Pennant, in his tour in Scotland, visited the island of Islay in 1772, and made the following remarks regarding the Adders there: “Vipers swarm in the heath: the natives retain the vulgar error of their stinging with their forked tongues ; that a sword on which the poison has fallen will hiss in water like a red-hot iron; and that a poultice of human ordure is an infallible cure for the bite.” ? IS RATAYVRAD GLA OF “COUCH, THOMSON, AND VARRELE A GOOD USPECIES? By GerorceE Sim, A.L.S. PEARES I Ve and. V; FOR a good many years back I have been endeavouring to compile a list of the fishes of the east coast of Scotland, and no family has given me more trouble than the Rays. The result has been that extended investigations were necessary, and the outcome of one of these I now beg to lay before the readers of the “ Annals.” To the form under consideration no fewer than fourteen different names have been given, many of the earlier writers holding it to be a distinct species, while latterly it has been bandied about from variety to species, and back again, until one can scarcely say how the matter at present stands. As indicated above, Messrs. Couch, Thomson, and Yarrell hold it to be a distinct species; while Drs. Giinther and Day, in their respective works, consider Raza radiula as merely the adult form of Raza circularis, the latter author assuming that his R. czrcularis and the Cuckoo and Sandy Rays of Couch are one and the same. This is the point which I wish to discuss in the present contribution. Before, however, going farther, it is necessary 1 «A Tour in Scotland and Voyage to the Hebrides, 1772,” vol. ii. p. 230, IS RAIA RADULA A GOOD SPECIES ? 221 to point out that 2. circulars of Day is the Homelyn Ray —Home, Sandy, and Spotted Rays of Yarrell; while it is the Cuckoo Ray of Couch, with the scientific name of miraletus. Nor are the figures given of the species to be regarded as more satisfactory. No two of them are alike, nor are they in form like the fish they are intended to represent. Day’s figure of A. cercularis would pass for R. radula, but it is in no way like the true czrcularis. Couch’s uncoloured figure of cercularis, which he names the Cuckoo Ray, is good so far as form goes ; but the spinulation is not correct. Besides, he describes the figure as being that of a male; if it is so, he has omitted to show the claspers. The coloured figure of his Cuckoo Ray is not the proper shape, as may be seen by comparing it with the uncoloured one at p. 114, vol. 1. Yarrell’s figure of cévcularis, which he designates the Homelyn Ray, is, so far as form goes, the most correct of the lot; but he shows nothing of the spinulation on the “ wings.” The latter author’s figure and description of A. radula, as given in his supplement to “ British Fishes,” published in 1839, p. 19, is merely a reproduction of that given by Couch in the “ Magazine of Nat. Hist.” New Series, vol. xi.,, and is intended for a female, but is in outline more nearly that of a male, the anterior edges of the female being rounded instead of being hollowed out as his figure represents it. Beneath the figure Mr. Yarrell has appended the follow- ing names :— Raia radula, Delar, ‘‘ Mém. Poiss. Ivic.” in “ An. Must. Hist. Nat.” ts; sail, Pp. ger x Rate rape, Risso, “ Hist.” t. ili. p. 151, sp. 38. * - » vatissotre, Blainv., “ Faun. Franc.” p. 25. — < Razza scuffina, C. L. Bonap, ‘‘ Faun. Ital.” pt. xii. i‘ The Sandy Ray, Couch, “ Mag. Nat. Hist.” vol. xi. Pe 7a He further remarks: “The close accordance of the figure and description of this fish by Mr. Couch to the figure and descriptions of Raza radula of the authors here quoted leaves little room to doubt but that they refer to the same ¥ 222 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY species, and I include the fish, therefore, as here given, on Mr. Couch’s authority.” Is it any wonder, then, after such over-naming has occurred, that error should have crept in? But it does seem strange that those who have written more recently on the Rays should have fallen into error. As will be seen from the above, Day puts the Cuckoo Ray, and Sandy Ray of Couch as the same species. This he was certainly not warranted in doing, for the follow- ing reasons. First, 2. vaduwla is an abyssal form, while R. circularts is not. Second, rvadula attains a much larger size than cercularts, and before vadiula is mature it is longer and broader than mature czvcularis. What I mean by mature is, that in vadula the claspers of the male are not developed beyond two inches long when the fish itself has attained a size considerably beyond czrcwlaris, in which these organs are of full size, and the fish producing young. In confirmation of this I have taken many eggs from cerciularis, and have had them hatched out. Third, in vadila the male is always much smaller than the female, while in czrcularis the sexes are of the same size. Fourth, the claspers in vadula differ in form from those of czrcularzs, the former having a sharp spine on the edge which the latter never has, Fifth, the teeth of both species, though similar in. form, are ‘not identical, |’ Sixth, ‘the form Col) the two fishes: sis Gverm: different, the anterior edges of vadula being very much straighter than those of cercularzs, ze. the anterior edges of circularts are more hollowed out, and the head is more marked off from the body than in vadula (see Plate IV.). Seventh, the colour and marking in the two species are different. In vadula the ground-colour of the dorsal surface is of a light cinnamon brown, with regularly-placed whitish spots upon it; while czvcwlaris is usually of a yellowish colour, with only the central circular mark on each “ wing.” In addition to this, it has sometimes white markings similar to those on vadula, and it is from this fact, perhaps, that some ichthyologists believe it to be merely the young of radula, and that the large circular spots disappear with age. This, however, seems to me untenable, for it is mature, and produces its kind while the large marks are still upon it. % m LOZ: S [~) Ann. Scot. Nar Hr a « sree tion apt et ey IS RAZA RADULA A GOOD SPECIES ? 223 Again, these same white markings, similarly arranged, are to be seen as frequently upon Raza radiata, a form which no one would think of confounding with either of the species under consideration. Eighth, the proportion of females over males in vadula is extraordinary. From 7th May 1892 until 5th July 1895 I kept a daily record of all the examples of vadu/a that were brought into Aberdeen Market, and within that period 2865 females stood against 123 males ; whereas in the case of cercularis, from 15th August 1894 until 12th July 1895, the numbers were 2237 females and 2381 males, showing an excess of 144 males over females. Now, the question arises (and has to be answered by those that hold the two forms to be the same), What becomes of the excess of males in what some writers are pleased to call its immature state? It may also be asked, Why is there such a paucity of males when the fish is in what they term its adult state? And further, At what stage of their existence does the change take place, in the form, external colour, and markings of the two forms? If reference is made to Plate IV. there will be seen a series of Raza radula, ranging from 74 inches to 30 inches across its broadest part ; and in the case of Raza circularis, from 3 inches to its full size of 18 to 22 inches, broader than which I have never seen it. Besides this, cevcularzs is quite abundant, and breeds freely in Aberdeen Bay and along the coast both north and south, while vadu/a is entirely absent from that ground, and is not to be found until we reach deep water to the north of Wick. Again, if cévcularis is the young of vadula, how is it that not a single example of it is caught in company with radula? One would naturally expect that the immature stage would occasionally be found with the adult. The nature and distribution of the spines of the two forms differ, vadu/a having a few strong irregularly-placed spines upon the nose, and three rows of from seventeen to eighteen spines on each “wing,” and the anterior end of these rows does not come nearer the edge of the fin than 14 inches. On the other hand, crcularzs has no strong spines upon the nose, and those on the “wings” come right up to, and extend along, the anterior edge, the spines becoming 224 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY less as they advance towards the front. There are some- times four rows of these spines, and they form a triangular patch, the long end of which points posteriorly. And lastly, it will be seen on reference to Plate V. that the dorsal spinulation of each form differs widely from the other. In reference to the spinulation of the Rays, Dr. Giinther, in his “Introduction to the Study of Fishes,” says: “The males of all are armed with patches of claw-like spines, retractile in grooves of the integument, and serially arranged, occupying a space on the upper side of the pectoral fin near the angle of the disc, and frequently also the sides of the head.” These spines are certainly not retractile in the British forms. They are firmly set by broad bases into the skin, and are immovable. Taking all things into consideration, there seems to be no doubt but that Raza radula must stand as a distinct species. This opinion I have held from the first, but refrained from expressing it until such time as a series of each in all their stages could be obtained. This has, within the past two years, come to hand, and I have now an un- broken series of each species, and I consider that I am warranted in saying that no further doubt need exist that the idea of crvcularis being the immature form of radula is erroneous. This, however, is only one of the many tangled points in reference to the Rays, but enough has been said to show that much work yet remains to be done regarding this group of fishes before the subject can be placed on a satisfactory footing. EXPLANATION OF PLATES. PLATE IV. Fig. 1. &. cercularis. Fig. 2. R. radula. Males. Figs. 3-6. A. vadula. Figs. 7-9. R. cércularis. Females. Fig. 10. 2. radiata. PLATE V. Dorsal Spinulation, etc., of Male 2. czrcularis. Large and small spines near eyes. Large and small spines near tail. Large and smali spines on wings. 4. Upper teeth. 5. Lower teeth. Wn = Dorsal Spinulation, etc., of Male 2. radula. 6. Spines near eyes. 7. Spines on wings. 8. Spines on tail. 9. Small spines on tail. 10. Upper teeth. 11. Lower teeth. Ann. Scot. Nat. Hist 1902. PLATE V SOME NOTES ON THE SCOTTISH CRANGONIDAt 225 SOME NOTES ON THE SCOTTISH CRANGONID-. By Tuomas Scort, F.L.S. THE chief purpose of the following notes is to bring together the various scattered records of the Scottish species of the family Crangonide that have been published from time to time. The best-known species of the family is the common shrimp, Crangon vulgards (Linn.), which the Rev. Mr. Stebbing describes in his felicitous style as being “apparently in the zoological ideas of many persons not only the typical shrimp, the shrimp par excellence, but the only shrimp.” At the time of the publication of Professor Bell’s “ History of the British Stalk-eyed Crustacea,” little appears to have been known regarding the distribution of the Crangonidz in the Scottish seas, for although six species are described by that author, the only direct reference made to Scotland is in connection with Crangon spinosus (Leach), where, at page 262, he remarks: “I have a specimen taken by my friends Professor Forbes and Mr. M‘Andrew, off Shetland.” But since Professor Bell’s day many observers have been in the field, and the distribution of the Crangonide in the Scottish seas has received much attention, with the result that ten species are now included in the marine fauna of Scotland ; they comprise nine species of Crangon, together with Sadznea septemcarinata. I will briefly mention in their order a few of the works published subsequent to that of Professor Bell, in which more or less prominence is given to the Scottish Crangonide. 1. The Rev. A. M. Norman, “ Last Report on Dredging among the Shetland Isles” (published in the Report of the British Associa- tion for 1868), records Crangon vulgaris, C. Alimannt, C. fasciatus, C. trispinosus, C. spinosus, C. echinulatus, and Sabinea septem- carinata. 2. Prof. MacIntosh, ‘‘The Marine Invertebrates and Fishes of St. Andrews,” published in 1875, records only Crangon vudgaris. 1 «* A History of Crustacea,” vol. Ixxiv. of the International Scientific Series, ps 225. 44 D 226 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY 3. In Smiles’ “ Life of Thomas Edward,” published in 1877, five species of Crvangon are included in the list of Moray Firth Crustacea, vizi—C. vulgaris, C. spinosus, C. sculptus, C. trispinosus, and C. Allmannt. 4. “The Invertebrate Fauna of the Firth of Forth,” by Leslie and Herdman, published in 1881, contains records of Crangon vul- garis, C. Almanni, and C. nanus. 5. “The Decapod and Schizopod Crustacea of the Firth of Clyde,’ by Dr. J. R. Henderson, published in 1886, contains records of Crangon vulgaris, C. spinosus, C. sculptus, C. nanus, C. Allmannit, C. echinulatus. 6. In the “ Fourth Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scot- land,” Appendix F, No. viii. 1886, is a paper by the Rev. A. M. Norman, containing interesting observations on Crangon neglectus and C. fasciatus. Several other papers, including some by myself, published in the Annual Reports of the Fishery Board for Scotland, will be referred to, where necessary. Dr. Henderson, in his work on the Clyde Crustacea, includes the genus /Vzka in the family Crangonidz, but Bell, Spence Bate (“ Challenger” Macrura), and the Rev. T. R. R. Stebbing, exclude it. Professor Bell places za in the family Alpheide, but the other two authors named make it the type of the family Nikide. The nine species of Cvangon recorded from Scottish waters are by some writers grouped under four genera, viz. : CRANGON, Fabricius, represented by Crangon vulgaris and Crangon Allmannt. PONTOPHILUS, Leach, represented by Crangon spinosus.. CHERAPHILUS, Kinahan, represented by Crangon trispinosus, Crangon echinulatus, Crangon neglectus, and Crangon nanus. And EGEON, Risso, to which is assigned Crangon fasciatus and Crangon sculptus. 1 propose, however, to treat of them all under the old and more familiar name of Crangon ; the Sabznea, for which there appears to be but the one record, being kept separate. REMARKS ON THE SPECIES. CRANGON VULGARIS (Zz77.).—This is one of the largest as well as the commonest of the Scottish species of Crvangon. It is a littoral species, and is found all around our shores where the beach is sandy. SOME NOTES ON THE SCOTTISH CRANGONID AE 227 The rostrum is moderately broad at the base, but tapers towards the apex, which is rounded. ‘The carapace, or shield, is comparatively smooth, and is furnished in front with three moderately prominent spine-like teeth, one on each side, and one in the middle behind the rostrum ; the three teeth are nearly in line, but the middle one is slightly posterior to the others. ‘The remaining segments are smooth and evenly rounded on the dorsal surface, except that in some specimens there is a slight flattening or depression along the middle dorsal aspect of the last segment. ‘The colour is usually a ‘“‘ speckled grey.” One of the largest specimens, with ova, in our collection measures 70 millimeters from the point of the rostrum to the extremity of the “tail”; but larger specimens may sometimes be observed. CRANGON ALLMANNI, A7zzahan.—This is also a common species, and is perhaps as common and generally distributed as the last, but being confined to deeper water is not as frequently noticed by the casual observer. It has a moderately close resemblance to C. vulgaris, but scarcely attains so large a size. ‘The carapace, as in vulgaris, 1s comparatively smooth, and has similar spine-like teeth in front ; the remaining segments are also smooth, except that in the last one there is a distinct groove bordered on each side by a prominent ridge which extends the whole length or nearly so of its dorsal aspect. Moreover, the rostrum is not only distinctly narrower, but it is more cylindrical; the specimens are also usually of a brownish colour rather than grey. The largest ova-bearing speci- mens in our collection range from 55 to 58 millimeters in length from the point of the rostrum to the end of the tail. CRANGON TRISPINOSUS (/fai/stone).—This species resembles in some respects a small Crangon vulgaris, especially in the armature of the carapace, or shield, but the colour is somewhat different, and so also is the form of the rostrum. In this species the rostrum is comparatively short and broad, it sides are nearly parallel, and the apex, instead of being rounded, is subtriangular. Moreover, the arrangement of the three spines on the front of the carapace is somewhat different from that usually observed in Crangon vulgaris, in which species the middle spine is slightly posterior to those at the sides, while in C. ¢vispinosus the two side spines are slightly posterior to the middle one—a difference readily noticed if one looks across the back of the specimen; the same difference is observable between C. ¢rispinosus and C. Alimannt. The abdominal segments are all comparatively smooth, and evenly rounded on the dorsal aspect, but a shallow groove extends along the middle of the proximal half of the telson, or middle tail-piece. A female with ova taken in Aberdeen Bay measured about 26 millimeters from the extremity of the rostrum to the end of the telson. I have examined specimens of C. ¢visfinosus from the Firth of 228 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY Forth, Aberdeen Bay, and the Moray Firth. It is one of the species recorded by Thomas Edward, of Banff, and the Rev. A. M. Norman has recorded it from Shetland, but it has not yet been observed in the Clyde, nor do I know of any record of it from any place on the west of Scotland. CRANGON FASCIATUS, /t7/sso.—In this species the rostrum is comparatively short and broad, with an abruptly truncate apex, in fact the apex, instead of being rounded, is sometimes slightly concave. The carapace bears a single central spine, situated a short distance behind the base of the rostrum: ‘‘on either side of the spine and between it and the margin are three slight lobe-like folds. Between this portion of the carapace and its hinder margin is a deeply-cut sulcus, arching forwards at the sides. ‘There are two transverse bands of dark brown, one across the fourth segment of the abdomen and the other across the telson and uropods.” ! This is apparently a rare species in the Scottish seas. JI know of only two localities where it has been obtained ; these are—Shet- land, where five specimens were obtained by the Rev. A. M. Norman in 1868; and off Musselburgh, Firth of Forth, where two specimens were captured in four to five fathoms.” It is a small species ; the specimen recorded by Prof. Bell measured six-tenths of an inch (15 mm.) in length, but the Musselburgh specimens measure orate more than ro mm. CRANGON NEGLECTUS, G. O. Sars.—The rostrum in this species, as in the last, is moderately broad, but instead of having the apex abruptly truncate, it is distinctly and evenly rounded. The carapace has a single central spine situated as in C. fasctatus, and a “second small tubercle-like spine on the central line behind it”; but the lobe-like folds are wanting, while “the sulcus which in that species defines their lateral regions is much less distinct and deep.” This species, like the previous one, has the fourth abdominal segment, and the telson and uropods, adorned with transverse coloured bands, but they are more ofa chestnut colour than dark brown. This small species was first observed in Loch Tarbert (Loch Fyne) in 1886, and afterwards in Largo Bay, Firth of Forth, in eight to nine fathoms, in 1891. One of the Largo Bay specimens in my collection measures about 18 mm. from the apex of the rostrum to the end of the tail. In part iii. of the “Nineteenth Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland,” p. 278, I have recorded this species from the Bay of Nigg and the Moray Firth; this was an error, for these specimens were ie referable to Gan trispinosus. CRANGON NANUS, Avoyer (=C. BisPINosuS, /ad/stone, of Bell’s “British Stalk-eyed Crustacea”).—In this species the rostrum is 1 See Norman’s paper in the *‘ Fourth Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland,” 1886, i. p. 156. * « Ninth Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland,” 1891, iii. p. 309. SOME NOTES ON THE SCOTTISH CRANGONID 229 small and tapers gradually to the narrow but boldly-rounded apex. The carapace is armed with two small spines on the median line, one being situated a short distance from the base of the rostrum, while the other is intermediate between it and the posterior margin. The carapace is also adorned with numerous minute tubercles arranged more or less in longitudinal lines, which look like indistinct ridges, the principal one being in line with the two spines already alluded to. The two median spines are more prominent in some specimens than in others, and appear more distinct when the carapace is viewed from the side; the arrangement of the tubercles is also more conspicuous when the specimen is partially dried. Crangon nanus appears to be generally distributed round the Scottish coasts. It has been recorded from the Firth of Forth (Leslie and Herdman, and others) ; off Aberdeen ; the Firth of Clyde (Robertson and myself) ; Shetland Islands (Norman, who describes it as common in 40-50 fathoms 5-8 miles east of Balta; also Whalsey Skerries Haddock Ground, and occasionally elsewhere). Two females (with ova) which I measured did not exceed 11 mm. in length. CRANGON sPiINosus, Zeach.—This and the next two species have a spiniferous carapace. The rostrum in C. sfznosus has a strong spine on each side near its base, so that it has somewhat of a trifid appearance; its apex is bluntly rounded. ‘The carapace is armed with five spiniferous ridges ; the central ridge and the one on each side of it usually extend close to the posterior margin, and each is usually provided with three spines ; the other two ridges are less complete. The last two segments of the abdomen are flattened along the median dorsal line, the flattened part being bounded on either side by a slightly raised border ; a second pair of raised lines are observable on the same segments outside of those already referred to, but these are indistinct unless in partly-dried specimens ; the other abdominal segments are very faintly keeled. The telson is flattened or slightly grooved. Crangon spinosus has been recorded from various Scottish local- ities. It has not been recorded from the Firth of Forth or St. Andrews Bay, but Sim obtained it off Aberdeen in 1871-72 ;1 and it has been taken in the same neighbourhood during the recent investigations on behalf of the Fishery Board for Scotland. It is one of the species recorded for the Moray Firth in Smiles’ ‘ Life of Thomas Edward.” It is described by Henderson as being “not uncommon in the Clyde,” and it is also one of the species recorded by Alex. Patience ;? while in his Shetland Report Norman describes 1 «Scottish Naturalist,” vol. i. p. 184. 2 « Millport Mar. Biol. Stat. Communications” (Noy. 1900), p. 30. 230 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY it as common. ‘The larger specimens in our collection range from 45 to fully 50 mm. in length from the apex of the rostrum to the extremity of the tail. CRANGON ECHINULATUS, JZ. Sarvs (=C. SERRATUS, /Vorman?). This species was discovered about the same time by M. Sars and Norman, unknown to each other, but Sars’ description appears to have been first published. In this species the rostrum is nearly as in C. vulgaris, being moderately narrow, and tapering to the somewhat acute apex. The armature of the carapace resembles that of C. spznosus. Five ridges, one central and two on each side, extend nearly the whole length of it, while posteriorly a short ridge terminating in a small tooth at its anterior end occurs on each side of the central ridge. The central ridge is usually armed with three teeth, and the principal ridge on each side of it with five or six, but the other two lateral ridges have usually only two teeth near the proximal end. All these teeth are depressed and directed forwards. ‘The third, fourth, and fifth abdominal segments are keeled along the median dorsal line ; the dorsal surface of the sixth is flattened and slightly grooved, and the telson is also slightly grooved at the base. The species appears to be widely distributed, but the only localities from which it has been recorded are the Shetland Islands and the Hebrides, where it was discovered by the Rev. A. M. Nor- man; off Skate Island, Loch Fyne, where Dr. Henderson obtained a single specimen ; and near the mouth of the Clyde estuary, where it was found moderately frequent by the fishery steamer Gazland. A female (with ova) measured 34 mm., and another specimen (without ova) 45 mm. in length. CRANGON scuLpTus, Ze//—This species, which appears to be rare in Scottish waters, I have not seen. ‘The only Scottish records known to me are the following :—(1) two specimens were captured in five fathoms in Lamlash Bay, Firth of Clyde (Norman); (2) a single specimen was dredged in twenty fathoms off Muggie Point, Little Cumbrae (Henderson); and (3) the species is recorded for the Moray Firth in Smiles’ ‘ Life of Thomas Edward.” The following brief description of the species is derived from Bell’s “ British Stalk-eyed Crustacea ” :—Rostrum short and compara- tively broad, and abruptly truncate at the apex. ‘The armature of the carapace resembles that of C. sfznosus. ‘The abdominal seg- ments have their dorsal surface distinctly sculptured, the raised portions being polished, while the depressions are slightly pubescent. The third, fourth, and fifth segments are distinctly keeled, but the sixth segment and telson are channelled. The rostrum in this species appears to resemble very closely that of C. fasciatus. 1 «British Assoc. Rept. for 1861 ” (pub. 1862), p. 151, TERRESTRIAL PLANARIANS IN SCOTLAND 231 SABINEA SEPTEMCARINATA, Sadime.—One of the principal points of difference between Sadinea and Crangon is that in the former the second pair of thoracic legs are not chelate but simple. The only known British example of this species was captured in 1861 by the Rev. A. M. Norman sixty miles east of Shetland, at a depth of eighty to ninety fathoms. ‘This is the only species among those enumerated here that has peculiarly arctic distribution ; and probably when the seas around the Shetland Islands come to be more thoroughly examined other arctic forms may be obtained. ONPTHE OCCURRENCE OF TERRESERIAE PEANAKIANS IN SCOTEAND: By W. T. Caiman, D.Sc., University College, Dundee. ALTHOUGH terrestrial species of planarian worms have long been known to occur in England, and have recently been recorded from many localities in Ireland by Dr. R. F. Scharff, they do not appear to have been observed hitherto in Scotland. I have lately met with a species in the neighbourhood of Kirkmichael, in Perthshire, and I wish to call attention to the probable occurrence of at least one other native species in this country. The land-planarians are particularly interesting from the point of view of geographical distribution, and it is very desirable that the range of our British species should be exactly determined. A full account of all the species will be found in von Graffs great monograph,! and short descriptions of the British forms are given by Scharff.” Rhynchodemus terrestris (O. F. Miiller). This species was described so long ago as 1774 by the Danish zoologist O. F. Miiller, who says of it, “Primo intuitu juniorem Limacem crederes” ; and indeed its close resemblance to a small grey slug has no doubt often caused it to be over- looked by collectors. Large specimens may be about an inch in length when extended by about 54, inch in breadth 1 «Monographie der Turbellarien, II. Tricladida Terricola (Landplanarien).” 1899. * «Trish Naturalist,” ix. pp. 215-218, September 1900, 232 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY in the middle of the body, which is more or less flattened and narrowed at either end. The upper side is dark grey in colour, the under side whitish. The narrow anterior extremity, which is generally raised from the ground in moving, bears a pair of minute black eyes. The surface of the body is smooth and moist, and a track of slime is left behind as the animal moves. The mouth is on the under side of the body, a little behind the middle of its length, and the minute genital aperture may be discerned some distance further back. I found this species in July of this year under mossy stones in a little thicket of alders, on the bank of the river Ardle, near Kirkmichael, Perthshire. A prolonged search only resulted in the discovery of three specimens, the largest not more than half an inch in length when alive. kh. terrestris has been found in many localities in England, as far north as Westmoreland and Cumberland, and it is widely distributed in Ireland. The range of the species appears to include the greater part of Western Europe, from Denmark to the Balearic Islands. Rhynchodemus scharffi, v. Graff (?)—A _ species of land- planarian certainly different from the foregoing was collected by Professor D’Arcy W. Thompson, C.B., in September 1901, near Crinan, Argyleshire. The specimen unfortunately went to pieces before it could be preserved, but from the appear- ance of the fragments and from the description of the living animal I am disposed to identify it with this species, with which it agreed in its large size (over an inch in length) and its light yellow colour. RA/. scharffi has hitherto been found only in hot-houses near Dublin, but Professor v. Graff and Dr. Scharff agree in thinking that it is probably indigenous. The only other land-planarian known to occur in Britain is Placocephalus (or Bipalium) kewensts (Moseley), a cosmopolitan species which has been introduced into hot- houses in several places in England and Ireland. This species, which may be easily recognised by the flattened semicircular expansion at the anterior end of the body, has not, so far as I know, been found in Scotland. The museum of University College possesses, however, a specimen of a large SCOTTISH RUBI 233 Riynchodemus from the hot-houses of the Edinburgh Botanic Gardens, sent to us some years ago by Dr. W. G. Smith (now of Leeds). In its external characters, and especially in the arrangement of the longitudinal bands of colour on the body, it seems to approach most closely to R&z. hallezz, v. Graff, a species known only by two specimens from the Philippine Islands. SCOP TISH RUB: By Prof. James W. H. Trait, A.M., M.D., F.R.S. (Continued from p. 176.) 78. PEEBLES. . 1dzeus.—R. . Chameemorus. “ Balfour MS.,” “Top. Bot.”—R. ne 79. SELKIRK. . 1dzeus.—R. . radula (s. s¢vict.). Near Faldonside, 1893, AZarshal/._|R]. . saxatilis. ‘‘ Farquharson, Catalogue,” ‘Top. Bot.”—R. Chamemorus. ‘Farquharson, Catalogue,” “Top. Bot.”—R. nn 80. ROXBURGH. . idazeus.—R. . Rogersii. Ayton to Cairncross, C. Bazley.—R. sradula, “Add. Rec. 1892.” . ochrodermis, A. Ley. Lessudden, Bazley, 1898.—R. ceesius, L.—R. . saxatilis. ‘‘ Brotherston,” ‘*Top. Bot.”—R. Chamemorus, “Duncan MsS.,” “N.B. Guide,” 1837; “Top: Bot.” —R. ba od od od od od po 81. BERWICK. . ideeus.—R. . suberectus. ‘Top. Bot.”—[R]. . plicatus. ‘‘ Johnston,” “Top. Bot.”—{R]. . macrophyllus. Johnston, “ Fl. Berw.” 1831 ; ‘Top. Bot.”—[R]. . leucostachys, Schlecht. ‘“‘ Johnston,” “'Top. Bot.”—(R). . mucronatus, Blox. (as mucronulatus). “Johnston,” “Yop. Bot.” —(R). . radula (s. stract.). Ayton to Cairncross, Bailey, 1900.—R. . echinatus (as rudis). ‘‘ Top. Bot.”—(R). PR FR FARR 234 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY . dumetorum, W. and Nees, vay. ferox, Weihe. & A. Rogers, 1897.—R. . corylifolius. Johnston, in “ Fl. Berw.” ; #. A. Rogers, 1897.—R. . Balfourianus, Blox. Johnston, “'Top. Bot.”—R. . cesius. Johnston, in “ Fl. Berw.” . saxatilis. ‘Top. Bot.”—R. . Chameemorus. /oknston, in “Fl. Berw.”; “ Add. Rec. 1886.” ArRPAPRP BF 82. HADDINGTON. . 1dzeus.—R. . mucronatus.—(R). . nr 83. EDINBURGH. ideus. Salisbury Crags, Lightfoot, 1778.—R. affinis. ‘‘ Top. Bot.” . latifolius. ‘“ Balfour,” “Top. Bot.”—(R). .radula. ‘Top. Bot.”—[R]. . corylifolius. Roslin Woods, etc., Grevzd/e, in “ FI. Scot.” 1824. . cesius. ‘ Haughton,” in “Fl. Scot.” 1824. . saxatilis. ‘‘ Balfour, Catalogue,” “‘ Top. Bot.”—R. Chameemorus. “FI. Scot.” 1824; “ Balfour, Catalogue,” ‘Top. Bot.”—R. Wan A WW 84. LINLITHGOW. R. idaeus.—R. R. latifolius. “Top. Bot.”; near Bridge of Cramond, IV. AZ. R—R. R. villicaulis (s. Za¢.). ‘* Top. Bot.” R. villicaulis (s. s¢vic¢.). Cramond Bridge, 1897, W. AZ R.—R. subsp. Selmeri. 1897, W. M. R.—R. R. macrophyllus. subsp. Schlechtendalii. “Top. Bot.”—(R). R. mucronatus (as mwucronulatus). “Top. Bot.”—R. R.radula (s. s7zc7.)., ooo — Re subsp. echinatoides. Near Cramond Bridge, 1896, I” AZ. X. —R. R. corylifolius. 1900.—R. R. cesius. Near Cramond Bridge, 1896, W. AZ. XR. 85. FirE AND KINROsS. R. idzus, var. obtusifolius (as var. Zeesz7), “ Add. Rec. 1885”; Dr. Mactier, ‘‘ Gard. Chron.” November 1882, specimen given by him to me. . trhamnifolius. ‘ Syme,” “Top. Bot.”—R. . nemoralis, var. glabratus (as var. of macrophyllus). “Top. Bot.” ar FRAPPR ARF RASCH 7 wae rhs) eli) cl rclclt oh Mats SCOLPSEH RUB 235 . Lindebergii, P. J. Muell.—R. . mucronatus (as mucronulatus ). “Top. Bot.”—R. p-radula,(s. daz.)\ “Top: Bot? . radula (s. s¢vict.).—R. . oigocladus, var. Newbouldii (Bab.).—R. . ceesius.—R. . saxatilis. ‘Tom Drummond,” “Top. Bot.”—R. 86. STIRLING. ~idzeus.. “Add; Rec. 1886.”—R. var. obtusifolius.—R. fissus.—R. . suberectus. ‘Top. Bot.”—R. . Rogersii. C. H. Waddell (“J. Bot.” 1899).—R. . plicatus.—R. var. hemistemon.—R. . Lindleianus.—R. . rhamnifolius. Near Stirling, 1897.—R. subsp. Bakeril. 1900.—R. . nemoralis, P. J. Muell. var, glabratus. Dried specimen seen, 1896, IV. JZ, R.—R. . Scheutzii. Stirling and Gargunnock in great quantity, 1896, W. M. R. ; villieanlis (s. Zaz). ‘G: £. Hunt,” “Top. Bot.” (s. strict.).—R. subsp. Selmeri. 1896, IV. AZ. R.—R. . macrophyllus. G. &. Hunt, “Top. Bot.”—R. . hirtifolius, vay. danicus. 1896, 1% AZ, R.—R. . mucronatus (as mucronulatus). “G. L. Hunt,” “Top. Bot.”—R. . melanoxylon. trgo01, WV. AZ, R.—R. . infestus. Castle Hill and Gargunnock, 1896, WV. AZ. R.—R. . Drejeri. Castle Hill and near King’s Park, 1896, IV. AZ. R.—R. . radula (s. s¢vict.). “Stirling and Gargunnock, plentiful,” 1896, W. M. R.—R. subsp. echinatoides. Gargunnock, 1896, IV. AZ. R.—R. . echinatus.—R. . serpens (as var. vivu/aris). ‘‘Gargunnock Woods, Azds¢one and Stirling ; greatly needing confirmation.”— R]. dumetorum, var. britannicus. Castle Hill, Stirling, 1896, IV. M. R.—R. var. diversifolius. ‘Castle Walls, Stirling, Croad/,” ‘ Bot. Rec. Club Rep. 1875.” In 1895 list, but omitted from ‘‘ Handbook,” as probably having been é77¢annicus. var, tuberculatus, Bab. In 1895 list, but not in list in “ Handbook,” 236 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY R. corylifolius. Castle Hill, Stirling, 1896, 1. JZ. R.—R. var. sublustris. Castle Hill, 1896, W. AZ. &.—R. var. cyclophyllus (as var. conjungens). ‘‘ Hunt,” “Top. Bot.” —(R). R. ceesius. Castle Hill, 1896, W. AZ. R.—R. R. saxatilis. ‘‘ Duthie, Catalogue,” “Top. Bot.” R. Chamemorus. ‘“N.B. Guide,” 1837 ; “ Hooker, sf: 73" > Pop: Bot.”—R. 87. W. PERTH AND CLACKMANNAN. R. idzeus.—R. var. asperrimus. Callander Crags, W. JZ. R. 1897.—R. R. fissus. # IV. White, 1884.—R. R. suberectus. “Top. Bot.”—R. R. Rogersii. Abundant and conspicuous, 1897, IV. AZ, R.—R. R. plicatus. “ Greville,” “Top. Bot.”—R. R. affinis. ‘Top. Bot.” and “Fl. P.”—[R]. R. incurvatus. “Loch Earn, 1897,” W. AZ. R.—R. R. Lindleianus, ‘‘Clackmannan,” “Top. Bot.” ; near Aberfoyle and Callander, 1896, W. AZ. R. R. rhamnifolius. Callander Crags, 1896, W. AZ. R.—R. R. nemoralis. Near Callander, 1896, W. AZ. R.—R. R. Scheutzii. ‘ Exceedingly common about Callander,” 1896, W. M. R.—R. - R. pulcherrimus. Loch Vennachar, etc., 1896, W. AZ, R.—R. R. Lindebergii. Callander Crags, 1896, W. AZ. R.—R. ) R. villicaulis (s. s¢vic¢.). “ Extraordinarily abundant on Callander Crags,” etc., 1896, W. AZ, R.—R. subsp. Selmeri. 1896, WV. AZ R.—R. subsp. rhombifolius. Between Vennachar and Callander, 1896, W. M. R. R. gratus, Focke. 1900.—R. R. macrophyllus, szésp. Schlechtendalii. Between Callander and Lake of Menteith, 1896, W. AZ. R.—[R]. R. hirtifolius, var, danicus. Common, 1896, IV. JZ, R.—R. R. pyramidalis. 1900.—R. . R. mucronatus. “Frequent and locally abundant,” 1896, W. JZ. R. —R. R. melanoxylon. Fairly common, 1896, I. JZ. R.—R. R. infestus. ‘“ About Callander,” etc., 1896, M7 JZ. R.—R. R. Drejeri. Loch Vennachar, 1896, W. JZ R.—R. Be tadula(s2)s772c7,).— ke subsp. anglicanus, Rogers. Near Aberfoyle, 1896, VW. AZ. R. —R. subsp. echinatoides. Callander, etc., 1896, W. JZ R.—R. subsp. sertiflorus. Callander and Aberfoyle, 1896, W. AZ. R. —R. SCOTTISH RUBI 237 (“R. humifusus.” ‘Top. Bot.” (= 2. pallidus, W. and N.).| R. Koehleri.—| R }. subsp. dasyphyllus (as pallidus). “Top. Bot.” ; near Callander, 1896, W. M. R. [R. saxicolus. “ Inverarnan, 1845, Babington,” “ Fl. Perthensis.”] FREE Pre Papp r perp PRP . dumetorum, vayv. britannicus, Rogers. Near Callander, in plenty, 1896, W. M. R.—R. . corylifolius. 1896, W. AZ. R.—R. . cesius. Near Callander, 1896, W. JZ. R.—R. . saxatilis. ‘“‘ Syme, sp.”—R. . Chamemorus. ‘‘ Ben Cleuch, Graham, 1840,” “ Fl. P.”—R. 88. Mip PERTH. . ideus.—R. var. obtusifolius, noted thus (88) in the “ Handbook,” but apparently for (89), which see. fissus. & B. White, 1884.—R. . suberectus. By Loch Tay, # B. W., 1884.—R. Rogersil. Knock of Crieff, C. Bazley, 1894.—R. plicatus. “Top. Bot.”—R. var. hemistemon. / B. W., 1884.—[R]. nitidus. “Near Methven Bog” (“Flora Perth.”).—[R]. affinis. “FI. P.”—[R\]. latifolius. “Top. Bot.”; “Breadalbane, Ladington, 1844” ; “FY, P.”—R. imbricatus.—| R ]. carpinifolius. “ Fl. P.”—[R]. incurvatus. ‘Fl. P.”; Loch Earn, 1896, W. AZ, R.—R. . Lindleianus. “FI. P.”; ‘Loch Earn and Loch Tay,” W. AZ R. —R. . rhamnifolius. & 4. W., 1884.—(R). . Scheutzii. Knock of Crieff, 1896, W. AZ. R.—R. . pulcherrimus. 1900. . Lindebergii. Near Killin, J/arshal/, 1892.—R. . villicaulis (s. Za¢.). & B. W. 1884. R. (s. strict.). Glen Lochy, Marshall and Hanbury, 1891.—R. subsp. Selmeri. 1897, W. A. R.—R. subsp. rhombifolius.—| R]. . gratus.—[R]}. . ramosus, Briggs. “FI. P.”—[R]. .macrophyllus. “ 4. W., 1884. Between Killin and Loch Tay, 1896, W. M. R.—[R]. subsp. Schlechtendali. var. macrophylloides, t9g00.—R. var. amplificatus.—(R). . Salteri, “Fl. P.”—[R]; 238 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY R. micans, Gren. and Godr. # 4. IWW., 1884; no authentic speci- men seen by Mr. Rodger from north of Cheshire.—|R]. R. hirtifolius (s. Zat.) # B. White, 1884. var. danicus. Loch Earn, etc., 1897, W. JZ. R.—R. R. pyramidalis. “Fl. P.”; Loch Earn and Killin, 1896, W. AZ. R.—R. R. mucronatus. Loch Earn, 1896, W. AZ. R.—-R. R. melanoxylon. Loch Earn, 1896, W. AZ, R.—R. R. infestus. Murthly, 1894, ZrazZ—R. [R. Drejeri. Loch Earn, 1896, W. AZ. R., but not in “‘ Handbook. ai R. radula (s. s¢vic¢.). Knock of Crieff, nate, W, MSR: subsp. echinatoides. Between Killin and Loch Tay, 1896, W. M. R.—R. R. echinatus “ FI. P.”—(R). R. Lejeunei, W. and Nees. / &.W., 1884; not accepted by W. AZ. R. R. cavatifolius, P. J. Muell. “Fl. P.,.—[R]}. IRe-rosaceus, Wand ‘Nees, ~ Pl Py -(R). var. hystrix, W. and Nees. #: B. IV., 1884.—[R]. R. Koehleri. & B. WV, 1884.—[R]. subsp. dasyphyllus (as pallidus, F. B.W., 1884).—(R). Rk. dumetorum, vav. britannicus. Loch Earn and Knock of Crieff, 1896, W. M. R—R. var. tuberculatus (as scabrosus, Muell.). “Fl. P.” (R). var. fasciculatus (as var. of corylifolius). “Fl. P.”—[R]. R. corylifolus. # B. W., 1884.—R. var. sublustris. ‘Fl, P.”—R. var. cyclophyllus (as var. conjungens). “Fl, P.”—[R]. . Balfourianus.—[R}. . cesius. “Fl. P.” Loch Earn and Killin, 1896.—R. . saxatilis. About Loch Rannoch. Lighffoot, “ Fl. Scot.” 1778.—R. . Chamemorus. Mountains about Loch Rannoch. Ligh/foor, “Fl. Scot.” 1778.—R. ArAA 89. East PERTH. -idzeus. Laighwood, J/‘fz¢chie, in “ Old Statistical Account,” 1793. var. obrusifolins: Sepgieden, Drummond-FHay Ace Fl. P.”) .fissus. “Near Blairgowrie, A. Sturrock,” (“ Fl. P.”\—[R]. suberectus. # B. W., 1884.—[R]. sulcatus. ‘* Muirton Wood (Sturrock),” “FI. P.”—[R]. . plicatus. # B. W., 1884.—[R]. var. hemistemon. /. B. W., 1884.—[R]. affnis. & B. W., 1884.—[R]. . latifolius. & &. W., 1884.—(R). . imbricatus. “Fl. P.”—[R]. . carpinifolius. “Fl. P.”—[R]. . Incurvatus. ‘Blairgowrie, Sturrock,” “ Fl. P.”—(R). ern P Wn nh id od APRA 7) ARP PRR Re. R. R ra SCOTTISH RUBI 230 . Lindleianus. ‘Fl. P.”—R. . rhamnifolius. “‘ Blairgowrie, A. Sturrock,” “ Fl. P.”—(R). mwillicaulis (s;da7:)., “HIS Py? villicaulis (s. s¢rict.). M2 and Hand., “ Add. Rec. 1890”; near Blairgowrie, 1892, Marshall.—[R]. subsp. Selmeri. 1896, W. M. R.—R. . gratus (as var. of wi//icaulis). ‘‘ Woody Island,” “ Fl. P.” .ramosus. “ Fl, P.”—[R]. . rusticanus. “Island below Linn of Campsie.” ‘Fl. P.”—R. . macrophyllus.—[R]. subsp. Schlechtendalii, vay. amplificatus. “Fl. P.” Salteri, “FI. P.”—[R]. Colemanni. ‘FI. P.”—[R]. Sprengelii, “Fl. P.-—[R]. . hirtifolius, vay. danicus.—R. . pyramidalis. “Fl. P.”—[R]. . mucronatus. ‘Rattray, Sturrock,” “Fl. P.”—R. .radula) & B. W., 1884.—[R]. . echinatus. “FI. P.”—(R). . Babingtonii. “ Countlaw, Rattray, A. Sturrock,” “Fl. P.”—[R]. . cavatifolius. “ Fl. P.” (as var. of R. Koehlert).—[R]. [R. [R. foliosus. “FI. P.” Not accepted by W. JZ. R.] Lejeunei. “Fl. P.” Not accepted by WJZ. R.] rosaceus. “Fl, P.”—(R). var. hystrix. & B, W., 1884; “not certainly known from Scotland.”—[R]. Koehleri, swdsp. dasyphyllus (as paliidus). “ FI. P.”—[R]. . dumetorum, var. diversifolius. ‘“ Fl. P.”—(R). var. tuberculatus (as scabrosus, Muell). ‘“ Fl. P.”—(R). var. fasciculatus (as variety of corylifolius). ‘FI. P.,—[R]. . corylifolius. B. W., 1884.—R. var. sublustris. “ Fl. P.”—(R). var. cyclophyllus (as var. conjungens), F. B. W., 1884.—(R). R. Balfourianus. & B. W., 1884.—(R). Recess. «ole R. saxatilis. Dunkeld and Blair, Zighéfoot, “ Fl. Scot.” 1778.—R. R. Chameemorus. ‘Fl. P.”—R. [R. arcticus. ‘‘ Ben-y-glo, Richard Cotton,” “Eng. Bot.” t. 1585. ] go. FORFAR. R. ideus. ‘Plentiful. Fruit. . . . occasionally white,” Gardiner in “ Fl. Forf.” 1848,—R. R. fissus. “Top. Bot.”—R. R. suberectus. ‘ Top. Bot.”—[R]. R. plicatus.—[R]. R. Lindleianus.—R. iS) 4 Wd od Pe arn AAFP FRPP FF Ww v2) R 7 po po Pe pd po ro bo po fe) ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY . radula (s. s¢vic¢.).—R. . corylifolius. Gardiner, in “ FI. Forf.”—R. _ saxatilis, “N.B. Guide,” 1837; ‘“‘ Top. Bot.”—R. Chamemorus. “N.B. Guide,” 1837; ‘‘ Top. Bot.”—R. g1. KINCARDINE. idzeus.—R. ‘fissus.—R. . Rogersii. 1900.—R. plicatus. Zvaz/, 1884.—R. rusticanus (as discolor). “Top. Bot.”—R. mucronatus (as mucronulatus). “Top. Bot.”—R. radula. Zvai/, 1884.—[R]. . rosaceus, s#bsp. Purchasianus.—[R]. . corylifolius. Zvaz/, 1884.—R. var. sublustris. Zyvaz/, 1884.—(R). var. cyclophyllus.—(R). . cesius. Near Banchory Ternan, Szm, 1884.—R. P saxatilis, | “Symes Gat, “Wop. Bet. ——k- . Chamemorus. “FI. Abred.” 1838 ; “ Top. Bot.”—R. g2. S. ABERDEEN. .ideus. ‘FI. Abred.” 1838.—R. var. asperrimus. Occasionally found, Z7az/. . fissus.—[R ]. . suberectus. ‘ Bot. Guide,” 1860; Z7vai/, 1884.—[R]. . plicatus. Zraz/, 1884.—R. var. hemistemon. “ Top. Bot.” . latifolius. Near Aberdeen, 1901, Zvai/.—(R). . rhamnifolius, Z7vai/, 1884.—(R). . thyrsoideus. Z7az/, 1884.—[R]. . macrophyllus. “By River Don at Aberdeen,” “ Brit. Rubi,” “Top. Bot.”—[R]. . mucronatus (as mucronulatus). ‘Top. Bot.” New Machar and Fintray, 1901, ZraiZ—R. radula, swbsf. echinatoides. Bank of Dee at Cults, 1900, Trail.—R. . rosaceus, szdsp. Purchasianus (as RR. glandulosus, var. Reutert). “Top. Bot.”—[R]. . corylifolius. ‘Fl, Abred.” 1838.—R. var. sublustris. Zvraz/, 1884.—(R). var. cyclophyllus.—(R). . saxatilis. David Skene, MS., about 1765; “Fl. Abred.” 1838; “Dickie, Cat.,” “Top. Bot.”—R. . Chamzemorus. JD. Skene, MS., about 1865; “ Dickie, MS.,” “Top. Bot.”—R. id Wm prAna AAA ey v2) = AP FP xP Wan A RWWA SCOTTISH RUBI 241 93. N. ABERDEEN. . idzeus.—R. var. obtusifolius. Tarves and Longside, both in 1tgor, Zyaz/.—R. var. asperrimus. Occasionally found, 1g00, Z7az7. . carpinifolius. Near Mormond House, 1900, Zvac/.—(R). . villicaulis (s. s¢vzc¢.). Near Strichen, 1900, Zvaz/.—R. . thyrsoideus. Slains, 1901, apparently introduced, Zraz/.—R. mucronatus. Cruden, tgo1, Z7raz/.—R. melanoxylon. Aberdour and near Turriff, t9g01, Zraz/.—R. infestus. King Edward (probably this), 1g00, Zvaz/.—(R). radula. Aberdour, 1901, Zvaz/.—R. . foliosus. Methlick, rg00, Zyraz/.—R. . corylifolius. St. Fergus and Fyvie, 1900, Zvaz/.—R. var. cyclophyllus. Tyrie, 1901, Zraz/.—R. . saxatilis. ‘‘ Dickie’s Flora Abred.” ‘Top. Bot.’—R. Chamemorus. ‘Top. Bot.” ; Bennachie, Dickie in “ B. Guide.” —R. 94. BANFF. . ideeus.—R. Rogersii. By Mouth of the Fiddich, 1899, Zvac/.—R. . plicatus. Alvah, 1901, 77az/.—R. valtinisy «Add. Rec. 1837, . melanoxylon.—Gamrie, 1901, Zrai/.—R. . Infestus. Gamrie, 1901, Zraz/.—R. . radula. Gamrie, 1900, Zraz/.—R. . foliosus. Alvah, 1900, Z7az/.—R. . Koehleri, swdsp. dasyphyllus? ‘Tarlair, Gamrie, Z7vaz/.—(R). corylifolius.—R. var. sublustris.—(R). . saxatilis—‘‘ Gordon, MS.,” “N.B. Guide,” 1837, and “ Top. Bot.”—R., a Chamemorus:. “Gordon: MS,” “ON-B Guide” and “Top. Bot.”—R. 95. ELGIN. . idzeus.—R. . Rogersii. Alves and Dunphail, AZarshall and Shoolbred, 1899. —R. . plicatus, var. hemistemon. Near Brodie, JZ. and S., 1899.—R. . affinis. Near Forres, G. C. Druce, “ Add. Rec. 1887.” In Mr. Rogers’ list of 1895, but omitted from ‘‘ Handbook” as he has not seen authentic specimen from north of Anglesey, the plant from Forres being probably Se/mert. . rhamnifolius. Near Forres, G. C. D., ‘‘ Add. Rec. 1887.”—(R). . villicaulis (s. s¢vzc¢.). Garmouth, near Forres, etc., JZ and Sf., 1899.—R. subsp. Selmeri. G. C. Druce, 1895.—|R]. ++ E Xd Ae mop wp ARR RE ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY . macrophyllus. Near Forres, 1888, G. C. D.—[R]. _ hirtifolius, var. danicus. Dunphail, JZ. and Sh. . melanoxylon. Alves and Garmouth, M. and Sh., 1899.—R. radula (s. strict.) Wood near Forres, JZ, and Sh.—R. echinatus. Near Alyth, G. C. D.; “Add. Rec. 1888.”—(R). saxatilis. “Gordon, Cat., “N.B. Guide,” 1837, ‘Top. Bot.” —R. Chamzemorus.—R. 96. East NEss. idzeus.—R. fissus. Somerville, “ Add. Rec. 1897.”—(R). . suberectus. ‘“‘Add. Rec. 1887”5 near Kinchurdy, Gr G. Druce, 1888—R. . Rogersii. Near Nairn, common, JZarshadl and Shoolbred, 1899. —R. . plicatus. “Add. Rec. 1892”; Kilmorack, Z. S. Marshall. —R. var. hemistemon. By Nairn River, Z. S. JZ, 1893.—R. . Scheutzii. 1900.—R. . Villicaulis (s. s¢rvict.). Marshall, 1892, “ Add. Rec.” ; Nairn, AZ. and S., 1899.—R. subsp. Selmeri. E. Ness and Nairn, G. C. D.—R. macrophyllus (s. /a¢). “Between Beauly and Kilmorack,” Marshall. subsp. Schlechtendalii, “Top. Bot.”—(R). . hirtifolius.—R. var. danicus.—Common round Nairn, 1899, JZ. and SZ.—R. . pyramidalis. Beauly, 1890, G. C. D.—R. mucronatus. Kilmorack, 1892, and Nairn, 1899, AZarshall. —R. . melanoxylon. Common about Nairn, 1899, JZ. and SZ.—R. . corylifolius. Beauly, 1892, AZarshall.—R. . saxatilis, “Stables, sf.” “N.B. Guide,” 1.839, andy = lop Bot.”—R. . Chamemorus. ‘‘Gordon, s/.,” “N.B. Guide,” 1837, and “ Top. Bot.”—R. 97. West NEss. ideeus.—R. fissus.—R. . suberectus. “Add. Rec. 1891”; Roy Bridge, 1896, AZarshall and Shoolbred.—R. . plicatus. “Add. Rec. 1891”; Roy Bridge, 1896, WZ and S. —R. . nitidus, rg00.—R. ~atinis.. “Mops Bon? . latifolius, 1895.—(R). R R SCOTTISH RUBI 243 . carpinifolius. AZacvicar, “ Add. Rec. 1893.”—R. . Lindleianus. JZacvicar, ‘‘ Add. Rec. 1896.”—R. [R. rhamnifolius. Recorded in 1891, in error. | R. Scheutzii, 1g00.—R. R. pulcherrimus. JZacvicar, Add. Rec. 1893”; Fort-William, 1896, AZ. and S.—R. Rk. dumnoniensis, Bab. AZacvicar, ‘‘ Add. Rec. 1893.” R. villicaulis. AZacvicar, “ Add. Rec. 1893” ; (as exsularis, Aresch.) Roy Bridge, 1896, AZ. and St.—R. subsp. Selmeri. S.W. corner of Inverness-shire, WV. £: AZiller, 1895, “Add. Rec. 1895.”—R. R. macrophyllus. Roy Bridge, 1896, JZ. and S/.—R. R. hirtifolius, vav. danicus (as pyramidalis, “ Add. Rec. 1894 ”).—R. Rk. pyramidalis. (Recorded from Moidart in W. M. Rogers’ list of 1895, but omitted from “ Handbook,” as incorrectly named, having been the preceding plant). R. Boreeanus. Macvicar, ‘‘ Add. Rec. 1898.”—[R]. R. mucronatus (as mucronulatus), “Top. Bot.” Plentiful in Glen Roy and Glen Spean, 1896, JZ. and S/.—R. R. infestus. AZacvicar, “ Add. Rec. 1894” ; Fort-William, 1896, AZ. and S/.—R. R. rosaceus, swbsp. infecundus, Rogers. 1896, IV. AZ. R.—R. R. corylifolius. ‘‘ Add. Rec. 1897.”—R. essaxatilis, “NB. Gude,” 1837 3% Lop. Bot,’ —_R; R. Chamemorus, ‘Top. Bot.”—R. 98. ARGYLL. R. ideeus.—R. R. fissus. “Top. Bot.”; near Dalmally, JZarshall and Shoolbred, 1894.—[R]. R. suberectus. ‘Top. Bot.”—R. R. Rogersii. Several localities, 1901, W. MZ. Rogers.—R. R. plicatus. “Add. Rec. 1893,” W. 47. &. Sandbank to Glen Masson, 1901, W. AZ. R.—R. R. affinis. Near Dalmally, G. C. Druce, 1888. R. carpinifolius. Dalmally, JZ. and SzZ., 1894.—R. R. Lindleianus. ‘“ Frequent,” 1901, W. AZ. R.—R. R. rhamnifolius. Dalmally, G. C. D., 1888 ; C. £. Salmon, “ Add. Rec. 1898.”—R. subsp. Bakeri. Hedge at Sandbank, r901, W. AZ. R.—R. R. Scheutzii. From Sandbank to Glen Masson, / A. Rogers, 1901. —R. R. dumnoniensis. Dalmally, JZ and S., 1894.—R. R. pulcherrimus. Dalmally, J7. and JS., 1894.—R. R. villicaulis (s. s¢vzc¢.). Inveroran, 1894, AZarshall.—R. subsp. Selmeri. Dalmally, plentiful, JZ, and SZ.—R. 244 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY R. macrophyllus. 1900.—R. subsp. Schlechtendaliil. _1900.—R. var. macrophylloides. Glen Masson, 1901, & A. Rogers. . hirtifolius, Ie danicus. Glen Masson, 1r901, & A. &.—R. R R. pyramidalis. Kirn, 1901, W. AZ, &.—R. R. cinerosus, Rogers. Dalmally, 1901, W. MZ. &.—R. R. mucronatus. Near Dalmally, 1893, JZ. and S/.—R. R. melanoxylon. Dalmally, 1893, JZ. and Sz.—R. R. infestus. Kirn, 1801, W. JZ. R.—R. R. radula, szdsp. echinatoides.—[R]. subsp. sertiflorus. Abundant about Arrochar, 1901, Marshall. —R. R. Koehleri, swésf. dasyphyllus. Kirn to Glen Masson, rgor, W. M. R.—R. R. saxatilis. “Top. Bot.”—R. R. Chamzemorus. Near Kingshouse, JZ. and Hand., 1889.—R. (Zo be continued.) SCOTTISH HIPRAC LA By James W. H. Trait, A.M., M.D., F.R.S., F.LS. In the ‘Topographical Botany of Scotland, it was stated (“ Annals Scot. Nat. Hist.’ October 1898, p. 230), that the records under Averactum had been deferred, in the hope that Mr. Hanbury would be able to revise them, so as to secure greater accuracy. As he has not been able to fulfil his intention to do so, I have thought it better to issue the following notes, compiled by myself from records published by Messrs. Hanbury, E. and W. Linton, Marshall, and others, in recent years. It has been confined to those in Watson’s “Topographical Botany,” Ed. 2 (in brackets), and the later publications, to secure, as far as possible, uniformity of value in the nomenclature. The “species” of earlier records often differ so widely from those in the subjoined list, that it is not advisable to combine those of the two periods in such a list ; and the revision of the records is a task that I cannot attempt to perform. The list has been prepared with care from the SCOTTISH HIERACIA 245 sources indicated ; but I can scarcely hope that it is free of errors. Corrections will be gratefully received. The num- bers are, as in “ Topographical Botany of Scotland,” those of the Watsonian vice-counties. GROUP PILOSELLA. Hieracium pilosella, Z., all except 97 and 112. var. nigrescens, /77es., go. Hf. aurantiacum, L., 72, 87, 88, 93, 95. (H. pratense, Zausch, in “Top. Bot.” as H. collinum, 79, 83, 95.) Group ALPINA GENUINA. (H. alpinum, Z., in ‘Top. Bot.” 88, 90, 92, 96, 97, 98, 99, 104, 105, 108.) H. alpinum, segr. (=H. melanocephalum, Zausch, of “Top. Bot.,” which gives 90, 92, 96); recorded by Druce from 94, 96, 105, and by Marshall, in error, from 08. H. holosericeum, Lackh. (in ‘ Top. Bot.” 88-90, 92, 97, 98), 73, 88, 89, 94, 96-98, 105, 108. H. eximium, Lackh. (in ‘‘ Top. Bot.” 88-90, 92, 94, 97), 88, 89, 94, 96-98, ? 105. var. tenellum, Backh., 88, 92, 94, 96, 98, 105. H. calenduliflorum, Backh. (in ‘Top. Bot.” 88-90, 92), 88, 89, 97, 98. H. graniticolum, £. axd W. Linton, 92, 94, 96, 105. H. gracilentum, Back. (in ‘‘ Top. Bot.” 90, 92, 98), 88, 89, 94, 96- 98. . petiolatum, “7fstrand, 92, 94, 96. . globosum, Back. (in “Top. Bot.” 89, 92, 94), 89, 94, 96, 105, 106, 108. oo Group ALPINA NIGRESCENTIA. (H. pulmonarium, aggr., in “Top. Bot.” ?85, 88-90, 92, 94, 96, 974/163.) H. nigrescens, Willd. (in “Top. Bot.” 88, go, 92, 96, 97, and [8s5, 89, 94, 108]), 72, 88, 89, 92, 94, 96, 97, 105. var. commutatum, Lzzdeb., 92. var. gracilifolium, #: 7. H., 87, 88. satratum, 772 f., 87, 88; 97, Qo;Lo5:. . curvatum, £//strand, 88, 97, 108. . Backhousei, / /. H., 88, 92, 94, 96-98, 106. . lingulatum, Backh., (in “Top. Bot.” 88, go, 92, 96, 97), 87-89, 94, 96, 97, 105, 108. jangengenqen 246 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY H. senescens, Backh. (in “Top. Bot.” 85, 88, 90, 92, 99), 87, 88, 94, 96-98, 105. __ H. Marshalli, Z. / Linton, 88, 90, 92, 98, 108. H. chrysanthum, Back. (in “Top. Bot.” 89, 90, 92, 96, 97, 108), 88-89, 94; 96, 97, 105. var. microcephalum, Lackh., 88, 92, 97- . sinuans, & /. #., 87, 88, 98. . centripetale, / /. /Z, 72, 88, 92, 96, 97, 100. . submurorum, Zzzdeb., 88, 90, 97, 98. Group ALPINA HyYPARCTICA. H. hyparcticum, A/mq., 108. Group AMPLEXICAULIA. H. amplexicaule, L., 89. . GROUP CERINTHOIDEA. H. callistophyllum, 7: 7. 7, 88, 90, 97, 98. var. cremnanthes, / /. 77, 87, 88, 92, 97, 98. H. anglicum, /. (in “Top. Bot.” 72, 85, 88-90, 92, 103, and [81, 83, 86, 91, 96, 97, 98, 104, 105, 108, 110, 111]), 85, 37-89, 94, 96, 98, 104, 105, 108-ITIT. var. acutifolium Backh., 88, 90, 92, 96, 104, 108. var. longibracteatum, / /. 7, 88, 89, 93, 94, 97, 98, 194, 105, 108-110. . cerintheforme, Backh., 88, 89, 97, 98, 110. . iricum, /7. (in “Top. Bot.” 92, 108, ?109, 111), 72?, 88-90, 98, LOA, Ol, LOS, 1 LO: . flocculosum, Backh. (in “Top. Bot.” 90, 92, ?96), 88, 89, 97; 98, 108. . breadalbanense, /: /. /Z., 88. ; langwellense, 7: /. 7., 72, 89, 97, 93, 107, 100: . Clovense, £. and W.-Linton, 72, 89, 90, 110. ooo © we GROUP OREADEA. | Leyi, FJ, 75 88-90,.92) 105: . Carenorum, 72/172") 108. . Schmidtil, Zausch (= H. pallidum of “Top. Bot.,” which gives it for 72, 80, 81, 83, 87-90, 92, 96, 98, 99, 106, 107, ?108, 109, 111), 72, 89, 93, 94, 98, 104, 105, 108, IIo. var. crinigerum, /7. (in ‘Top. Bot.” 92), 96, 110, PIT2. H. lasiophyllum, Aoch, 89, 90, 110. var. euryodon, /, J. H., 88, 89, 90, 92, jangengee SCOTTISH HIERACIA 247 wfarrense;, 7, /: £7.,:88, 89,390; 92, LOd. . eustales, FE. and W. Linton, 88, 92. . proximum, / 7. ., 108, 109. caledonicum, /: /. H., 92, 104, 106-11T. ribicundum, / /. #7., 72, 90, 02, 90,105, 108, 109; 111. var. Boswelli, £. and W. Linton, 88, 104, 105, 108-111. . Oreades, 77, 110. var. subglabratum, & /. 4, 90, 108, 109. . pseudonosmoides, Dadsz., 88, 89, 95. . argenteum, #7. (in “Top. Bot.” 89-92, ?108, 109), 72, 87-90, 92, 97, 98, 105, 109, 110. var. septentrionale, / /. 77, 108. . nitidum, Backh. (in “Top Bot.” 92, 96), 72, 90, 97, 107, 108." . Sommerfeltii, Zzmdeb., 72, 88, 89, 90, 92, 97, 104, 105, 108, 109. var. tactum, & /. 7. 97, 98. EL. ‘seoticum, #7; £7, 9e, 108, 109,\1 10. (H. onosmoides, 47.) var. buglossoides (Arv. Touv.), 72, 79, 88, 89, 92, 99, 104, LOO; 107,.1ler (H. saxifragum, 7.) var. orimeles, 7. J: 77.,98, 112: soos (se pscpiscflaeltscfias GROUP VULGATA. H. stenolepis, Zzvdeb., 72, 92, 104, 108, IIo. var. anguinum, W. FR. Linton, 72, 108. H. aggregatum, Backh. (in “Top. Bot.” go, 92), 88, 90, 96, 97. var. prolongatum, / /. //, 88. H. Pictorum, #. and F. Linton, 88, 90, 92, 97, 98. var. dasythrix, £. and F: Linton, 87, 88, 97, 98. Penivales 74.7. 273 (87-90, 02, 97, LO4, 107, 106, LL0. var. subhirtum, / J. H., 87-89, 97, 98. H. pollinarium, / /. 7, 108. (H. murorum, Z. aggv., in “Top. Bot.” all except 72-74, 97, 9S, 103.) segr. (in “Top. Bot.” go, 92), 87-89, 94, 96, 98, 104. var. micracladium, Dahi/st., 75, 83, 86, 88, 90, 108. var. camptopetalum, / /. 7, 109. var. crassiusculum, Admg., 108. var. variicolor, Dahls¢., 88, 89. var. ciliatum, Almg., 72, 88, 99, 105, 108. var. caliginosum, Dafilst., 88. var. sagittatum, Lzzdeb., 88, 89. var, sarcophyllum, Stenstr., 72, 88, 97, 108. var. subulatidens, Dahész., go. Elveuprepes, J: J; 77. °37-90n 026075 6S,. 10; var. glabratum, £, and W. Linton, 87-90. 248 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY . orcadense, Z£. and IW. Linton, 111. . rubiginosum, / /. /7. . duplicatum, 4/7g., 88. . cesium, /y. (in “Top. Bot.” 90, 92, 108, 111), 72, 88, 89, 92, 94, 96, 97, 104, 105. var. pallidum, Dahist. (72, 105)? ay tusulare. 7, /. 17. 80. var. petrocharis, Z. and W. Linton, 88. H. ceesiomurorum, Zinded., 88, 89, 92, 96, 98, 108. H. orarium, Zizdeb., 89, 108, 109, TIO. var. erythreum, /£. and W. Linton, 108. var. tulvam, 7 7. 47, 105, 109, TUF. H. duriceps, 2 J. 47.,°72, 87, 88,098, 104,195, 207; 1G) ere: var, cravoniense, /. J. 77, 108. (H. gravestellum, Dah/st.) var. rhomboides, Sferzst7., 88, 90, 92, 98, 108. (“H. sylvaticum, Z.,” aggr., in “Top. Bot.” for all except 72, 74, one ery ACIS SHILI) . dissimile, Zzzdeb., 108. var. polienum, Dahist., 92, 96, 109. . vulgatum, /7. (in “Top. Bot.” 78, 83, 85-90, 92, 96, 103-105), 72-74; 76, 87-89, 93-95) 97; 98, 102, 105, 108-110. . stenophyes, £. azd IV. Linton, 72, 88?, 97, 99 ?, 108. . subanfractum, £. S. Marshall, 88, 97, 98. . angustatum, Lzndeb., 72, 88, go, 92, 108. . subramosum, Tinar, 85. (H. diaphanum, /7.) var. stenolepis, Zindel., 89. H. diaphanoides, Zznded., ? 72. ; var. apiculatum, £. and W. Linton, go. H. sciaphilum, Uechtr., “embraces a large portion of the specimens labelled ‘ . valgatum, Fr.’ in our herbaria,” F. J. Hanb. jeogengen gee Gott fg © GROUP RIGIDA. H. gothicum, Backh., aggr. (in ‘Top. Bot.,” from 80?, 85, 87, 90, 92). segr. (72, 77), 88-90, 96, 104, 109. var. latifolium, Lackh., 88, 90, 104. var. basifolium, Zizdeb., 88, go. H. sparsifolium, Zindeb., (72, 73), 88, 97, 98, 104, 105, 107, IIo. H. rigidum, Hartm., 93. var. Friesii, Hartm., 109. var. tridentatum (#7.), (in “Top. Bot.” 87), 72, 88. var. longiciliatum, 92. f | 4 ‘ angen generis) SCOTTISH HIERACIA 249 Group ALPESTRIA. . pulchellum, Zzzdeb., 112. . zetlandicum, Beeby, 108, 112. . truncatum, Lzzdeb., 87, 96, 97. . protractum, Lzzdeb., 112. . dovrense, /7., 97, 106, 108, 112. var. Hethlandie, / J. 7., 112. var. spectabile, Z. S. ALarshall, 89. . Dewari, Boswell, 87-89, 96-99. Group PRENANTHOIDEA. . prenanthoides, V7//. (in “Top. Bot.” [77, 81, 83, 84, 85, 86, 89, 90, 91, 95, 104], with ? 79, and as good records 88, g2, 96, 109), 87-89, 2.90, ?g1, 108. . Borreri, Syme (in “Top. Bot.” 79? and go). Group FOo.iosa. pS strictums, 772 “in “Pop. Bot.’ 85, 87, 88, 90, 96, 96, 99, ToO2, 108, 111), 89, 95-97, 104, 106-110. var. reticulatum (Lizdeb.), 88, 92, 96, 98, 105, 106, 108, TOG, LLO. var. angustum (Lzndeb.), 88, 89, 92, 95, 97- var, opsianthum, Dasdést., 87, 88. var. subcrocatum, £. and IW. Linton, 72, 79, 97- var. amplidentatum, / /. /7,, 85, 88, 89, 96-98, 111. . corymbosum, /7. (in “Top. Bot.” 77, 80, 87-90, 92, 96, 103, 108, PLL), SS, 89, 91-93, 96, 105, Tob; 16S, To9. var, prelongum (Lindedb.), 88, 105. var. salicifolium (Lindeb.), 87, 89, 97 ?. H. auratum, #7. 72, 87-89, 92, 96-98, 105, 107-109, III. He icrocatum; #7; (in “lop, Bot..70, $0, 87-92, P06, 2 98; oo an tnulense, 72 fe koe: Lan 03- 109, [112]), 72, 73, 87-89, 96-98, 104-106, 109. var. trichophyton, A/mg., 88. var. pycnophyllum, Zzndeb., 88. SMaritimumy A: 7/5 fre. . boreale, #7. (m “Top. Bot.” from 73, 76, 77, 79-81, 87,.90-92, 94190-1092, TO4);972-75,. 87,50, 95. H. umbellatum, Z. (in “Top. Bot.” 72, 73, 80, and with ? from 77, 81, 53, 85, 90,701, Noo-no2, 1oS, 109), 72°75; 88, "G0), 95, 96, 98. var. filifolium, Backh., 96. var. pauciflorum, /fartm., 108. 250 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY Nore.—lIn the “Journal of Botany” (July 1902, pp. 257-260), Mr. Fred. N. Williams discusses 7. anglicum, Fr., and allied forms, and states the following conclusions that modify the names in the list :—As varieties of 7. anglicum in Scotland, he- gives—a, genuinum, Syme, which ascends to 810 m. in S. Aberdeen; [, acutifolium, Backh.; 6, longibracteatum, F. J. Hanb. ; 6 amplexicaule, Backh., Scottish Highlands; 6, drev7- furcatum, F. N. Williams (= #. Leyz, F. J. Hanb., of above list). To 4 anglicum he also refers (with reasons for doing so) FT. langwellense, F. J. Hanb., and 4. Carenorum, F. J. Hanb., both of the above list. Mr. Williams also discusses (“ Journal of Botany,” August 1902, pp. 291-293) “ Hveracium murorum and HZ. cesium of British Floras,” and gives reasons for the following changes :— “ FZ, murorum,” Brit. auct., must stand as H. szlvaticum, Gouan, (being “AZ. murorum, var. 2. silvaticum,” of Linneeus). 7. stenolepis, Lindeb., of the above list has been reduced to rank as a variety of HY. sz/vaticum by Almquist, with the concurrence of Dahlstedt. “ Ff. cesium,’ Brit. auct., zoz Fries., must bear name flocculosum, Backh. var., Mr. Williams suggesting that Mr. J. G. Baker’s name might be associated with it. AH. cesium, Fr., =“ 7. murorum, var. a,” of Linnzeus, and has not been found in Britain. ZOOLOGICAL NOTES. Bank Voles as Garden Pests.—We have been considerably bothered by a visitation of “mice” in and around the garden here this summer, and I cannot say that our feelings of annoyance are lessened by the fact that Mr. Service has identified our visitors to belong to the comparatively scarce species, the Bank Vole or Red Field Vole (A@icrotus glareolus). However, it may be worth record- ing their presence here in numbers. Their chief resort is my rock garden, where they do continual damage among my alpine and choice herbaceous plants, and are very difficult to entrap. In the kitchen-garden perhaps their worst depredations have been among the cauliflowers ; they have almost ruined our crop. On the other hand, they have scarcely touched strawberries, which sometimes have suffered from common mice.—W. D. R. Doucias, Orchardton, Castle-Douglas. Black Mountain Hare in Caithness-shire—A Black Hare (Lepus variadilis), a female, was shot by Hector Urquhart, one of the under-keepers to His Grace the Duke of Portland, at Braemore, Langwell, Caithness, on the 3rd of February this year, and sent ZOOLOGICAL NOTES 251 here to be preserved. The coat is glossy black, with no white except half-a-dozen white hairs at the joint of the hip. The measurements and characters correspond exactly with those of the White or Mountain Hare. When cased it is to be sent to Langwell House, Caithness.—Lrwis DunsBar, Thurso. Grampuses in the Solway.—On 27th July I was interested in watching a herd of Grampuses (O7ca gladiator) off Southerness Point. ‘There were certainly half-a-dozen animals in the drove, and there might be a dozen, but, of course, they could not be seen all at once, and we could only guess at the real number as they rose and plunged on the surface of the waves at different spots. Some of the beasts were fully adult, while others were only half-grown. Salmon were plentiful in the Firth at the time, and doubtless these Cetaceans had come up in pursuit. I did not see any salmon myself rise in front, as they do when Porpoises and Grampuses are after them, but 4 or 5 miles farther up the Firth some friends who were watching them saw the salmon leaping frantically out of the tide as the Grampuses came close upon them. It is an ordinary and common sight to see Porpoises in the Solway—often in considerable herds—but a sight of Grampuses up the Firth is a much rarer occur- rence. ‘These animals were upon this occasion quite as wary as usual, keeping well out in the channel, and turning with the first of the ebb, so as to avoid the ever-present possibility of being caught aground on some of the great banks.—R. SERvicE, Maxwelltown. Bird Notes from the Island of Coll_—This spring, about the roth April, when a field near the Castle at Coll was being ploughed, four of the many Common Gulls (Z. cams), as usual, closely following the plough, were killed or disabled by the tilth turned up by the plough falling back onthem. Colonel J. Lorn Stewart, the laird, went to see the scene of this accident and the dead gulls. An old man who had ploughed for many years in Coll informed me that he had several times known single gulls killed in this manner, but never as many as four.—On the 12th June I saw, on the shore, a lot of nine Sanderlings (Caddris arenaria). Eight of these were in perfect summer plumage, the ninth very slightly so. They were very tame, allowing me to watch them within about five yards’ distance. The above date is very late to observe these birds.—Many Little Stints (Tringa minuta) were about Crossapoll sands in April 1902. This bird was not included in List of Birds observed in Coll (Annals Scot. Nat. Hist., 1899, pp. 206-9).—On the 15th June I saw a pair of Yellow Hammers (mberiza citronella), evidently nesting. This is an addition to list of birds breeding in Coll.—On the same day I saw a single Arctic Tern (Sterna macrura) bully a Heron, which I had flushed from the sea-shore. The Heron appeared to be in abject terror, and, continually shrieking out its ‘‘ crank, crank,” came 252 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY back within shot of me, settling down again not far off. I find that a plant which is much eaten by wild-fowl in winter is the Water- Lobelia (Zobelia dortmanna), which grows in vast profusion near the shores of most of the lochs.—L. H. Irsy, London. The Starling Roost on Cramond Island.—The Starlings which have frequented Cramond Island for some years back, and in re- markable numbers since the autumn of 1899, seem to have deserted the place. In the January number of the “Annals” an account was given of the daily migrations of the birds up to November 1got. From that date onwards there was nothing in their movements that differed from what had been observed in the previous seasons. Towards the middle of June this year the usual number of Starlings frequenting the island was noted, and up to the end of the month they continued to cross regularly. About the beginning of July they ceased to come under observation, and only small flocks were occasionally seen. On the 18th of September I visited the wood where the Starlings roosted, and was not at all surprised that the birds had forsaken the place. Despite the rainy season, the branches were still quite encrusted with the excreta of the Starlings, and a good number of the trees had been killed as the result. The stench of the place was very disagreeable. From inquiries made I find that the period during which the Starlings have frequented this planta- tion (five years) is about the average length of time these birds have been noticed to occupy a particular roost—CuHas. CAMPBELL, Dalmeny Park. Note on the Swift.—One pair were seen on 1oth May here by a good observer. I did not note any personally until 25th May; but they stayed, for this district, unusually late in autumn. My average date for their departure is 9th August. This year Swifts (Cypselus apus), some days as many as five, were seen until 17th August about Dumfries, and on 21st August I saw a pair at Auchencairn.— R. SERVICE, Maxwelltown. Turtle Dove and Quail in Southern Shetland.—During the second and third weeks of June we had a good many Turtle Doves about. They first appeared after a severe gale from the 5.S.W. on the 28th of May, and for some days after a few were seen, and I heard of them here and there all over the parish. I feel sure we must have a considerable number of Quails breeding here this year, as I hear them calling all around.—THomMas HENDERSON, Jun., Dunrossness. Seareity of the Landrail.—During this phenomenally sunless season now drawing to an unregretted close, I have seen one Land- rail (Crex pratensis) only, and have not heard the call of the bird half a score of times in all. Were they really so scarce, or has the season condemned them to silence >—R. SErvice, Maxwelltown. ZOOLOGICAL NOTES 253 Late Nesting of the Woodecock.—I think it may interest you to know that a Woodcock’s nest with two eggs and one young bird was found in Kintore Parish on the roth of August by some men who were cutting ferns. The eggs proved to be rotten, and the keeper who gave them to me informed me that the young one was carried off by one of its parents. Is not this a very late date for this bird to breed >—Tuomas Tait, Inverurie. [The Woodcock is sometimes double-brooded, and there are instances on record of nests having been found in July and August. We believe, however, that such occurrences are quite exceptional.—Ebs. | Black Terns near Hawieck.—On 2nd June several Black Terns (Hydrochelidon nigra) were observed flying over some mossy land near Hawick, and one of them, a male, was shot and sent to me for preservation.—CuaRLEs Kirk, Glasgow. Fulmars in Sutherland in the Nesting Season.—When visiting Handa on 4th July, the fishermen whom we had with us pointed out a pair of Fulmar Petrels about fifty yards away. At this distance it was difficult for me to distinguish them, and from the overhanging nature of the cliffs it was impossible to follow them far in their flight. On the 8th, when visiting Clomore Head near Cape Wrath, I saw several pairs flying high up and on a level with the top of the cliffs. Sometimes they came within a few feet of me, and I easily made out their yellow-tipped beaks. At this time the weather was threatening a gale from the north with heavy mist, and when the mist cleared I saw several of the same birds flying out and in from a grassy ledge on the face of a cliff. As they alighted they promptly disappeared, to reappear again in a few minutes ; doubtless they were feeding their young. The 9th was very stormy, with rain, but the roth was fair though blowing strongly from the north. On this date the birds were flying low, and I saw them again landing on the ledge and one was sitting on the grass. Farther along one dis- appeared under an overhanging rock, but the wind was too strong to venture to the edge of the cliff to see where it had gone to. I should think that there were about a dozen pairs in all.—THoMAS Tait, Inverurie. Poultry feeding on Slow-worms.—At the end of August a lady sent me from Colvend a couple of fowl’s stomachs, each containing large fragments of Slow-worms (Axguzs fragilis). She had selected a good, fat, full-grown chicken, and on dressing it for table she found the greater part of a Slow-worm inside. Not liking the idea of using the fowl for food, it was laid aside. Another chicken was taken and killed, and an examination was at once made of its interior. Similar pieces of this reptile were also found in the second chicken. The old Scottish prejudice against serpents, eels, and such- 254 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY like asserted itself strongly, and chickens for table purposes were tabooed in the meantime. The fowls in question had been reared, and were running, upon a large piece of rough uncultivated hill ground to the rear of a farmhouse. Cocks and hens do on occa- sion devour strange things, and I have seen a hen chase, catch, kill, and swallow—not without much straining and gulping—a mouse.— R. Service, Maxwelltown. Lepidoptera in Banffshire.—In July last, Avgymzs aglaza, Linn., was not uncommon on the Banffshire coast. At one part, where the rock-cistus (Helianthemum vulgare) abounds, I found the rare Polyommatus artaxerxes, Fabr. My son caught the first specimen seen. He also captured a worn specimen of the Painted Lady (Pyrameis cardui, Linn.) beside the cairn on the Binn of Cullen, 1050 feet above sea-level. The Six-spot Burnet Moth (d. jilipen- dule) was flying in great numbers over the bent in one valley close to the beach. HENnry H. Brown, Cupar-Fife. Pupa Anglica (/ev.) in Midlothian (Forth Area).—On 14th June last I found a few specimens (one of which has been shown to Mr. J. W. Taylor, Leeds) of this small mollusc on withered sedge- leaves in a wet spot in the wooded ravine of the Fullarton Water (a tributary of the Esk) below Edgelaw, Midlothian. In Roebuck’s “Census” of Scottish Land and Fresh-water Mollusca no locality falling within the Forth area is given for the species, but many years ago it was recorded from ‘‘ Banks of the Esk” in Stark’s “ Picture of Edinburgh ” (183 4).—W1Lu1amM Evans, Edinburgh. BOTANICAL NOTES AND NEWS. The Rowan-tree and its Parasites on Speyside.—August of this year was spent by me near Kincraig. The Rowan (Pyrus Aucuparia, Ehrh.) is of frequent occurrence in the district ; and, as Junipers are also very abundant, the leaves of most of the Rowans showed the orange-yellow thickened spots due to Gymmo- Sporangium Juniperinum in the stage formerly known as Restefa cornuta. Some trees had the leaves so severely attacked that it seemed the fungus must seriously weaken the hosts, yet the latter seemed not much the worse. But the parasite that most interested me was Aphis Sorbi, Kalt., on account both of its action on the twigs and of its relation to the Wood Ant (Formica rufa). My attention was drawn to the presence of a parasite by the strange appearance of the twigs on certain young trees. The leaves were rolled backward into balls from 1} to nearly 3 inches in diameter. On one tree of about seven feet in height and little branched, I BOTANICAL NOTES AND NEWS 255 counted nearly forty such balls, the twigs being almost all affected. The shoot remains stunted, and the leaves are barely half their normal size. The leaf-stalks and chief veins are thickened and unusually hairy. On the backs of the leaves in the beginning of August were many young insects, apterous females, and a few pupe. By the end of August the winged insects had emerged and taken flight, and only a few wingless and young insects remained. Some of the insects agreed well with the description and figures of A. Sorbi, Kalt., but others showed considerable variability in the ground colour, from olive-green to dull yellowish white ; and of the winged females, some had blackish transverse markings over a large part of the upper surface of the abdomen, while others showed only the row of dots down each side, as described by Buckton. Iam not aware of this Aphis having been recorded from Scotland previously. It was not altogether easy to examine the pseudogalls. Whenever the twigs were touched, Wood Ants swarmed out from between the leaves of the balls, and at once placed themselves in the position to resist interference with what they evidently regarded as their possessions. Every ball was occupied by the ants, often about a dozen in each, and they formed a very efficient guard. It reminded me of the very close relations that exist between numerous plants and ants in the tropics (as I frequently have seen them in Brazil); only, on the Rowan the ant-dwellings are due to the presence of a parasite hurtful to the plant though useful to the ants, not due to peculiarities in structure of the host plants——JAmEs W. H. TRAIL. The year 1902 has established a very bad record in Scotland for continued inclemency and low temperature. Agricultural reports from all parts of the country indicate a general agreement that vegetation shows over a month’s backwardness as compared with a fairly warm season. The first barley was cut in Aberdeenshire in the last week of August, and a field of oats was begun on 5th September ; but both these were in the very early district of Fyvie, and almost everywhere oats were still quite green in September. The Ling (Cadduna Erica) only began to open towards the end of August, at a date when it is frequently almost out of flower. Careful records of the effects on vegetation of so marked a departure from normal seasons would be of much interest. At the Conference of the Pharmaceutical Society in Dundee in August, the President, Mr. George Claridge Druce, M.A., F.L.S., took as the subject of his address, ‘‘ The Progress of Scottish Botany” from the year 1684 onwards, that year being selected as that in which appeared Sibbald’s *‘ Scotia Illustrata.” The importance of the work of the earlier explorers is well shown, G. Don’s contribu- tions especially being very fully treated. The species and forms peculiar (within the British Islands) to Scotland are enumerated 256 ANNALS OF SCOTTISH NATURAL HISTORY and their distribution discussed. The address is a very valuable contribution to the history of the botanical investigation of Scotland, a work in which Mr. Druce has taken no small part. “The Hepatic of the British Isles,” by Mr. W. H. Pearson, has been completed, the last part having been published. CURRENT LITERATURE. The Titles and Purport of Papers and Notes relating to Scottish Natural History which have appeared during the Quarter—July-September 1902. [The Editors desire assistance to enable them to make this Section as complete as possible. Contributions on the lines indicated will be most acceptable and will bear the initials of the Contributor. The Editors will have access to the sources of information undermentioned. ] ZOOLOGY. Late Nestinc or Terns. W. E. Frost. Zhe Meld, 23rd August 1902, p. 364.—Nest with two eggs found near the Isle of Ulva, Argyllshire, on 15th August. Notes FROM THE GATrty MARINE LABORATORY, ST. ANDREWS. By Prof. M‘Intosh, M.D., LL.D., F.R.S. Ann. and Mag. Wat. Hist., September 1902, pp. 252-260, pl. vii—The notes refer to Fishes and Worms, some of which are of Scottish origin. List oF SPECIES, VARIETIES, AND ABERRATIONS OF LEPIDO- PTERA SO FAR ONLY RECORDED FROM THE BririsH IsLANDs. By J. W. Tutt, FES. Zyxt. Record, 1st and 25th July 1902, pp. 186- 188 and pp. 202-205.—Several Scottish forms referred to. LEPIDOPTERA IN PERTHSHIRE. E. Rogers Bush. Lt. Record, September 1902, pp. 249-250.—This note refers to Cirrhcedia xerampelina, Drymonia chaonia, Anticlea sinuata, and Thera simulata. PyRAMEIS (VANESSA) CARDUI IN FIFESHIRE. Henry H. Brown. Entomologist, August 1902, p. 219.—Specimen taken from Kemback Hill on 28th June. Tue Hasirs or NyssIA LAPPONARIA. Percy C. Reid. £vz. Mo. Mag., September 1902, p. 222.—-Notes on specimens taken at Kinloch Rannoch. ACOSMETIA CALIGINOSA IN THE HEBRIDES. Charles G. Barrett. Ent. Mo. Mag., August 1902, p. 184.—Suggests that occurrences of this species are due to a sporadic migration. The possibility of its having a habitation somewhere in the far west is also alluded to. CURRENT LITERATURE 257 XENOLECHIA THIOPS IN DUMBARTONSHIRE. J. R. Malloch. Ent. Mo. Mag., July 1902, p. 161.—A long note giving particulars of the capture of this species in April. COLEOPTERA IN SCOTLAND. T. Hudson Beare, F.R.S.E., F.E.S. xt. Record, 25th July, pp. 222-223.—Eleven species of water-beetles captured in a small stream near Polmont, Stirlingshire, on 28th September 1go1, and forty-one of Coleoptera in general near Peebles in January 1902. COLEOPTERA IN SCOTLAND. ‘T. Hudson Beare, F.E.S. £vz. Record, September 1902, pp. 241-242.—Notes on about thirty species captured in various localities. COLEOPTERA AT RannocH. T. Hudson Beare. Lt. Mo. Mag., August 1902, p. 179.—-Eighteen species recorded, which were taken from 27th to 29th June. NOTES ON SCOTTISH CRuSsTACEA. By Thomas Scott, F.L.S. Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., July 1902, pp. 1-5, pl. ii—Four species are dealt with, two of which are described as new to science. BOTANY. NOTES ON THE FLORA OF THE SHORES OF THE FIRTH OF FORTH. By M. King. TZvans. Edin. Field Nat. and Micr. Soc., Session 1900-I19OT, pp. 202-205. NOTES ON THE TOPOGRAPHY AND FLORA OF STRATH DEARN. By S. Archibald. Zrans. Edin. Field Nat. and Micr. Soc. 1900-1901, pp. 161-164. HIERACIUM ANGLICUM, FR., AND ITS VARIETIES. By Frederic N. Williams, F.L.S. Journ. Bot., 1902, pp. 257-260.—Discusses and describes various forms and their distribution; and refers ff, Leyt, F. J. Hanb., A dangwellense, ¥. J. Hanb., and H Care- norum, F. J. Hanb., to . anglicum, Fries. HIERACIUM MURORUM AND H. ca&siuM OF BRITISH FLORAS. By F.N. Williams. Zc. pp. 291-293.—See zofe to paper on Scottish Hieracia, p. 250. A CATALOGUE OF THE BRITISH MARINE ALG&. By E. A. L. Batters. /ourn. Bot., 1902, suppl., pp. 33-56. 44 F IN DEX Acherontia atropos in Dumbartonshire, 61 Acosmetia caliginosa in the Hebrides (Curr. Lit.), 256 Acrobolus Wéilsont in Scotland (Curr. Lit.), 126 Adder in the Highlands, 151; in Sol- way, 153; notes on the Scottish, 217 Adder, Black, in Kincardineshire, 185 Alge, Scottish, 186; catalogue of British marine (Curr. Lit.), 192 Andrena angustior in Scotland, 186 Andrena helvola in Scotland (Curr. Lit.), 62 Andrena rujicrus in Perthshire, 186 Apatania muliebyis in Lanarkshire (Curr. Lit.), 125 Ash, three Galls on, 123 Avitauna of the Outer Hebrides, 1888- 1902, 83, 136, 199 BARCLAY, Wm., notes on Aberdeen- shire Roses, 39 Bass on west coast of Inverness-shire, 185 BELL, RoBERT B., Great Snipe in Orkney, 54 BENNETT, ARTHUR, F.L.S., records of Scottish plants for 1901, addi- tional to Watson’s ‘‘ Topographical Botany ” (1883), 32, 102 BIp1E, Surgeon-General, C.I.E., notes on the Scottish Adder, 217 Bird notes from the Island of Coll, 251 ; from Shetland, 52, 183, 252 Birds, report on the movements and occurrence of, in Scotland, 1901, 66, 129, 193 BissHorp, C. H., Great Spotted Wood- pecker in Argyllshire, 119 Black Fish off Aberdeen, 121 Blenny, Yarrell’s, at Portobello, 55 Book Notices, Essays, and Photo- graphs :—Some Birds of the Canary Islands and South Africa, by Henry E. Harris, 63; A Manual of the Birds of Iceland, by Henry H. Slater, M.A., F.Z.S., etc., 63; Life by the Sea Shore: an Intro- duction to Natural History, by Marion Newbigin, D.Sc., 64; Fauna, Flora, and Geology of the Clyde Area, 126; The Life-history of British Serpents, by Gerald Rk. Leighton, M.D., 127 ; Insect Life : Souvenirs of a Naturalist, by J. H. Fabre, 127 ; A Treatise on Zoology, edited by E. Ray Lankester, 128 ; Botanical Club, Scottish Alpine, at Killin (Curr. Lit.), 125 Botanical Notes (Curr. Lit.), 125 Botanist, a nearly forgotten Scottish, 167 Bream, Spanish, on Kincardine coast, 121 Brown, Henry H., Lepidoptera in Banffshire, 254 Buchan, additions to the Flora of, 45 BUCKLEY, Dis) Bray hazaas stock Dove in Caithness, 53; Osprey in Outer Hebrides, 184; Pintail in Caithness-shire, 184 pane Snow, in Argyll in summer, 103 Buzzards, Honey, in Aberdeen, 120 peers Rough-legged, in Ayrshire, 103 CaLMAN, W. T., D.Sc., on the occur- rence of Terrestrial Planarians in Scotland, 231 CAMPBELL, CHARLES, Starling roost on Cramond Island, 2, 252 CAMPBELL, J. MACNAUGHT, F.Z.S., Hedgehog in Argyllshire, 50; Porbeagle Shark in Clyde waters, Capnia atra in Inverness-shire, 185 INDEX Capreolate Fumitories, the British, 189 ; (Curr. Lit.), 192 Carolina Crake in Tiree, 9 Centrolophus niger, a Scottish specimen of, 10; off Aberdeen, 121 Centrophorus ringens in British waters, 13 Chara baltica in Scotland (Curr. Lit.), 126 Chimera monstrosa in Pentland Firth, 122 Chrysophanus phleas, var. Schmidti2, near Paisley (Curr. Lit.), 61 CLARKE, W. EAGLE, F.L.S., further occurrence of Greenland Redpolls in Barra, 118; Wheatear capturing Moth on the wing, 118; Common Tern nesting in Shetland, 121; Adder taking to water, I21 Coleoptera, addition to list of Scottish, 56; at Stornoway (Curr. Lit.), 61 ; in Scotland (Curr. Lit.), 257; at Rannoch (Curr. Lit.), 257 ‘*Conchology, British,’ additions to (Curr. Lit.), 191 Conchology of the Clyde (Curr. Lit.), 124 Crabro aphidium in Scotland (Curr. Tits) on Crangonidee, Scottish, notes on, 225 Crustacea, notes on Scottish (Curr. Lite)5 257 Dicranum strictum in Scotland, 191 Dolphins, Bottle-nosed, in Moray Firth, I TRO UAS Weel Re VisAe Bales. etc., Bank Voles as garden pests, 250 Dove, Stock, in Caithness, Ayrshire, 183 Dove, Turtle, in Shetland, 252 Dragon-flies in 1901 (Curr. Lit.), 124 Duck, Pintail, breeding in Selkirkshire, 120; in Caithness-shire, 1843; in Fife and Perth, 184 DunBar, Lewis, Black Mountain Hare in Caithness, 250 535 an Eider, King, in Fifeshire (Curr. Lit.), 124 Entomostraca found in Aberdeenshire, 21 Erica Stuartz, nov. hybr., 176 Euphrasiacurta, Fr., anew form of, 177 EvANS, WILLIAM, F.R.S.E., Siskins in Edinburgh district, 53 ; Yarrell’s Blenny at Portobello, 55; SpAzzx convolvuli in Scotland, 56 ; Wotozus panzert in Scotland, 56; Ahyssa persuasoria in Moray, 56; Ichneu- monidee in ‘‘ Forth,” 57; Waxwing | 259 in Edinburgh, 118; Capnia atra in Inverness-shire, 185;