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;