vs Ne nag feeds Byers rena “awiare eg eee ore ene Wes Ne ge Scr Set Pew ne} ct My tm ky, id leanemua ie wo ea rh) aad sry) Oe Medan ey, Mndnato ws y eras di Kiar Cite ay Saat oe. mS PR fa him en ioe wee eee re pare rere Nm U> $i wraps wae ene a, Wm me Mites oy nod ae eae peers ne nt ee Pee rice ors ovine, Wn Bey Wyatinne hye Pwd viniatorm wey » seus depends eae Wet Nchannee wae ex, Laem get tie Lear Nepean ers * Yer sien ey Fe < ex ag Roeser ince OLN ae aR a Braids crm. : : 2 Seber ~ ener = 3 ue 5 Fee sree ~ ete ete See Introduced pre-1970 Critical taxa have been looked at very carefully and many specimens of them pe ommine dl Maps for the main ones, which are outlined here, are still considered incomplete. Asplenium trichomanes L. Since the Atlas of the British flora, a new subspecies (A. trichomanes subsp. pachyrachis (Christ) Lovis & Reichst.) and a nothosubspecies (A. trichomanes nothosubsp. staufferi Lovis & Reichst.) have been identified for Wales (Rickard 1989). A. trichomanes subsp. trichomanes is considered under-recorded especially in the southern half of Wales. New records for this area were only accepted after microscopic measurement of the exospores according to the method of Reichstein (Hegi 1984). The A. trichomanes distribution map is identical with that for A. trichomanes subsp. quadrivalens D. E. Meyer emend. Lovis, and is omitted. Dryopteris affinis (Lowe) Fraser-Jenkins. An understanding of Dryopteris affinis as comprising three subspecies in the British Isles has only emerged in the second half of the 1980s (Fraser-Jenkins 1987). Var. paleaceo-lobata sensu Fraser-Jenkins is included under subsp. affinis and var. robusta (Oberholzer & von Tavel ex Fraser-Jenkins) Fraser-Jenkins & Salvo under subsp. borreri (Newman) Fraser-Jenkins, but records of these varieties were almost zero. Polypodium vulgare L. agg. The records of Polypodium vulgare were treated with caution as many applied to P. vulgare sensu lato. Where accurate identification could not be established records were DISTRIBUTION OF PTERIDOPHYTA IN WALES S treated as P. vulgare agg. For P. X font-queri Rothm. and P. x shivasiae Rothm. only records confirmed by R. H. Roberts are mapped. Many of the records of the commonest hybrid, P x mantoniae Rothm., have also been confirmed by R. H. Roberts. Ophioglossum azoricum C. Presl. Only the records recognized by Paul (1987) are included. Trichomanes speciosum Willd. The distribution map includes only records for sporophytes. Other sites where only gametophytes have been found are not included. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank all Welsh vice-county recorders, other interested members of the B.S.B.I. and the British Pteridological Society for adding to the updated base-maps, for pointing out erroneous records and answering numerous queries. C. D. Preston allowed access to the record-card files at the Biological Records Centre, Monks Wood Experimental Station, provided a set of pteridophyte maps resulting from the B.S.B.I. Monitoring Scheme (1987-1988) and answered numerous queries about the records. A. C. Jermy allowed us to examine specimens in the cryptogamic herbarium, BM. Thanks are due to referees for determinations and help with the taxonomy, especially C. R. Fraser-Jenkins (Dryopteris affinis) and R. H. Roberts (Polypodium), and A. C. Jermy. We also thank the numerous recorders who sent in specimens for determination and J. G. Gavan for preparing the maps. REFERENCES Derrick, L. N., Jermy, A. C. & PAut, A. M., eds (1987). Checklist of European Pteridophytes. Sommerfeltia 6: i-xx, 1-94. FRASER-JENKINS, C. R. (1987). Dryopteris, in Derrick, L. N. et al., Checklist of European Pteridophytes. Sommerfeltia 6: x—xiil. Hea, G. (1984). Illustrierte Flora von Mitteleuropa, 3rd ed., 1(1): 215-216. Berlin & Hamburg. Hype, H. A. & Wane, A. E. (1940, 1948, 1954, 1962). Welsh Ferns, 1st—4th eds. Cardiff. Hype, H. A., WabE, A. E. & Harrison, S. G. (1969, 1978). Welsh Ferns, 5th & 6th eds. Cardiff. Jermy, A. C., ARNOLD, H. R., FARRELL, L. & PERRING, F. H,. (1978). Atlas of Ferns of the British Isles. London. Pau , A. M. (1987). The status of Ophioglossum azoricum (Ophioglossaceae: Pteridophyta) in the British Isles. Fern Gazette 13: 173-187. PERRING, F. H. & SELL, P. D., eds. (1968). Critical supplement to the Atlas of the British flora. London. PERRING, F. H. & WALTERS, S. M., eds. (1962). Atlas of the British flora. London. RickarD, M. H. (1989). Two spleenworts new to Britain — Asplenium trichomanes subsp. pachyrachis and Asplenium trichomanes nothosubsp. staufferi. Pteridologist 1: 244-248. (Accepted August 1991) APPENDIX: CHECKLIST OF WELSH PTERIDOPHYTES Adiantum capillus-veneris L. Asplenium adiantum- “nigrum L. Asplenium adiantum-nigrum L. x A. septentrionale (L.) Hoffm. (A. X contrei Callé, Lovis & Reichst.) Asplenium billotii F. W. Schultz Asplenium ceterach L. Asplenium marinum L. Asplenium ruta-muraria L. - Asplenium scolopendrium L. Asplenium septentrionale (L.) Hoffm. Asplenium septentrionale (L.) Hoffm. subsp. septentrionale xX A. trichomanes L. SSS. trichomanes (A. X __ alternifolium Wulfen nothosubsp. alternifolium) Asplenium trichomanes L. Asplenium trichomanes L. subsp. pachyrachis (Christ) Lovis & Reichst. Asplenium trichomanes L. subsp. pachyrachis (Christ) Lovis & Reichst. x A. trichomanes L. subsp. quadrivalens D. E. Meyer emend. Lovis (A. trichomanes L. nothosubsp. staufferi Lovis & Reichst.) Asplenium trichomanes L. subsp. quadrivalens D. E. Meyer emend. Lovis 2 G. HUTCHINSON AND B. A. THOMAS specimens is no longer practical, nor is it a suitable method of portraying the distribution of taxa. We decided instead to record distribution on a 10-km grid square system. With the completion of the B.S.B.I. Monitoring Scheme (1987-88) and talk of a new atlas of the British flora, although funds have not yet been allocated, 1990 is a convenient date to end the current time span. These maps we present here, in advance of a new Welsh Ferns, to ensure their early availability to a wide audience in the hope that these will stimulate further interest in Welsh pteridophytes and their distribution. COMPILATION OF MAPS The base-maps used were those of Perring & Walters (1962) and Perring & Sell (1968) with nomenclature modified according to Derrick et al. (1987). To these were added records held by the Biological Records Centre, Monks Wood Experimental Station in November 1986 which included all the records of Jermy et al. (1978). Information from all the specimens at NMW was checked as was that from specimens of the more critical taxa at BM. Appropriate literature sources were also checked. The records in the Welsh Plant Records data-files held at NMW were added (including records received which applied up to the end of 1990). Updated maps were sent, for modification and comment, to all Welsh vice-county recorders and several interested members of both the B.S.B.I. and the British Pteridological Society. However, maps of those taxa considered to be rare were only sent on a vice-county basis to the relevant vice- county recorder(s). Several records were added at this stage and recorders were also able to point out former mapping errors. A healthy correspondence on queries followed, which included obtaining more details from records at the Biological Records Centre. Generally, the wishes of vice- county recorders were complied with, especially the removal of doubtful records. Untraceable — records were not used for the maps and on the boundary with England only records from the Welsh side of the 10-km square were included. The 10-km square records which appeared in the Adlas of the British flora as 1930 onwards that could not be traced are given a separate symbol because they _ cannot be assigned to either side of the 1950 time span boundary used in our maps. Following this stage of the work it has been possible to add numerous records that resulted mostly either from field work associated with current county flora surveys or determinations of new specimens sent to NMW. Finally, the pteridophyte maps compiled from the B.S.B.I. Monitoring Scheme (1987-1988) were added. The maps are presented in Figs 1-84, arranged in alphabetical order. Symbols used for the maps are as follows:— @ 1970-1990 © 1950-1969 @ 1930-1969 untraced Adlas of the British flora record © pre-1950 @ Introduced 1970-1990 > Introduced pre-1970 Critical taxa have been looked at very carefully and many specimens of them examined. Maps for the main ones, which are outlined here, are still considered incomplete. Asplenium trichomanes L. Since the Atlas of the British flora, a new subspecies (A. trichomanes subsp. pachyrachis (Christ) Lovis & Reichst.) and a nothosubspecies (A. trichomanes nothosubsp. staufferi Lovis & Reichst.) have been identified for Wales (Rickard 1989). A. trichomanes subsp. trichomanes is considered under-recorded especially in the southern half of Wales. New records for this area were only accepted after microscopic measurement of the exospores according to the method of Reichstein (Hegi 1984). The A. trichomanes distribution map is identical with that for A. trichomanes subsp. quadrivalens D. E. Meyer emend. Lovis, and is omitted. Dryopteris affinis (Lowe) Fraser-Jenkins. An understanding of Dryopteris affinis as comprising three subspecies in the British Isles has only emerged in the second half of the 1980s (Fraser-Jenkins 1987). Var. paleaceo-lobata sensu Fraser-Jenkins is included under subsp. affinis and var. robusta (Oberholzer & von Tavel ex Fraser-Jenkins) Fraser-Jenkins & Salvo under subsp. borreri (Newman) Fraser-Jenkins, but records of these varieties were almost zero. Polypodium vulgare L. agg. The records of Polypodium vulgare were treated with caution as many applied to P. vulgare sensu lato. Where accurate identification could not be established records were DISTRIBUTION OF PTERIDOPHYTA IN WALES 3 treated as P. vulgare agg. For P. X font-queri Rothm. and P. X shivasiae Rothm. only records confirmed by R. H. Roberts are mapped. Many of the records of the commonest hybrid, P x mantoniae Rothm., have also been confirmed by R. H. Roberts. Ophioglossum azoricum C. Presl. Only the records recognized by Paul (1987) are included. Trichomanes speciosum Willd. The distribution map includes only records for sporophytes. Other sites where only gametophytes have been found are not included. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank all Welsh vice-county recorders, other interested members of the B.S.B.I. and the British Pteridological Society for adding to the updated base-maps, for pointing out erroneous records and answering numerous queries. C. D. Preston allowed access to the record-card files at the Biological Records Centre, Monks Wood Experimental Station, provided a set of pteridophyte maps resulting from the B.S.B.I. Monitoring Scheme (1987-1988) and answered numerous queries about the records. A. C. Jermy allowed us to examine specimens in the cryptogamic herbarium, BM. Thanks are due to referees for determinations and help with the taxonomy, especially C. R. Fraser-Jenkins (Dryopteris affinis) and R. H. Roberts (Polypodium), and A. C. Jermy. We also thank the numerous recorders who sent in specimens for determination and J. G. Gavan for preparing the maps. REFERENCES Derrick, L. N., JErMy, A. C. & PAut, A. M., eds (1987). Checklist of European Pteridophytes. Sommerfeltia 6: i-xx, 1-94. : FRASER-JENKINS, C. R. (1987). Dryopteris, in Derrick, L. N. et al., Checklist of European Pteridophytes. Sommerfeltia 6: x—xiil. Heai, G. (1984). Illustrierte Flora von Mitteleuropa, 3rd ed., 1(1): 215-216. Berlin & Hamburg. Hype, H. A. & Wane, A. E. (1940, 1948, 1954, 1962). Welsh Ferns, 1st-4th eds. Cardiff. Hype, H. A., Wapve, A. E. & Harrison, S. G. (1969, 1978). Welsh Ferns, Sth & 6th eds. Cardiff. Jermy, A. C., ARNOLD, H. R., FARRELL, L. & PERRING, F. H. (1978). Atlas of Ferns of the British Isles. London. Pau, A. M. (1987). The status of Ophioglossum azoricum (Ophioglossaceae: Pteridophyta) in the British Isles. Fern Gazette 13: 173-187. PERRING, F. H. & SELL, P. D., eds. (1968). Critical supplement to the Atlas of the British flora. London. PERRING, F. H. & WALTERS, S. M., eds. (1962). Atlas of the British flora. London. RickarD, M. H. (1989). Two spleenworts new to Britain — Asplenium trichomanes subsp. pachyrachis and Asplenium trichomanes nothosubsp. staufferi. Pteridologist 1: 244-248. (Accepted August 1991) APPENDIX: CHECKLIST OF WELSH PTERIDOPHYTES Adiantum capillus-veneris L. Asplenium adiantum-nigrum L. Asplenium adiantum-nigrum L. x A. septentrionale (L.) Hoffm. (A. X contrei Callé, Lovis & Reichst.) Asplenium billotii F. W. Schultz Asplenium ceterach L. Asplenium marinum L. Asplenium ruta-muraria L. _ Asplenium scolopendrium L. Asplenium septentrionale (L.) Hoffm. Asplenium septentrionale (L.) Hoffm. subsp. septentrionale x A. trichomanes L. suey trichomanes (A. X alternifolium Wulfen nothosubsp. alternifolium) Asplenium trichomanes L. Asplenium trichomanes L. subsp. pachyrachis (Christ) Lovis & Reichst. Asplenium trichomanes L. subsp. pachyrachis (Christ) Lovis & Reichst. x A. trichomanes L. subsp. quadrivalens D. E. Meyer emend. Lovis (A. trichomanes L. nothosubsp. staufferi Lovis & Reichst.) Asplenium trichomanes L. subsp. quadrivalens D. E. Meyer emend. Lovis + G. HUTCHINSON AND B. A. THOMAS Asplenium trichomanes L. subsp. quadrivalens D. E. Meyer emend. Lovis x A. trichomanes L. subsp. trichomanes (A. trichomanes L. nothosubsp. lusaticum (D. E. Meyer) Lawalrée) Asplenium trichomanes L. subsp. trichomanes Asplenium viride Hudson Athyrium filix-femina (L.) Roth Azolla filiculoides Lam. Blechnum spicant (L.) Roth Botrychium lunaria (L.) Swartz Cryptogramma crispa (L.) Hook. Cyrtomium falcatum (L. f.) C. Presl Cystopteris fragilis (L.) Bernh. Diphasiastrum alpinum (L.) Holub Dryopteris aemula (Aiton) Kuntze Dryopteris affinis (Lowe) Fraser-Jenkins Dryopteris affinis (Lowe) Fraser-Jenkins subsp. affinis Dryopteris affinis (Lowe) Fraser-Jenkins subsp. borreri (Newman) Fraser-Jenkins Dryopteris affinis (Lowe) Fraser-Jenkins subsp. cambrensis Fraser-Jenkins Dryopteris affinis (Lowe) Fraser-Jenkins x D. filix-mas (L.) Schott (D. X complexa Fraser-Jenkins) Dryopteris carthusiana (Vill.) H. P. Fuchs Dryopteris carthusiana (Vill.) H. P. Fuchs x D. dilatata (Hoffm.) A. Gray (D. x deweveri (Jansen) Jansen Wachter) Dryopteris dilatata (Hoffm.) A. Gray Dryopteris dilatata (Hoffm.) A. Gray x D. expansa (C. Presl) Fraser-Jenkins & Jermy (D. < ambroseae Fraser- Jenkins & Jermy) Dryopteris expansa (C. Presl) Fraser-Jenkins & Jermy Dryopteris filix-mas (L.) Schott Dryopteris filix-mas (L.) Schott X D. oreades Fomin (D. X mantoniae Fraser-Jenkins & Corley) Dryopteris oreades Fomin Dryopteris submontana (Fraser-Jenkins & Jermy) Fraser-Jenkins Equisetum arvense L. Equisetum arvense L. X E. fluviatile L. (E. X litorale Kuhl. ex Rupr.) Equisetum fluviatile L. Equisetum hyemale L. Equisetum palustre L. Equisetum palustre L. x E. telmateia Ehrh. (E. x font-queri Rothm.) Equisetum sylvaticum L. Equisetum telmateia Ehrh. Equisetum variegatum Schleicher ex Weber & Mohr Gymnocarpium dryopteris (L.) Newman Gymnocarpium robertianum (Hoffm.) Newman Huperzia selago (L.) Bernh. ex Schrank & C. F. P. Mart. Hymenophyllum tunbrigense (L.) Sm. Hymenophyllum wilsonii Hook. Isoetes echinospora Durieu Isoetes lacustris L. Lycopodiella inundata (L.) Holub Lycopodium annotinum L. Lycopodium clavatum L. Matteuccia struthiopteris (L.) Tod. Onoclea sensibilis L. Ophioglossum azoricum C. Presl Ophioglossum vulgatum L. Oreopteris limbosperma (All.) Holub Osmunda regalis L. Phegopteris connectilis (Michx) Watt Pilularia globulifera L. Polypodium cambricum L. Polypodium cambricum L. X P. interjectum Shivas (P. X shivasiae Rothm.) Polypodium cambricum L. X P. vulgare L. (P. X font-queri Rothm.) Polypodium interjectum Shivas Polypodium interjectum Shivas X P. vulgare L. (P. X mantoniae Rothm.) Polypodium vulgare L. DISTRIBUTION OF PTERIDOPHYTA IN WALES Polypodium vulgare L. agg. Polystichum aculeatum (L.) Roth Polystichum aculeatum (L.) Roth x P. setiferum (Forskal) Woynar (P. x bicknellii (Christ) Hahne) Polystichum lonchitis (L.) Roth Polystichum setiferum (Forskal) Woynar Pteridium aquilinum (L.) Kuhn Selaginella kraussiana (Kuntze) A. Braun Selaginella selaginoides (L.) Link Thelypteris palustris Schott Trichomanes speciosum Willd. Woodsia alpina (Bolton) Gray Woodsia ilvensis (L.) R. Br. 7 6 i 2 4 6 + +— — | S/H | ie. S\J | IE ! | sts t 9 v.c. 52, Ang. 3 : Sar eer RS ae, | v.c. 51, Flints:. Wel 49, Caerns v.c.|50, Denbs. 4 all: = a vic. 48,| Mer a al at { a y ae ail =| _| oO} vic. 47) Monts. af | s/O | S|N + t | 7 v.c.| 46, Cards. v.c.|43, Rads. b + S|M + + + + 4 v.c, 45, Pembs. v.c.|42, Brecs. 2 | yc. = Carme. eS e v.c.|35, Mons, SR ly h i vic. 41,] Glam. Tr ir SiS | i 1 d L | ! 7 4 0, a all H SiT j Sava shilel eel ipiak pup) aL 469) Map of Welsh vice-counties and 10-km squares. 6 G. HUTCHINSON AND B. A. THOMAS Ficures 1—6: 1. Adiantum capillus-veneris; 2. Asplenium adiantum-nigrum; 3. Asplenium adiantum-nigrum X A. septentrionale (A. X contrei); 4. Asplenium billotii; 5. Asplenium ceterach; 6. Asplenium marinum. DISTRIBUTION OF PTERIDOPHYTA IN WALES fl ek au | | 2 Ficures 7-12: 7. Asplenium ruta-muraria; 8. Asplenium scolopendrium; 9. Asplenium septentrionale, 10. Asplenium septentrionale subsp. septentrionale x A. trichomanes subsp. trichomanes (A. X alternifolium nothosubsp. alternifolium); 11. Asplenium trichomanes subsp. pachyrachis; 12. Asplenium trichomanes subsp. pachyrachis x A. trichomanes subsp. quadrivalens (A. trichomanes nothosubsp. stauffert). 8 G. HUTCHINSON AND B. A. THOMAS Fig. 13 FicureEs 13-18: 13. Asplenium trichomanes subsp. quadrivalens; 14. Asplenium trichomanes subsp. quadrivalens A. trichomanes subsp. trichomanes (A. trichomanes nothosubsp. lusaticum); 15. Asplenium trichomanes subsp. trichomanes; 16. Asplenium viride; 17. Athyrium filix-femina; 18. Azolla filiculoides. DISTRIBUTION OF PTERIDOPHYTA IN WALES Figures 19-24: 19. Blechnum spicant; 20. Botrychium lunaria; 21. Cryptogramma crispa; 22. Cyrtomium falcatum; 23. Cystopteris fragilis; 24. Diphasiastrum alpinum. 10 G. HUTCHINSON AND B. A. THOMAS FicuREs 25-30: 25. Dryopteris aemula; 26. Dryopteris affinis; 27. Dryopteris affinis subsp. affinis; 28. Dryopteris affinis subsp. borreri; 29. Dryopteris affinis subsp. cambrensis; 30. Dryopteris affinis x D. filix-mas (D. X complexa). DISTRIBUTION OF PTERIDOPHYTA IN WALES : 11 Ficures 31-36: 31. Dryopteris carthusiana; 32. Dryopteris carthusiana x D. dilatata (D. Xx deweveri); 33. Dryopteris dilatata; 34. Dryopteris dilatata x D. expansa (D. X ambroseae); 35. Dryopteris expansa; 36. Dryopteris filix-mas. — 12 G. HUTCHINSON AND B. A. THOMAS Fig. 37 FiGuREs 37-42: 37. Dryopteris filix-mas x D. oreades (D. X mantoniae); 38. Dryopteris oreades; 39. Dryopteris submontana; 40. Equisetum arvense; 41. Equisetum arvense Xx E. fluviatile (E. X litorale); 42. Equisetum fluviatile. DISTRIBUTION OF PTERIDOPHYTA IN WALES 13 4 2 3 4 FicurEs 43-48: 43. Equisetum hyemale; 44. Equisetum palustre; 45. Equisetum palustre x E. telmateia (E. X font-queri); 46. Equisetum sylvaticum; 47. Equisetum telmateia; 48. Equisetum variegatum. 14 G. HUTCHINSON AND B. A. THOMAS Figures 49-54: 49. Gymnocarpium dryopteris; 50. Gymnocarpium robertianum; 51. Huperzia_ selago; 52. Hymenophyllum tunbrigense; 53. Hymenophyllum wilsonii: 54. Isoetes echinospora. DISTRIBUTION OF PTERIDOPHYTA IN WALES 15 Fig. 55 Figures 55-60: 55. Isoetes lacustris; 56. Lycopodiella inundata; 57. Lycopodium annotinum; 58. Lycopodium clavatum; 59. Matteuccia struthiopteris; 60. Onoclea sensibilis. 16 G. HUTCHINSON AND B. A. THOMAS FicuRES 61-66: 61. Ophioglossum azoricum, 62. Ophioglossum vulgatum; 63. Oreopteris limbosperma; 64. Osmunda regalis; 65. Phegopteris connectilis; 66. Pilularia globulifera. DISTRIBUTION OF PTERIDOPHYTA IN WALES 17 Fig. 68 @8000000 nd ep ©0880 FIGURES 67-72: 67. Polypodium cambricum; 68. Polypodium cambricum x P. interjectum (P. X shivasiae); 69. Polypodium cambricum X P. vulgare (P. X font-queri); 70. Polypodium interjectum; 71. Polypodium interjectum X P. vulgare (P. X mantoniae); 72. Polypodium vulgare. 18 G. HUTCHINSON AND B. A. THOMAS Fig. 73 () ® ® @ ® ® pOQO O8 it Ficures 73-78: 73. Polypodium vulgare agg.; 74. Polystichum aculeatum; 75. Polystichum aculeatum X P. setiferum (P. X bicknellii); 76. Polystichum lonchitis; 77. Polystichum setiferum; 78. Pteridium aquilinum. DISTRIBUTION OF PTERIDOPHYTA IN WALES Fig. 79 Figures 79-84: 79. Selaginella kraussiana; 80. Selaginella selaginoides; 81. 82. Trichomanes speciosum, 83. Woodsia alpina; 84. Woodsia ilvensis. 19 Thelypteris palustris; Watsonia, 19, 21-37 (1992) 21 Peroxidase isoenzyme and morphological variation in Sorbus L. in South Wales and adjacent areas, with particular reference to S. porrigentiformis E. F. Warb. M. C. F. PROCTOR and A. C. GROENHOF Department of Biological Sciences, University of Exeter, Hatherly Laboratories, Prince of Wales Road, Exeter EX4 4PS ABSTRACT The delimitation of microspecies of Sorbus L. (Rosaceae) occurring in South Wales, the Wye Valley, the Bristol area and Mendip is considered in relation to their peroxidase phenotypes and leaf, fruit and growth-habit characters. On isoenzyme evidence, S. minima (A. Ley) Hedl., S. leyana Wilmott, S. anglica Hedl. and S. bristoliensis Wilmott all appear essentially uniform and well delimited. S. xX vagensis Wilmott is variable in peroxidase phenotype, as expected of a sexual hybrid. S. leptophylla E. F. Warb. appears genetically uniform, but plastic in habit and leaf size. Its established distribution is limited to two localities in Brecs. (v.c. 42); peroxidase evidence and fruit characters confirm a probable relationship to plants on Craig Breidden, Monts. (v.c. 47). S. eminens E. F. Warb. from near Symonds Yat is genetically different from plants in the Bristol — Mendip area, which show similarities in peroxidase, leaf, fruit and growth-habit characters to trees on the Menai Straits and to S. hibernica E. F. Warb. Plants which have been named S. porrigentiformis E. F. Warb. in South Wales include: (a) a widespread plant, of uniform peroxidase phenotype, with obovate leaves and broad crimson fruits, typically forming a twiggy shrub with rather slender shoots (the holotype appears identical with this); and (b) a much more local plant in the Mynydd Llangattock — Cwm Clydach area and the Black Mountains, of different peroxidase phenotype, commonly growing into a small tree, with more oblong biserrate leaves and larger subglobose scarlet fruits. Plants from near Symonds Yat growing with and somewhat resembling S. porrigentiformis, differ from both (a) and (b) in peroxidase phenotype. Like S. porrigentiformis, they appear more closely related to S. graeca (Spach) Kotschy than to S. aria (L.) Crantz, sensu stricto; they need further study. INTRODUCTION The British species of Sorbus L. (Rosaceae) comprise three sexually reproducing diploids, S. aucuparia L., S. aria (L.) Crantz and S. torminalis (L.) Crantz, and a number of polyploids all of which are probably normally apomictic. These form populations of essentially identical individuals which can be recognized as distinct microspecies (Warburg 1952, 1962; Perring & Sell 1968). The microspecies distinguished in the British Isles fall into three groups. The largest number (making up the S. aria aggregate) appear to be derivatives of diploid S. aria sensu lato. A group including S. anglica Hedl. show characters intermediate between S. aria sensu lato and S. aucuparia; the S. latifolia group are similarly intermediate between S. aria sensu lato and S. torminalis. All but four of the described microspecies of Sorbus in the British Isles occur in the area around the Bristol Channel. The sites at which they grow fall into three broad groups. In an eastern group of sites, on the Carboniferous Limestone of Mendip, the Avon Gorge and the Wye Valley, the apomicts occur in contact with sexual S. aria as well as S. aucuparia and S. torminalis. The other two groups, on the Carboniferous Limestone crags of Breconshire and West Glamorgan and on the Old Red Sandstone of the North Devon and West Somerset coast, are beyond the western limit of S. aria and the Whitebeam populations appear to be wholly apomictic. Sorbus in the Bristol Channel area thus presents a picture of some complexity, and potentially of great interest as a model for studying the evolution and ecology of an apomictic group. Proctor et al. (1989) investigated populations in Devon and West Somerset, and showed the usefulness of peroxidase isoenzyme phenotypes in helping to delimit and characterize apomictic Sorbus populations. Isoenzymes provide additional characters and make possible an interplay of hypothesis 22 M. C. F. PROCTOR AND A. C. GROENHOF and test between biochemical and morphological evidence; they also extend the possibilities for assessing genetic relationships between populations. Warburg (1952, 1957) indicated the occurrence of some variation within S. anglica, S. eminens E. F. Warb. and S. porrigentiformis E. F. Warb. The experience of a number of field botanists has suggested that there are real difficulties in the characterization and identification of several of the species, especially S$. porrigentiformis in South Wales. Warburg (1952) gave chromosome numbers of 2n = 51 and 2n = 68 in that species. In this paper we present the results of a survey of peroxidase phenotypes in apomictic Sorbus populations in South Wales and neighbouring areas, and consider the results in relation to some morphological characters of the plants, and their geographical distributions. MATERIALS AND METHODS PEROXIDASE ISOENZYMES Shoot samples were collected in the field in the summers of 1989 and 1990, and brought back fresh to the laboratory. The extracts used for electrophoresis were of ‘bark’ tissue scraped from (usually) second-year shoots. They were made as soon as possible after collection, but we found that even in summer shoots remained in good condition for a week or more if kept in polythene bags in a refrigerator. The extracts were run on vertical polyacrylamide slab gels. Details of the methods used are given by Proctor ef al. (1989), and the conventions used to describe peroxidase phenotypes here are the same as in that paper. The bands obtained on the gels can conveniently (but arbitrarily) be divided into six groups (Fig. 1). Two slow-running groups (A and B) and a fast-running band (F) tend to be rather diffuse and present in most or all samples, so are of little taxonomic interest. Bands in groups C and E are well defined, and occur in varying combinations in all the British apomictic Sorbus species. One or two bands of group D, characteristic of S$. aucuparia, occur in the apomicts of the S. anglica group. LEAF, FLOWER AND FRUIT CHARACTERS We collected herbarium material from most of the populations we examined; the specimens have been retained by M.C.F.P. In addition, we collected and pressed a number of samples of - representative individual leaves from short shoots; these were photocopied as a convenient means for record and comparison. The colour of both leaf surfaces was recorded from some of the material while still fresh by matching with the R.H.S. Colour Chart (Royal Horticultural Society 1966). Fresh pollen samples from flowers collected in June 1989 were examined microscopically after staining in aceto-carmine, and samples from the same inflorescences were tested for germination in 15% sucrose solution. Fruit was collected in September and early October. Length and breadth of samples of well-formed fruits were measured to the nearest 0-2 mm using a sliding caliper-rule. To provide a reproducible and quantitative basis for recording fruit colour, fresh fruits were matched with a limited sub-set of the shades in the R.H.S. Colour Chart, chosen so that their coordinates in the system of the Commission Internationale d’Eclairage (C.I.E.) formed a reasonably evenly graded series. Individual fruits tend to run through the whole or a part of this series as they ripen; broad differences between species are easily established, but for rigorous comparisons fruits need to be at the same stage of ripeness. The C.1I.E. chromaticity and reflectance coordinates for the shades used are given in Appendix 1. RESULTS The peroxidase phenotypes found in our material are summarized diagrammatically in Fig. 1, and — the fruit measurements in Table 1. S. ANGLICA AND ITS ALLIES Samples of S. anglica from the Mynydd Llangattock area, the Wye Valley, the Avon Gorge, PEROXIDASE ISOENZYME AND MORPHOLOGICAL VARIATION IN SORBUS L. 23 2 x2) ® ® @ 3 S i elf i Ain o =~ 3 one 3 Ke) = oe = =X x x ax =] (One) fe) fe) — — - o fox a= _ P= = = ® jor ro) > 0 Co) Co) > > 2 iS Da Eo a a. o © fo) = = Te! fe) fe) — = G) o id wm om - © o 2 gS Py oe oy ae) > > 5 E a a) SS Shika pee “ Be = S = & ® Woe sees o 2 aS c Ss = es = CS Os Ora Osa. Ore c iss] = aS) WY 7) c © ® O MGR iS ES ees D> © en) = £ c c o > PN OL 1 UO! a Bio 8 o = 79 a 5 © o c S Ce) | SES 2 Sy Sis tay te ro) BY £ Oo 5 2 S & = na fra ® ® = = 2 3 £ .S & Le es | Si, 6 O oe oO ee ee 8 Ree Gass as os S x e iss 2 = o o : 5 Sa aay : mt : , : : ; ; : roo) “ oO st Lo o [i ee ee ey ee in Rees ee ee a ee Py re ge ee eg i ol eM ee C1 aE | Ge GE GE | GD) GED EER c= = — Gp — eee | —— ——> soe eC CS C4Au Pe eS => => x E3 a Eas | ee Pres a aR Ficure 1. Schematic diagram of peroxidase phenotypes of apomictic Sorbus populations from South Wales and adjoining areas. Conventions follow Proctor et al. (1989). Cheddar, Breidden and Llangollen all show the same peroxidase phenotype as that found in a plant of Avon Gorge origin by Proctor et al. (1989). The trees varied slightly in leaf shape but in general had somewhat more angular and deeply incised lobes than plants from Devon (Fig. 2). There appears also to be a consistent difference in fruit shape between trees on Breidden and those farther south (Table 1). The geographically very restricted S. minima (A. Ley) Hed1. (five trees) and S. leyana Wilmott (three trees) show consistent and distinctive peroxidase phenotypes. In S. minima Proctor et al. (1989) indicated a pair of bands in positions D2 and E1; the latter generally stains more strongly and the two are often not clearly resolved. Pollen of both species showed virtually no germination in 15% sucrose solution, and a large proportion of misshapen and empty grains, suggesting that both are probably triploid (Liljefors 1953). THE S. LATIFOLIA GROUP Four trees of S. bristoliensis Wilmott from the Leigh Woods side of the Avon Gorge were consistent " in their peroxidase phenotype, erroneously shown by Proctor et al. (1989) as including band C4; this is absent in S. bristoliensis, although the weak band CS is present. S. croceocarpa (Sell 1989), of which there are planted and naturalized trees around Bristol, has a peroxidase phenotype differing from that of S. devoniensis E. F. Warb. most conspicuously in the very much stronger band C3; the same phenotype is found consistently in material from the type area in Anglesey and at Nantporth on the Bangor side of the Menai Straits. Four trees of S. X vagensis Wilmott all gave different peroxidase phenotypes, a result consistent with the supposition that this is a sporadically occurring sexual hybrid. 24 M. C. F. PROCTOR AND A. C. GROENHOF TABLE 1. FRUIT DIMENSIONS AND COLOURS FROM SORBUS POPULATIONS, SEPTEMBER- OCTOBER 1989-90 Fruit dimensions are given for individual trees; n is the number of fruits measured. Length/breadth ratios were calculated individually for each fruit. Fruit colour assessments are based on all the material available from a Species and locality S. aucuparia Countisbury, N. Devon (v.c. 4) Lynmouth, N. Devon (v.c. 4) S. anglica N. Whilborough Common, S. Devon (v.c. 3) (i) (ii) Woody Bay, N. Devon (v.c. 4) Cheddar, N. Somerset (v.c. 6) (i) (ii) Lover’s Leap, Mons. (v.c. 35) Cwm Clydach, Glam. (v.c. 41) Breidden, Monts. (v.c. 47) (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) S. aria Cheddar, N. Somerset (v.c. 6) (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Seven Sisters Rocks, Herefs. (v.c. 36) S. leptophylla Craig-y-Rhiwarth, Brecs. (v.c. 42) (i) (iv) Craig-y-Cilau, Brecs. (v.c. 42) S. aff. leptophylla Breidden, Monts. (v.c. 47) S. wilmottiana Bristol, W. Gloucs. (v.c. 34) S. eminens Bristol, W. Gloucs. (v.c. 34) Leigh Woods, N. Somerset (v.c. 6) Worlebury, N. Somerset (v.c. 6) 15 10 Length mean (s.d.) (mm) 10-2 (0-51) 9-9 (0-86) 11-0 (0-43) 10-8 (0-64) 10-9 (0-56) 10-7 (0-63) 10-9 (0-68) 10-1 (0-48) 10-6 (0-22) 11-7 (0-52) 11-2 (0-88) 12-4 (0-43) 14-1 (0-77) 12-3 (0-39) 11-4 (1-09) 12-8 (0-79) 14-7 (0-56) 14-3 (0-73) 14-4 (0-32) 13-3 (0-68) 14-8 (0-71) 14-3 (0-30) 10-7 (0-54) 13-8 (0-77) 12-0 (0 92) 12-7 (0-81) Breadth mean (s.d.) Length/breadth (mm) 11-0 (0-46) 10-6 (0-50) 12-4 (0-62) 11-8 (1-07) 11-9 (0-29) 11-6 (0-94) 11-6 (0-63) 10-1 (0-44) 10-6 (0-61) 11-3 (0-50) 11-4 (0-68) 12-7 (0-56) 13-6 (0-68) 13-5 (0-55) 11-3 (0-97) 11-6 (1-25) 13-8 (0-64) 13-0 (0-61) 13-1 (0-52) 12-5 (0-43) 14-3 (0-63) 11-6 (0-75) 10-4 (0-61) 15-4 (0-64) 13-8 (0-91) 14-0 (0-62) particular locality at the time of scoring. mean (s.d.) 0-93 (0-036) 0-93 (0-051) 0-89 (0-045) 0-91 (0-039) 0-92 (0-038) 0-92 (0-024) 0-95 (0-080) 1-00 (0-037) 1-00 (0-047) 1-04 (0-059) 0-98 (0-052) 0:98 (0-035) 1-04 (0-048) 0:91 (0-045) 1-01 (0-034) 1-09 (0-079) 1-23 (0-067) 1-03 (0-035) 0-89 (0-029) 0-87 (0-045) 0-91 (0-057) Fruit colour (R.H.S. Colour Chart) 44A(-45A) 33A 444-454 (444-454 45A(-46A) 45A 44A(-45A) (28A-)32A(-33A) (44A-)45A 99 br) 44A-A5A - (44A-)45A (33A-)44A-45A(—46A) 45A+46A PEROXIDASE ISOENZYME AND MORPHOLOGICAL VARIATION IN SORBUS L. Pre TABLE 1. continued Species and locality Cheddar, N. Somerset (v.c. 6) (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) Seven Sisters Rocks, Herefs. (v.c. 36) (i) (il) S. aff. eminens Bangor, Caerns. (v.c. 49) (i) (11) S. hibernica Dromineer, N. Tipperary (v.c. H10) Rathdrum, Co. Wicklow (v.c. H20) S. porrigentiformis (‘Type (a)’) Anstey’s Cove, S. Devon (v.c. 3) Woody Bay, N. Devon (v.c. 4) Cheddar, N. Somerset (v.c. 6) Heale Ladder, N. Somerset (v.c. 6) Wick Rocks, N. Somerset (v.c. 6) Craig-y-Rhiwarth, Brecs. (v.c. 42) (i) (ii) Craig-y-Cilau, Brecs. (v.c. 42) Aberedw Rocks, Rads. (v.c. 43) (‘Type (b)’) | Daren Disgwylfa, Brecs. (v.c. 42) (i) (ii) (iii) Blackrock, Glam. (v.c. 41) Craig-y-Cilau, Brecs. (v.c. 42) Cwm Clydach, Glam. (v.c. 41) Taren-yr-Esgob, Mons./Brecs. (v.c. 35/42) 10 10 10 12 Length mean (s.d.) (mm) 10-9 (1-12) 14-2 (1-06) 12-0 (0-32) 11-2 (0-38) 10-6 (0-39) 10-2 (0-19) 12-0 (0-66) 11-2 (0-39) 13-8 (0-65) 12-3 (0-46) 10-6 (1-11) 9-1 (0-68) 10-2 (0-55) 9-3 (0-18) 10-6 (0-42) 9-6 (0-50) 9-8 (0-49) 9-0 (0-52) 10-8 (0-62) 11-0 (0-61) 12-2 (0-67) 11-2 (1-15) 11-8 (0-24) 11-4 (0-59) 11-3 (0-70) 11-1 (0-42) 12-2 (0-64) 12-4 (0-75) 11-6 (0-27) Breadth mean (s.d.) (mm) 13-2 (1-01) 16-5 (0-64) 14-3 (0-42) 13-4 (0-61) 11-5 (0-18) 11-6 (0-52) 13-4 (0-46) 13-2 (0-79) 14-8 (0-58) 13-2 (0-39) 132811622) 11-8 (0-58) 13-4 (0-93) 11-0 (0-17) 12-4 (0-38) 11-4 (0-40) 12-3 (0-37) 11-7 (0-40) 13-0 (0-86) 12-4 (0-45) 13-7 (0-48) 12-0 (0-82) 12-0 (0-58) 13-6 (0-40) 12-0 (0-69) 12-7 (0-12) 12-6 (0-40) 12-7 (0-75) 13-6 (0-33) Length/breadth mean (s.d.) 0-83 (0-056) 0-86 (0-031) 0-85 (0-030) 0-84 (0-029) 0-97 (0-034) 0-88 (0-043) 0:90 (0-044) 0-86 (0-031) 0-94 (0-032) 0-93 (0-028) 0-78 (0-067) 0-78 (0-045) 0:77 (0-035) 0-84 (0-041) 0-86 (0-033) 0-85 (0-049) 0-80 (0-035) 0:78 (0-034) 0-84 (0-042) 0-90 (0-028) 0:90 (0-042) 0-93 (0-043) 0-99 (0-035) 0-84 (0-026) 0-94 (0-064) 0-88 (0-025) 0-97 (0-037) 0-98 (0-022) 0-86 (0-011) Fruit colour (R.H.S. Colour Chart) (44A-)45A—46A 45A(-46A) 99 (44A-)45A 46A 45A-46A-53A 46A-53A (45A-)46A(-53A) 46A(-53A) 45A—46A ASA 44 A—45A(-46A) 9° 99 45A (33A-)44A(-45A) 45A 26 TABLE 1. continued M. C. F. PROCTOR AND A. C. GROENHOF Length Breadth mean (s.d.) mean(s.d.) Length/breadth Fruit colour Species and locality n (mm) (mm) mean (s.d.) (R.H.S. Colour Chart) S. graeca, sensu lato, Seven Sisters Rocks, Herefs. (v.c. 36) Peroxidase phenotype I (i) 5 10:2 (0:37) 12-6 (0-57) 0-82 (0-039) 45A-46A (ii) 15 . 10-7 (0:59) 12-9 (0-61) 0-83 (0-036) 46A (iii) 6 10-9 (0-43) 13-3 (0-43) 0-82 (0-026) 3, (iv) 5 9-6 (0-33) 12-5 (0-64) 0-78 (0-018) 5% (v) 10 ~=10-1 (0-63) 12-2 (0-45) 0-83 (0-025) 46A-53A Peroxidase phenotype II 5 11-0 (0-66) 12-2 (0-58) 0-90 (0-038) (45A-)46A Peroxidase phenotype III 7. 10-8 (0:41) 11-9 (0-67) 0-91 (0-043) 46A S. rupicola Brixham, S. Devon (v.c. 3) (i) 6 12-8 (0-58) 14-3 (0-50) 0-90 (0-021) (33A—)44A(-45A) (ii) 10. 12-1 (0-91) 13-6 (0-87) 0-89 (0-026) fe (iii) 10 ~=—-:11-4 (0-85) 13-5 (0-72) 0-85 (0-029) fe Trentishoe, N. Devon (v.c. 4) 10 = 13-0 (0-62) 14-9 (0-60) 0-87 (0-041) 45A—46A Breidden, Monts. (v.c. 47) (i) 5 11-2 (0-36) 12-6 (0-56) 0-89 (0-015) — (ii) 5. 10-5 (0:23) 11-7 (0-23) 0-90 (0-023) — (iii) 5 11-0 (0-70) 12-3 (0-42) 0-89 (0-042) — Tighnabruaich, Main Argyll (v.c. 98) 1 12-0 (—) 12-8 (—) 0-94 (—) — THE S. ARIA GROUP S. leptophylla E. F. Warb. most characteristically forms a sprawling tree with long more or less pendulous branches and large leaves (Fig. 3a—b), rooted into shady vertical limestone cliff faces. Plants of this form grow at both of its two known Breconshire localities, and at both sites have the same constant peroxidase phenotype. It is probably fortuitous that this matches that of “Taxon D’, an unnamed apomict from the North Devon — West Somerset coast, resembling S. vexans E. F. Warb. but with broader and darker red fruits (Proctor et al. 1989), as the two plants are quite different in habit and leaf and fruit characters. At Craig-y-Rhiwarth S. leptophylla is the predominant species (Fig. 3c—f), and the erect individuals in full sun at the top of the cliff appear at first sight very different from those beneath the tree canopy. It is evidently plastic, and small trees can be difficult to distinguish vegetatively from the biserrate-leaved porrigentiformis-like plant that accompanies it at Craig-y-Cilau. We have no evidence of its occurrence anywhere in South Wales other than the two localities mentioned. Pollen samples showed a high percentage of well-formed grains and good germination in 15% sucrose solution. Warburg (1957) indicated that S. leptophylla probably occurred also in Montgomeryshire (on Craig Breidden). Some plants on the west crags of Breidden have leaves similar in shape to typical S. leptophylla but smaller (Fig. 3g—h). One tree of this type that we sampled appears identical in peroxidase phenotype with Breconshire S. leptophylla, and has fruits similar in size, shape, colour and lenticel size and distribution. Specimens collected on the north crags of Breidden by P. J. M. Nethercott in 1990 may also belong to the same form, their somewhat larger leaves reflecting response to a shadier and less drought-stressed habitat. S. wilmottiana E. F. Warb. (Warburg 1962, 1967) is a rare species of the Avon Gorge at Bristol. We have been able to examine only two trees, which gave a distinctive peroxidase phenotype (C1 C2 El): PEROXIDASE ISOENZYME AND MORPHOLOGICAL VARIATION IN SORBUS L. Dy FiGure 2. Silhouettes of representative leaves. (a)—(f) S. anglica (a) N. Whilborough Common, S. Devon, v.c. 3, (b) Woody Bay, N. Devon, v.c. 4, (c) Cheddar, N. Somerset, v.c. 6, (d) Lover’s Leap, Mons., v.c. 35, (e) Cwm Clydach, Glam., v.c. 41 ,(f) Breidden, Monts., v.c. 47; (g) S. leyana, Daren Fach, Brecs., v.c. 42; (h) S. minima, Craig-y-Cilau, Brecs. NECA? i) (o6) M. C. F. PROCTOR AND A. C. GROENHOF (g) (h) Figure 3. S. leptophylla: silhouettes of representative leaves. (a) and (b) Craig-y-Cilau, Brecs., v.c. 42; (c)-(f) Craig-y-Rhiwarth, Brecs., v.c. 42; (g) and (h) S. aff. leptophylla, Breidden, Monts., v.c. 47. PEROXIDASE ISOENZYME AND MORPHOLOGICAL VARIATION IN SORBUS L. 29 (g) fo) 10 cm [at ye Oh Figure 4. Silhouettes of representative leaves of S. eminens sensu lato, and related populations. (a) Seven Sisters Rocks, Herefs., v.c. 36 (Wye Valley phenotype (i)), (b) Seven Sisters Rocks (Wye Valley phenotype (ii)), (c) Leigh Woods, N. Somerset, v.c. 6, (d) Bristol, W. Gloucs., v.c. 34, (e) Worlebury, N. Somerset, v.c. 6, (f) Cheddar, N. Somerset, v.c. 6, (g) Nantporth, Bangor, Caerns., v.c. 49, (h) S. hibernica, Dromineer, N. Tipperary, v.c. H10, (i) S. hibernica, Rathdrum, Co. Wicklow, v.c. H20. 30 M. C. F. PROCTOR AND A. C. GROENHOF (c) (f) 4 (i) Figure 5. Silhouettes of representative leaves of S. porrigentiformis and related apomictic populations. (a)—(i) S. porrigentiformis (Type (a)) (a) Babbacombe, S. Devon, v.c. 3, (b) Wick Rocks, W. Gloucs., v.c. 34, (c) Cheddar, N. Somerset, v.c. 6, (d) Leigh Woods, N. Somerset, v.c. 6, (e) Seven Sisters Rocks, Herefs., v.c. 36, (f) Nicholaston, Glam., v.c. 41, (g) Craig-y-Rhiwarth, Brecs., v.c. 42, (h) Craig-y-Cilau, Brecs., v.c. 42, (i) Aberedw, Rads., v.c. 43; PEROXIDASE ISOENZYME AND MORPHOLOGICAL VARIATION IN SORBUS L. 31 Fig. 5. continued -(j)-(0) ‘large-leaved porrigentiformis’ (Type (b)) (j) Cwm Clydach, Glam., v.c. 41, (k) Daren Disgwylfa, Brecs., v.c. 42, (1) Craig-y-Cilau, Brecs., v.c. 42, (m) Taren-yr-Esgob, Mons./Brecs., v.c. 35/42, (n) Daren Lwyd, Brecs., v.c. 42, (0) Cwmyoy, Mons., v.c. 35; (p) Bristol Type (c), Leigh Woods, N. Somerset, v.c. 6; (q)-(s) S. graeca sensu lato, Seven Sisters Rocks, Herefs, v.c. 36, (q) peroxidase phenotype I, (r) peroxidase phenotype II, (s) peroxidase phenotype III. Leaves (e), (0), (r) and (s) are from material collected at flowering time in late May; their small size is mainly due to this, rather than inherent difference from other comparable populations. o>) bh M. C. F. PROCTOR AND A. C. GROENHOF S. eminens E. F. Warb. was described (Warburg 1952, 1957) as occurring in woods on the Carboniferous Limestone of the Wye Valley and the Avon Gorge. Three trees from shady beech woodland above Seven Sisters Rocks (Fig. 4a), and a small plant with similarly shaped but smaller and firmer leaves in nearby open rocky scrub all showed a constant peroxidase phenotype (C1 C2 (C3) El E2); two further trees of similar leaf shape (Fig. 4b) differed in showing a stronger band C3. Warburg (1957) stated that S. eminens around Symonds Yat has proportionately longer, more rhomboid and more deeply-toothed leaves than plants from the lower Wye Valley or the Avon Gorge. We have found no trees of S. eminens matching the Avon Gorge form in the lower Wye Valley. Herbarium specimens from this area, including Warburg’s type in BM, appear essentially similar to other Wye Valley material, and agree well with Warburg’s description and illustration. Samples collected from a uniform population in the shady lower fringe of Leigh Woods in the Avon Gorge showed a constant peroxidase phenotype (C2 C3 E1 E3). We found the same peroxidase phenotype in uniform populations of trees in rocky grassland or open scrub near Weston-super-Mare and in Cheddar Gorge. The Avon Gorge and Mendip populations are similar in most leaf, fruit and growth-habit characters; the Mendip plants have rather firmer leaves with a broadly cuneate base and their fruits have larger lenticels. Field observation suggests that the difference in leaf texture may be mainly due to the more exposed habitat of the Mendip trees, but that the difference in shape of the leaf base is, at least in part, genetic. Two other Sorbus populations resemble the Avon Gorge and Mendip ‘S. eminens’ in peroxidase phenotype and leaf characters. These are a population at Nantporth near Bangor, Gwynedd, which has been named S. porrigentiformis but is clearly not that species, and the widespread Irish S. hibernica E. F. Warb. Both have fruits similar in size, shape and colour to the Avon Gorge plant (Table 1). S. porrigentiformis is by far the most widely recorded species in our area. There are at least four clearly different peroxidase phenotypes which correlate with morphological characters (Fig. 5, Table 1), and appear relevant to a satisfactory delimitation of this species. (a) The most widespread, with peroxidase phenotype C2 C3 El E2, occurs throughout the recorded range of the species from Torbay and Gower to Radnorshire and the Bristol-Mendip area. It is typically an open shrub (rarely a small tree) with rather angular and ‘twiggy’ branching, and relatively slender twigs. The leaves are dark green above (usually 147A on the R.H.S. Colour Chart), obovate, with an entire cuneate base and almost simple outwardly directed teeth (Fig. 5a—i); the fruit is broader than long (length/breadth ratio c. 0-75—0-85), and a deep crimson red when ripe. Samples of pollen from Gower and Craig-y-Rhiwarth showed 72-84% of well-filled grains and about 20% germination in 15% sucrose solution; Dr Q. O. N. Kay has obtained chromosome counts of 2n = (67—)68 in plants from Woody Bay (v.c. 4), Wick Rocks (v.c. 34) and Craig-y-Cilau (v.c. 42) (unpublished). The holotype of S. porrigentiformis in BM appears identical with this form. (b) The plant which has been called ‘large-leaved porrigentiformis’ from Craig-y-Cilau and some other crags in the Mynydd Llangattock area has a different peroxidase phenotype (C2 C3 (C4) E2 E3). It readily grows into a well developed tree, usually with rather more robust shoots. The leaves are somewhat more oblong in outline, and tend to be biserrate (Fig. 5j-o); the fruits are rather larger, subglobose (length/breadth ratio c. 0-85—0-95) and a brighter red. We have found material with this peroxidase phenotype and morphological characters on Carboniferous Limestone at Craig-y-Cilau and crags to the east on Mynydd Llangattock, in Cwm Clydach, and on Old Red Sandstone at Taren-yr-Esgob, Daren Lwyd and near Cwmyoy in the Black Mountains. Dr Q. O.N. Kay has obtained chromosome counts of 2n = 68 in plants from Cwm Clydach (v.c. 41) and Daren Disgwylfa (v.c. 42). The population at Taren-yr-Esgob has leaves with a more narrowly cuneate base and sharper and more deeply incised teeth (Fig. 5m). The leaf-shape difference appears to be correlated with a consistently clearer separation between peroxidase bands E2 and E3 in this population than elsewhere, but both differences are rather slight. (c) A morphologically uniform population of rather small trees in the Avon Gorge shows consistently the peroxidase phenotype C2 (C3) (E2) E3. In leaf shape (Fig. 5p) and habit this plant could be mistaken at first sight for $. porrigentiformis, but it has lighter green leaves (usually 146A on the R.H.S. Colour Chart) which more nearly resemble a small S. aria. The Bristol ‘porrigentifor- — mis’ discussed by Proctor et al. (1989) is this plant. (d) Plants on Seven Sisters Rocks near Symonds Yat in the Wye Valley, growing with S. porrigentiformis and showing a general resemblance to it in leaf-shape (Fig. 5q—s), habit, and fruit shape and colour have the peroxidase phenotype Cl C2 (C3) El E2; several morphologically PEROXIDASE ISOENZYME AND MORPHOLOGICAL VARIATION IN SORBUS L. 33 different groups of individuals differ in the relative intensity of the bands. Similar phenotypes occur in S. eminens from the same area, and appear to be common in crimson-fruited forms of S. aria sensu lato, in the Wye Valley generally. These plants cannot be genetically identical with any of the other S. porrigentiformis-like populations we have examined. The very widely distributed S. rupicola (Syme) Hed. is rather sporadically scattered in our area. Samples examined from Gower, Craig-y-Cilau and Craig Breidden agree in peroxidase phenotype with material from Devon, Yorkshire and Scotland (Proctor et al. 1989 and popup ished data). ANOMALOUS INDIVIDUALS We have not searched systematically for aberrant individuals within otherwise uniform apomictic populations, but a few examples have come to light in the course of our sampling. One individual at the top of Craig-y-Rhiwarth, in a population mainly of S. leptophylla with a few S. porrigentiformis (type (a) above), has distinctive ovate leaves and gave a peroxidase phenotype (C2 E1 E3) different from either. A tree below Leigh Woods, Bristol, with long cuneate-based many-veined leaves, clearly differing from S. aria or any of the named apomicts, also has a unique peroxidase phenotype. A single tree with rather narrow rhomboid leaves at Cwmyoy gave a peroxidase phenotype similar to but not identical with S. wilmottiana. DISCUSSION Our results are consistent with accepted taxonomic views for the more geographically restricted apomictic species, namely S. minima, S. leyana, S. bristoliensis, S. leptophylla and S. wilmottiana. The peroxidase isoenzyme variation confirms that S. x vagensis is probably a sporadically occurring sexual hybrid. However, the most interesting findings relate to S. eminens and S. porrigentiformis. The isoenzyme evidence confirms the difference between S. eminens from the Avon Gorge and material from the Symonds Yat area (Fig. 6). Indeed the difference in peroxidase phenotype suggests that the two populations may not be very closely related. On the other hand, the peroxidase evidence links the Avon Gorge form with trees on Mendip, with the population that has been named S. porrigentiformis on the Menai Straits, and with S. hibernica. Warburg verbally suggested an affinity between a specimen from Cheddar and S. hibernica, without identifying it with that species (P. J. M. Nethercott, in litt.). These plants all show similarities in leaf form and toothing, and in growth habit, and their relationships need further investigation. Our observations on S. porrigentiformis and related plants show why there have been problems in delimiting this species in South Wales, and suggest how these may be resolved. The widespread plant (type (a) above; Fig. 7) corresponds to the generally accepted concept of S. porrigentiformis (Warburg 1952, 1957; Butcher 1961) and appears identical with the Wye Valley specimen on which Warburg typified this species (Offa’s Dyke, Tidenham, 18 September 1933, A. J. Wilmott (no. 4484) (BM)). It is locally accompanied or replaced in the Mynydd Llangattock-Cwm Clydach area and the Black Mountains by genetically distinct populations (type (b); Fig. 8) which should be regarded as an independent taxon. The uniform but probably more local plant in the Leigh Wood quarries (type (c)) needs further study in the context of other Avon Gorge, Mendip and Wye Valley populations. Warburg & Karpati (1968) associate S. porrigentiformis with S. graeca (Spach) Kotschy rather than with S. aria sensu stricto. The S. porrigentiformis-like plants which accompany true S. porrigentiformis near Symonds Yat are clearly genetically different from any we have examined elsewhere, but they share S. graeca-like characters (cuneate-based obovate leaves and crimson subglobose fruits with few lenticels) with S. porrigentiformis and a number of our other apomicts. Field observations and herbarium material both indicate the existence of much variation in the Wye Valley. In South Wales, as in South-west England, the peroxidase variation in Sorbus seems nicely matched to the morphological variation and to the needs of recognizing and delimiting the apomictic populations. In the Symonds Yat area it appears that this is not so, and that considerable morphological variation may be accompanied by little or no variation in the peroxidase enzymes, especially among the more S. graeca-like plants. In general, if two individuals show different isoenzyme phenotypes under the same conditions, they cannot be genetically identical, but the fact that two individuals are identical with respect to a particular enzyme system does not necessarily 34 M. C. F. PROCTOR AND A. C. GROENHOF Ficure 6. Distribution of S. eminens E. F. Warb. in 2-km squares (tetrads) of the National Grid. @ Symonds Yat-type peroxidase phenotype; A Avon Gorge-type peroxidase phenotype; O other records of S. eminens sensu lato. The O shows the locality of the holotype specimen. mean that they are identical in other respects. More work is needed on the Wye Valley populations, and exploration of other enzyme systems may well prove useful in this. The apomictic Sorbus species we have considered are all confined to crags and rocky ground, an essentially disjunct habitat. Their present distribution must reflect an interplay between colonization and extinction on these ‘islands’ in a ‘sea’ of country they cannot colonize (Macarthur & Wilson 1967). S. rupicola has by far the widest total range (Perring & Sell 1968), in which wide disjunctions suggest fragmentation of a once more continuous area, perhaps in the more open landscape of the early Post-glacial (Pigott & Walters 1954; Birks 1973; Boyd & Dickson 1987). Next most widespread are S. porrigentiformis and S. anglica, both with much more coherent distributions centred on the South Wales limestone. Some of the more restricted distributions may have relic features, but to a great extent we are probably looking at rather recent patterns of bird dispersals (compare the patterns in Rubus of Weber (1987)) from centres of origin concentrated in three main areas, the Avon Gorge and Wye Valley, the Mynyd Llangattock area, and the Exmoor coast. From the peroxidase data, it is tempting to speculate that S. porrigentiformis was involved in the origin of S. anglica, S. leyana, S. minima, S. bristoliensis (Sell 1989) and other apomictic populations within its area (but excluding S. leptophylla and the North Devon apomicts); farther north, S. rupicola was probably the S. aria-group parent of S. arranensis and S. pseudofennica (Proctor et al. 1989). However, the inheritance of peroxidases in Sorbus is unknown, and likely to be complex (Gottlieb 1981), so these are no more than tentative conjectures which should stimulate search for other evidence. It was Linnaeus’s precept that the first step in understanding is to know the entities one is dealing with. However, the interest of Sorbus only begins with the delimitation and enumeration of apomictic microspecies. A far more interesting challenge is to understand how an apomictic group PEROXIDASE ISOENZYME AND MORPHOLOGICAL VARIATION IN SORBUS L. 35 Figure 7. Distribution of S. porrigentiformis E. F. Warb. in 2-km squares (tetrads) of the National Grid. @ peroxidase phenotype (a); O tetrads from which we have seen material which on morphological characters appears certainly to be this type. O shows the location of the holotype specimen. Outside the area of this map, S. porrigentiformis confirmed as peroxidase phenotype (a) occurs in v.c. 3 in tetrads SY82.70, 92.62 and 92.64. of this kind came into being, under what selection pressures, and how it functions over an extended span of time (Gustafsson 1947; Clausen 1954; Asker 1979). In this quest, fast-growing herbaceous plants (e.g. Taraxacum (Richards 1970a, b, 1973; Ford 1981)) and the long-lived populations of Sorbus offer complementary opportunities. In the latter genus, many questions of cytogenetics, population biology and ecology invite investigation, both in the apomictic populations of South Wales and South-west England, and in the mixed sexual and apomictic populations of the Wye Valley, Avon Gorge and Mendip which may well provide models for the kind of situation in which many of our present-day Sorbus apomicts originated. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work would not have been possible without the help and cooperation of many people who have given us information about localities, answered our queries, sent us Sorbus material, or granted us permission to visit sites, particularly Miss Gill Barter, Mr D. Doogue, Mr T. J. Evans, Dr G. Howells, Dr Q. O.N. Kay, Dr D. L. Kelly, Dr H. McAllister, Miss Vicky Morgan, Mr P. D. Sell, Mr A. McG. Stirling, Dr G. B. Wilson and Mr R. G. Woods. We are grateful to them all. Our especial thanks are due to Mr P. J. M. Nethercott and Mr M. Porter for their generosity in sharing their knowledge and much time in the field with us, and to Dr Margaret E. Proctor without whose work on Devon Sorbus this project would never have begun. 36 M. C. F. PROCTOR AND A. C. GROENHOF 20 e—> f} Ny p a eS = = ae /2 sr Bee Ficure 8. S. porrigentiformis sensu lato. Distribution of peroxidase phenotype (b) (‘large-leaved porrigentifor- mis’) in 2-km squares (tetrads) of the National Grid. © population at Taren-yr-Esgob. REFERENCES ASKER, S. (1979). Progress in apomixis research. Hereditas 91: 231-240. Birks, H. J. B. (1973). Past and present vegetation of the Isle of Skye. Cambridge. Boyp, W. E. & Dickson, J. H. (1987). A Post-Glacial pollen sequence from Loch a’Mhuillinn, North Arran: a record of vegetation history with special reference to the history of endemic Sorbus species. New Phytol. 107: 221-244. BritisH CoLour Councit (1938). Horticultural Colour Chart. London. BuTcHER, R. W. (1961). A new illustrated British Flora. London. CLAUSEN, J. (1954). Partial apomixis as an equilibrium system in evolution. Atti del LX Congresso Internationale di Genetica. I. Caryologia 6 (suppl.): 469-479. Forp, H. (1981). The demography of three populations of dandelion. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 15: 1-11. Gort .ies, L. D. (1981). Electrophoretic evidence and plant populations. Progress in Phytochemistry 7: 1—46. Gustarsson, A. (1947). Apomixis in higher plants. II. The causal aspect of apomixis. III. Biotype and species formation. Acta Univ. lund. 43: 71-370. Lityerors, A. (1953). Studies on propagation, embryology and pollination in Sorbus. Acta Horti Bergiani 16: 227-329. MacartTHur, R. H. & Witson, E. O. (1967). The theory of island biogeography. Princeton. PERRING, F. H. & SELL, P. D. eds. (1968). Critical supplement to the Atlas of the British Flora. London. Picotr, C. D. & Watters, S. M. (1954). On the interpretation of the discontinuous distributions shown by certain British species of open habitats. J. Ecol. 42: 95-116. Proctor, M. C. F., Proctor, M. E. & GRoENHOF, A. C. (1989). Evidence from peroxidase polymorphism on the taxonomy and reproduction of some Sorbus populations in south-west England. New Phytol. 112: 569-575. Ricuarps, A. J. (1970a). Eutriploid facultative agamospermy in Taraxacum. New Phytol. 69: 761-774. Ricuarps, A. J. (1970b). Hybridization in Taraxacum. New Phytol. 69: 1102-1121. PEROXIDASE ISOENZYME AND MORPHOLOGICAL VARIATION IN SORBUS L. 3) Ricuarps, A. J. (1973). The origin of Taraxacum agamospecies. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 66: 189-211. Roya HortTIcULTURAL SocIETY (1966). R.H.S. Colour Chart. London. SELL, P. D. (1989). The Sorbus latifolia (Lam.) Pers. aggregate in the British Isles. Watsonia 17: 385-399. Waresure, E. F. (1952). Sorbus L., in CLAPHAM, A. R., Tutin, T. G. & WARBuRG, E. F. Flora of the British Isles, Ist ed., pp. 539-556. Cambridge. Warburg, E. F. (1957). Some new names in the British flora [Sorbus]. Watsonia 4: 43-46. WarsurcG, E. F. (1962). Sorbus L., in CLapHaM, A. R., Tutin, T. G. & WARBURG, E. F. Flora of the British Isles, 2nd ed., pp. 423-437. Cambridge. Warsurc, E. F. (1967). Sorbus wilmottiana E. F. Warburg, sp. nov., in SELL, P. D. Taxonomic and nomenclatural notes on the British flora. Watsonia 6: 296. WarsurG, E. F. & KArpATI, Z. E. (1968). Sorbus L., in Tutin, T. G. et al., eds. Flora Europaea 2: 67-71. Cambridge. WesER, H. E. (1987). Typen ornithochorer Arealentwicklung, dargestellt an Beispielen der Gattung Rubus L. (Rosaceae) in Europa. Bot. Jb. 108: 525-535. (Accepted April 1991) APPENDIX The table below gives the C.I.E. coordinates of the shades from the R.H.S. Colour Chart used in matching fruit colours for Table 1, and the corresponding colour names from the earlier Horticultural Colour Chart (British Colour Council 1938). The first two figures of the C.I.E. coordinates define the chromaticity (hue and saturation) of the colour on a modified colour triangle; the third coordinate measures percentage reflection. Colours 28A-33A appear in the ‘orange-red group’ and colours 44A-53A in the ‘red group’ of the R.H.S. Colour Chart; 45A is a nearly pure red. For further explanation see Royal Horticultural Society (1966). Number in R.H.S. C.I.E. coordinates Reflection Colour Chart Colour name X y factor (%) 28A Persimmon Orange 0-547 0-391 45-5 32A Indian Orange 0-561 0-370 27-6 33A Capsicum Red 0-567 0-355 23-6 44A [unnamed] 0-592 0-339 14-6 45A Guardsman Red 0-593 0-315 IES 46A Currant Red 0-546 0-310 9-4 53A Cardinal Red . 0-522 0-298 8-3 Saad aaa ith ac Watsonia, 19, 39-41 (1992) 39 Short Notes OROBANCHE ALBA STEPH. EX WILLD. IN FIFE (V.C. 85) Comment is necessary on “An account of Orobanche L. in Britain and Ireland” by Rumsey & Jury (1991), particularly on the section dealing with O. alba Steph. ex Willd. Here, the authors state that “it is now believed absent from the east coast of Britain” and lament its disappearance from Fife. I may have been the source of this belief, as in Ballantyne (1970) I said — rashly as it turns out — that the species was extinct in all its former v.c. 85 stations. Happily this is not the case. In view of the confusion, it is as well to document the plant’s localities in Fife. These are all on the north shore of the Firth of Forth, from west to east:— GR NT1.8: East of St David’s, 1820 (E); Cliffs below St David’s, ‘fine specimens” (Graham 1840); 1969, J. Carlyle (pers. comm.). This locality is a small rocky bay with cliffs of 15-20 m between Inverkeithing and Dalgety Bay new town. I did not see O. alba on a visit on 3 August 1979 but as I did not search the area thoroughly, it may well still be extant. GR NT2.8: (a) Sibbald (1684) stated that he found ‘“‘Orobanche major . . . Broomrape upon the Buck [back] of Bruntisland’’; in 1710 he rephrased this comment to read: “I found it below a rising ground upon the north side of the town of Bruntisland” (Sibbald 1803). (The earlier description is repeated by several authors, e.g. Greville (1824).) Both Sibbald’s localities almost certainly refer to an area near to or on Burntisland Binn, a low hill some 200 m high overlooking the town. Over two centuries elapsed before the next record from here — a specimen in E dated 1906 says ‘‘Burntisland’’; more specifically, a year later another observer stated ‘“‘near the Binn, Burntisland, July 1907 (J. Anderson) and later, W. E. Evans” (in an annotated copy of Balfour & Sadler (1871)). There seems to be no further records from this site. (b) A separate locality from (a) appears to be c.2-2-5 km to its east, between Burntisland and Kinghorn. This is variously given as follows:— near Pettycur, 1837, KNS (Young 1936); “‘. . . walked to hills east of Burntisland, . . . picked Orobanche rubra’’, 1854 (Balfour, 1902); near Kinghorn, 1892 (STA); Kinghorn, 1904/07 (E); ‘‘on broken ground between Kinghorn and Burntisland”’, 1907 (E). There are no further records from this area, which is now occupied by a large caravan site, although neighbouring cliffs (with difficult access) may still provide a haven. (c) Perhaps the best known site is on top of a grassy cliff at Abden near the old Kinghorn Poorhouse, about half-way between Kinghorn and Kirkcaldy; this is usually referred to as near Seafield Tower, which is some 400 m to the north. The first mention is in 1809 (Maughan, 1811 and in E) and there are records at regular intervals since, mainly in E and BM, to 1903; by this time, it appeared to be almost extirpated, as described by Blackstock, a local naturalist. Commenting on the “rooting-out” of Fife’s rare plants, Blackstock (1895) continued ‘Fifteen years ago, Orobanche rubra {etc.| where plentiful in well-defined stations along the Fife coast. Five years ago, I counted twenty good specimens of the Broomrape at its station near Kinghorn. . . Last year I saw two plants — this year [1893] I failed to discover any”’. Ten years later, in 1903, another local botanist said of the same site: “‘. . . if fortune specially favours us, we may gather a single specimen of the rarest plant in Fife, the red Broomrape”’ (Young 1903). It was these observations that led me to believe that the species had disappeared about the turn of the century. However, in 1971 J. E. Lousley (pers. comm.) wrote to me to say that he had found the plant on 29 July 1938 (specimen in RNG). I again searched for it, as I had done in the 1960s, without success; then, late in 1985 I was told it had been seen during that summer, and on 23 July 1986 I came across three stunted stems. I have not had the opportunity of returning since. GR NT2.9: An open circle appears on the map of O. alba provided by Rumsey & Jury (1991) for this square but there is none in the Adlas (Perring & Walters 1962) and I know of no locality. This record is presumably based on the specimens collected by W. MclIvor from “Kirkcaldy” (MANCH, 1847; STA, undated). Nominally this is in this square but the actual station is almost certainly Abden (above). 40 SHORT NOTES GR NO4.0: In the New Statistical Account (1845) for the parish of Kilconquhar the compiler (the local minister) in 1837 listed several plants from “‘under Kincraig Hill, on rocks”, among them O. rubra. While this site is quite suitable, there is no other record from a locality which became well explored. In particular, Charles Howie, who lived not far away and who botanized in east Fife from c. 1834-84, does not mention the species from here. Additionally the minister’s botanical knowledge must be questioned as he includes, from elsewhere in the parish, such improbable species as Silene acaulis, Azalea procumbens and Adiantum capillus-veneris! The record in Wood (1862/87) is based on the N.S.A., as is the “Elie” of Sonntag (1894). It seems best to discount this locality. To summarize, O. alba has been definitely recorded in four separate localities in v.c. 85. In two of these it is probably extinct; in the other two, it seems to be surviving, although in small numbers. It needs to be refound in the St David’s station to establish its status there, while the Abden site requires to be monitored regularly because of the very small size of the population there. I am grateful to D. R. McKean and A. Angus for checking specimens in E and STA respectively. REFERENCES Bacrour, I. B. (1902). Botanical excursions made by Professor John Hutton Balfour, 1846-1878. Notes Roy. Bot. Gard. Edinb. 2: 175. Ba.rour, J. H. & SADLER, J. (1871). The flora of Edinburgh, 2nd ed. Edinburgh. BALLANTYNE, G. H. (1970). The flowering plants of Kirkcaldy and District. Kirkcaldy. BiackstTock, W.S. (1895). Plants of Kirkcaldy. Proc. East of Scotland Union of Natural History Societies: 61-65. GRAHAM, R. (1840). Notice of recent excursions in the neighbourhood of Edinburgh. Trans. Proc. bot. Soc. Edinb. 1: 63. GREVILLE, R. K. (1824). Flora Edinensis. Edinburgh. MauGuHan, R. (1811). List of the rarer plants observed in the neighbourhood of Edinburgh. Mem. Wernerian Nat. Hist. Soc. 1: 234. New STATISTICAL ACCOUNT (1845). Parish of Kilconquhar (by Rev. W. Fernie) 9: 323. PERRING, F. H. & WALTERS, S. M. eds. (1962). Atlas of the British flora. London. Rumsey, F. J. & Jury, S. L. (1991). An account of Orobanche L. in Britain and Ireland. Watsonia 18: 257-295. SIBBALD, SiR R. (1684). Scotia Illustrata. Edinburgh. SIBBALD, Sir R. (1803). The history, ancient and modern, of the sherriffdoms of Fife and Kinvois: . . New ed. [of 1710 ed. ] Cupar. SONNTAG, C. O. (1894). A pocket flora of Edinburgh. Edinburgh. Woop, W. (1862/87). The East Neuk of Fife. ist & 2nd eds. Edinburgh. Youna, W. (1903). Botanical Sketch. Davidson’s Illustrated Guide to Kirkcaldy and Neighbourhood: pp.83-87. Youna, W. (1936). List of the flowering plants and ferns recorded from Fife and Kinross (v.c. 85). Trans. Proc. bot. Soc. Edinb. 32: 1-173. G. H. BALLANTYNE Branksome, 193 Nicol St., Kirkcaldy, Fife, KY1 IPF RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF A DISCARDED NAME IN CREPIS L. (ASTERACEAE) While reviewing Linnaean names associated with temperate eastern North American species of Hieracium and Crepis I chanced upon Crepis vesicaria L. subsp. haenseleri (Boiss. ex DC.) P. D. Sell (1976), a name in current use (e.g. Clapham, Tutin & Moore 1987). The name is no longer correct because of modifications made in Art. 57 of the 1983 Sydney Code (cf. Reveal 1983a) conferring priority and transferability to autonyms, a concept supported by Sell when he reluctantly proposed this combination. Accordingly, the following change is mandated. Crepis vesicaria L. subsp. taraxacifolia (Thuill.) Thell. in Schinz & R. Keller, Fl. Schweiz ed. 3, 2: 361 (1914), autonym priority established by C. taraxacifolia subsp. haenseleri (Boiss. ex. DC.) Nyman, Consp. 459 (1879). Crepis taraxacifolia Thuill., Fl. Env. Paris ed. 2, 409 (1799). Barkhausia haenseleri Boiss. ex DC., Prodr. 7: 153 (1838). C. vesicaria subsp. haenseleri (Boiss. ex DC.) P. D. Sell in Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 71: 254 (1976). SHORT NOTES 41 C. vesicaria var. taraxacifolia (Thuill.) B. Boivin in Naturaliste Canad. 94: 523 (1967). It is possible that var. taraxacifolia is not the correct name for the taxon at this rank. Until there is a catalogue of all infraspecific names for Old World plants (Reveal 1983b) it will be difficult to ascertain autonymic synonymy as required by the Code. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to thank J. R. Press and E. Groves of The Natural History Museum, London, for their assistance. Work on the typification of temperate eastern North American plants is supported by National Science Foundation Grant BSR-8812816. This is Scientific Article A-6199, Contribution No. 8368, of the Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service. REFERENCES CrapHaM, A. R., TutIn, T. G. & Moore, D. M. (1987). Flora of The British Isles, 3rd ed. Cambridge. REVEAL, J. L. (1983a). The Demoulin Rule and newly mandated combinations in Eriogonum (Polygonaceae). Taxon 32: 292-295. REVEAL, J. L. (1983b). The need for an index to infra-taxonomic entities. Taxon 32: 622. SELL, P. D. (1976). Taxonomic and nomenclatural notes on the Compositae subfam. Cichorioideae. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 71: 236-267. J. L. REVEAL Department of Botany, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-5815, U.S.A. Watsonia, 19, 43-51 (1992) 43 Book Reviews Plant form. An illustrated guide to flowering plant morphology. A. D. Bell. Pp. xiiit+341, with numerous colour photographs and line drawings. Oxford University Press, Oxford. 1991. Price £50 hardback (ISBN 0—19-854279-8); £25 paperback (ISBN 0—19-854219-4). This book is a mine of information on morphological terms, many of them not well known, at a time when morphology is seldom taught in detail. There is a good index and an excellent cross- referencing system, which, however, makes the book harder to read right through. The author states that he has tried to make the book attractive, “‘the better to woo the budding botanist and the curious amateur plantsman’’. He has certainly succeeded in his primary aim. The book is laid out in such a way that a topic is dealt with in one or more double page spreads. Usually on the left there is a colour photograph and descriptive paragraphs: on the right-hand page are excellent line drawings by Alan Bryan, relating to the same topic. This results in a strangely shaped book, wider than it is long. For the most part the colour photographs are excellent, although in my copy, at least, a few were over-exposed (Figs 62b, 74, 170 and especially 134). In many cases they could have been made more useful, especially to the novice, by the use of arrows or labels. How will the “budding botanist’? know, for example, that Epiphyllum in Fig. 294 is the narrow green plant growing up the tree trunk, and not the much more obvious tree itself? In my opinion, it would also be helpful to have rather more detailed legends to the line drawings, so that they can be understood without frequent reference to the text (consider, for example, Fig. 73). Teaching opportunities have been lost in these ways. A good feature of the book is the provision of examples from all over the world, often unusual or little known plants. The second part of the book deals with “Constructional organization’’, especially the architecture of tropical trees. Although this section is also interesting, I am not entirely convinced that the two parts of the book successfully complement one another. The author emphasizes throughout that, in order to understand the adult morphology, it may be necessary to study development; but it is on developmental topics that the book is weakest. It is unfortunate, also, that the dynamic aspects of phyllotaxis receive little emphasis, and that the fractional method of description has been perpetuated. Although there are a few curious placings — Cyclamen sits oddly with root tubers, for example, and haustoria under root morphology — there seem to be few errors. There are also few typographical errors, although the legend to Fig. 205 includes a substantial part of the legend to Fig. 239. The term membraneous is used instead of membranous, and principle instead of principal. This is a beautifully produced book containing a wealth of information on plant morphology which it is important should not be lost. It is not entirely clear, however, who its principal readers will be. Few students of plant science to-day, however regrettably, will be able to spend the time required to master the whole book (or have the funds to buy their own copy). On the other hand, if the book is to be used as an illustrated dictionary, as the author suggests, it fulfils its purpose very well. Anyone who has consulted Willis (A Dictionary of the flowering plants and ferns, 1966) or its more modern counterparts will find this book extremely useful, as will those who need to describe plants. E. G. CUTTER A colour guide to rare wild flowers. J. Fisher. Pp. 364. Constable, London. 1991. Price £12.95 hardback (ISBN 0—09-470780-4); £11.95 paperback (ISBN 0-09-469190-8). British and Irish botanists are well served, too well served, with illustrated field guides. Having recently reviewed our popular field botanical literature (British Wildlife 2: 214-218, 1991), and 44 BOOK REVIEWS concluded that a substantial body of it is superfluous, my first reaction to another guide was predictably jaundiced. Nevertheless, the publishers appear to have found a small niche in the market, and have produced a neat and cheap volume. Some 150 species are featured, grouped by seven regions, e.g. Home Counties, Isles of Scilly, that are rich in rarer species. Each text entry consists of an informal description of the appearance and habitat of the plant opposite a full-page photograph. A miniature map of the region included under each species is of no use at all, other than a reminder that one is perhaps searching in the Home Counties for Melittis melissophyllum, which might anyway be better sought in Cornwall — possibly the publishers were unaware of the Alas of the British Flora? The photographs vary in quality and many do not come up to the standard of those in recent field guides. The text has a freshness of style, however, which conveys that the author is an enthusiast, is familiar with the literature and recent research, and knows his plants in the field. Nevertheless, the contents tested even my robust attitude (pro-picking flowers, hunting, shooting, etc.) to conservation. The title says it all: the book tells the naturalist, reputable or not, where to find some of our rarest wild flowers. There will be those who feel that the book thus provides a service, but this argument has the same suspect basis as that preached by those who market illustrations of the unclothed human form. I fear that this guide will indeed fall ‘into the wrong hands’; nor is seeking rarities as an end in itself a healthy intellectual exercise for the botanist. Several text entries give detailed instructions as to how to reach localities for very rare plants, including precise road directions and, more disturbingly, six-figure grid references. Fortunately the concept of rarity employed here seems to be based on unfamiliarity (the book having a distinctly south-eastern bias), and a good many of the species included are not particularly threatened. Leucojum aestivum, for instance, flourishes in the suburbs of Reading, and most of the species included in the section on Scilly are merely locally common weeds. One could include within this category the native Scillonian rarity, Ornithopus pinnatus, a denizen of the celebrated Tresco Abbey Gardens’ rockery. Nor will anybody who has seen Oxalis pes-caprae colouring Cretan olive groves a sickly yellow in spring worry unduly about its possible fate at the remotest extremity of its range. However, the locations of other species should never have been included, although mercifully the author is circumspect about some of the choicer rarities. The information divulged is of a sort best kept within notebooks and amongst friends (see Obituary of John Codrington, p. 53). The book ends with a list of addresses and telephone numbers of Wildlife Trusts, and a note on the dust cover suggests that they be approached for permission and information, including the state of the season. I suspect that these bodies, with often limited administrative resources, will be less than pleased to receive a deluge of enquiries from rarity hunters armed with what ought to be confidential data! From my own experiences on excursions, I know only too well that a minority of botanists do lack self-control and will dig up plants for their gardens. Furthermore, the rising popularity and fashionability of horticulture, not least its current fashion for ‘wild flowers’, means that rich pickings are to be had from selling rare plants — and, as with antiques, some sources of supply are more dubious than others. J. R. AKEROYD The families and genera of flowering plants. Edited by K. Kubitzki. Vol. 1. The ferns and gymnosperms. Edited by K. U. Kramer & P. S. Green. Pp. 430 with 216 figures. Springer Verlag, Berlin. 1990. Price DM298 (ISBN 3-540-51794—4). This well produced volume is the first in a proposed series covering the vascular plants. This ambitious project is competently started, well produced, and written and edited by a selected group of international experts in the different fields. The first volume of the series covers the ferns and fern allies (edited by K. U. Kramer) and the gymnosperms (edited by P. S. Green). The ferns are ably written by a recognized group of experts in the different families. As with all such projects there is an unfortunate limitation in discussions caused presumably by restrictions in length. Most of the articles provide an excellent review of the families and genera although, at least at the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, not all the family and generic delimitations will be followed. The detailed studies of Holttum on the Thelypteridaceae, which resulted in the recognition of many BOOK REVIEWS 45 clearly defined genera are not followed, the species being placed in a restricted number of genera rather than the more numerous genera of Holttum which indicate the relationships within the family. Classification of the ferns at the level of the family is still in dispute. At Kew we will be following the families as listed by Brummitt. Thus the Pteridaceae will be treated in several families: Parkeriaceae, Adiantaceae and Pteridaceae. In addition the genus Nephrolepis will continue to be treated within the family Oleandraceae rather than in the monotypic family Nephrolepidaceae. Generic limits outlined for the Polypodiaceae are not accepted and rather than the very broad concepts of Aglaomorpha we will continue to accept its related genera, Thysanosoria, Merinthosor- us, etc. which were studied by Roos. Indeed at both generic and family levels little stability in the application of names can be expected. The limits used in this book are not necessarily widely accepted. Probably one of the most difficult aspects of the book is the decision to arrange the families alphabetically. It is unfortunate that the families were not arranged according to their relationships, particularly as family limits are still uncertain. This approach will cause major problems within the dicotyledons. The detailed treatment of the recognized genera with the references specific to each family will, despite differences in generic delimitation, provide an indispensible reference book to the student of the pteridophytes. It is difficult to understand why some chapters, such as Conservation, were included in the section on ferns particularly with the limitations in space. The author of this section is a recognized expert in conservation of pteridophytes and the chapter in no way reflects either his knowledge or the available information. The gymnosperms were the work of a single author, C. N. Page from Edinburgh. The treatment provides an up-to-date review of the families and genera of the gymnosperms and the subdivision of the Podocarpaceae is widely, if not universally, accepted. The high standards of the pteridophyte section are equalled in the section on gymnosperms. The series on vascular plants starting with this first volume will provide an indispensible reference which must find its place in every reference library. It is hoped that the treatments at family level will be organized according to the relationships between the families as this will greatly increase the use of the volumes to the student of botany. The cost of these volumes will unfortunately restrict their availability in the libraries of the developing world where they could be extensively used as a reference for teaching University courses. This volume sets a high standard for the remainder of the series and will undoubtedly be a classic of this decade. A low priced edition for the developing world would be a great service to taxonomy. R. J. JOHNS Flora of eastern Saudi Arabia. J. P. Mandaville. Pp. x+482; 268 colour plates. Kegan Paul International, London. 1990. Price £95 (ISBN 0—7103—0371-8). This exemplary regional Flora fills a notable gap in the Arabian floristic literature. The author, an American employed in the oil industry, has spent the past 25 years exploring the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia and has also made a major contribution to our knowledge of the flora of Oman. Although the area covered is not rich in species, nor for that matter in families (73 are recognized in the Flora), there were many thorny taxonomic problems to be confronted in preparing this first - critical treatment of an area where the Saharo-Arabian element of the flora intermingles with Mediterranean and subtropical elements. The book starts with a short history of botanical investigations of the Province; several notable travel writers are among those mentioned, including Harold St John Philby, Bertram Thomas and Wilfred Thesiger. The geography and climate of the area are described, and a significant extension of subtropical (Sudanian) vegetation into central Arabia is highlighted in the chapter on phytogeography. The region’s palaeo-environments are also described, and the introduction ends with a short section on vegetation. The Flora proper is set out in the order of Stebbins’ sequence of 1974, which is close to that of 46 BOOK REVIEWS Cronquist. Families, genera and species are keyed and described, and detailed distribution summaries are augmented by citations of the author’s and other specimens. Vernacular names, collected by the author in the field, are cited when available. His scholarly approach to etymology is coupled with terse observations on economic uses; under Deverra triradiata, for instance, he notes that ‘‘“Many Bedouin herdsmen note the camel’s particular fondness for this aromatic shrub.” Selected species, such as three of the four Stipagrostis, are provided with dot distribution maps, and there are 268 colour photographs, most of very high quality, which should broaden the sales appeal of the book. A glossary of botanical terms, a gazetteer of geographic names cited in the text, an eight-page bibliography, and two indexes of vernacular names (one in Arabic order, the other in transliteration) precede the general index. The choice of a close-up of Aegilops kotschyi to illustrate the dust jacket is a bold one, yet it epitomises a ‘desert plant’ and also represents the area’s largest family, the Gramineae. The author’s notes provide some original insights into the many taxonomic problems of the flora. They are invariably helpful and perceptive, displaying a profound field knowledge of the Arabian flora as well as setting out pointers to the need for further work. His extremely tactful phraseology when referring to Migahid & Hammouda’s Flora of Saudi Arabia (2nd ed., 1978) as being ‘“‘designed to be Kingdom-wide in scope . . . although the basis for its attribution of taxa to the Eastern Province was somewhat unsure” will hardly offend anyone. But in practice Mandaville’s Flora will be of far greater value to users outside the Eastern Province, as I have found when working on collections from the United Arab Emirates, and it will be of great relevance throughout the peninsula. The hopes expressed in the Preface that the book may “assist to some extent in the development and conservation of natural resources in these lands which have been my home for 40 years” deserve to be fulfilled. Saudi Arabia now has a Flora, as well as a flora, of which to be proud. J.R. EDMONDSON The Cornish flora supplement 1981-1990. L. J. Margetts & K. L. Spurgin. Pp. vi+119, with frontispiece line drawing and endpaper map. The Trendrine Press, Zennor, St Ives, Cornwall. 1991. Price £14 (ISBN 0—-9512562-2-X). In Margetts & David’s A review of the Cornish flora 1980, one of the authors forecast that “further investigations would proceed vigorously” but he would not have foreseen that enough records would accumulate within the next ten years to justify the publication of a Supplement. Knowledge of the Cornish flora has been greatly increased by individual recorders and various surveys. These include the Lizard project directed by Dr L. C. Frost of Bristol University, the monitoring scheme and meetings of the Botanical Society of the British Isles, and mapping on a 1-km square basis in S. E. Cornwall by the Caradon Field and Natural History Club. Not only have many areas been studied in greater detail since the Review but more attention has been given to introduced species ranging from aliens to garden outcasts. The arrangement of families, genera and of the species (with a few exceptions) is the same as in the Review, apart from the garden escapes and casuals which were listed at the end. In the Supplement these are included in the main list. As in the Review, localities for the less common species are listed under the number of the appropriate 10-km square but species that are common or frequent and widespread were not treated in detail there and are not referred to in the Supplement. In general the nomenclature, English names and distribution follow the Review closely, making it a pleasure to use the two volumes side by side. The Supplement is strongly bound, well laid out and clearly printed with the minimum of typographical errors. Improvements over the Review include the greater distinction between the generic name and its authority, and the placing of the Dandy (or other) number after rather than before the specific name. The use of bold type-face for the word ‘introduced’ in place of a sign, and for the vice-county ‘West’ and ‘East’ and for ‘Scilly’ make the text much easier to use. These three words are succeeded rather than preceded by the star used to indicate a new vice-county or Scilly record. The authors have kept up with contemporary studies of various genera and mapping of critical BOOK REVIEWS 47 species, for example in Rosa, Taraxacum and Rubus. The last-named genus includes the appropriately named R. metallorum L. J. Margetts, which is frequent in the old metalliferous mining areas in W. Cornwall. A description and Latin diagnosis of this new species is given in the appendix. The large amount of information in this Supplement includes the up-dating of some records, reports of over 180 new vice-county records (including introductions) and of a number of exciting discoveries. No one who has a copy of the Review can afford to be without this excellent Supplement. It should also enhance sales of the Review, which is still available (see Watsonia 14: 293-294, 1983). J. A. PATON Flora of the Outer Hebrides. R. J. Pankhurst & J. M. Mullin. Pp. 171, with 6 maps, 3 transect outlines and 4 half-tones. Natural History Museum, London. Price £19.95 (ISBN 0-565-01121-9). This is a provocative Flora, being something less and something more than it pretends to be. In appearance and content it is much of what we have come to expect in a modern county Flora. The cover is immediately appealing. There are introductory chapters by specialists on geography, geology, geomorphology and soils, climate and vegetation, floristic and vegetational history, vegetation, botanical history and plant lore of the Outer Hebrides. In addition there is an index of place names with six-figure grid references, the bibliography is cross referenced with particular islands, and there are lists of S.S.S.I.s and N.N.R.s and of collectors. The flora list is arranged in two column format which makes it compact and easy to scan though the absence of an index of genera may be a continuing aggravation to users for whom plant classification is not a daily routine. There are excellent keys to Euphrasia, Rubus, Hieracium and Taraxacum which should tempt field botanists to plunge deeper into these troubled but well charted waters and promote more intelligent collecting. The use of English and Gaelic names recognizes a cultural dimension to local botany and the importance of vernacular names in education and conservation. Ancient links with Ireland are seen in our mutual celebration of Cu Chulainn, Patrick and Colm Cille in the Gaelic names. Compilers of the standard list of Irish plant names used in the Census Catalogue of the flora of Ireland looked at times to Dwelly and Cameron for inspiration and the compilers of the present list of Gaelic names have found inspiration in Irish examples, though the comprehensive list in the second edition of the Census Catalogue was apparently not available in time. While both compilations might have benefitted from closer co-operation, the Gaelic names selected by Clark and MacDonald will go a long way towards the production of a standard list of Gaelic names for plants. The Gaelic Books Council assisted with the expenses of the Flora. Molaim an saothar agus an taca. [I praise the labour and the support — Ed. ] There are few typographical or editorial errors though reference to a Salicornia perennis community on p. 39 may cause some confusion. The authors had to deal with an unusually high number of unsatisfactory records including unsubstantiated literature records, field records not refound, student hoaxes and specimens of doubtful provenance or identification. In this matter they have adopted the role of reporters rather than commentators allowing themselves only expressions of mild scepticism or faint hope that improbable records might be confirmed. Outright dismissal is delivered at times in the words of third parties, as A. J. Wilmott’s, ‘‘I don’t believe it’’, on hearing a report of Cerastium arcticum. Users of .the Flora will need to read the chapter on the history of recording and the introduction to Potamogeton to get a flavour of the rivalries and indiscretions which hampered progress with the Outer Hebrides flora for decades. It would have been difficult to select from among the unconfirmed records all those which ought to be disregarded and consigned to an appendix of errors; the baby might have been thrown out with the bath water. As it is, the flora list is unsatisfactory. Further work on the confirmation or otherwise of the doubtful records is needed. A conservative view ought to be taken of what is probable or even possible in the islands. The authors have acknowledged the considerable work done by their predecessors, notably 48 BOOK REVIEWS Professor J. W. Heslop-Harrison, Miss M. S. Campbell and A. J. Wilmott. It is their wish that the book should form a basis for a future, more detailed and comprehensive Flora. Meanwhile we are indebted to the authors and their team of workers and writers and to the Natural History Museum for an important and long overdue Flora of these fascinating islands. D. SYNNOTT Crucifers of Great Britain and Ireland. B.S.B.I. Handbook No. 6. T. C. G. Rich. Pp. 336. Botanical Society of the British Isles, London. 1991. Price £10 (ISBN 0—901158—20-8). This latest of the B.S.B.I.s monographic handbooks is a worthy addition to an indispensible and acclaimed series. Crucifers, i.e. the family Cruciferae or Brassicaceae, covers “‘the 138 species most likely to be found in the field” in Britain and Ireland, and sets a high standard for future titles and revisions of earlier handbooks. Written with a blend of diligence and enthusiasm, which just occasionally merges into whimsy, it is a more substantial volume than the others, but retains a neat, compact feel in the hand. Although Tim Rich is now among our Society’s more familiar figures, the B.S.B.I. was brave to commission one of its then younger members to write a handbook to this large taxonomic group. Nevertheless, the risk paid off handsomely, and nobody doubts the wisdom of the Publications Committee’s decision. Crucifers is a most useful contribution to the literature on this family, and will be of value to all European as well as to British and Irish botanists. The descriptions are thorough and based for the most part on living material, and under each species there are substantial observations on taxonomy, variation, ecology and, where data are available, biosystematics. A 10-page bibliography at the end reflects the author’s broad study of the family. Introductory sections on taxonomy and identification are for the most part excellent. The keys to genera and species are clear and should not be too hard to follow. The very first key directs the reader to sections A—H of the main key, thus avoiding a lengthy crawl through the whole key. The main key is embellished with small line drawings of morphological features, something that I would not normally favour, but here they do not clutter and help to explain terminology to an unfamiliar reader. It is a feature that will be popular with the Field Studies Council and others who teach groups of students. Generic keys follow and there is an informal synoptic key to provide a short cut and aide-memoire. I should have liked to see more in the introductory section on the economic aspects of this important family that provides such a significant proportion of the vegetable crops, salads and arable weeds of Europe. ; The coverage is thorough, with the inclusion of all native and established adventive species, together with several persistent casuals. This adds greatly to the value of the book, as it is likely that certain species will become more widespread, not least as a result of the consequences to trade of a post-1992 E.C. free market and increased contact with eastern Europe. Recent years have seen a considerable expansion of the range of Hirschfeldia incana, for example, in both Britain and Ireland, especially in London and Dublin where it is now rather common. Indeed, Tim Rich was the first to report its occurrence in Dublin (/r. Nat. J. 22: 531-2, 1988), where too many of us had dismissed it as Brassica nigra. Had this present work been available, we might have been encouraged to note the seeds in the beak of the fruit! Conversely, Camelina sativa has decreased markedly in Britain and Ireland during this century with the decline of the flax fields which were its characteristic habitat. However, the revival of flax, or rather linseed, cultivation in Norfolk and elsewhere, together with other new crops, may perhaps lead to an increase in the frequency of this and other crucifers. For two critical genera, the author has called on the services of other specialists. A highlight of the book is the account of Rorippa, including hybrids, written jointly with B. Jonsell. More controversial is the account of Cochlearia, by K. H. Dalby, which takes a distinctly narrow view of specific limits, albeit one closer to the view of some continental workers. Two other departures from convention, at least from Flora Europaea (including the as yet unpublished revision of Volume 1), are the inclusion of Cardaria in Lepidium, with the treatment of the two European subspecies of L. draba at specific rank, and the inclusion of Cardaminopsis petraea within Arabis. These small BOOK REVIEWS 49 matters should not upset too many botanists; synonymy is nothing new in Cruciferae, a family of economic importance that has thus been over-classified and now has too many genera! The general appearance of the book, alas, falls down somewhat. The overall standard of the copious line drawings suffers from their being the work of a number of artists, as they vary in quality as well as style. The use of a single artist would have ensured a more consistent, professional-looking product. This ought to be borne in mind for future handbooks, since they are a flagship publication of our Society. Although the fact that the artists have provided their services free is to be applauded and the great majority of the drawings are of a high standard, the end-product may support accusations from some quarters that the B.S.B.I. is too often amateurish in its approach. The author has obviously bravely coordinated the efforts of the various artists, making sure for example that floral parts were consistently illustrated. The use of 10-km dot distribution maps has greatly enhanced the value of the later handbooks, although in this case there are rather too many maps — they are surely not necessary for rarer species — and sometimes too many symbols have been used for clarity. The numbering of the maps, based on that used for species in the text, is confusing. In many cases, I should have preferred a more detailed geographical description in the text itself. Crucifers of Great Britain and Ireland is an essential book for the field botanist and should encourage more of us to tackle them, especially the despised ‘yellow crucifers’. It would be good if this handbook were to reach a wider public, both as a standard reference and as publicity for the B.S.B.1., but the Society does maintain a rather cryptic publication policy. J. R. AKEROYD British Plant Communities. Vol. 1: Woodlands and scrub. Edited by J. S. Rodwell. Pp. x +395, with 25 line drawings and 25 floristic tables with accompanying distribution maps. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1991. Price £70 (ISBN 0—521—23558-8). With this book the editor presents us the first volume of a planned 5-volume series. For the authors it is the most difficult volume, since here the principles and methods must be laid out. Moreover, it also encompasses the most difficult of the plant communities, the woodlands. Already at a first brief look, it is apparent that it is scientifically a complete success, and that it is also an important work for plant sociology. That it is being reviewed by a Continental European plant sociologist indicates that it also has great value extending well beyond the British Isles. Indeed, it fills a painfully felt gap for us. Descriptive vegetation science depends in the long run on regional comparison, and until now such comparisons were difficult, if not impossible. To be sure, for Ireland and Scotland there were several individual surveys available (viz. White & Doyle, McVean & Ratcliffe, Birse), but for England and Wales, despite a wealth of synecologically and syndynamically valuable studies, a comprehensive systematic review of vegetation types was lacking. In addition, the organization of such a magnum opus is of interest, since only 15 years have passed since the beginning of the actual field work — a short time for an enterprise based in an inductive way on circa 35,000 vegetation relevés! This undertaking received its initial impulse from the urgent need of nature conservation for a systematic overview of the objects to be protected, valid on a large scale and based on uniform standardized methods. Hence there was first of all a need for exactly described plant communities (vegetation types), which at the same time form the biotopes for animals. Thus it is understandable that the old discussions of methods far removed from actual practice did not break out again, rather “one proceeded pragmatically — the success of the result shows that this was good. Although four universities took part, it was possible quickly to agree upon a procedure and that despite different evaluation methods, a self-consistent picture emerged. Dr J. S. Rodwell was primarily responsible for this course of events. (Here I would have liked to have learned more about the methods and techniques of the individual research groups involved.) In any case, one strived more for ecologically valid statements than for difficult mathematical algorithms — much as on the Continent. The British modus operandi (can one say: the modern British school?) has many features in common with this Continental school, the Braun-Blanquet concept, which today has gained worldwide acceptance. Indeed, certain passages could be incorporated in a Continental European 0 BOOK REVIEWS Nn textbook: common principles are for example taking into account all species, according to their frequency of occurrence, the strict uniformity of relevé plots and last, but not least, the crucial criterion for ordering called “frequency and abundance’, which evidently corresponds quite well to the term ‘Treue’ of the Braun-Blanquet school. Even though no formal hierarchy was aimed for, as it turns out three categories have been introduced and proved useful: community, sub-community and variant. The parallel to associations is of course obvious. The authors then also draw parallels between groups of communities and the Continental ‘Verbande’. One could now wish further to have a general survey of woodlands in the form of a table of ‘Stetigkeit’ or degree of presence (as we say instead of frequency). All together, 25 communities have been described, which in turn are placed into six principal groups, the largest one being the Mixed deciduous and Oak-Birch woodlands. The greatest part of the book is dedicated to the presentation of the communities and their subunits. This is done in a consistent way throughout, in the sequence: Synonyms — Constant species (i.e. those of high degree of presence) — Rare species — Physiognomy — Sub-communities — Habitat — Zonation and succession — Distribution (inside Britain) with dot-distribution map — Affinities (also with the Continent) — Floristic table (with degree of presence and abundance). A list of literature references of around 400 items closes this work, an effort which lays out the basic aspects of the vegetation in a most exemplary way, while offering a wealth of detailed information as well. We congratulate our British colleagues, students, nature conservationists and floristically interested active amateurs on this foundation for the plant sociology of the British Isles! O. WILMANNS The Orchids of Suffolk: an Atlas and History. M. Sandford. Pp. 123. Suffolk Naturalists Society, Ipswich. 1991. Price £15 (ISBN 0-9508154-3-8). Like its companion The Butterflies of Suffoik this is a well-produced, readable, well-illustrated and informative book. Its 123 pages cover the 32 species that have been recorded from the county, only twelve of which are now present in anything like reasonable numbers. The book also covers eight hybrids. But the book is much more than just species accounts, for there are also interesting chapters on ecology, variation, habitats, soil regions, conservation, the Suffolk Orchid Survey, and a fascinating contributed chapter by Francis Simpson on “‘Suffolk orchids — half a century of change”’ which gives us one man’s historical perspective and brings out the joys of botanizing. But it is the catalogue of species that most readers will use most and which occupied more than half the book. The accounts have detailed information on the discovery and subsequent fortunes of each species, along with ecological information, taxonomic problems, variations, as well as anecdotal snippets from older publications. The conservation status is discussed but, here and in the general chapter, the reader is faced more by a catalogue of woes rather than with ideas for the future. Even allowing for some of the more intractable problems, more could have been done to lay out the practical steps that could be taken to ensure that yet more local extinctions do not occur. Related to this, it would have served the local and wider botanical community well if a list of needed research had been included, perhaps with some idea of priority. How many more populations will disappear because we failed to understand what simple management actions were required to save them? The reference list is complete, but the list of useful addresses is remarkable for its omission of the Nature Conservancy Council (now English Nature) and its regional offices. It is certain that this book will encourage increased local interest in and concern for this fascinating group, and it is hoped that this will in future be reflected in improvements in their status. A. J. WHITTEN & L. FARRELL BOOK REVIEWS 51 Recovery; a proposed programme for Britain’s protected species. A. J. Whitten. Nature Conser- vancy Council, C.S.D. Report, No. 1098. Peterborough. 1990. The bulk of this work is a compilation of proposals for active conservation to ensure the continued survival in the wild in Britain of each of our endangered species, and it is a mine of information about these species. For each of the 217 or so species treated, information is given on their distribution, ecology, reasons for rarity and suggested management which could increase their frequency to such an extent that the species would no longer be endangered. Each account ends with costings for the parts of each proposal; site management, translocations, enforcement, research and the monitoring which will be required over the next 15 years. The total budget required to carry out all these proposals is around £800,000 over the 15 years, at 1991 prices. In addition to the individual species accounts, the introductory 27 pages and a series of appendices (72 pages) discuss the rationale behind the proposals and arrange the species of each category (plants, bats, Lepidoptera, etc.) in order of degree of threat, recovery potential and the budget required. English, Welsh and Scottish plants are considered separately and separate lists are also given for each habitat. It is interesting to see how little is known about most of our native rare plants (and the majority of our common ones as well), so I strongly support Dr Whitten’s appeal for more autecological studies. For most species we don’t even know whether they are usually self-compatible or self-incompatible and only rarely are the conditions required for seedling establishment known. Many species appear to require disturbance and therefore active management to provide the open habitats required for seedling establishment (e.g. Stachys alpina, S. germanica, Teucrium botrys, Damasonium alisma, etc.), such disturbances naturally having been provided by large mammals, perhaps especially wild boar, a species eliminated from Britain by Man. Gardeners may not be as surprised as Dr Whitten that some species which grow poorly in the wild grow vigorously in cultivation when they are adequately watered and competition is removed (see comment under Carex depauperata). Relieved from competition, many species of poor competitive ability (e.g. Equisetum arvense, Poa annua) can thrive and grow all too well. Through pointing out the gaps in our knowledge this book should stimulate many research projects in addition to the conservation work proposed. How many of the proposals will be implemented is rather uncertain in the present political and financial climate, but it is reassuring to note that, though species-centred, the significance of habitat conservation is stressed, ‘honeypots’ with many rarities and great species diversity being mentioned as of particular importance. The positive approach proposed in this work may not appeal to those who prefer ‘laisser-faire’ conservation, but Man has already done so much damage that many habitats and populations will never recover without active intervention. We may think the situation bad in overcrowded Britain, but it is much worse elsewhere, especially in relic communities and islands (e.g. New Zealand, see New Scientist, 20th April 1991). While conserving Britain’s habitats, fauna and flora we must never forget our responsibility as a rich country to the rest of the world and remember that if Britain were to be wiped off the face of the Earth very few clearly distinct species would become extinct.and it would make very little difference to the biodiversity of the Earth. This book is a model for similar projects throughout the world and it clearly demonstrates the value in Britain of the specialist societies and County naturalists’ trusts. With many people having been involved in the compilation, errors are bound to have crept in. On page 280 the Natterjack Toad is referred to as a “‘lizard’’. Arabis alpina is described as annual, though all Floras and experience show it to be perennial, and there is no mention of the fact that Cotoneaster integerrimus is apomictic, a major consideration when deciding how it should be - propagated as it grows in the presence of other Cotoneaster species and is difficult to root from cuttings. These, however, are very minor criticisms. It is perhaps a pity that bryophytes are not covered as some primarily western oceanic and montane species and habitats are probably of greater world significance than any of the British populations of vascular plant or animal species dealt with here. A follow-up work on bryophytes and lichens would be welcome, though recovery would depend almost wholly on habitat management, as we have not yet developed the knowledge and skills to-cultivate them. H. A. McALLISTER s %. PEW AES © me Lind Watsonia, 19, 53-66 (1992) 53 Obituaries JOHN ALFRED CODRINGTON (1898—1991) The varied aspects of that endearing character, Lt-Col. John Codrington, have been well set out in obituaries in The Times and The Daily Telegraph of 23 April, The Independent of 3 May, and The Rutland Times, supplemented by further notices in The Times. These cover his extraordinary career, but hardly mention his life-long absorption in plants. He painted four remarkable sets of flowers, dated 1905, 1905, Spring 1906 and Summer 1906, 19 in all, when he was 6 and 7. In July 1908, aged 9, he was given a nicely bound copy of the Rev. C. A. Johns’ Flowers of the Field, and he was growing alpines when still young. The interest never left him, and was kept up even during his 20 years with his father’s regiment, the Coldstream Guards. In 1920, when quartered at Wimbledon, he noted Potentilla norvegica. He sent a long letter from Salzburg to the Wild Flower Magazine dated September 1922, recording several plants; and another from Constantinople in June 1923. He wrote a beautifully clear set of “botanical maps and directions” for over 300 scarce and rare plants in England and Scotland, labelled ‘“‘confidential’’, with an index. An O.S. map is noted for each and the grid reference. Most are dated 1953, but they extend from 1951 until 1969. Some dozen are marked “most secret”’, and as many “‘secret’’, but not all will still be valid, e.g. for Agrostemma githago. This set has been gifted to the Botany Library of the Natural History Museum, London. He kept up his painting all his life, almost all of landscape or gardens, including garden designs — his first essay in design was a knot garden at Rockingham Castle in 1916, which still survives. The only later painting of a flower I have seen is of Cypripedium calceolus in 1957, which is with his directions for finding that species, and is frankly a poor depiction. In all, something between 2,000 and 4,000 of his paintings survive. The Royal Horticultural Society awarded him its Veitch Memorial Medal in gold in 1989, “‘living proof that the finest gardeners never age”’ as the President put it. There is a good account of him in The Garden for November 1987. I first met him soon after the last war, and we had kept in regular touch ever since, including on the tours of the International Dendrology Society, of which he was a faithful member. At both the houses he eventually lived in, in Pimlico and Rutland, he grew remarkable plants. The Ranelagh Cottage house reverts to the Grosvenor Estate, which will try to get a suitable tenant for the garden. What happens to Stone Cottage, at Hambleton, Rutland, is currently uncertain. Its garden he described in The Englishman’s Garden of 1982, and in The Garden for November 1988. He worked with Sir Alexander Korda for some years after the war (with Merle Oberon too) at London Films. On one occasion he noticed on a film set that the flowers were wrong for the time of year the action was taking place. Sir Alexander bet him that no-one would complain, and no-one did. Among the plants that interested him most and he distributed widely were Bupleurum falcatum from Essex stock, which seeded freely in his chalky garden, Smyrnium perfoliatum, Bowles’ Golden Grass Milium effusum ‘Aureum’, and white-flowered Herb Robert (Geranium robertianum). He grew many native and naturalized plants in his ‘“‘mad wild jungle” (as he put it) at Hambleton, Sisymbrium strictissimum doing particularly well; and there were others he had collected from exotic places. He took seed of a cypress from the Holy Land in 1922, two of the progeny being still in the churchyard at Oakham and others in that at Preston, nearby, all family territory. His name will be found as having made contributions to publications such as The Hand List of the Plants of the London Area of 1951, The Atlas of the British Flora of 1962 and the Flora of Essex of 1974. He was the unquenchable enthusiast, pestering me to go and see how the London Rocket (Sisymbrium irio) was on Tower Hill (which he had seen during 1951-6 at least) until a year or so before he died. Apart from the accounts already mentioned, I know of nothing that he put into print about plants, except occasional letters to Country Life. This is sad, because he had travelled the world endlessly 54 OBITUARIES and saw much, and had written a manuscript autobiography. I think that he did not consider himself a botanist, but was just a devoted, clubbable plantsman, with a wealth of stories. But what a plantsman! D. McC inTock NORAH DAWSON (1913—1991) Norah Dawson, B.S.B.I. Recorder for County Armagh, died on 4 March 1991. A daughter of Armagh, the ‘City of Saints and Scholars’, Norah was one of the most modest and yet competent of amateur botanists. A history graduate of The Queen’s University of Belfast, she trained as a librarian, and spent her working life in the employment of Armagh County Council, where she was for many years the County Librarian. Norah’s interest in botany developed through the Armagh Field Naturalists’ Society, of which she became one of the founder members in 1952. At first, the Society was a small band of enthusiastic novices. Norah, because of difficulties with her sight, preferred to concentrate on plants, whereas birds absorbed most of the attention of other members. Perhaps rather unusually for her time, she had studied German rather than Latin at school, but nevertheless soon mastered the use of Latin names for plants. With encouragement from the late Pat Kertland, Norah became interested in recording plant distribution during the years leading up to the publication of the B.S.B.I.’s Atlas. Later, during the 1960s, the Armagh Field Naturalists along with the Belfast Naturalists’ Field Club began a project to record the Co. Armagh flora in 5-km squares, and Norah became the stalwart of this project. On her retirement, she took on the honorary secretary’s post in the Field Naturalists’ Society, a role she carried out with singular efficiency and good humour for several years. As the Society’s chairman and a near neighbour, I came to know Norah and her constant companion Burren well at this time. Burren, a red setter, was ironically not named after the botanists’ Mecca in western Ireland, but after a little-known townland of that name in Co. Down. In fact, Burren became known under another name to my family rather earlier than Norah, on account of the memorable sight of him emerging from another neighbour’s back door and careering across the unfenced back gardens of our recently built estate with a string of sausages hanging from his jaws. Burren was temporarily known as ‘The Sausage Stealer’; quite unfairly as it turned out, as we later discovered that the neighbour in question was a butcher with a surplus of out-of-date sausages. The early years of her retirement were the time when Norah was at her most botanically active, most days in summer being spent recording along the by-ways of the County, and also further afield in Ireland, both on her own or with the Irish Biogeographical Society. As befitted a professional librarian, her plant records were kept in a magnificent state of order, and she also kept meticulous notes on butterflies in Co. Armagh. Her role as a B.S.B.I. Recorder was largely one of collating her own records, the county at that time being sparsely populated by resident botanists and seldom visited by outside ones. A modest and unassuming person, Norah could always be relied on to do anything she undertook in a thorough and reliable way. She always felt that a little more work was needed before the records © for her county would be in a fit state for publication. It was a great shame, therefore, that health problems led to premature decline in her recording activities and, as the major contributor to the stock of botanical records in Co. Armagh, that she did not live to see them through to publication in a County Flora. 2 . S. FAULKNER OBITUARIES 55 JOHN GEORGE DONY (1899—1991) John Dony M.B.E., B.Sc., Ph.D., Hon. F.L.S., who died in Luton on 24 March 1991, was one of the best-known British field botanists of this century. He was essentially interested in the distribution, ecology and features which were susceptible to statistical analysis rather than the systematics of plants. His Flora of Bedfordshire was widely recognized as a model of how such things should be done and truly, as the late Sir E. J. Salisbury said, “takes a worthy place amongst its predecessors and contemporaries’, and so does its author amongst his. His efforts for conservation in the county in which he was born and died were sustained and successful, resulting in a well- merited M.B.E. in 1983. John was born in Luton on 8 August 1899 in Court Road by the parish church in a road of typical mid-Victorian terraced houses, now totally destroyed. A great fondness for the church, indeed a magnificent building, remained with John throughout his life, although he had no time for religious doctrine. His father, an engineer, was a well-known Sunday School teacher and a very active member of the Chase Street Mission, Luton from 1901 until its closure in the early 1940s. His great- grandfather was a Cornish tin miner who changed the name from Doney. His mother’s family were local and mainly connected with the hat industry. His grandfather was a founder member of the Luton Industrial Co-operative Society in 1883, and John himself was an ardent Fabian. His education at Surrey Street School, like that of so many of his contemporaries, was restricted to elementary school (but from what I know of its products it must have been immeasurably superior to that of the present day). In 1913 he became an apprentice at Hayward Tyler, an engineering firm renowned for their hydraulic pumps, where he worked on the bench. He stayed in the firm until 1920, his service there broken by World War I, when he joined the Royal Navy Volunteer Reserve from June to December 1918, although he did not see active service. From 1920 to 1922 John worked as a draughtsman in London and Cardiff but then after matriculating at London University in 1922 became an uncertificated school teacher. His working in Cardiff probably explains his support of Glamorgan County Cricket Club. A suggestion that his first teaching post was in Cardiff appears to be inaccurate as there is no other mention of this, and his first school post was at Norton Road School, Leagrave. He obtained an Acting Teachers’ Certificate in 1924, the last time a teacher could become qualified without going to college. He moved to Queen’s Square School from 1925 56 OBITUARIES until 1931, then to a school in Kentish Town for nine years. Although he had attended W.E.A. evening classes in engineering, mathematics and Spanish years before, his attempts to better his lot now started in earnest. He attended the University Extension Class, 1931-32, in Economics at Toynbee Hall with W. Milne-Bailey as tutor, for whom he wrote a long essay on the hat industry which was shown to J. J. Mallon, the Warden of Toynbee Hall, and Barbara (later Baroness) Wootton, both of whom encouraged him to continue. He enrolled as a student of the London School of Economics, working in the evenings until he gained his B.Sc. in 1936. He had married another teacher in the 1920s but this marriage was dissolved in 1931. The beginnings of the straw hat industry in Luton go back to visits by James I, whose mother Mary, Queen of Scots had brought over to Scotland some Lorraine straw-plaiters — or so the story used to go. Actually the industry may have had more local origins. However it started, it eventually dominated the town, which became a main centre in Europe for the trade. The extent of its importance is now inconceivable to a generation most of whom do not even own a hat. My own paternal grandfather, a Belgian hatter, came to Luton in the 1890s when it was the Mecca for hat- workers of all sorts. John had decided to work on and obtain a doctorate and the hat industry was an obvious choice of subject for a Lutonian and he gained a Ph.D. in 1941 for his thesis on its history and economics. To tell the truth he used modern pressurised interrogation techniques on the surviving hat firms of the day by bombarding them with innumerable queries and wanting to see their records. From his thesis he produced a book, A history of the straw hat industry (1942), which became accepted.as the standard, if not the only, work on the subject. The industry rapidly declined until it became a fragment of the town’s economy but John’s desire to investigate this was never accomplished. His teaching career blossomed and after a short spell at the North Western Polytechnic, he became in 1941 History and Economics Master at Luton Modern (later Grammar) School and remained there until his retirement in 1964. There he was much loved and universally known by the nickname ‘Doc’. , It is always rather difficult to pin down accurately the start of an interest, but John as a schoolboy belonged to The Band of Hope, a society for promoting temperance principles among the young (although John was not averse in later life to a modest drink in convivial company). This worthy body gave a series of books as prizes for an essay on ““The evils of strong drink” and John, a winner, chose The Works of Shakespeare and J. Saunders’ Field Flowers of Bedfordshire, the latter an austere work scarcely likely to inspire a youngster. When he was 15 he made a collection of insects and plants and received a commendation for the flowers. It is likely that Frederick Mander, (later Sir Frederick, General Secretary and President of the N.U.T. and Chairman of Bedfordshire County Council), keen on orchids and a teacher at Surrey Street School, encouraged him most of all to let his innate interest in natural history develop. Mander’s name appears several times in the Orchidaceae in John’s Flora. John’s early interest in botany relaxed during the time he was obtaining qualifications but was rekindled in 1935 and developed considerably during the War years. Once he had resolved to write a new Flora of his county, a group of like-minded friends (particularly Horace Souster, perhaps his most constant companion). gathered together and an immense amount of field work was undertaken. How far this had advanced was evident from a very successful exhibition entitled ““Wild Flowers in Bedfordshire” which was mounted at the Luton Museum some years before the Flora was published. The covering booklet for this was of course written by John and for many Lutonians it was the first intimation of the project. This sustained labour by John and many helpers culminated in his Flora of Bedfordshire in 1953, without doubt his finest work. This was a subscriber publication and was produced for the very modest sum of “42s nett”. I was already an old Africa hand by then and received my copy in Nairobi together with a letter from John dated Christmas Day, 1953 (he wrote in a small but very legible hand which achieved maximum information per square inch of paper). Almost unbelievably the 1000 copies cost only £1271 to produce and an expected deficit of £600 was soon turned into a small profit. John was extremely sensitive about the reception of this work and he awaited comments eagerly. I think that they were without exception extremely favourable, as indeed they should have been — John had a natural bent for accuracy and his publications were accordingly much more polished than those of many a professional scientist. The 20 pages of historical introduction to Bedfordshire botany make fascinating reading, combining as they do John’s twin interests of botany and local history. The geographical index is a feature I still constantly use. Today this 42 shilling book usually fetches about £18—25, which seems rather low bearing in mind inflation. It was reissued in 1978 in a much less OBITUARIES 57 pleasing format. John then moved on to writing the Flora of Hertfordshire, which was published in 1967 by the Hitchin Urban District Council, again with an introduction by Sir E. J. Salisbury. Although only 14 years later than the Bedfordshire Flora, the changes in book production gave it an altogether different look. There was also the novelty of 47 pages of tetrad dot maps. These two Floras show to a remarkable degree John’s capability of marshalling an enormous amount of varied information and presenting it in an orderly form; this was perhaps his dominant characteristic; it is of course a prerequisite of a good historian. John developed a deep interest in conservation but was not unreasonable. He recognized that progress, whatever we might individually think about it, was inevitable and did not make foolish demands. His well-reasoned pleas produced more success as a result. Perhaps all this was started as a result of a disgraceful act he witnessed as a youngster — the demise of Grass of Parnassus (Parnassia palustris) in Bedfordshire. The last population was uprooted in his presence by an amateur botanist who proudly gloated: ‘“That is the last time anyone will find that here!”’. John mentions this in his Flora of Bedfordshire but did not hint that he witnessed it. Perhaps it is as well that I have forgotten the name of the perpetrator. The designation of Knocking Hoe, Pegsdon as a National Nature Reserve in 1958 was a major success for John. Like many on the political Left, he seemed to actively enjoy being on committees and helping to found new societies; he did valuable work for a surprising number of them. Early on, his political affiliations developed (he had long warned of the dangers of fascism) and he became a local secretary of the Left Wing Book Club and a founder member of the Luton Branch of the Fabian Society. He became its chairman when it re-formed in 1967 after ten years of lack of public interest. He was Honorary Keeper of Botany at Luton Museum from 1935 until 1988 during which time he built up an admirable local herbarium and library; from 1955 he undertook the same duties at Hitchin Museum. Already a Member of the Wild Flower Society, he joined the Botanical Society of the British Isles (then the Botanical Exchange Club) in 1937 and after 1947 held office continually - aS, successively, a Council Member, its Honorary Field Secretary (later renamed Honorary Meetings Secretary) (1949-56), Honorary General Secretary (1956-64), a Vice-President (1965-66) and finally President in 1967-69. After this he was made an Honorary Member. He helped found the Bedfordshire and Huntingdonshire Naturalists’ Trust in 1961 and was also a founder member in 1962 of the Hertfordshire and Middlesex Trust. He was almost a founder member of the Bedfordshire Natural History Society but missed the first meeting ( I fear I used to gloat over this); he was, however, intimately associated with it for over 40 years and served as President in the early 1960s. He also served as President of the Hertfordshire Natural History Society and of the South Bedfordshire Association of National Trust Members. In 1954 he was elected a Fellow (Honoris Causa) of the Linnean Society of London. Other posts which he held were Chairman of the South Bedfordshire Preservation Society (which he helped form in 1948) and the presidency of the Luton Workers’ Educational Association which he took over from Lord Hill (‘The Radio Doctor’) in 1977 and retained for ten years. Towards the end of the 1980s John relinquished his various duties and one of his last acts was to grace the opening of the John Dony Field Centre by the Mayor of Luton in October 1990. He was extremely interested in alien plants, particularly those resulting from the use of wool shoddy; a remarkable number grew in Bedfordshire and in some places such as Flitwick railway sidings one could be forgiven for thinking one was in Australia rather than Britain. Anxious that every record should be as accurate as possible, he gradually got to know all the botanists of his day, particularly the specialists on tricky groups. Many of them accompanied him on field trips. Whilst Edgar Milne-Redhead was stationed at Dunstable during World War II, a great friendship sprang up between them and they travelled by bicycle and train over much of the county collecting records. A particular friend was V. H. Chambers who died in 1984. He had begun a herbarium when only twelve years old and continued to list his records until 1931. Later he specialized in the Hymenoptera and became a recognized authority on certain groups. He collaborated with John and was in fact the stimulus which persuaded John to undertake the arduous task of writing a proper Flora. Vic had a car early on and they undertook numerous joint expeditions; Vic shared with me the almost total inability to ride a bicycle. Many young botanists owe much to John’s encouragement. Peter Taylor and I were both protegés during the war and we both decided eventually to become professional botanists. Peter was very neat and tidy (like John) and did very much more to help John with recording and indeed wrote the Section on the Hepaticae 58 OBITUARIES in the Flora of Bedfordshire. | already had many zoological interests which interfered with botanical recording. My father viewed my interest in botany with dismay, particularly as I had a degree in physics, and was certain I would never get a job as a biologist (they were rare in those days) and it was John who showed it was a possibility, and in fact made it a respectable option. Without his help and introductions to other people, probably neither Peter nor I would have ended up at Kew. One of my main memories of him during the war years was the speed with which he walked despite his short stature — like a galleon in full sail bent into the wind — and this continued well into later life. In those early days transport was scarce and we had no car — a large part of most expeditions was done on foot which of course helped us to find more. John got on well with others, whether peasants or aristocrats. During the gathering of records for the Flora he needed to examine the flora of many private and government properties. This was usually arranged in advance, nearly always without difficulty, but occasionally had to be done off the cuff, so to speak. He had a formula for this: when the door opened he would say ““We are botanists” in much the same way as one might announce that one was the Governor of the Bank of England! Nearly always this resulted in permission being given — only occasionally was the reply the equivalent of ‘get lost’! John had a quite authoritarian air about him which somewhat overawed the opposition. A group of us often ended up in a pub (as often as not the Speed the Plough just north of Barton and actually mentioned by name on sheet 95 of the old one inch map) on our way back from a meeting in Bedford for a modest drink. He ate very frugally, often only an apple for lunch during a field trip; which fruit he was proud of being able to split into two pieces by a deft twist of the hand. Although as a schoolboy he disdained history, a W.E.A. evening course on economic history he attended in 1917-18 kindled a strong interest —- so much so that history ultimately became his bread and butter. He became particularly fascinated by local history, about which he gained an encyclopaedic knowledge. It is an interesting coincidence that the road of his birth long ago formed part of the estates of Sir John Rotherham, one of the oldest parts of Luton. He was part author of The Story of Luton (1964) (reprinted 1966 and 1975) and wrote many other historical papers besides. John’s total output of articles was quite considerable, many being in the Bedfordshire Magazine and The Bedfordshire Naturalist, also Watsonia and its predecessors. He was an excellent writer of obituaries. In 1971 he joined the élite band of amateur naturalists to have received the Bloomer Award of the Linnean Society (H. H. Bloomer, 1866-1960, was himself an amateur who mainly studied bivaive molluscs). John married for a second time in 1962, Christina Mayne Goodman, a keen Birmingham botanist and former England hockey international, who proved the perfect companion. Most of John’s work after this date was in the nature of a joint effort. He is survived by her and a son by his previous marriage. Undoubtedly the secret of John’s success was hard work and determination coupled with enthusiasm and orderly methods, all in fact attributes of the Victorians, one of whom he could just claim to be. He could certainly have been a successful politician and probably a business man but he chose to become a schoolmaster don who will long be remembered for his attainments. PUBLICATIONS OF J. G. DONY* MAJOR WORKS 1942 A history of the straw hat industry. Luton. 1946 The hat industry, in H. A. SILVERMAN, ed. Studies in industrial organisation, pp. 155-198. London. 1953 Flora of Bedfordshire. Luton (reprinted 1978. Wakefield). 1964 (With J. Dyer and F. Stygall) The story of Luton. Luton. (2nd ed., 1966). (With J. Dyer, 3rd ed., 1974). 1967 Flora of Hertfordshire. Hitchin. 1970 A history of education in Luton. Luton. *Compiled mainly from a list produced by himself. It excludes detailed elaboration of recorder’s reports. Some very short notes, exhibition reports, etc. are also omitted. 1974 e976 1984 1991 OBITUARIES 59 (With F. H. Perring and C. M. Robb) The English names of wild flowers. London. (With F. H. Perring and S. L. Jury, 2nd ed., 1986). Bedfordshire Plant Atlas. Luton. The story of High Town. Bedfordshire County Library. (2nd ed., 1985). (With C. M. Dony) The wild flowers of Luton. Luton. ~ MAJOR WORK EDITED 1975 A view from the alley (by A. S. Darby). Luton. | ARTICLES 1946 1947 1948 1948 1949 | | / | | 1950 Additions and emendations to the Comital Flora for v.c. 30 (Bedfordshire). Rep. botl Soc. Exch. Club Br. Isl. 1943-4: 803-14. What Bedfordshire is. J. Beds. Nat. Hist. Soc. 1: 8-12. Bedfordshire naturalists 1.: William Crouch (1818-1846). Ibid.: 50-52. The case for nature reserves. Bedford. Mag. 1: ie Wild orchids in Bedfordshire. [bid.: 145-8. (With K. Piercey) Nature reserves. Bedford. Nat. 2: 19-21. Bedfordshire naturalists 2.: James Saunders (1839-1925). Ibid.: 58-61. A Bobart herbarium at Bedford. Bedford. Nat. 3: 15-16. Bedfordshire Naturalists 3.: Charles Abbot (1761-1817). Ibid.: 38-42. Hats and headgear. In Chambers’ Encyclopaedia. A contribution to the flora of Huntingdonshire. Watsonia 1: 301-7. Bedfordshire Naturalists 4.: William Hillhouse (1850-1910). Bedford. Nat. 4: 40-2. Problems of distribution raised in the compilation of a county flora, in J. E. Lousley, ed. The study of the distribution of British plants, pp. 69-74. London. The distribution of Bunium bulbocastanum. Ibid.: 74-76. (With J. E. Lousley) The travels of plants. Bedford. Mag. 3: 185-9. Wool aliens in Bedfordshire, in J. E. Lousley, ed. The changing flora of Britain, pp. 160-3. London. Cyperus rotundus. Proc. botl Soc. Br. Isl. 1: 159. The position with regard to the conservation of nature in Bedfordshire. Bedford. Nat. 8: 12- 13: Hordeum leporinum Link, H. glaucum Steud. and H. pusillum var. pubens Hitchcock. Proc. botl Soc. Br. Isl. 1: 323-24, Notes on the Bedfordshire railway flora. Bedford. Nat. 9: 12-16. The drawings of Caroline Gaye. Bedford. Nat. 10: 14-15. The place of the local flora in the study of the British flora, in J. E. Lousley, ed. Progress in the study of the British flora, pp. 30-9. London. Some Hertfordshire plant records. London Nat. 38: 74-6. Nature conservation in Bedfordshire. Bedford. Nat. 14: 19-24. Flowers of the roadsides. Bedford. Mag. 8: 34-7. The expectation of plant records from prescribed areas. Watsonia 5: 377-85. Counting the cost, in P. J. Wanstall, ed. Local Floras, pp. 87-94. London. Botanists in Hertfordshire. Hertfordshire Past and Present 3: 39-44. The Botanical Society of the British Isles. Wild Flower Mag. 339: 5-6. The Hertfordshire Natural History Society. Wild Flower Mag. 345: 6-7. A Bedfordshire botanist and schoolmaster. Bedford. Mag. 11: 69-72. (With J. Godber) Bedfordshire. Encyclopaedia Britannica. Nature reserves in Bedfordshire. Bedford. Mag. 11: 153-6. Presidential Address. The B.S.B.I. in a changing Britain. Proc. botl Soc. Br. Isl. 7: 311-23. Additional notes on the flora of Bedfordshire. [bid.: 523-35. Charles Abbot’s ‘Flora Selecta’. Bedford Nat. 23: 27-9. Notes on the flora of Hertfordshire. Trans. Herts. Nat. Hist. Soc. 27: 23-4. Straw hats — a bibliography. Costume 1: 10-11. Plant notes for 1969. Trans. Herts. Nat. Hist. Soc. 27: 83. 60 OBITUARIES 1970 The journals of the Botanical Society of the British Isles. Watsonia 8: 1-2. 1970-1 The wild flowers of the river. . . of the riverside . . . of the Ouse meadows and gravel pits. The trees of the river. The Lock Gate 3: 58-60; 69-70; 98-100; 107-8. 1971 The need for a recommended list of English names for British plants. B.S.B.I. Recorders’ Conf. Rep., pp. 87-94. — Plant Notes for 1970. Trans. Herts. Nat. Hist. Soc. 27: 119-20. 1972 Opening up the Bedfordshire countryside. Bedford. Mag. 13: 184-90. — A new system of recording for Bedfordshire. Bedford. Nat. 26: 12-15. 1973 The straw-plaiting industry in Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire. J. Watford & Distr. Ind. Hist. Soc. 3: 34-42. 1974 Changes in the flora of Hertfordshire. (Presidential Address). Trans. Herts. Nat. Hist. Soc. 27: 255-64. — Some problems of a railway flora. Herts. and Middlesex Trust for Nature Conservation Symposium 2: 2-5. 1975 The Bedfordshire Natural History Society. Wild Flower Mag. (Spring Issue): 11-12. — Putting a quart into a pint pot. B.S.B.I. Recorders’ Conf. Rep. (Attingham Park). 1976 How Luton became a borough. Bedford. Mag. 15: 135-40. — (With K. Williamson) The natural history of the Ashridge Estate. National Trust. — Plant Notes, 1971-1974. Trans. Herts. Nat. Hist. Soc. 27: 323-4. 1977 (With C. M. Dony) Some additional wool aliens in Bedfordshire. Watsonia 11: 428. — Species-area relationships in an area of intermediate size. J. Ecol. 65: 475-84. — §Species-area relationship in Bedfordshire. Bedford. Nat. 30: 61-2. — Change in the flora of Bedfordshire, England, from 1798 to 1976. Biol. Conserv. 11: 307-320. — Plant Notes, 1975-1976. Trans. Herts. Nat. Hist. Soc. 28: 26-7. 1978 The 1919 Peace Riots in Luton. Publications of Beds. Hist. Rec. Soc. 57: 205-33. — Flowering Plants, in D. Shirley, ed. Hertfordshire, a guide to the countryside, pp. 34-7. 1980 Some wild flowers of the Trust’s reserves in Bedfordshire. Ardea: 37-42. — Wool aliens. Watsonia 13: 73-4. — Melampyrum arvense L. - a native or alien species? [bid.: 166. 1981 The natural vegetation of Dunstable and Whipsnade Downs. Bedford. Nat. 35: 43-54. 1982 (With C. M. Dony) Childing Pink in Bedfordshire. Watsonia 14: 228. 1985 (With I. Denholm) Some quantitative methods of assessing the conservation value of ecologically similar sites. J. appl. Ecol. 22: 229-38. — Introduced plants, in Wildlife in towns and cities (Country Life Guides): 32-38. 1986 Introduction to Mate’s Illustrated Guide to Luton. Luton. —— (With C. M. Dony) Further notes on the flora of Bedfordshire. Watsonia 16: 163-172. 1987 Naturalists in the past; Changes in the Flora, in B. S. Nau, C. R. Boon & J. P. Knowles, eds. Bedfordshire Wildlife, 13-25 & 79-83. — Nature reserves in Bedfordshire. Bedford. Mag. 20: 323-7. PAMPHLETS AND PRINTED REPORTS 1943 Report on the Luton hat industry. (To Nuffield College social reconstruction survey.) *1948 Wild flowers in Bedfordshire. (An exhibition at Luton Museum and Art Gallery.) [undated]. 1947-86 Reports of Recorder for Botany (J. Beds. Nat. Hist. Soc., later Bedford. Nat.) 1948 Report of field meeting: Bedford and district. Rep botl Exch. Club Br. Isl. 1946-7: 220-3. *1948 Bedfordshire Wild flowers. Luton Museum. 1950 Report of field meeting: Huntingdonshire. B.S.B.J. Year Book 1950: 51-3. 1970 (With S. Cowdy and P. D. Rixon) The natural history of Milton Keynes country zone. (To Countryside Commission.) 1971 Species-area relationships. (Mimeo. to Natural Environment Research Council.) — A report on sites of natural history interest in Bedfordshire. (To Bedfordshire County Council.) 2 The classification and assessment of mires in Bedfordshire. British Ecological Society. *There appear to be two separate items involved. I have a copy of a white undated 16-page pamphlet with a photograph of Alisma on the front cover; C. Boon has a green pamphlet dated 1948 with a similar photograph but with 20 pages. OBITUARIES 61 OBITUARIES 1963 Francis Morland Day, M.A. (1890-1962). Proc. botl Soc. Br. Isl. 5: 194. 1965 Wendell Holmes Camp (1905-1963). Ibid. 6: 99. — Charles E. Freeman (1906-1965). Bedford. Mag. 10: 4-6. 1968 Gordon Mark Leo Haskell (1920-1967). Proc. botl Soc. Br. Isl. 7: 496. 1976 Ray Palmer (1896-1975). Bedford. Nat. 29: 66-7. _— Thomas Wyatt Bagshawe — an appreciation. Bedford. Mag. 15: 185-7. 1977. J. Edward Lousley (1907-1976). Watsonia 11: 282-6. 1980 Sir Edward J. Salisbury C.B.E., D.Sc., F.R.S., F.L.S. (1886-1978). Trans. Herts. Nat. Hist. Soc. 28:2. _— Harold Owen White — an appreciation. Bedford. Mag. 17: 227-8. _ 1985 Victor Horace Chambers (1911-1984). Bedford. Nat. 39: 3-5. 1990 John Campbell Gardiner (1905-1989). Watsonia 18: 239-240. 1964 Flora of Nottinghamshire (R.C.L. & B. M. Howitt); A contribution to the flora of Merioneth (P. M. Benoit & M. Richards). Proc. botl Soc. Br. Isl. 5: 277-8. 1965 The concise British flora in colour (W. Keble Martin). Proc. botl Soc. Br. Isl. 6: 198-9. 1966 A guide to herbarium practice (J. W. Franks). Ibid.: 299. 1968 Britain’s Green Mantle (A. G. Tansley), 2nd ed. Bedford. Mag. 11: 271. 1969 A history of Bedfordshire (J. Godber). Bedford. Mag. 12: 128-30. — Flora of Derbyshire (A. R. Clapham). Museums J. 69: 76-7. 1972 Flora of Monmouthshire (A. E. Wade); Flora of Rutland (G. Messenger). Museums J. F233. _— Watsonian Vice-counties of Great Britain (J. E. Dandy). Watsonia 9: 49-50. 1973 A computer-mapped flora (D. A. Cadbury, J. G. Hawkes & R. C. Readett). Ibid.: 282-5. 1975 Friends in Bedfordshire and west Hertfordshire (J. Godber). Bedford. Mag. 15: 126. 1976 The minutes of the first Independent Church at Bedford (H. G. Tibbutt). [bid.: 305-6. , 1977 Atlas of breeding birds of Great Britain and Ireland (J. T. R. Sharrock); Atlas of non-marine | mollusca of the British Isles (M. P. Kerney). Watsonia 11: 407. -—— A nature conservation review (D. A. Ratcliffe). Bedford. Nat. 31: 9. re John Howard the philanthropist (J. Godber). Bedford. Mag. 16: 82-3. _1980 An ecological flora of Breckland (P. J. O. Trist). Watsonia 13: 153-4. , 1983 Bird habitats in Britain (R. J. Fuller). Brit. Birds 76: 55-6. — Simpson’s Flora of Suffolk. Watsonia 14: 437. /1986 The book of Dunstable and Houghton Regis (V. & L. Evans). Bedford. Mag. 20: 170. ; | BOOK REVIEWS j | | | ) B. VERDCOURT JOHN DONY, HISTORIAN AND TEACHER John Dony was a most remarkable man with limitless interests and boundless energy. He was a true self-made man — he left school at 14, completed an engineering apprenticeship, and then, without any full-time attention to study, qualified as a teacher, earned a respectable degree in Economics, -and then secured a Doctorate. The record does not end there for, and this is well documented in the ‘bibliography above, there is a prodigious list of publications devoted to his two academic loves of Botany and History. ‘| Although he was a prolific historian, I would think that his national reputation is greater in Botany and that may be because much of his historical work focusses on Luton. However, even a parochial interest must not be dismissed for what he produced is of considerable value and not just to local people. John was best known for his work on the Straw Hat industry (the subject of his Ph.D. thesis) which was originally inspired more by the issues of labour relations than by the product itself. This work grew out of an essay on trade unions and the hat industry first composed in 1931 for his Economics tutor. Much encouraged by J. J. Mallon and Barbara Wootton, the subject was later to 62 OBITUARIES be enlarged and developed into his doctoral thesis. John had no direct connection with the hat industry but, as it was an important and lively economic activity in Luton, it offered a ready and accessible research topic. In concert with two others (Dyer and Stygall) he produced the definitive local history under the title The Story of Luton. As a schoolboy it is known that he had little taste for history but his enthusiasm was kindled by a W.E.A. class and he took to the subject with a passion, and it was that very passion that made him an effective and entertaining teacher, for he made history challenging, alive, and, importantly, relevant. John was very much a son of Luton and he came from a well-known local family which lived almost in the centre of the town. John’s grandfather supported the Co-operative cause and was a founder-member of the Luton Industrial Co-operative Society. John’s share number, which he inherited via an uncle, was 2. He was thus ‘related’ to the development of what was once a significant social movement. We were fortunate at Luton Grammar School to have been taught by scholars, but most were drawn from relatively comfortable middle class backgrounds. John was not of that mould. Although he was a success, he had had to struggle to be so. He was his own man and he brought to his many activities a very marked sense of reality doubtless drawn from his experiences. For a man otherwise destined for the machine-shop John won his place in the pantheon of great teachers. He was a man who bore his achievements modestly and without display; he gave much of himself and was always a ready friend and counsellor. His like is rare enough and it is an honour to be one of his ‘old Boys’. M. BUTCHER JOHN DONY AT THE LUTON MUSEUM When I started work at Luton Museum as assistant to the curator in 1938 we were the only full-time curatorial staff, but we had an Hon. Keeper of Botany, John Dony. On Saturday mornings and in the school holidays he darted about the museum, working on the herbarium with a great sense of purpose. He remained Hon. Keeper of Botany for the next 50 years. No museum can have had more valuable and devoted service than he gave to Luton. He appeared only at these times because he was teaching in Kentish Town and also working for a Ph.D. in Economics, having taken his first degree two years before, by evening study after a full day’s teaching. He gained his doctorate for his thesis on the straw hat industry in 1941. In the same year he took a post at Luton Grammar School, teaching history and economics, and remained there until he retired, as Head of History, in 1964. He was born, brought up and educated in Luton; worked in his teens as an apprentice engineer there until 1920; and began his teaching career, first in Luton and then in Kentish Town (but still living in Luton). His chosen study, the straw hat industry, was not just a subject for a thesis. He had grown up in a town which had been shaped by this industry, which took from it its urban pattern, its social nuances. It was the social and economic complexities of the industry which fascinated him. His studies in local history and politics were never those of an academic specialist, but, as in his. botanical work, were ‘habitat studies’. His historical writings are mostly about Luton: A History of the Straw Hat Industry (1942); The Story of Luton (1964); A History of Education in Luton (1970), enriched by his own experience as- pupil and teacher there in the early years of this century; and The 1919 Peace Riots in Luton (1978), in a volume presented to another Bedfordshire historian, Joyce Godber. Again he wrote from first hand knowledge, a mildly participating witness of this tragi-comedy of local politics, in an essay which shows how well he understood the character of the town he had lived in, worked in and served all his life. A. BucK ee JOHN DONY AND THE B.S.B.1I. John Dony’s influence on the Society’s development was second only to that of Ted Lousley in the early post-War years. Throughout those two formative decades, the 1950s and 1960s, he was OBITUARIES 63 continually in office: initially as the first-ever Field Secretary; in due course, for eight years, as General Secretary; and ultimately as the third amateur to fill the Presidential chair in the new post- War amateur/professional alternation. While, unlike Lousley, his involvement in the Society’s affairs never extended to administering its finances and he was content to leave the publications side of its activities to others, the nine years he devoted to organizing and overseeing its annual meetings programme — a much more onerous responsibility than is generally appreciated — proved an excellent preparation for running the Society as a whole, so that when Lousley stepped down as General Secretary in 1956 no succession to that office can ever have seemed so natural and appropriate. Though very different personalities, the two of them worked together in harmony, united by a common commitment to efficiency and shared battle scars from the endless in-fighting that had characterized the régime that preceded theirs. John in particular never forgot or forgave, to the end of his days, the airy casualness with which the supposed joint organizer had left him to cope alone, almost at the last minute, with the arrangements for the all-important 1950 Conference at which the Atlas of the British Flora had its original, carefully stage-managed conception. Nothing of the kind ever happened again once the Society’s meetings programme was entrusted to his hands alone. Ina very short time, indeed, the atmosphere was transformed: the conflicts and cantankerousness for which some of the first post-War field meetings were notorious at once became a thing of the past, as John brought to these occasions his chuckling sociability, his supreme meticulousness and his unending tact. They were qualities from which the Society was to benefit more generally in his subsequent spell as General Secretary and which rendered the team who served with him in those years a memorably happy and smoothly-functioning one. The meticulousness which he brought to the Society’s administration was the hallmark of his personal botanical work too. Delighting in precision, with that tiny, figure-like handwriting characteristic of the mathematically inclined, he loved nothing more than working carefully- delimited areas with steadily increasing intensiveness. Deeply rooted in his home town of Luton and surrounding countryside, he had the compiling of local Floras as his manifest botanical destiny. And not just their compiling: his training in economics additionally gave him a taste for just those aspects from which local Flora-writers typically tend to shrink, and he would spare no trouble in working out costings and gauging market potential, matters on which he became the acknowledged national expert and was ever-pleased to be asked for advice by fellow authors. It irked him greatly that the handsome profit that the first of his Floras had unexpectedly made all went into the coffers of its local government sponsor, yielding him no personal benefit financially in return for all the effort he had put in, not least in earlier raising the money that had made publication feasible; and he was determined ever afterwards to assume the risk of publication himself, convinced by that first experience that works of this type were sound commercial propositions provided the production and marketing received the careful attention they deserved. Not everyone felt able to share his optimism on that score, which assumed an input of time and labour which few if any others were likely to be prepared to contemplate (it extended, for example, to acting as your own publisher’s representative and hawking copies in person to every bookshop in the county); but he was a lasting force for good in making Flora-writers think more carefully and constructively about the stages that must come after the accumulating of the records. The series of habitat studies which formed a major and novel feature of the first of his Floras has had many copiers, while his switch from the traditional octavo format to a quarto one for the succeeding Flora of Hertfordshire, to accommodate the printing of the systematic list in double columns, which he perceived as dictated by cost-cutting logic, was so much admired by K. G. Messenger that he modelled his Flora of Rutland exactly upon it. Above all, John was identified with tetrad-mapping. If not quite the first to employ this method (E. S. Edees anticipated him by just one year), he was certainly to the fore in exploiting it and in promoting its adoption generally. The work that he undertook in this direction for his Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire plant atlases so fascinated him that he even talked for a time of going to live in Co. Carlow on his retirement and submitting that underexplored, similarly-sized county to the same exhaustive treatment. If that was to remain but a pipe-dream, it was happily a different story with his gradually-developing wish to research more deeply into the classically Watsonian question of the number of plant species to be expected in an average stretch of ground — the subject of an impressive paper that he contributed to Watsonia in 1963, in which his early statistical training came into its own. A grant secured from the Natural Environment Research Council (a signal achievement in 64 OBITUARIES itself) not only made that possible, but also largely allayed the financial anxieties that had began to prey upon him as his time to retire approached. Captivated by grid-square mapping and cursed with a home territory in which the administrative boundaries had been subject to numerous and substantial changes, John became a dedicated opponent of the long-standing vice-county system, repeatedly drawing attention to its drawbacks at conferences and in informal discussion. Eventually he took the opportunity of his Presidential Address in 1968 to advocate its wholesale abandonment and the adoption of 50-kilometre squares as the Society’s unit for recording in its stead. No one could have put the case better, and he was undoubtedly more disappointed than he ever let on that his arguments failed to win enough converts to bring about that change. It was probably the only major disappointment in a notably productive botanical life, in which he raised to a new high level of achievement the long and proud tradition in these islands of producing local Floras. It is as a local Flora-writer that he would surely wish to be remembered above all and the capacity in which his contributions are most obvious and likely to prove most enduring. But the B.S.B.I. more generally has cause to mourn the passing of a man who left his own very special mark on it, in the course of the many years in which he served it with singular selflessness, endearing himself to all of us who had the good fortune to know him. DE: ALLEN MARY PATRICIA HAPPER KERTLAND (1902—1991) Miss Pat Kertland had an enlightened upbringing and education which was Edwardian in the best sense. In her youth she travelled widely, including a trip to the Far East, went up to her local university and earned a higher degree. Her M.Sc. thesis, entitled ““The ecology of Divis”, was written while she was Hugh Wisnom Scholar at the University and formed the basis of a major paper in J. Ecol. 16: 301-322 (1928). She was blessed with the ability to use ‘family money’ without ostentation and was able to live much of her life in the way she wished, without the absolute requirement to hold the highest possible salaried post, though by training and intellect she would have had little difficulty in securing a senior position in any University. She worked in the Botany Department of The Queen’s University of Belfast, in which she had been a student, from 1929 to 1937 as Honorary Herbarium Assistant, as Demonstrator in Botany from 1937 to 1945 and as Curator of the Herbarium from 1945 to 1967. Within these few lines is encompassed a vast amount of work both personal and in the inspiration of generations of students, for although the Department was never large, it produced a number of outstanding botanists over the years on all of whom she had an influence; B. E. S. Gunning, M. Morrison and J. S. Pate immediately coming to mind. She was a colleague of Professor James Small and his successors Jack Heslop-Harrison and Eric Simon. The Herbarium collection was greatly enhanced and completely reorganized during her Curatorship. Her last great task was to oversee its transfer to the Ulster Museum (BEL) in the spring of 1968, though, technically, she had retired in the autumn of 1967. Her taxonomic work was meticulous and through it she got to know a large group of experts across the world. From 1951, she was formally involved with the /rish Naturalists’ Journal; at first as Assistant Editor with A. W. Stelfox for two years, then as Editor until 1976, when Mrs Elizabeth Platts succeeded her. After her retirement she continued to give both of her time and material resources and remained on the management committee until her death. A short appreciation of her period as Editor appeared in Jr. Nat. J. 19: 1-2 (1977) and, with it, a reproduction of the pencil portrait created in 1973 by Raymond Piper which shows her in repose. Through the Belfast Naturalists’ Field Club she reached a wide audience as excursion leader and lecturer. Through the B.S.B.I. she became known to a wide spectrum of botanists and was unfailing in her assistance to members, at least to those of whom she approved, in the discovery, or rediscovery, of rare species across Ireland. OBITUARIES 65 The Jrish Naturalists’ Journal fitted well into Pat Kertland’s persona: it gave her the opportunity to do good by stealth. As Editor she encouraged the amateur naturalist in every way possible, often taking the barest bones of a scientific note and converting it to an acceptable technical standard. One recent project dear to her heart was the creation and publication of the Flora of Lough Neagh by John Harron (1986). This book, dedicated to her, reflects the encouragement of others and the drive which epitomised her life. She recognized the value of the data, and associated record specimens, which the author was collecting and, over a long period, catalysed a team to help him convert this raw material into the finished product. I was privileged to be one of Pat Kertland’s students in the early 1950s at a time when she took on extra duties after Dr Mary Lynn’s early retirement due to unstable health (though happily she is still with us today). I can vouch for her ability as a lecturer, though, on field trips, her propensity to take both hands off the steering wheel to point out features of interest was disconcerting, to say the least. In recent years ill-health struck cruelly; firstly increasing deafness and then sudden total blindness. This did not break her spirit: she moved to a nursing home, organized readers and continued to make her distinctive contribution to life. I can do no better than end with a quotation from the Address by the Rev. Dr David Lapsley given at her funeral in late February 1991: “Most of all she is held in deep respect and affection because of her interest in people. She was a source of encouragement to others, this honest woman, with a manner that could be formidable and brusque. She appeared not to suffer fools gladly, but her words and deeds were constantly flavoured by kindness and generosity.” W. D. LINTON EVAN ROBERTS (1906—1991) When Evan Roberts died on 15 May 1991, at the age of 84, Wales lost one of her most outstanding field botanists of this century, a man whose special interest was the distribution and ecology of the arctic-alpine plants of Snowdonia and who became the acknowledged authority on them. He was born in Capel Curig, the little village in which he was to spend the whole of his life. Even when he married, he went to live only a mile away, and following the death of his wife, Mabel, in 1969, moved back to the house where he was born, to spend his latter years with one of his sons. On leaving the village school at 14, he found employment at the local slate quarry and worked there almost continuously until it closed in 1953. The work was hard, often dangerous, and poorly paid. It was these circumstances which eventually drove Evan on to the course which was to give his life a new dimension and himself so much pleasure and satisfaction. For, having married when he was 23, the increasing needs of his young family forced him to give up his treasured motor-cycle and consequently spend more time on the hills around Capel Curig. As he was fond of recalling, one Saturday afternoon during this period proved particularly fateful. He took the path up Moel Siabod, the hill immediately behind his home, and, just before reaching the summit, came across a plant with beautiful purple flowers which he had never seen before. It was only after several inquiries that he found its name: the plant which had captured his imagination was Saxifraga oppositifolia. For him it proved to be the key to a new world and from then on Evan spent much of his spare time searching for it on other hills around Capel Curig. He got hold of a copy of J. E. Gniffith’s Flora of Anglesey and Carnarvonshire and thereafter searched for other arctic-alpine plants such as Lloydia serotina, Polygonum viviparum and many others. A chance meeting with E. Price Evans, the notable ecologist, gained Evan a friend who had considerable influence on him. For Price Evans urged him to keep a full list of all the plants he found, with details of their locality, altitude, aspect and the nature of the local rock. Thus began the most thorough and systematic account ever made of Snowdonia’s arctic-alpine plants and all that grew with them. Years of careful and laborious work went into the survey, so that at its completion the plant life of this area was better known than it had ever been before. Rare plants thought to be extinct were rediscovered; others were found in new localities where they were formerly unknown, such as, for instance, his discovery of Dryas octopetala on the remote cliffs of Creigiau Gleision, 66 OBITUARIES 8 km from its previously known site above Cwm Idwal. When he took Price Evans there to see it some time later, they found Carex capillaris near by, a new record for Wales and an interesting addition to the mountain flora of Snowdonia. Happily, both plants still survive in this remote spot, where they may be seen together with Saxifraga oppositifolia, Polystichum lonchitis and many other species found here by Evan. In addition to his dedication and enthusiasm (and in spite of a defect in one eye) Evan was well qualified for the work he undertook — he was hardy and a skilful climber. During World War II he assisted in training Commando units in the techniques of rock-climbing. It was therefore no surprise that when the Nature Conservancy acquired Cwm Idwal as its first National Nature Reserve in Wales, in 1954, Evan was appointed to be its Warden. He was later promoted to be the Chief Warden in North Wales, a position he held until his retirement. In this new post his unfailing good nature, unruffled manner and natural courtesy, especially when dealing with those who sometimes transgressed the code of conservation in the Reserves, made him universally respected. His generosity and readiness to share his knowledge of the mountains and their flora with all who sought his help, made him many friends over the years. His services were in great demand to lead parties of students and others around the Reserves and, indeed, anywhere in Snowdonia. The illustrated lectures he gave during the winter months (both in his native Welsh and in English) became very popular and did much to further an understanding of the conservation. movement among the general public in North Wales. Evan’s concern for conservation was apparent long before he joined the staff of the Nature Conservancy. I recall his deep disappointment when a small bog near Capei Curig, in which, in 1946, he had found Hammarbya paludosa, was destroyed by forestry operations a few years later, in spite of his appeal for its preservation. But I have happy memories, too, of many botanical excursions with him on fine summer days to Cwm Glas and Clogwyn y Garnedd, where he could show me most of the rare plants as unerringly as if they were in his own back garden; and of one occasion when he took me to a rock crevice high up on Snowdon to see the very rare Woodsia alpina. To be with him for a day on the mountains was an inspiration, for he knew Snowdonia, its cliffs and crags, gullies and ledges like the palm of his hand. Although he published very little, his detailed records were made availne to the Nature Conservancy. Copies of them have also been deposited in the Library of the National Museum of Wales in Cardiff. The value of his work on the mountain flora of Snowdonia was recognized by the University of Wales, in 1956, when it awarded him the richly deserved honorary degree of M.Sc. He was later to receive the M.B.E. for his services to conservation over a long period, often beyond the call of his official duties. He was, indeed, a remarkable man and his loss is irreplaceable. He will be remembered with affection and gratitude by those who knew him. We extend our deep sympathy to his three sons and their families in their bereavement. R. H. RoBerts Watsonia, 19, 67-71 (1992) 67 Report ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING, 4 MAY 1991 The Annual General Meeting of the Society was held at the Merseyside Maritime Museum, Liverpool, at the invitation of the National Museums and Galleries on Merseyside, at 11.15. 95 members were present and Mr J. Ounsted, Vice-President, took the Chair. Apologies for absence were read and Minutes of the 1990 Annual General Meeting, as published in Watsonia 18: 331-332 (1991), were approved and signed by the Chairman. REPORT OF COUNCIL The adoption of this report, which had been circulated to members, was proposed from the Chair, seconded by Dr E. C. Nelson and accepted nem con. TREASURER’S REPORT AND ACCOUNTS The Hon. Treasurer, proposing the adoption of his Report and Accounts, offered to explain any points. Dr T. C. G. Rich asked for clarification of the terms of covenant of subscriptions. Mr Walpole replied that the covenants must be for a minimum of four years. The adoption of the Report was seconded by Mr R. G. Ellis and Dr P. Macpherson, who coupled this with a vote of thanks to the Treasurer. This was carried unanimously with applause. SUBSCRIPTION INCREASES FROM JANUARY 1992 Following the general rise in costs, particularly of postage, Council had proposed the following rates from 1992: Ordinary £12.50 to £15.00 Family £1.00 to £2.00 Junior £5.00 to £6.00 Senior £7.50 to £9.00 Institutional £12.50 to £15.00 The Hon. General Secretary noted that there had been no increase in subscriptions since 1986. Mrs M. Lindop, relaying a query from a member unable to be present, asked for clarification of the Senior rate. The Hon. General Secretary read the definition as in B.S.B.I. Rule 24: “Persons over 60 who have been members of the Society for at least 10 years and who are no longer in full time employment may elect to pay an annual reduced subscription at such rate as from time to time shall be decided by Council”. It was agreed to republish this rule in B.S. B.J. News for the information of ‘members. The adoption of the new rates was proposed by the Hon. Treasurer, seconded by Mrs A. Lee, and carried with none against. ELECTION OF PRESIDENT The election of Dr P. Macpherson F.R.C.P., F.R.C.R., F.L.S., as nominated by Council, was proposed from the Chair and carried unanimously with acclamation. Dr Macpherson was then welcomed and took the Chair. Thanking Mr Ounsted, he also thanked members for his election, saying that this leap to President had in no way been anticipated, but that he was humbly and deeply 68 REPORT appreciative. The President then called on Dr J. R. Akeroyd to thank the retiring President, Professor D. A. Webb Sc.D., F.M.L.S., who was unfortunately unable to be present at the meeting. Dr Akeroyd, recalling that he and Professor Webb had shared the same biology teacher at Charterhouse, the late Percy ‘Cheese’ Chapman, reminded us that Professor Webb was first a marine biologist, whose research over the years had ranged from the blood pigments of sea-squirts to Saxifraga. Professor Webb, who had been one of the driving forces of Flora Europaea and had dominated Irish botany since the death of Praeger, had been an active President of this Society, frequently making the long journey to attend meetings and supporting all the B.S.B.I. activities during his term of office. He thanked Professor Webb on behalf of the Society and this was acclaimed with applause. ELECTION OF VICE-PRESIDENTS The election of Mr P. S. Green, Dr G. Halliday and Mr A. C. Jermy, as nominated by Council, was proposed by Dr R. J. Pankhurst, seconded by Mr R. M. Burton and carried unanimously. RE-ELECTION OF HON. GENERAL SECRETARY AND HON. TREASURER Proposing the re-election of Mrs M. Briggs, the President recalled that, when invited to accept nomination for President, he had asked if a medical certificate ensuring the good health of the Hon. Secretary was available. He particularly thanked the Hon. Secretary for the Annual Report of Council and this year for the first of a new series of the Year Book which had been widely acclaimed by members. Proposing the re-election of Mr Walpole, the President adding to his earlier vote of thanks, referred to the considerable workload of the Treasurer for the Society. The elections were formally seconded by Mrs A. Lee and Mr R. G. Ellis and carried unanimously with applause. ELECTION OF COUNCIL MEMBERS In accordance with Rule 10, nominations had been received for Dr J. R. Akeroyd, Mr J. M. Montgomery and Dr T. C. G. Rich. Their election was proposed by Mr R. G. Ellis, seconded by Dr — R. J. Pankhurst and passed unanimously. MINOR AMENDMENTS OF THE RULES OF THE SOCIETY Some changes in the wording of eight of the Society’s Rules, to incorporate changes of Rules approved by Annual General Meetings since 1968, and to consolidate the wording, had been discussed and approved by Council. Copies of the amended Rules were available at the meeting, and had been offered to members by post beforehand on request. The amendments were accepted without comment. ELECTION OF HONORARY MEMBERS Mr R. G. Ellis, proposing Mr M. Walpole F.C.A., F.L.S., spoke of him as a keen supporter of conservation and active member of his local Wildlife Trust, and as a botanical book collector with the finest private collection in this country. For the Society Mr Walpole was a decisive Chairman of the Publications Committee, and, most significantly, as Hon. Treasurer he has efficiently handled B.S.B.I. finances for 20 years. Proposing Mr A. O. Chater, Mr Walpole noted that some societies awarded medals to individual members as a token of appreciation of distinction in service to the society. Mr Chater, a competent Secretary of the Publications Committee for nine years, was co-author of Sedges of the British Isles and had also been very involved in the publication of five other titles in this series of B.S.B.I. REPORT 69 Handbooks. His general botanical advice has been valued by the officers and members alike, and as a Carex Referee and the Specialist on Nomenclature his adjudications are generously offered and highly respected. Before the meeting neither recipient knew that they had been nominated by Council; both were unanimously elected with warm applause. RE-ELECTION OF HONORARY AUDITORS the Hon. Treasurer, in proposing the re-election of Grant Thornton, West Walk, Leicester, referred to the honour for the Society to present their Accounts over the name of these distinguished Auditors. Their re-election was passed unanimously, and the President agreed to write expressing thanks from the Society. ANY OTHER BUSINESS Mr M. Walpole, as Chairman of the Publications Committee, reported that the Committee had appointed two new Watsonia Editors: Dr R. R. Mill and Dr E. C. Nelson. Both were present and were welcomed. Dr R. J. Gornall had retired and Dr B. S. Rushton would now be Receiving Editor. Thanking Dr Gornall on behalf of the Society he observed that the high standards of Watsonia had increased during the ten years of Dr Gornall’s editorship. He was thanked for competently coping with the very heavy workload, and for his skill at conforming to prescribed budgets. Thanks were extended also to all the Society’s Editors, not least to Mr R. G. Ellis (B.S. B.I. News) and Mr D. H. Kent (B.S.B.I. Abstracts). The Report of the B.S.B.I. Monitoring Scheme by Dr T. C. G. Rich was complete in two large format volumes, of which copies of Vol. II (the maps), sufficient for distribution to v.c. Recorders, were now available, and a matching number of copies of Vol. I were in production. Because of their large size, publication of further copies would be costly and, at the request of Council, the Hon. Secretary asked how many of the members present (who were not v.c. Recorders) would be interested in purchasing copies if these were to be published at approximately £20. Almost all those members signalled by a show of hands as wanting to purchase a copy if published. Possible ways to reduce the cost, e.g. smaller paper size for Vol. I, or ashortened text as an Introduction to the maps, were discussed. Dr Rich noted that he had submitted three papers to Watsonia on the results of the Scheme. Dr Rushton pointed out that if these papers were accepted by and published in Watsonia, they could not be published elsewhere. A lengthy and lively discussion followed and the matter was referred to Council with some urgency, in view of the time that had elapsed since the end of the field work and the completion of the Report. Following some general announcements, the President then thanked Dr J. R. Edmondson and his assistants for the excellent local arrangements and the meeting closed at 12.23. Mary BriGGs PAPERS READ AT THE ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING Four papers were presented on the theme of “Botanists and Books’’. Michael Walpole first spoke on British Floras and the book collector, explaining his personal reasons for collecting local Floras and sharing some anecdotes on the sometimes difficult relationships with antiquarian booksellers. He found it particularly difficult to confine his collecting to a severely restricted field, given the large number of publications which have botanical data in their contents. Charles Nelson then gave a talk entitled ‘“Out of olde bokes . . . cometh al this newe science”: musings on bibliography and botanists. Aptly complementing the previous speaker, he chose a series of examples to illustrate his theme that it was not only the printed contents of the books which were of significance to posterity, but also the jottings, scribblings and more deliberate mutilations of 70 REPORT books (such as bookplates — several exuberant examples were shown) which provide rich pickings for botanical historians. After the tea break, Tim Rich presented a paper Towards an Atlas of the British Flora 2000, the date being millennial rather than a firm prediction. Based on his experience during the recently completed Monitoring Scheme project, he outlined various methods for the efficient capture of distributional data and made a strong plea for the continuation of involvement in field recording which would lead to the publication of a new Atlas. The final speaker, Bob Barnard of H.M.S.O. Publications, gave a professional publisher’s account of The new technology of publishing botany books, showing examples from various recent H.M.S.O. publications to demonstrate new methods of typesetting, illustrating and distributing books. Reference was made to CD-ROM technology as well as to more conventional printed products, with helpful guidance on the various ways in which publishers price their products. THE NATURAL HISTORY BOOK FAIR This was the first occasion on which a Book Fair had been arranged as a commercial venture at the Maritime Museum. It was organized by the Botany Department of Liverpool Museum to take place in conjunction with the Annual General Meeting. The following booksellers participated: B.S.B.I. Publications (Oundle) Broadleaf Books (Cardiff) Chantrey Books (Sheffield) John Price (Marlborough) Parry Books (Liverpool) Subbuteo Natural History Books (Treuddyn) Summerfield Books (Brough) Tim Oldham, of Wyseby House Books, had to withdraw at a late stage because of illness. It was generally agreed that this event enhanced the value of a conference on “Botanists and Books” as well as providing tempting purchasing opportunities for bibliophiles. The agreeable atmosphere of the Maritime Museum’s historic warehouse galleries was also appreciated. EXHIBITION: SOME NORTH-WEST BOTANISTS AND THEIR BOOKS A small display was mounted by the Botany Department of Liverpool Museum containing short biographical sketches of some of the principal authors of botanical books in N.W. England together with examples of the books themselves as well as items from the archives. One of the highlights of the exhibition was a copy of Thomas Johnson’s 1633 edition of Gerard’s Herball. The following botanists with North-west connections were featured: William Bean (1817-1864); Joseph Dickinson (1805-1865); John Gerard (1545-1612); Conrad Theodore Green (1863-1940); Leopold Hartley Grindon (1818-1904); Thomas Batt Hall (1814-1886); William Roscoe (1753- 1831); William Gladstone Travis (1877-1958); John Warren, Baron de Tabley (1835-1895); James Alfred Wheldon (1862-1924) and Albert Wilson (1862-1949). Also on show were samples of the manuscript of de Tabley’s Flora of Cheshire, together with examples of specimens from his herbarium, on loan from the National Botanic Gardens, Glasnevin, Dublin. The organizers are indebted to the authorities at Glasnevin, as well as to Mr Neville Carrick, the City of Liverpool’s Librarian and Mr Eric Greenwood, Keeper of the Liverpool Museum, for the loan of items for this exhibition. A leaflet entitled Some North-west Botanists and their Books was prepared by Lorna Cunliffe- Lister, a student from the Department of Museum Studies, University of Leicester, to accompany the exhibition. REPORT Til FIELD EXCURSION HELD IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE A.G.M. BODNANT GARDEN AND THE GREAT ORME, NORTH WALES. 5 MAY 1991 A coach party of 42 people together with about 20 travelling by car made the journey to Bodnant Garden, near Conwy, on a day which started cloudy but developed into a gloriously sunny afternoon. The garden at Bodnant, which was given to the National Trust by the late Lord Aberconway, is set in a precipitous valley close to the estuary of the River Conway. It is managed partly as a formal garden and partly as a ‘wilderness’ garden with steeply sloping rocky banks and a network of crazily angled paths. The facilities have been enhanced by a garden centre (under refurbishment) and a new restaurant and coffee shop which, despite the Bank Holiday crush, was able to offer an efficient luncheon service. After lunch the coach departed for Llandudno, hoping to take its passengers to a rendezvous with the car-borne botanists at the foot of the Great Orme. Alas, Bank Holiday crowds attending a “Victorian Extravaganza” in Llandudno, coupled with the closure (due to a landslip) of the coastal road which encircles the peninsula, conspired to delay the coach to the point where the two parties set off separately for the limestone massif of the Great Orme. Led by three local botanists, Wendy McCarthy, Ted Phenna and Geoff Battershall, 17 members set off on an ‘alternative A.G.M. excursion’. Numerous specialities were seen including Aster linosyris, Hypochoeris maculata, Helianthemum canum, Hornungia petraea, Orchis morio and Cotoneaster integerrimus. The coach party, having finally reached the ungrazed area below the cablecar station, were able to scramble up the slopes above the foot of the Happy Valley gardens in order to see some of the characteristic early-flowering limestone plants, including Scilla verna, and Brassica oleracea at its northern limit of distribution in Wales. Thanks are due to Tim Rich for contributing to this report, to all the speakers and exhibitors at the Book Fair, to the staff of the Conference Office at the Merseyside Maritime Museum for their efficient handling of the front-of-house arrangements, and to the Trustees of the National Museums and Galleries on Merseyside for their hospitality. J. R. EDMONDSON aL. *4. oy: *16. aegis 18. Fi). o20). DAE B.S.B.I. Conference Reports BRITISH FLOWERING PLANTS AND MODERN SYSTEMATIC METHODS Ed. A. J. Wilmott, 1948, 104 pages, 18 plates. £5.25. . THE STUDY OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF BRITISH PLANTS. Ed. J. E. Lousley, 1951. 128 pages, illustrations and maps. . THE CHANGING FLORA OF BRITAIN Ed. J. E. Lousley, 1953. 203 pages, 9 plates, 25 text figs. SPECIES STUDIES IN THE BRITISH FLORA Ed. J. E. Lousley, 1955. 189 pages, 2 plates and 23 text figs. £5.25. PROGRESS IN THE STUDY OF THE BRITISH FLORA Ed. J. E. Lousley, 1957. 128 pages, 4 plates and 9 text figs. £5.25. . A DARWIN CENTENARY Ed. P. J. Wanstall, 1961. 140 pages, 7 plates, 12 text figs. . LOCAL FLORAS Ed. P. J. Wanstall, 1963. 118 pages, 1 plate (map), 9 text figs. . THE CONSERVATION OF THE BRITISH FLORA Ed. E. Milne — Redhead, 1963. 90 pages. . REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY AND TAXONOMY OF VASCULAR PLANTS Ed. J. G. Hawkes, 1966. 182 pages, 1 plate, 9 text figs. . MODERN METHODS IN PLANT TAXONOMY Ed. V. H. Heywood, 1968. 312 pages, numerous text figs. Held in association with the Linnean Society of London. . THE FLORA OF A CHANGING BRITAIN Ed. F. H. Perring, 1970. 158 pages, 21 text figs. £3.50 (1973 reprint). . TAXONOMY, PHYTOGEOGRAPHY AND EVOLUTION Ed. D. H. Valentine, 1972. 431 pages, numerous text figs and tables. Held in association with The Linnean Society of London and the International Organisation of Plant Biosystematists. . PLANTS WILD AND CULTIVATED Ed. P. S. Green, 1973. 232 pages, 8 plates and 24 text figs. £3.20. . THE OAK: ITS HISTORY AND NATURAL HISTORY Ed. M. G. Morris & F. H. Perring, 1974. 376 pages, illustrations. £8.25 . EUROPEAN FLORISTIC AND TAXONOMIC STUDIES Ed. S. M. Walters, with the assistance of C. J. King, 1975. 144 pages and 4 plates. Held in association with the Linnean Society of London. £3.80. THE POLLINATION OF FLOWERS BY INSECTS Ed. A. J. Richards, 1978. 213 pages and 31 plates. Held in association with the Linnean Society of London. £45. THE BIOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF RARE PLANT CONSERVATION Ed. H. Synge, 1981. 586 pages and numerous text figs. Held in association with the Linnean Society of London. £49.95. i PLANT LORE STUDIES Ed. R. Vickery, 1984. 260 pages. Held in association with the Folklore Society. £7.50. ARCHAEOLOGY AND THE FLORA OF THE BRITISH ISLES Ed. M. Jones, 1987. 128 pages and numerous text figs. Held in association with the Association | of Environmental Archaeologists. £15. THE LONG TRADITION Ed. H. J. Noltie, 1987. 192 pages, 25 black and white illustrations. Held in association with the Botanical Society of Edinburgh and The Society for the History of Natural History. £21.50. HEATHERS AND HEATHLANDS Ed. S. L. Jury, 1989. 68 pages, numerous text figs and tables. Held in association with the Linnean Society of London. £4.85. Items marked with an asterisk are in print and available from BSBI Publications, 24 Glapthorn Road, Oundle, Peterborough PE8 4JQ, at the prices stated (postage included). | | | 4 | INSTRUCTIONS TO CONTRIBUTORS Scope. Authors are invited to submit Papers and Short Notes concerning the taxonomy, biosystematics and distribution of British and Irish vascular plants, as well as topics of a more general or historical nature. Manuscripts must be submitted in duplicate, typewritten on one side of the paper, with wide margins and double-spaced throughout. Format should follow that used in recent issues of Watsonia. Underline where italics are required. Names of periodicals in the References should be abbreviated as in the World list of scientific periodicals, and herbaria as in British and Irish herbaria (Kent & Allen 1984). Further details on format can be found in B.S.B.I. News 51:40—42 (1989). Tables, figure legends & appendices should be typed on separate sheets and attached at the end of the manuscript. Figures should be drawn in black ink and identified in pencil on the back with their number and the author’s name. They should be drawn no more than three times final size, bearing in mind they will normally be reduced to occupy the full width of a page. Scale-bars are essential on plant illustrations and maps. Lettering should be done with transfers or high-quality stencilling, although graph axes and other more extensive labelling are best done in pencil and left to the printer. Photographs can be accepted if they assist in the understanding of the article. Contributors are advised to consult the editors before submission in cases of doubt. Twenty-five offprints are given free to authors of Papers and Short Notes; further copies may be purchased in multiples of 25 at the current price. The Society takes no responsibility for the views expressed by authors of Papers, Short Notes, Book Reviews or Obituaries. Submission of manuscripts Papers and Short Notes: Dr B. S. Rushton, Department of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, University of Ulster, Coleraine, Co. Londonderry, N. Ireland, BTS2 1SA. Books for Review: Dr J. R. Edmondson, Botany Department, Liverpool Museum, William Brown St, Liverpool, L3 8EN. Plant Records: the appropriate vice-county recorder, who should then send them to C. D. Preston, Biological Records Centre, Monks Wood Experimental Station, Abbots Ripton, Huntingdon, PE17 2LS. Back issues of Watsonia are handled by Messrs Wm Dawson & Sons Limited, Cannon House, Folkestone, Kent, to whom orders for all issues prior to Volume 18 part 1 should be sent. Recent issues (Vol. 18 part 1 onwards) are available from the Hon. Treasurer of the B.S.B.I., 68 Outwoods Road, Loughborough, Leicestershire, LE11 3LY. February 199 Contents F. & GROENHOF Ty ological AN ok :: cage? Sak Botanical Society of the British Isles Patron: Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother Applications for membership should be addressed to the Hon. General Secretary, c/o Department of Botany, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London, SW7 5BD, from whom copies of the Society’s Prospectus may be obtained. Officers for 1991-92 Elected at the Annual General Meeting, 4th May 1991 President, Dr P. Macpherson Vice-Presidents, Mr J. Ounsted, Mr P. S. Green, Dr G. Halliday, Mr A. C. Jermy Honorary General Secretary, Mrs M. Briggs Honorary Treasurer, Mr M. Walpole Editors of Watsonia Papers and Short Notes, J. R. Edmondson, R. R. Mill, E. C. Nelson, B. S. Rushton* Plant Records, C. D. Preston Book Reviews, J. R. Edmondson Obituaries, J. R. Akeroyd “Receiving editor, to whom all MSS should be sent (see inside back cover). ; @% @ rae eH is Bt : eu M Watsonia, 19, 73-95 (1992) : (HATSRAL BISTORD) - 2 SEP 1992 Recording bias in botanical surveys OCAAY CIRHARY er SUSI SR EIS BEE RII | T. C. G. RICH* and E. R. WOODRUFF Biological Records Centre, Monks Wood Experimental Station, Abbots Ripton, Huntingdon, Cambs.; PEI7 2LS ABSTRACT Recording bias in botanical surveys arises primarily from the recording behaviour of individual botanists, sometimes coupled with the survey techniques and the types of plants being recorded. Recording bias is probably widespread in botanical surveys; it does not invalidate the records, but requires that care is taken with interpretation. Some generalizations are made to help assess recording bias, and are illustrated using examples found during the B.S.B.I. Monitoring Scheme. INTRODUCTION In any botanical survey, there is an inevitable degree of recording bias (Hope-Simpson 1940; Sykes et al. 1983; Nilsson & Nilsson 1983; Kirby et al. 1986; West & Hatton 1990, etc.). Efforts are therefore usually made to minimise bias by adopting a controlled, systematic, repeatable method (Greig-Smith 1964). In the recording techniques adopted for most national or county plant atlases (e.g. Perring & Walters 1962; Hall 1980), recorders individually select the areas within squares to visit, and then record the species present to fill the time available, or until the list is felt to be comprehensive. Such an unstructured recording technique might be expected to introduce considerable local bias to the data collected, and especially if the surveys are to be repeated. For instance, only 52% of the records collected by two independent parties of botanists six weeks apart in the same tetrads (2-km squares) were common to both surveys (Rich & Woodruff 1990, 1992). Efforts are often made to achieve even coverage (e.g. Dony 1963), but failure to achieve this is only one of many sources from which bias can arise. Documentation of what was done and where and when and by whom can help with interpretation of the data, but such details are rarely collected. Bias originates primarily from differences in the recording behaviour and the ability of individual botanists, but may also arise from the survey techniques or the types of plants being recorded. The extent of bias in the data collected is rarely known, and few cases are described in detail. Perring & Walters (1962) presented provisional distribution maps of about 40 taxa and explained why the data were thought to be inadequate. Nilsson & Nilsson (1983) found that sampling error accounted for two-thirds of the apparent species turnover rates on islands in Sweden. Preston & Eversham (1992) describe selected examples of botanical and zoological recording bias. The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to the problems of recording bias by using some examples encountered during the B.S.B.I. Monitoring Scheme (Rich & Woodruff 1990, 1992). The B.S.B.I. Monitoring Scheme was a 10-km square sample survey of Britain and Ireland during 1987 and 1988 to assess the current status of the flora. Over i600 botanists collected 985,000 records in 425 out of the 429 sample 10-km squares, representing 2660 taxa. Many of the examples are drawn from a comparison of these data with those collected for the Adlas of the British florat (Perring & Walters 1962). Nomenclature follows Clapham et al. (1987). * Present address: 24 Lombardy Drive, Peterborough, PE1 3TF + hereafter referred to as the Aflas. 74 T. C. G. RICH AND E. R. WOODRUFF q5 RECORDING BIAS IN BOTANICAL SURVEYS ‘OSDYII8 DUWUAISOLBY pue wnsopou wnuosdjog (p ‘d) ‘4olpu uoydisosv3v7T pure snjysaa snqny (q ‘e) :adueyo Jo susoyjed sepiunts Ajuoredde surmoys exe} Jo sited pajoajag “| FUNI{ ©) bs d ob a ALES SONOS is fe ies Ole wige aia | Nay OO | asx) : 76 T. C. G. RICH AND E. R. WOODRUFF EXAMPLES OF RECORDING BIAS NOTE ON PRESENTATION OF THE MAPS The maps show only data from the 10-km squares sampled for the B.S.B.I. Monitoring Scheme (one in every nine; see Rich & Woodruff 1992). The symbols are enlarged so that they are clear to read when the maps are reduced and do not indicate the actual areas covered. The symbols used are as follows: © Recorded only for the Af/as (1930-1960 in Britain, before 1960 in Ireland). ¢ Recorded only for the Monitoring Scheme (1987-1988). @ Recorded for both the Atlas and the Monitoring Scheme. Thus, a predominance of open circles may suggest a decline in relative frequency between the surveys, and a predominance of pluses, an increase. THE IMPORTANCE OF ASSESSING BIAS The importance of assessing bias can be seen from the apparent similarities between the following selected pairs of maps. Unless the extent of recording bias is known, any conclusions drawn from the data may be misleading. Rubus vestitus and Lagarosiphon major (Figs 1a, b): The increase in records for the former species reflects an increase in recording of critical taxa coupled with incomplete historical data; for the latter it reflects a real increase in the frequency of the plant. Agrostemma githago and Polygonum nodosum (Figs 1c, d): The former species has decreased markedly during the last 30 years; the latter has undergone a taxonomic revision and is no longer recognised by most recorders. BIASES RELATED TO THE QUALITY AND QUANTITY OF RECORDING It is often said that the distribution of plants reflects the distribution of botanists, and this is particularly true for the more critical taxa and for small areas. Fig. 2 shows how the apparent distribution of Carex hostiana X viridula correlates with areas recorded by A. O. Chater and J. Harron who know this obscure hybrid well. It is, however, probably widespread in the north and west where its parents grow together. Another botanist, M. Porter, recorded critical taxa in great detail in Brecon for the Monitoring Scheme, resulting in apparently highly localised concentrations of records of species of Rubus, Hieracium, Taraxacum and Euphrasia (Rich & Woodruff 1990). Taxonomic awareness and recording fashions may bias results on a wider scale and for commoner taxa. Many critical groups have been more widely recorded for the Monitoring Scheme than for the Atlas (e.g. Hieracium, Fig. 3a), but some were more widely recorded for the Adlas (e.g. Rhinanthus, Fig. 3b), resulting in artificial changes in frequency. Compared to a general average of 16% more records for the Monitoring Scheme than the Adlas, there are 24% more records for five selected genera (Carex, Polygonum, Populus, Rumex and Salix) covered by the B.S.B.I. Handbook series (Jermy et al. 1982; Kent & Lousley 1981; Meikle 1984). Trist & Sell (1988) drew attention to the occurrence of two subspp. of Molinia caerulea in the British Isles; there were four records of the subspp. in 1987 and 33 in 1988. These increases in records are no doubt due to increased awareness of the taxa concerned. Fig. 4 shows 10-km squares where above average percentages of critical taxa were recorded for the Atlas and Monitoring Scheme surveys; the squares correlate well with areas known to have been well-recorded. There are differences in opinion between recorders over which introduced species or garden escapes to record. In recent years it has also become more acceptable to record all introductions as they have become more widespread in the wild. Consequently, exaggerated rates of increase may be observed for species which were present but often ignored during recording for the Aflas (Fig. 5). However, it is also still more acceptable to record some introductions than others — taxa are more likely to be recorded if they are included in national or local Floras or if listed on the record cards. Crops such as Wheat (Triticum aestivum) and Barley (Hordeum vulgare), which are not listed on cards, are poorly recorded on roadsides compared to others, such as Oil-seed Rape (Brassica napus) (Fig. 6), which are listed on the cards and are widely recorded. Bias also arises from differences in taxonomic opinion and also from common errors; many recorders simply follow the major floras. There is little agreement on the current taxonomic status of the subspp. of Juncus bulbosus, resulting in confusion between the records (Fig. 7a, b). Viola canina RECORDING BIAS IN BOTANICAL SURVEYS A. O. Chater, JH = J. Figure 2. Correlation between (a) the distribution of Carex hostiana X viridula and (b) the areas recorded by two botanists (AC Harron). VG T. C. G. RICH AND E. R. WOODRUFF 78 “SDV B43 10} popiose: Ajapim soul ‘sounu “dsqns sour snyjupuiyy (q) 39-eae Regression Model 2 0-19 5-34 —0-36 ns 0-00 ns BOF Ee ea Ores RMSE = root-mean-square error; ns = not significant; *** = p<0-001. B.S.B.I. Monitoring Scheme data was generally quite good. The mean deviation (bias) was smallest for the prediction method using Model 2, the root-mean-square error indicating its advantage over Model 1. However the error was least for simple Gaussian smoothing. There was a notable and statistically very significant difference between counties (Table 4). In terms of effort per tetrad, Kent was more intensively surveyed for the county Flora than for the Monitoring Scheme, whilst Bedfordshire was less so. In any survey the uniformity of sampling effort is of great importance. The B.S.B.I. Monitoring Scheme was carefully controlled with this objective (Rich & Woodruff 1990), but differences must inevitably have occurred. Variation also exists between the county Floras, some being over-sampled in comparison with the Monitoring Scheme, whilst others were relatively under-sampled. For validation we have selected county Floras with a high and fairly uniform sampling coverage. Even though the per-tetrad effort may sometimes have been less than that achieved by the Monitoring Scheme, overall they will all have had more intensive sampling. Thus the resolution of the response surfaces produced from the Monitoring Scheme will be poorer than those which could’ be obtained from the county Floras. In general we would expect those species with a fairly general but patchy distribution, such as those requiring habitats in old woods, to be less easy to predict than those species with distributions depending on some more widespread factor of the physical environment such as climate or soil type. This seems to be the case when comparing the deviances explained for E. europaeus and T. europaea on the one hand, with H. non-scripta and V. montana — on the other (Table 2). It is also supported by the closer agreement between overall county atlas data and the Gaussian-smoothed response surface (rows 1 and 2 in Table 3) for E. europaeus than for H. non-scripta and V. montana. The ability to predict species presence or absence using regression methods also seems to be somewhat species-specific (Table 2). Those whose distribution is strongly restricted by specific environmental factors such as climate (FE. europaeus and T. europaea) are seen to be better predicted than the others. Predictions were substantially improved by including information on 10- km square occurrence (Model 2). It is interesting that the coefficients a;, b;, c; in Model 2 were so close in value that a single regression would have sufficed for all four species. One of the main advantages of the logistic regression approach is that it can readily be extended to include other information (Le Duc et al. 1992). Such information might include, for instance, soil type (Avery 1973) and local climate (Bendelow & Hartnup 1980). Perhaps more important for many widespread species would be inclusion of additional habitat information such as the presence of woods, rivers, or a coastline. Such information is now becoming available in, for instance, the I.T.E. land classification database (Bunce et al. 1981). The more accurately the present frequency of a species can be estimated the better we shall be able to detect change in the future. CONCLUSIONS In Great Britain, sufficiently good survey data are now available to derive reliable national estimates of the probability of species occurrence in tetrads. Such estimates can be validated using | ; ) | | | { PREDICTING THE PROBABILITY OF SPECIES OCCURRENCE 105 independent data from county Floras. Using Gaussian-smoothed data from the Monitoring Scheme, combined with additional information about each tetrad, regression models can be developed which would improve the accuracy of estimates. These estimates can be used in future to detect the effects of major disturbances such as climate change or large-scale shifts in land use. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was partly supported by a grant from the Forestry Research Co-ordination Committee. We thank Chris Preston for his assistance in selecting the county atlases, and Tim Rich for suggestions on use of the Monitoring Scheme database. REFERENCES Avery, B. W. (1973). Soil classification in the Soil Survey of England and Wales. J. Soil Sci. 24: 324-338. BENDELOw, V. C. & Hartnup, R. (1980). Climatic classification of England and Wales. Soil Survey Technical Monograph No. 15. Harpenden. Bunce, R. G. H., Barr, C. J. & Wuirtaker, H. A. (1981). Land classes in Great Britain: Preliminary descriptions for users of the Merlewood method of land classification. Merlewood Research and Develop- ment Paper No. 86. Grange-over-Sands. Dony, J. G. (1963). The expectation of plant records from prescribed areas. Watsonia 5: 377-385. Dony, J. G. (1967). Flora of Hertfordshire. Hitchin. Dony, J. G. (1976). Bedfordshire plant atlas. Luton. ELuis, G. (1986). The new mapping scheme. B.S.B.I. News 43: 7-9. GRAHAM, G. G. (1988). The flora and vegetation of County Durham. Durham. GREEN, B. H. (1989). Agricultural impacts on the rural environment. J. Appld Ecol. 26: 793-802. Hatt, P. C. (1980). Sussex plant atlas. Brighton. Hii, M. O. (1991). Patterns of species distribution in Britain elucidated by canonical correspondence analysis. J. Biogeog. 18: 247-255. HunrtLeEY, B., BARTLEIN, P. J. & PRenticE, I. C. (1989). Climatic control of the distribution and abundance of beech (Fagus L.) in Europe and North America. J. Biogeog. 16: 551-560. INSLEY, H. (1988). Farm woodland planning. Forestry Commission Bulletin No. 80. London. I.U.C.C. INFORMATION SERVICES GrouP (1989). UNIRAS reference guide, version 6. Inter University Committee on Computing, University of Manchester, Manchester. IvimEy-Cook, R. B. (1984). Atlas of the Devon flora. Exeter. JONGMAN, R. H. G., TER BRAAK, C. J. F. & VAN TONGEREN, O. F. R. (1987). Data analysis in community and landscape ecology. Wageningen. Le Duc, M. G., Sparks, T. H. & Hitt, M. O. (1992). Predicting potential colonisers of new woodland plantations. Aspects Appld Biol. 29 (In press). McCosu, D. J. (1988). Local Floras — a progress report. Watsonia 17: 81-89. PERRING, F. H. & Watters, S. M., eds (1976). Atlas of British flora, 2nd ed. Wakefield. PHILP, E. G. (1982). Atlas of the Kent flora. Maidstone. Primaves!, A. L. & Evans, P. A. (1988). Flora of Leicestershire. Leicester. Ricu, T. C. G. (1986). The B.S.B.I. monitoring scheme. B.S.B.I. News 44: 11. Ricu, T. C. G. (1987). B.S.B.I. monitoring scheme. B.S.B.I. News 45: 9-12, 46: 7, 47: 8-12. Ricu, T. C. G. (1988). B.S.B.I. monitoring scheme. B.S.B.I. News 48: 8-10, 49: 16-17, 50: 16-17. Ricu, T. C. G. (1989). B.S.B.I. monitoring scheme. B.S.B.I. News 51: 17, 52: 19. Ricu, T. C. G. & Wooprurr, E. R. (1990). B.S.B.I. Monitoring Scheme 1987-1988. Unpublished report to the Nature Conservancy Council. Tamm, C. O. (1991). Nitrogen in terrestrial ecosystems: questions of productivity, vegetational changes and ecosystem Stability. Ecological Studies 81. Berlin. Tarpey, T. & Heatn, J. (1990). Wild flowers of north-east Essex. Colchester. (Accepted February 1992) june ap Wn > vy : es ae bettas Watsonia, 19, 107-112 (1992) 107 The distinction between the Festuca ovina L. and Festuca rubra L. aggregates in the British Isles C. A. STACE, A.-K. K. A. AL-BERMANI and M. J. WILKINSON* Department of Botany, University of Leicester, Leicester, LE] 7RH ABSTRACT The Festuca rubra L. and F. ovina L. aggregates (Poaceae) are defined and reliable means of distinguishing them in the British Isles are given. The best character concerns the young tiller leaf-sheaths, which are tubular in the former and split and overlapping in the latter aggregate. Characters that are often used to separate the two aggregates but are unreliable and therefore frequently cause misidentification are also listed. INTRODUCTION Festuca ovina L. and F. rubra L. fall into section Ovince Fries (= sect. Festuca) according to Hackel’s (1882) classification of the genus in Europe. Apart from these two species, which were each subdivided into a complex hierarchy of subspecies, varieties and subvarieties, Hackel included only nine other species, none of them British. He divided the section into two groups: Intravaginales, including F. ovina and eight other species; and Extravaginales vel Mixtae, with F. rubra and F. porcii Hackel. Markgraf-Dannenberg (1980) abandoned Hackel’s infrageneric classification, placing the 170 European species that she recognised into a number of intormal, unnamed groups. However, it is clear that 129 of these species would have been included in section Ovinae by Hackel. The increase from eleven to 129 over a period of 100 years is partly due to the description of newly discovered taxa, and partly due to a much narrower species concept that gradually developed. All the British taxa now recognised were placed by Hackel (1882) into either F. ovina or F. rubra, which are for convenience here referred to as the F. ovina and F. rubra aggregates. These taxa are listed under the names used by Hackel, Markgraf-Dannenberg and us (Wilkinson & Stace 1991, Al- Bermani 1991) in Table 1. Both the aggregates are very variable and also very important from both ecological and economic points of view. It is vital that plants of such importance are identified correctly, so it is particularly unfortunate that not only have the segregates of both aggregates been very widely misunderstood, but the two aggregates have been and are still frequentiy confused, particularly by British botanists. Virtually all the current British Floras, identification manuals and flower-guides that we have examined contain errors that would prevent accurate determination of at least some plants. Although most taxa of F. ovina agg. are easily separated from most taxa of F. rubra agg., certain taxa are not so easily placed. For example, within F. ovina agg., F. lemanii Bast. and F. brevipila Tracey are usually much more robust than, for exampie, F. ovina and are often misidentified as F. rubra. Conversely, F. rubra subsp. commutata Gaudin usually lacks rhizomes and is sometimes identified as a robust variant of F. ovina agg. In addition, pseudoviviparous variants of F. rubra are quite frequent and usually misdetermined as F. vivipara (L.) Sm., which belongs to the F. ovina agg. Although characters such as spikelet, lemma or awn lengths, leaf thickness and flatness and degree of adaxial ridging, culm height, degree of tuftedness and presence of rhizomes are important diagnostically in the section as a whole, they are of very little value on their own in distinguishing between the two aggregates, being in fact the most usual causes of confusion. Moreover, habitat preferences are of very limited value in separating these aggregates. For accurate determination it is *Present address: Scottish Crop Research Institute, Invergowrie, Dundee, DD2 5DA. C. A. STACE, A.-K. K. A. AL-BERMANI AND M. J. WILKINSON 108 poyoos ‘dsqns poyoav *dsqns pipinuiwuos ‘dsqns skyonjspsau ‘dsqus paogunt ‘dsqns sypaojy “dsqns paqna ‘dsqns viqna *f DIADUAAD “J ,opidiaasq , DY Ofisguo] DADAIAIA UOT DUDIIAOWAD smmsofyyf fiunuia] “ff pjooyyoiydo *dsqns i pinjaiy “dsqns puiao ‘dsqns puiao +7 Jaded juasaig NUOSPADYII “if SUIISAABIU “iY pnffip psoumad ‘dsqns paountl ‘dsqns sypsony *dsqns paqna ‘dsqns pidpuarv ‘Adsqns paqna *Yf pyofiount “4 pydydosajay “4 pjidiaasq oydyddyovay pyofisuo] DADAIAIA uony DUDIIAOULAD pyofinua] nupvuia] pjoonyorydo DIND{ISANS *] i, DUIAO “4 (0861) ds1aquouueC-Jesd ye ‘so1oods osay) 0) pordde Ajsuoim Uud0q Udo sey DYOf/isu0] “4 QWIeU OY y, 4 ‘saroads siy} 0) pordde Ajsuoim ud9q Ud}JO sey VIND]S -y OWIeU OY, ,. DAOYipuvss (S881) vsoumnsd vaount SIUD3INA DIADUIAD pydyddyovay DISADI pavdiaia pinay poyvoydisans puinuas “IeAQns ‘1eAqns “IBAQNS “IAQGNS “RAQGNS “IBAQNS “IBAQNS “TeAqNS “BANS “JEAQGNS "IBAQNS | xpDjof * pyofiupjd puinuas pynosnanp ponvjs puidns pipjpidvo SIUDBINA ICA “IBA “IRA “IRA “IBA “IBA “TOA “TRA paqna-na ‘dsqns wunasojaunp *dsqns pyjdydosajay ‘dsqns puiao-na ‘dsqns DAQNA “J DUIAO “J (Z881) [2yoeH SH ISI HSILIAd AHL NI SHLVOAUADOV VNIAO YW ANV VYdNy VONLSAd JO NOILVOIAISS VT TT ATAaVL DISTINCTION BETWEEN FESTUCA OVINA L. AND F. RUBRA L. 109 important that all these misleading characters be abandoned and that attention be focused on the characters described in the next section. The purpose of this paper is to provide infallible means of distinguishing between the F. ovina and F. rubra aggregates in the British Isles. Distinctions between the various segregates as listed in Table 1 have been detailed by Wilkinson & Stace (1991) for the F. ovina aggregate and will be detailed by Al-Bermani & Stace (in prep.) for the F. rubra aggregate. The data presented in the present paper have been gathered from many thousands of specimens, both living and preserved, over the past 20 years. Several hundred clones are grown and frequently studied in the University of Leicester Botanic Garden. The characters discussed here would require some modification if they were to be used successfully in some other parts of Europe. DIAGNOSTIC CHARACTERS The first two characters below provide an infallible distinction between the two aggregates; the others may be useful guides but should not be relied upon. TILLER LEAF-SHEATHS — FUSED OR OVERLAPPING In almost all grass leaves there is a clear distinction between the sheath, which encircles the stem and/or developing leaves above, and the blade, which arises from the top of the sheath. In some cases this overlapping structure persists to the base of the sheath, i.e. to the stem-node below, but often it progresses only part of the way down to the node, becoming a fused tube further down. In other cases the sheath has no free overlapping edges, but is a fused tube from the node below right up to the mouth of the sheath. This is particularly characteristic of the genera Glyceria and Melica. In the Festuca rubra aggregate the leaf-sheaths are tubular right up to or almost to the mouth, whereas in the Festuca ovina aggregate they have free overlapping edges for at least the upper 40% (and usually the upper 75%) of their length (Fig. 1). Only in very rare cases in the latter aggregate are the leaf-sheaths as much as 50% tubular. This difference is very clear-cut, but careful examination (preferably with a lens) must be made in order to avoid mistakes. Fresh material is much more easily observed than dried or pressed material. Moreover the tubular sheaths of F. rubra agg. are easily split on handling. It is essential that this observation is made on sterile innovation shoots (tillers), not on flowering shoots (culms), and that only the younger sheaths are examined. Older sheaths, including all those on the culms, become naturally split to the base. The older leaves should be successively stripped back from a tiller, leaving the uppermost sheath that was partly exposed as the one to examine. This is the single best character to distinguish the two aggregates. TILLERS — EXTRAVAGINAL OR INTRAVAGINAL Tillers arise from lower nodes of culms or of other tillers (actually from the axil between the stem and the base of the leaf-sheath) in one of two ways. In intravaginal branching (Fig. 1) the new shoot grows up more or less parallel with its parent stem and remains enclosed for some distance within the leaf-sheath in whose axil it arose. Higher up, the new shoot diverges from its parent, and later on the parental leaf-sheath often decays away, but the parallel growth of the old and new stems at the very base usually persists as evidence of intravaginal branching. In the Festuca ovina aggregate all branching is of this sort. In extravaginal branching (Fig. 1) the new shoot does not grow up parallel with the parent stem but grows out more or less at right angles, breaking through the base of the parent leaf-sheath (cf. lateral branches of Equisetum stems). Members of the Festuca rubra aggregate always exhibit extravaginal branching, but this varies in relative frequency from being the only type of branching to being much less common than intravaginal branching (hence Hackel’s group Extravaginales vel Mixtae). With copious fresh material the presence of extravaginal branches is therefore diagnostic of F. rubra agg. (and their absence diagnostic of F. ovina agg.), but with herbarium material, which is often very poorly collected, it is not safe to use this character except in a positive way. 110 C. A. STACE, A.-K. K. A. AL-BERMANI AND M. J. WILKINSON whee ath : ee 6 a 1 cm pay was ae oe a or “oe ( FicurE 1. Morphological characters of Festuca rubra agg. and F. ovina agg. A, extravaginal tillers. B, intravaginal tillers. C, fused tiller leaf-sheath as in F. rubra agg. D, overlapping tiller leaf-sheath as in F. ovina agg. E, vestigial auricles as in F. rubra agg. F, distinct auricles as in F. ovina agg. DISTINCTION BETWEEN FESTUCA OVINA L. AND FESTUCA RUBRA L. 111 Ficure 2. Patterns of sclerenchyma distribution (in black) in tiller leaf sections of Festuca rubra agg. (A—G) and F. ovina agg. (H-L). GROWTH HABIT — TUFTED OR RHIZOMATOUS Rhizomes always develop from extravaginal branches, but both intravaginal and extravaginal branches may remain close to the parent stem, resulting in a densely tufted habit. Hence the presence of rhizomes is diagnostic of F. rubra agg., but their absence is not diagnostic of F. ovina agg. Some rhizomes exist even on plants of F. rubra agg. that are very densely tufted, except in F. heterophylla Lam. and some specimens of F. rubra subsp. commutata. Mat-forming plants are almost always rhizomatous to some degree. 112 C. A. STACE, A.-K. K. A. AL-BERMANI AND M. J. WILKINSON AURICLES — CONSPICUOUS OR INCONSPICUOUS Auricles are developed in many grasses at the top of the leaf-sheath, on either side of its point of junction with the leaf-blade and ligule. In some species, such as Festuca pratensis Hudson, these are very conspicuous and developed as pointed projections. In the F. rubra aggregate auricles are virtually absent (Fig. 1), but in the F. ovina aggregate they are present as distinct rounded extensions (Fig. 1). This difference is clear-cut and unequivocal when the two types are viewed together but it is a comparative rather than absolute character and should be used only after experience with the ranges exhibited by both aggregates. LEAF ANATOMY — PATTERN OF SCLERENCHYMA The pattern of sclerenchyma distribution as seen in transverse section of tiller leaves is a very important character in the genus Festuca. Knowledge of the range of patterns found in the F. rubra and F. ovina aggregates (Fig. 2) can be used to distinguish between them. Sclerenchyma bundles are usually found in the subepidermal position opposite each of the veins (including the midrib) on the abaxial side, and in the subepidermal position at the leaf margins (e.g. Fig. 2B, G, J). Sometimes smaller subepidermal bundles are found opposite the veins on the adaxial side (e.g. Fig. 2A, E, F), and sometimes a girder of sclerenchyma connects the abaxial bundle with its adjacent vein (e.g. Fig. 2E, F). In some cases the abaxial sclerenchyma bundles extend laterally to form a band of sclerenchyma, in extreme cases forming a continuous zone from leaf-margin to leaf-margin (e.g. Fig. 2F, H). Both the continuous and the discrete patterns of sclerenchyma occur in both the F. rubra and F. ovina aggregates, but in the case of each pattern the two aggregates can, with practice, be distinguished. The continuous/discontinuous band is almost always accompanied by some girders connecting with the veins and/or by some small adaxial sclerenchyma bundles in the case of F. rubra agg., but never in the case of F. ovina agg. In addition the sclerenchyma at the leaf-margins and abaxially to the midrib is often much thicker than elsewhere in F. ovina agg. (e.g. Fig. 2J, K), but not in F. rubra agg. The discrete abaxial sclerenchyma bundles are usually of approximately equal size and are sometimes accompanied by small adaxial bundles in F. rubra agg. (e.g. Fig. 2B), whereas in F. ovina agg. adaxial bundles are always absent and the marginal and midrib abaxial bundles are usually conspicuously larger (e.g. Fig. 2J) than the others (or there are no others, e.g. Fig. 2L) in F. ovina agg. In addition, when the sclerenchyma is in discrete bundles, the leaf outline is much more angular in F. rubra agg. (e.g. Fig. 2B, C, G) than in F. ovina agg. (e.g. Fig. 2J, L). SUMMARY Only two characters can be used with complete success in distinguishing the Festuca ovina and F. rubra aggregates in the British Isles. Other characters vary in usefulness from being helpful after considerable experience to being highly misleading. The two diagnostic characters are summarized in the following couplet: Sheaths of young tiller-leaves fused into tube almost up to top; some or all tillers extravaginal ... F. rubra agg. Sheaths of young tiller-leaves with at least the upper 40% with free, overlapping margins; all tillers INUTEAV AGIAN: 6 hic ian co ea sje sera ate cals ere via Gi cancers Slstatia ec mn Ge ate sco te cine earn F. ovina agg. REFERENCES AL-BERMANI, A.-K. K. A. (1991). Taxonomic, cytogenetic and breeding relationships of Festuca rubra sensu lato. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Leicester. HaAckEL, E. (1882). Monographia Festucarum Europaearum. Kassel & Berlin. HAcKEL, E. (1885). Festuca ‘“‘glauca’’, in BENNETT, A. Report of the distributor for 1884. Rep. botl Exch. Club Br. Isles 1: 101-119. MARKGRAF-DANNENBERG, I. (1980). Festuca L., in Tutin, T. G. et al., eds. Flora Europaea 5: 125-153. Cambridge. WILKINSON, M. J. & Stace, C. A. (1991). A new taxonomic treatment of the Festuca ovina L. aggregate (Poaceae) in the British Isles. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 106: 347-397. (Accepted January 1992) Watsonia, 19, 113-120 (1992) 118 Host range and specificity of Orobanche minor Sm. on Crymlyn Burrows C. R. HIPKIN School of Biological Sciences, University of Wales, Swansea, SA2 8PP ABSTRACT A survey of hosts reported for the broomrape Orobanche minor Sm. (Orobanchaceae) in Britain and Ireland, indicates a very wide range for this species with most hosts recorded from the Leguminosae and the Compositae. Results from an investigation of the host range of a large coastal population of O. minor Sm. var. minor (sensu Rumsey & Jury) on Crymlyn Burrows, West Glamorgan, confirm 15 host species by observation of direct root contact between host and parasite. Some individual broomrapes were noted to parasitise more than one (up to three) host, each a different species. Seeds of O. minor var. minor taken from plants parasitising Eryngium maritimum germinated to produce plants that were able to parasitise Hypochoeris radicata, Trifolium hybridum and T. pratense. INTRODUCTION Of the 45 species of Orobanche L. recognised in Europe by Webb & Chater (1972), seven were assigned to the Orobanche minor group and two of these, O. minor Sm. and O. loricata Reichenb., are in the British flora (Clapham et al. 1987). Both these species have predominantly south-eastern distributions in Britain, with O. minor extending discontinuously west and north-west, more or less along the coast. Taxonomically, the O. minor group is rather problematic, a situation which is exacerbated by the great intraspecific variation exhibited by O. minor itself. In a recent account of Orobanche L. in Britain and Ireland, Rumsey & Jury (1991) divide O. minor into four varieties, (var. minor, compositarum, flava and maritima), and describe a number of features which aid their identification including a guide to their host ranges. Correct identification of the host can be helpful in the identification of several species of Orobanche. Unfortunately, however, although host specificity within the O. minor group may be of some significance taxonomically, it is confusing for at least two reasons. Firstly, some taxa appear to have rather wide, overlapping host ranges. Secondly, it is usually difficult to identify the host unequivocally in the field (Chater 1986) and it is likely that several hosts reported in the literature have been recorded in error. Nevertheless, some taxa may parasitise a well defined, narrow spectrum of hosts, e.g. O. minor var. maritima (Rumsey & Jury 1991), and the concept of physiological races with very specific host requirements (Musselman & Parker 1982) has often been suggested. Comments in county Floras indicate that coastal populations have frequently caused _ difficulties and this appears to be, in part, a consequence of an incomplete understanding of the host vem Se ee ranges of O. minor and O. maritima Pugsley (Pugsley 1940) in particular. Recent exchanges in the literature (e.g. Hambler 1991; Rumsey 1991) underline the controversial nature of this problem. . In this account, the host range of a large population of O. minor growing in mobile and partially fixed sand dune communities on Crymlyn Burrows in West Glamorgan (v.c. 41) is described. These studies exemplify the problems associated with coastal populations of O. minor and confirm a number of hosts, unequivocally. MATERIALS AND METHODS A large sand dune population of Orobanche minor was studied on Crymlyn Burrows (GR SS/ _ 710.930). In recent years the size of this broomrape population has usually numbered more than 114 C. R. HIPKIN TABLE 1. HOSTS FOR OROBANCHE MINOR RECORDED IN BRITAIN AND IRELAND Host CARYOPHYLLACEAE Honkenya peploides GERANIACEAE Geranium columbinum G. rotundifolium Erodium cicutarium Pelargonium spp. LEGUMINOSAE Clianthus puniceus Vicia faba Ononis repens Medicago arabica M. lupulina Trifolium arvense T. campestre T. hybridum T. medium T. pratense T. repens Lotus corniculatus Onobrychis viciifolia ARALIACEAE Hedera hibernica UMBELLIFERAE Eryngium maritimum Anthriscus sylvestris Pastinaca sativa Reference Rumsey & Jury (1991) White (1912) White (1912) Petch & Swann (1968) Lousley (1976) Murphy (1972) Jones (1985) Margetts & David (1981) Jones (1985) Savidge et al. (1963) White (1912) Jones (1985) Rumsey & Jury (1991) McClintock (1975) Bowen (1968) Jones (1985) Trimen & Thiselton-Dyer (1869) McClintock (1975) Jones (1985) Grose (1957) Jones (1985) Savidge et al. (1963) Ravenshaw (1860) Salmon (1863) Archer Briggs (1880) Grose (1957) Savidge et al. (1963) Bowen (1968) Messenger (1971) McClintock (1975) Kent (1975) White (1912) Murray (1896) Grose (1957) Grose (1957) Jones (1985) Wolley-Dod (1970)* White (1912)* McClintock (1975)** Bevis et al. (1978)** Davey (1909)* Margetts & David (1981)** Allen (1984) Jones (1985) Rumsey & Jury (1991) Grose (1957) Grose (1957) Holland et al. (1986) Jones (1985) Host Daucus carota (including subsp. gummifer) Garden spp. (e.g. carrot, caraway) BUDDLEJACEAE Buddleja davidii POLEMONIACEAE Polemonium caeruleum CONVOLVULACEAE Calystegia soldanella SOLANACEAE Nicotiana cultivar SCROPHULARIACEAE Parahebe catarrhactae LABIATAE Salvia verbenaca’ Glechoma hederacea PLANTAGINACEAE Plantago coronopus P. major P. maritima CAMPANULACEAE Campanula portenschlagiana C. poscharskyana DIPSACACEAE Dipsacus fullonum COMPOSITAE Brachyglottis cv. ‘Sunshine’ Olearia macrodonta Achillea millefolium Tripleurospermum inodorum Matricaria spp. Carduus nutans Cirsium arvense C. vulgare Reference Ravenshaw (1860)* Grose (1957) White (1912)* McClintock (1975)* Davey (1909)* Margetts & David (1981)§ Holland et al. (1986) Jones (1985) Lousley (1976) Jones (1985) Patrick & Hollick (1975) Rumsey & Jury (1991) Jones (1985) Margetts & David (1981) White (1912) Murray (1896)** Grose (1957) White (1912) Jones (1985) Ravenshaw (1860) McClintock (1975) Davey (1909)* Jones (1985) Grose (1957) McClintock (1975)§ Murphy (1972) Jones (1985) Jones (1985) Bowen (1968) Swann (1975)* Lousley (1976) Margetts & David (1981) Jones (1985) Rumsey & Jury (1991)* Jones (1985) Grose (1957) Rumsey & Jury (1991)* Kent (1975) Rumsey & Jury (1991)* Grose (1957) Jones (1985) HOST RANGE AND SPECIFICITY OF OROBANCHE MINOR SM. 115 TABLE 1. cont. Host Reference Host Reference COMPOSITAE cont'd Hypochoeris radicata Bowen (1968)* Petch & Swann (1968)* Petch & Swann (1968)* Jones (1985) McClintock (1975) Holland et al. (1986) Jones (1985) Rumsey & Jury (1991)* Rumsey & Jury (1991)* ~—C. vesicaria Dony (1953) Leontodon autumnalis McClintock (1975) Picris echioides Dony (1953) GRAMINEAE Crepis capillaris Linton (1919) Elymus farctus Rumsey & Jury (1991) Grose (1957) Ammophila arenaria Murray (1896) Grose (1957)* Murphy (1972) * = recorded as var. compositarum; * = recorded as O. amethystea; ** = recorded as O. amethystea but queried by author(s) as O. minor; * = recorded as O. maritima; ** = recorded as O. maritima but queried by author(s) as O. minor. 5,000 individuals. This presented opportunities to sample a relatively small number of specimens with minimal disturbance to a thriving population. Plants rooted in sand were excavated carefully (usually with ease and minimal disturbance to the rooting systems of host and parasite) and examined for host-parasite root connections. Hosts were traced via their root systems and identified. Often, it was possible to replace plants with little disturbance after substantiating host root contact. Plants were also cultivated in containers using as hosts Trifolium hybridum (cv. ‘Alsyke’, Elsoms Seeds Ltd, Spalding, England), T. pratense and Hypochoeris radicata (both grown from local stock). Seeds of O. minor were collected from individuals parasitising Eryngium maritimum on Crymlyn Burrows. Host plants were established in pots before inoculation with broomrape seeds which were applied in suspension directly on to the host roots. REPORTED HOST RANGE OF OROBANCHE MINOR SM. A cursory glance at the literature would reveal that O. minor has been recorded most frequently as a parasite of Trifolium spp., often as a weed in clover fields. It became well known, however, that other (often exotic) species were also parasitised by this broomrape and enthusiastic observations have led to a number of reports of largely unsubstantiated hosts. Table 1 lists a representative selection of hosts that have been reported over the last 130 years, and includes reports referring to all varieties of O. minor as well as O. amethystea Thuill. which has been recorded in error for O. minor in Britain (Clapham et al. 1987; Rumsey & Jury 1991). It is not a definitive list and, undoubtedly, many species that have been recorded as hosts for O. minor are missing from it. HISTORY AND IDENTIFICATION OF OROBANCHE MINOR SM. ON CRYMLYN BURROWS The accurate records of Rev. J. Lightfoot describing his visit in 1773 to “‘Breton Sands’’, in the Vicinity of Crymlyn Burrows (Carter 1954), do not mention any broomrapes. One of the first records of O. minor in the region was made by A. M. Barnard at Swansea in 1853 and nearly a hundred years later, in 1943, J. A. Webb, a very active, local botanist, recorded it at nearby Aberavon West Burrows (Hyde & Wade 1957) where it still grows today. During this period, this species would have been regarded as a local rarity and its presence would have attracted the attention of active | recorders. It is possible that O. minor was present in small numbers on Crymlyn Burrows at that time but, if so, it remained unrecorded until 1970 when a small population of about 100 individuals | was noted. By 1979, the population had increased markedly to approximately 6000 plants (author’s + own records). It appears that O. minor is either a relatively recent arrival at Crymlyn Burrows | (within the last 50 years) or was present in small numbers until the 1970s but had been overlooked by _ anumber of recorders. Similar, but smaller, populations of O. minor now occur elsewhere in West 116 C. R. HIPKIN Glamorgan, e.g. on the sand dune systems of Swansea Bay, South Gower and Margam Burrows and in Mid Glamorgan, on Kenfig Burrows. Several casual recorders have visited Crymlyn Burrows in the last ten years and named the Orobanche population there tentatively as O. maritima Pugsley. However, the morphological features of this population conform strongly with O. minor var. minor as described by Rumsey & Jury (1991). Thus: 1. Plants varied greatly in size, up to 60 cm in height, with the largest individuals usually found in association with Eryngium maritimum and then often in large clumps. Plants associated with other hosts were rarely as vigorous. 2. The bases of stems were not obviously bulbous. 3. The sizes and densities of inflorescences were variable. For example, inflorescence lengths varied from 5 cm to 50 cm with overall flower densities varying between 1-4 and 3-2 flowers/cm. Some individuals had inflorescences which were lax below and dense above and some were relatively lax throughout. Other plants exhibited inflorescences which were relatively dense throughout their length. 4. Bracts were 14-18 mm, similar in length to the flowers but often slightly Splenic in upper flowers. 5. Calyces were 11-13 mm and unequally bifid. 6. Corollas were 15-18 mm, suffused purple, glandular pubescent, the lower lip with subequal crisped lobes. 7. Flower diameters were always greater than 5 mm. 8. Filaments were hairy below and inserted 2 mm above the corolla base. 9. Stigma lobes were purple and united at base. | A smali number of pigment-less individuals were noted in the Crymlyn Burrows populations during the study; similar albino forms have been noted by Rumsey & Jury (1991). It should also be noted that Daucus carota subsp. gummifer is not a host for O. minor on Crymlyn Burrows. HOST RANGE OF OROBANCHE MINOR SM. ON CRYMLYN BURROWS O. minor var. minor has been observed to parasitise a number of hosts on Crymlyn Burrows. So far, 15 species of host have been identified and these are indicated in Table 2. Each host was — substantiated by direct observation of contact between the host root and the distinct, swollen haustorial region of the parasite. Where indicated, root specimens were taken, sectioned and examined under the light microscope. When this was done, microscopic examination confirmed physical interaction between host and parasite vascular systems. The most commonly recorded host was Eryngium maritimum. On Crymlyn Burrows, this species is very common in open mobile sand communities behind the foredunes, where there are often high densities of broomrape spikes (up to 25 spikes/m*). Other plants recorded with broomrapes 1 in this type of community are listed in Table 2(a). Many broomrape spikes were noted in the vicinity of Marram Grass (Ammophila arenaria) in this community. Indeed, several plants were noted growing in the middle of marram tufts. All such plants were investigated; none made any apparent contact with marram roots, but did make contact with the extensive root systems of FE. maritimum. Parasitism of hosts other than E. maritimum appears to be relatively rare in this community but a single broomrape individual was observed to parasitise Pastinaca sativa. More species were parasitised by broomrapes in partially fixed sand communities where E. maritimum is rare but legumes and composites are conspicuous. Typical species in these communities are listed in Table 2(b). The most commonly recorded hosts here were Ononis repens, Lotus corniculatus and Hypochoeris radicata. In addition, the composites Leontodon taraxacoides, Crepis capillaris, C. vesicaria, Senecio jacobaea, Erigeron acer and Tragopogon pratensis were also recorded as hosts. There was only one substantiated record of root contact with the legume Anthyllis vulneraria, although this species dominates large areas of partially fixed-dune on Crymlyn Burrows. Other minor hosts recorded were the crucifers Arabis hirsuta and Coincya monensis subsp. recurvata, and the plantain, Plantago lanceolata. HOST RANGE AND SPECIFICITY OF OROBANCHE MINOR SM. 117 TABLE 2. HOSTS FOR OROBANCHE MINOR VAR. MINOR IN MOBILE AND PARTIALLY FIXED SAND COMMUNITIES ON CRYMLYN BURROWS (a) Mobile sand communities + root contact with O. minor observed. (b) Partially fixed sand communities CRUCIFERAE CRUCIFERAE Coincya monenis subsp. recurvata Arabis hirsuta ats Matthiola sinuata Coincya monenis subsp. recurvata ats CRASSULACEAE VIOLACEAE Sedum acre Viola canina — ONAGRACEAE V. tricolor subsp. curtisii = Oenothera cambrica CARYOPHYLLACEAE UMBELLIFERAE Cerastium diffusum — Eryngium maritimum* C. fontanum ~ Pastinaca sativa Arenaria serpyllifolia — EUPHORBIACEAE GERANIACEAE Euphorbia paralias Geranium molle - CONVOLVULACEAE LEGUMINOSAE Calystegia soldanella Ononis repens* + COMPOSITAE Trifolium arvense — Senecio jacobaea Lotus corniculatus + S. squalidus Anthyllis vulneraria + Hypochoeris radicata UMBELLIFERAE Leontodon taraxacoides Pastinaca sativa — Crepis capillaris GENTIANACEAE CYPERACEAE Centaurium erythraea == Carex arenaria PLANTAGINACEAE GRAMINEAE Plantago lanceolata + — Vulpia fasciculata COMPOSITAE Ammophila arenaria Senecio jacobaea a Phleum arenarium S. squalidus — | S. vulgaris = Erigeron acer + Carlina vulgaris = Hypochoeris radicata oP ) Leontodon taraxacoides + Tragopogon pratensis + Crepis capillaris ste ) C. vesicaria A _ * Haustoria-root connections of some plants were sectioned and examined under the light microscope. | Taraxacum officinale agg. GRAMINEAE Festuca rubra Aira praecox Ammophila arenaria Phleum arenarium i In transitional areas between mobile and partially fixed sand communities, Eryngium maritimum often grows in close proximity to Ononis repens, Lotus corniculatus and Hypochoeris radicata. In i those places, broomrapes were observed making root contact with each of these species. _ On four separate occasions, single specimens of O. minor were observed making root contact “with two separate hosts. The following dual-host combinations were noted: (a) Hypochoeris -radicata and Ononis repens (in partially fixed sand); (b) Eryngium maritimum and Lotus corniculatus (transitional areas); (c) Crepis capillaris and Ononis repens (in partially fixed sand); (d) Crepis capillaris and Plantago lanceolata (partially fixed sand). On one occasion a triple-host combination of Arabis hirsuta, Hypochoeris radicata and Lotus corniculatus was noted in a partially fixed sand community. _ Minor hosts such as Arabis hirsuta and Erigeron acer often appeared greatly weakened by the 118 C. R. HIPKIN parasite and supported smaller broomrape specimens with lax inflorescences. In contrast, common hosts such as Eryngium maritimum, Ononis repens and Lotus corniculatus often showed normal vigour and the roots of leguminous hosts that were investigated always bore abundant nodules. E. maritimum often supported large broomrape specimens with dense inflorescences in clusters of 20 or more individual spikes. Seeds of O. minor var. minor taken from specimens parasitising Eryngium maritimum in mobile | sand communities were sown into separate pots containing Hypochoeris radicata (grown from seed taken from an individual in a typical partially fixed-dune community), Trifolium hybridum (cv. ‘Alsyke’) or T. pratense (transplanted from a local meadow) as potential hosts. All three species were able to act as hosts and supported specimens of O. minor that flowered and set seed. O. minor on Kenfig Burrows (GR SS/796.812) appeared to parasitise Eryngium maritimum and Ononis repens, mostly, whereas a small and short-lived population which occurred on a roadside verge in Swansea (GR SS/652.912) appeared to be parasitising Trifolium pratense and T. repens. However, none of these plants was excavated and investigated for root contact. DISCUSSION Positive verification of host species for O. minor in the field is difficult, particularly when specimens are growing in compacted soil, due to the fragile connections between parasite and host roots. Moreover, in some areas, O. minor is a rare or local species and potentially destructive sampling | should not be attempted. Under these circumstances the observer has to rely on a judgement based | on the presence and proximity of suitable hosts. Most records of host species, such as those in the | survey shown in Table 1, are probably based on such observations. However, significant patterns emerge from this survey and a number of relevant points may be deduced from it as follows: 1. Dicotyledonous perennials predominate as hosts for O. minor, whereas woody perennials are rarely reported. 2. Certain families such as Leguminosae and Compositae appear to contain several species which are suitable hosts for O. minor and there are many reports in the literature of parasitism on members of these families. 3. Other families also appear to be well represented in the survey such as Umbelliferae, Plantaginaceae, Geraniaceae and Labiatae. 4. Reports of the parasite on grasses (Murray 1896; Murphy 1972; Rumsey & Jury 1991) are infrequent and of interest. Parasitism of grasses (or other Monocotyledons) is rare in the genus Orobanche although it is a feature of other genera such as Aeginetia and Striga (Stewart & Press 1990). The study described here verified a number of the hosts given in Table 1 and underlines the importance of certain families such as Umbelliferae, Leguminosae and Compositae (see Table 2). Nevertheless, although Leguminosae was well represented in the study area, it was notable that certain species such as Anthyllis vulneraria, Lathyrus pratensis, L. tuberosus, Medicago sativa subsp. falcata, M. lupulina, Melilotus alba, M. officinalis, Trifolium arvense, T. fragiferum, Vicia cracca and V. sativa were rarely or never parasitised. In contrast, a much higher proportion of the composites represented were parasitised. Interestingly, two crucifers, Arabis hirsuta and Coincya monensis subsp. recurvata, were recorded as hosts although members of Cruciferae have rarely been reported as hosts before. One novel feature that emerged from this study was the occasional observation of O. minor var. minor individuals parasitising more than one host, each one a representative of a separate family. Presumably, this happens during establishment on a primary host when a haustorium also makes contact with the root of another compatible, secondary host in the near vicinity. —— eee —— | ¥ Parasitism of more than one host at the same time may occur commonly with other populations of | O. minor var. minor, a consequence of its very wide host spectrum. However, there is evidence that O. minor has developed host specific strains (Musselman & Parker 1982) and, clearly, populations ; of these would be limited in this respect. From the outset, it seemed possible, but intuitively unlikely, that the Crymlyn Burrows population was composed of more than one physiological strain, each with a limited set of hosts. For example, it could be argued that the mobile dune population which appeared to parasitise Eryngium | HOST RANGE AND SPECIFICITY OF OROBANCHE MINOR SM. 119 maritimum almost exclusively, was physiologically distinct from the partially fixed dune population which appeared to parasitise a wider spectrum of hosts. However, O. minor var. minor also occurs in transitional areas between well-defined mobile and partially fixed sand communities, where E. maritimum and other hosts are parasitised. Furthermore, it was shown that seed taken from a specimen parasitising E. maritimum in a mobile dune community germinated to produce vigorous specimens in pots containing Hypochoeris radicata, Trifolium pratense or T. hybridum. This evidence, together with observations of individuals parasitising multiple, unrelated hosts (including the combination of E. maritimum and Lotus corniculatus), does not support the argument that there are a number of host specific strains of O. minor var. minor on Crymlyn Burrows. The broomrape population of Crymlyn Burrows has become a striking feature of this actively accreting coastal dune system in recent years. However, although it is likely that a small population of O. minor was established there about 50 years ago, it seems probable that only in the last 20 years or so has it spread so conspicuously into mobile and partially fixed dune areas. Indeed, the establishment and spread of this population on Crymlyn Burrows resemble colonisations there by a number of non-native colonists such as Coincya monensis subsp. recurvata, Hirschfeldia incana, Senecio squalidus and Conyza canadensis. It is notable, therefore, that Rumsey & Jury (1991) suggest that O. minor var. minor may not be native in the British Isles. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am grateful to Mr Ian Tew for his invaluable help in the histological preparation of specimens and to Mrs Hilary Hipkin for her assistance in the field. Thanks also to Quentin Kay for allowing me access to his collection of county Floras. REFERENCES ALLEN, D. E. (1984). Flora of the Isle of Man. Douglas. ARCHER Briccs, T. R. (1880). Flora of Plymouth. London. Bevis, J., KETTLE, R. & SHEPHARD, B. (1978). Flora of the Isle of Wight. London. Bowen, H. J. M. (1968). The Flora of Berkshire. Oxford. Carter, P. W. (1954). Some account of the history of botanical exploration in Wales. Trans. Cardiff Nat. Soc. 82: 5-31. CHATER, A. O. (1986). Orobanche hosts — a cautionary tale. B.S.B.I. News 42: 10. CLAPHAM, A. R., Tutin, T. G. & Moore, D. M. (1987). Flora of the British Isles, 3rd ed. Cambridge. Davey, F. H. (1909). Flora of Cornwall. Penryn. Dony, J. G. (1953). Flora of Bedfordshire. Luton. Grose, D. (1957). Flora of Wiltshire. Devizes. HamBLer, D. J. (1991). Orobanche maritima: an overlooked feature? B.S.B.I. News 58: 18-19. HOLianp, S. C., Cappick, H. M. & DupDLey-Smitu, D. S. (1986). Supplement to the Flora of Gloucestershire. Bristol. Hype, H. A. & WapE, A. E. (1957). Welsh flowering plants. Cardiff. Jones, M. ee Orobanche hosts. B.S.B.1. News 41: 29. Kent, D. H. (1975). The historical Flora of Middlesex. London. Linton, E. F. (1919). Flora of Bournemouth. Bournemouth. _Lous.ey, J. E. (1976). Flora of Surrey. London. | Marcetts, L. J. & Davin, R. W. (1981). A review of the Cornish Flora 1980. Redruth. /McCuintock, D. (1975). The wild flowers of Guernsey. London. / MESSENGER, K. G. (1971). Flora of Rutland. Leicester. ‘Murpny, D. P. (1972). Orobanche hosts at Glasnevin. Ir. Nat. J. 17: 279. Murray, R. P. (1896). Flora of Somerset. Taunton. MUSSELMAN, L. J. & PARKER, C. (1982). Preliminary host ranges of some strains of economically important broomrapes (Orobanche). Econ. Bot. 36: 270-273. | Patrick, S. & Hoiiick, K. M. (1975). Supplement to the Flora of Derbyshire. Derby. Petcn, C. P. & Swann, E. L. (1968). Flora of Norfolk. Norwich. Pussiey, H. W. (1940). Notes on Orobanche L. J. Bot., Lond. 78: 105-116. )Ravensuaw, T. F. (1860). Flowering plants and ferns of Devonshire. London. \Rumsey, F. J. (1991). Orobanche maritima revisited. B.S.B.I. News 59: 9-10. / en ae ae 120 C. R. HIPKIN Rumsey, F. J. & Jury, S. L. (1991). An account of Orobanche L. in Britain and Ireland. Watsonia 18: 257-295. SALMON, J. D. (1863). Flora of Surrey. London. SaviDGE, J. P., HEywoop, V. H. & Gorpon, V., eds. (1963). Travis’s Flora of South Lancashire. Liverpool. STEWART, G. R. & Press, M. C. (1990). The physiology and biochemistry of parasitic angiosperms. Ann. Rev. Plant Physiol. 41: 127-151. Swann, E. L. (1975). Supplement to the Flora of Norfolk. Norwich. TRIMEN, H. & THISELTON-DyErR, W. T. (1869). Flora of Middlesex. London. Wess, D. A. & Cuater, A. O. (1972). Orobanche L., in Tutin, T. G. et al., eds. Flora Europaea 3: 286-293. Cambridge. Waite, J. W. (1912). Flora of Bristol. Bristol. Wo Ley-Dop, A. H. (1970). Flora of Sussex. Bristol. (Accepted October 1991) Watsonia, 19, 121-126 (1992) 121 The current distribution and abundance of Orchis ustulata L. (Orchidaceae) in the British Isles — an updated summary MJ.“ Y- FOLEY 87 Ribchester Road, Clayton-le-Dale, Blackburn, Lancs., BB1 9HT ABSTRACT Recent British records of Orchis ustulata L. (Orchidaceae) are described and the current range of the species is shown both as a distribution map and in tabular form. This updates information presented by the author in earlier work. INTRODUCTION The status and distribution of Orchis ustulata L. in the British Isles has been previously described on a regional basis (Foley 1987, 1990). Further exploratory work and additional knowledge gained as a result of publication of this information suggests that an updated summary is now appropriate. The distribution maps which were originally included were to a differing degree of precision, and the opportunity is now taken to combine all the available information on geographical distribution into a single map plotted on a 10-km square basis. DISCUSSION The additional records shown below are relatively small in number and do not significantly affect the overall distribution pattern of O. ustulata as previously described. They often represent small isolated populations containing just a few plants at, or close to, localities previously thought likely to be extinct. Such examples include Langdon Bay (E. Kent, v.c. 15), Waddingham (N. Lincs., v.c. 54) and Knaresborough (Mid-W. Yorks., v.c. 64), at each of which a welcome reappearance of the plant has occurred. Other new records are for small populations from areas in which there is apparently no previous known occurrence — Scarcliffe (Derbys., v.c. 57), Sandale (N.E. Yorks., v.c. 62), and some in S. Wilts. (v.c. 8). Just occasionally, population strength has been previously underesti- mated, in some cases significantly so, as at Martin Down (S. Hants., v.c. 11) which in fact is now confirmed to hold two important colonies. One of these is of especial interest in that it is in an area ploughed in 1957, the only instance so far noted where recolonisation has occurred so quickly. During 1987 a significant find was made in N.W. Yorks. (v.c. 65) by the author and a colleague where several hundred flowering plants occur in association with O. morio L. on traditionally managed, lightly grazed pasture. This is undoubtedly the best surviving population in northern England. Except by the tenant farmer, by whom its significance and extent were not appreciated, _ this strong population has apparently been previously overlooked. Two other unrecorded populations of significance were identified at Great Cheverell Hill (S. | Wilts., v.c. 8) by G. Goodfellow, and others have been located, also in v.c. 8, on Ministry of _ Defence land during lulls in artillery firing. The good flowering season of 1989 illustrated that in Ae Re A NS Britain, there are still some very significant populations of O. ustulata and this was particularly apparent at Parsonage Down (S. Wilts., v.c. 8), where one estimate suggests that the population is in excess of 30,000 flowering plants. This is perhaps the most important surviving single population of O. ustulata in north-western Europe. The late-flowering (July-August) form of O. ustulata, often recorded from southern England, has recently been described as var. aestivalis by Kimpel (1988) and subsequently raised to subspecific 122 M. J. Y. FOLEY a he rank as subsp. aestivalis by Kimpel & Mrkvicka (1990). These latter authors record details of its morphometry and deviation from the type, based on observations made on Central European populations where white-flowered plants are also noted for this newly described taxon. The additional British records described below, together with those previously contained in Foley (1987, 1990) (the latter modified to include new information where appropriate), have been combined and mapped on a 10-km square basis as shown in Fig. 1. The species is considered to be PLOTTED ON UTM GRID Ficure |. The past and present distribution of Orchis ustulata in the British Isles. Plotted in 10-km squares: @ still surviving, < considered extinct. ir AL DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE OF ORCHIS USTULATA L. 123 extant if it has been confirmed to be present in or after 1987, or if (and especially in the case of small colonies where an annual reappearance in flower can be unreliable) it has been seen shortly before this date and there has been no known change to the habitat likely to cause its loss. Additionally, all 54 10-km squares of the British Isles in which O. ustulata still occurs are listed in Table 1, and this also includes details of the respective population strengths. The 174 10-km squares for which the plant now appears to be extinct are given in Table 2, although it is possible that in some cases the plant may still reappear in small numbers. Further records for O. ustulata from any new or existing localities are still welcomed, and especially so are details of any summer-flowering populations. RECORDS The following records should be added to, or where appropriate replace, those given earlier (Foley 1987, 1990). Population strengths (in parentheses) use the code employed in the earlier papers, as follows: A = typically 1-10 flowering plants; B = 11-25; C = 26-50; D = 51-200; E = 201-1000; F = 1000+; PX = possibly extinct; X = extinct; U = unknown status, but likely to be either small colonies or extinct. N. Wilts., v.c. 7: SU/2.7, three new localities to the north of Aldbourne (A, A, A) (G. Goodfellow pers. comm.). S. Wilts., v.c. 8: ST/8.3, Whitesheet Hill, a few plants over a large area (A); ST/9.5, Great Cheverell Hill (see Foley 1990), three additional sites (A, B, E); SU/0.2, Hoopside (A); Middleton Down (R. Laurence pers. comm.) (A); Knighton Down, c. 50 plants in 1989 (D); Throope Down, on rank grassland, possibly lost (PX); SU/0.3, Steeple Langford — Cow Down, very good numbers in 1987 when grazing relaxed (R. Laurence pers. comm.) (E) — this should replace “‘(U)” in Foley (1990); Hadden Hill, about 30 plants in 1989 (C); SU/0.4, Parsonage Down, recent estimates including the very good season of 1989 suggest a population of tens of thousands (one estimate 30,000+ plants), perhaps the best site in north-western Europe — this extends over an area approaching 95 ha and is now considered to be one continuous large colony of plants; SU/0.5, Slay Down, English Nature [formerly N.C.C.] information of a colony in centre of M.O.D. impact area — strong colony, no details, perhaps (D) in 1988; SU/1.2, Homington Down, 40 plants at one site in 1989, status should therefore be (A, C) (see Foley 1990); SU/1.3, Cockey Down, discovered by P. Mobsby in 1988 (A); SU/1.4, Alton Down, two small colonies recorded by English Nature (A, A); SU/1.5, Chisenbury Warren, small colony on M.O.D. land in 1984 (A); Giant’s Grave, Pewsey Hill, up to 40 plants in 1985 on an ancient monument (C); Milton Lambourne, 20 plants in 1989 (B); SU/2.2, Witherington Down, 20 plants in 1988 — status now (B); SU/2.5, Haxton Down, reported here in 1986 by D. Soden on M.O.D. land (A). (Except where shown, all details for v.c. 8 are ex G. Goodfellow pers. comm.) S. Hants., v.c. 11: SU/0.1, Martin Down, two populations, one of which is in old arable, last ploughed in 1957 (E), and on old grassland (E). Also on Bokerley Dyke (P. Toynton pers. comm.) (D). There were substantial populations in 1991 with two plants of the white-flowered form occurring on the Dyke. E. Sussex, v.c. 14: TQ/4.0, Mount Caburn, Glynde at 44.08 — correct (U) to (F), there were 3000+ plants here in 1991 (F. Rose pers. comm.); TQ/5.0, Charleston Bottom, correct (A) to (D); Lullington Heath, correct (A) to (D), plants of late-flowering variant at both sites (D. C. Lang . pers. comm.). E. Kent, v.c. 15: TR/3.4, Langdon Bay, a single flowering plant was seen in 1981 (F. Horsman pers. - comm.) (A). Surrey, v.c. 17: TQ/2.4, three specimens in KDL collected in 1885 (X). W. Suffolk, v.c. 26: TL/9.5, etc., Shelland, and TM/0.4, near Hadleigh (see Foley 1990) — there is some doubt about these records. N. Lines., v.c. 54: SK/9.9, a single plant appeared in 1991 at the Waddingham site (see Foley 1987) after an absence of ten years (I. Weston pers. comm.). Derbys., v.c. 57: SK/2.5, eight additional very small populations (see Foley 1990), located as follows: one locality south of White Edge (L. Storer pers. comm.); four additional sites to the 124 M. J. Y. FOLEY TABLE 1. LOCATION AND RESPECTIVE STRENGTHS OF EXTANT POPULATIONS OF ORCHIS USTULATA IN THE BRITISH ISLES BY 10-KM SQUARE Grid reference of Number of Population strength 10-km square populations (for code — see text) ST/8.1 ST/8.3 ST/9.5 SD/9.8 SD/9.9 SZ/4.8 SU/0.1 SU/0.2 SU/0.3 SU/0.4 SU/0.5 SU/0.6 SU/1.2 SU/1.3 SU/1.4 SU/1.5 SU/1.6 SU/2.2 SU/2.4 SU/2.5 SU/2.7 SU/2.8 SU/3.3 SU/3.5 SU/3.6 SU/4.5 SU/5.5 SU/5.8 SP/1.3 SK/2.5 1 SK/5.7 SK/9.4 SK/9.9 SE/0.8 SE/1.8 SE/2.8 SE/3.5 SE/7.1 SE/8.8 SE/9.8 NZ/4.3 TV/5.9 TQ/2.1 TQ/3.0 TO/4.0 TO/4.1 TO/5.0 TOQ/8.6 les TL/3.3 TR/0.4 TR/2.4 TR/3.4 *G.R. withheld ° H ry wOwW> go tT a . > Q Q ,A,A,A,A,A,A,A,A,A,A,B,D,E > > > wo oo es) 0 iy > w w © go tn ,A,A,A,B OR ODO OB RR ND RR OD BR RR BR RR BR RRB Re nN Re eK KN BR WN PR BRR WN W BRK NY BRR Co a le A a a SO a oO ee a lt lt ol a lt Ot a a a a a a a * details withheld for a sensitive locality in v.c. 65 (N.W. Yorks.). DISTRIBUTION AND ABUNDANCE OF ORCHIS USTULATA L. 125 TABLE 2. 10-KM SQUARES FOR WHICH ORCHIS USTULATA IS NOW CONSIDERED TO BE EXTINCT IN THE BRITISH ISLES SX/5.4 NY/4.5 SK/5.5 TQ/2.0 SX/8.3 NY/5.3 SK/5.9 TQ/2.4 SX/9.5 NY/5.4 SK/6.4 TQ/2.5 SX/9.6 NY/6.1 SK/7.4 FOR SY/8.8 N77 1 SK/7.5 TOQ/5.5 SY/8.9 SZ/0.8 SK/9.0 TOQ/S5.7 ST/3.6 S229 SK/9.1 TQ/6.7 ST/4.5 SZ/5.7 SK/92 TQ/7.6 ST/4.7 SZ/5..8 SK/9.5 TL/0.1 Si/5.7 SU/1.7 SE/2a7. TL/0.2 ST/7.6 SU/1.8 SE/3.4 TL/0.3 Si/7.7 SU/2.3 SE/3.6 TL/0.8 ST/8.0 SU/3.2 SE/3 7 TE/O:9 ST/8.5 SU/3.8 SE/4.3 TE/2.3 ST/8.6 SU/3.9 SE/4.4 TL/3.4 ST/9.1 SU/4.2 SE/4.8 TL/4.4 S/9°3 SU/4.3 SE/5.0 TL/4.5 ST/9.4 SU/4.8 SES: TL/S.4 ST/9.6 SU/5.4 SE/5.4 SPIES YS ST/9.9 SU/6.2 SE/5:5 TL/S.6 SO/4.7 SU/6.7 SE/6.2 TL/6.6 SO/5.1 SU/7.1 SE/6.3 Wes SO/5.7 SU/7.8 SE/6.4 TL/7.6 SO/5.8 SU/9.4 SE/6-7 TL/8.3 SO/5.9 SP/0.0 SE/6.8 TL/9.5 SO/6.0 SP/0.2 SE/7.4 TF/0.0 SO/7.4 SP/0.3 SE/7.6 TF/0.1 SO/7.6 SP/1.0 SEIT TF/0.3 SO/7.8 SP/T:1 SE/7.8 TE/OS SO/8.0 SP/1.2 SES TF/6.0 $O/8.8 SP/3.0 SE/9.4 TA/0.1 $O/9.0 SP/4.0 SE/9.9 TA/0.7 SO/9.1 SP/4.1 NZ/1.0 TA/0.8 SO/9.2 SP/6.0 NZ/2.1 TA/1.0 S$O/9.3 SP/8.0 ; NZ/2.5 TA/1.4 $J/5.0 SEO NZ/3.1 TA/1.7 SD/4.7 SK/0.4 NZ/3.3 TR/0.6 SD/5.6 SK/0.7 NZ/3.6 TR/1.3 SD/6.9 SK/2.6 NZ/3.7 TR/1.5 SD/8.6 SK/4.5 NZ/4.5 TR/2.5 mY /1 3 SK/4.9 NZ/4.6 TM/0.4 NY/3.4 SK/5.0 NZ/9.0 TM/3.8 NY/3.5 SK/5.2 TQ/0.9 NY/4.3 SK/5.4 TQ/1.4 north-west of Brassington (L. Storer & B. G. Tattersall pers. comm.); two additional sites to the _ south-west of Longcliffe (east of Beardsley Plantation) (L. Storer pers. comm.); near Pinder’s Rock in 1987, recorded by M. Buckley — all these probably (A); SK/5.7, Scarcliffe, lightly grazed Magnesian limestone meadow, discovered in 1986 by R. A. Frost, three plants (A). S. E. Yorks., v.c. 61: SE/6.4, Fulford Ings, collected by H. Britten on 13 May 1928, herb. P. Burnett (R. Gulliver pers. comm.) (X); SE/9.4, Arras (not TA/0.4, Arram (Foley 1987) — an error) (Robinson 1902) (X). N. E. Yorks., v.c. 62: SE/5.5, Clifton Ings, still extant in 1926 when collected by H. E. Britten, herb. P. Burnett (R. Gulliver pers. comm.) (X); SE/6.7, Hovingham, specimen collected in 1871 by “M.T.”, herb. P. Burnett (R. Gulliver pers. comm.) (X); Wiganthorpe Park and also Terrington Carr and adjoining area, recorded by Yorkshire Naturalists’ Union in 1898 (X); SE/7.6 (or 7.7), 126 M. J. Y. FOLEY Castle Howard district, old record “‘in dry stoney meadows” (X); St Ann’s meadow, Castle Howard Park (X); SE/7.8, Gundale, possibly Gundale Slack (U); SE/8.8, Sandale, one plant in 1989 (I. Lawrence pers. comm.) (A). Mid-W. Yorks., v.c. 64: SE/3.5, Knaresborough, east of Birkham Wood, the last sighting was in 1967 after which the site was ploughed, but a single flowering plant was re-found by J. Barker in 1988 nearby. Regrettably this was immediately dug up by an unknown person (A). N.W. Yorks., v.c. 65: SD/9.8, Seata, Aysgarth, limestone pasture (A); SE/0.8, east of Aysgarth, two new small populations (A, A); SE/1.8, near Middleham, riverside pasture (A). (Note: In 1987 the author and S. Priest discovered a new locality in v.c. 65 on traditionally managed pasture. This is almost certainly the strongest surviving population in northern England (E). No details are given here as this is a very sensitive site, but relevant details are known to English Nature.) Durham, v.c. 66: NZ/2.5, Urpeth in 1913, J. W. Heslop-Harrison (Graham 1988) (X). Cumberland, v.c. 70: NY/5.4, Armathwaite, on west bank of the Eden north of the bridge. Last recorded in 1944 by F. Simpson (X). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Contributions of information on new or overlooked localities have been received from many people, all of whom I would now like to thank. Especially this includes G. Goodfellow, D. C. Lang, R. Laurence, D. Millward, M. Sanderson, B. G. Tattersall and P. Toynton, for their detailed help. REFERENCES Fo.ey, M. J. Y. (1987). The current distribution and abundance of Orchis ustulata L. in northern England. Watsonia 16: 409-415. Fotey, M. J. Y. (1990). The current distribution and abundance of Orchis ustulata L. in southern England. Watsonia 18: 37-48. GranaM, G. G. (1988). The flora and vegetation of County Durham. Durham. KUmpeL, H. (1988). Uber eine spatblihende Orchis ustulata-Sippe. Haussknechtia (Jena) 4: 23-24. KUmpeL, H. & Mrxkvicka, A. C. (1990). Untersuchungen zur Abtrennung der Orchis ustulata L. subsp. aestivalis (Kiimpel) Kimpel & Mrkvicka. Mitt. Bl. Arbeitskr. Heim. Orch. Baden-Wiirtt. 22: 306-324. Rosinson, J. F. (1902). The flora of East Riding of Yorkshire. London & Hull. (Accepted January 1992) | | | Watsonia, 19, 127-129 (1992) 127 Urtica galeopsifolia Wierzb. ex Opiz (Urticaceae) in Wicken Fen (E. England) D. V. GELTMAN Herbarium, Komarov Botanical Institute, Prof. Popov St 2, St Petersburg 197376, Russian Federation ABSTRACT A plant resembling the common nettle, Urtica dioica L., but almost lacking stinging hairs, occurs in Wicken Fen, Cambridgeshire. It is here considered as a separate species U. galeopsifolia Wierzb. ex Opiz, which differs from the former by several morphological characters and also by ploidy level. Some suggestions about the possible hybrid origin of U. dioica are put forward. INTRODUCTION Many British botanists know the strange almost stingless form of the common nettle (Urtica dioica L.), which occurs within the National Trust’s Wicken Fen nature reserve in Cambridgeshire, GR TL/55.70. These unusual plants grow in damp mesotrophic fen communities, in particular, at the margins of shrubby areas with other shade-tolerant herbs. Similar plants occur nearby, as at Chippenham Fen (Perring et al. 1964). The variation of morphological characters of U. dioica, with special reference to this particular population, was intensively investigated by Pollard & Briggs (1982, 1984a). They explained that the difference of this plant from typical ones arose through a process of gene flow. An exact taxonomic recognition had not been made, but it was mentioned that, probably, the “‘Wicken nettle’ belongs to var. angustifolia Wimm. & Grab. or var. subinermis Uechtr. The Flora of Cambridgeshire (Perring et al. 1964) treats these plants as f. angustifolia (Wimm. & Grab.) Moss. While studying the taxonomy of Urtica L. in the former U.S.S.R., I paid attention to the information published by Pollard & Briggs (1982). My assumption was that the ‘““Wicken form of common nettle” seemed to belong to a separate species, U. galeopsifolia Wierzb. ex Opiz, which I have recognised for Eastern and Central Europe (Geltman 1986, 1992) or to some intermediate form between this species and U. dioica. URTICA DIOICA AND U. GALEOPSIFOLIA U. galeopsifolia was described from Hungary by F. M. Opiz, Naturalientausch 9: 107 (1825), according to Domin (1943), and it differs from U. dioica mainly by characters of the leaf blades: they almost completely lack stinging hairs, but always possess a more or less dense indumentum consisting of simple (non-stinging) hairs. It is also differentiated by the location of its inflorescence; the lowest flowering branches of U. galeopsifolia appear on the level of the 13th—22nd node, and in U. dioica on the level of the 7th-14th node. Probably, this feature is linked to the period of flowering: U. galeopsifolia starts to flower later than U. dioica, approximately in mid-July (Geltman 1986). Not infrequently U. galeopsifolia has somewhat longer and comparatively narrow leaves, but this character is unsatisfactory, as typical U. dioica with numerous stinging hairs may sometimes have such a leaf shape. It is necessary to stress that neither U. galeopsifolia nor U. dioica have such narrow leaves as the Asiatic species U. angustifolia Fisch. ex Hornem., which does not occur in Europe. Unlike U. dioica, which is mostly tetraploid with 2n = 52 or, probably, 2n = 48 (there are only a 128 D. V. GELTMAN few records of 2n = 26), U. galeopsifolia is presumably diploid (2n = 26) and only one specimen was determined as tetraploid (Geltman 1984). U. galeopsifolia prefers a quite distinct type of habitat: damp woodlands, especially with Alnus glutinosa (L.) Gaertner, river banks and valleys, and eutrophic fens. I found a very clear example of the ecological separation of the two species in question in Central Ukraine, Cherkassy region. U. galeopsifolia occurred in Phragmites fen and Alnus glutinosa woodland, situated in deep valleys, bordered with hills, and U. dioica is found in more or less dry (at least, not swampy) Carpinus betulus L. woodlands on the hills, especially near roads and cattle paths. In the former U.S.S.R., U. galeopsifolia is distributed in the European part to the south of latitude 60°N, and also in the southern regions of Siberia eastwards to the river Angara; some localities are also known from Caucasia. It should be widely distributed in Atlantic, Central and East Europe, but before I had visited some British herbaria, I had seen quite reliable specimens of this species only from Hungary, Czechoslovakia and the Netherlands (Geltman 1986). In August 1991, I was fortunate to be able to visit Wicken Fen and to observe the local nettle population. In my view, the almost stingless plants which occur in the fen proper do not differ from U. galeopsifolia, as it occurs in Russia. So, U. galeopsifolia is a new species record for the British flora. U. galeopsifolia, nevertheless, is not a ‘completely good’ species, especially in terms of the species concept adopted in Flora Europaea (Geltman 1992). Sometimes transitional forms to U. dioica may be found, such as forms without stinging hairs but with scattered simple ones (I usually refer such plants to U. dioica). So, probably, some botanists may prefer to treat this taxon as a subspecies; the corresponding combination U. dioica subsp. galeopsifolia (Wierzb. ex Opiz) Chrtek does exist (Chrtek 1981). But I consider that species rank is more appropriate for this taxon for the following reasons. It is correct to apply the rank of subspecies to allopatric taxa of widely distributed species. But in the case of U. dioica and related species we have, obviously, quite a different situation: U. dioica is, probably, a species of hybrid origin (Geltman 1990). The first of its ancestors might be U. galeopsifolia (or a species closely related to it) and the second, U. sondenii (Simm.) Avrorin ex Geltman, which occurs mainly in the taiga zone of West and Central Siberia and Northern Europe also. Detailed distribution characteristics with map are given in Geltman (1986). This species has completely glabrous leaf blades with neither stinging nor simple hairs; some scattered stinging and simple hairs are located on the nodes of stems and on the inflorescence axis. It grows in meadows and Salix-carrs in river valleys, near streams, in damp forests, etc. Like U. galeopsifolia, it is a diploid (2n = 26). U. galeopsifolia was likely to be formed at least by the Pliocene period and might have penetrated _ to the British Isles at the time of existence of bridges with the continent. It survived the Pleistocene glaciations not far from the southern limits of the ice front. At the same time U. sondenii seems also to exist in the periglacial area, because the first migration of Siberian taiga species to Europe was possible at the end of Miocene, the next ones in the late Pliocene and in the interval between Dnepr and Moscow glaciations (Minyaev 1965)*. So, U. galeopsifolia and U. sondenii were likely to have" opportunities for hybridisation. Probably, there were no ecological barriers, because the ecological niches of both species are similar. As a result of hybridisation of diploid U. galeopsifolia and U. sondenii, a tetraploid ‘primary’ U. dioica could have been formed. These plants may have been very polymorphic in leaf shape and indumentum and had no stinging hairs on the leaf blades. Such ‘primary’ forms spread in Europe after the last glaciation and may also have appeared in Wicken Fen. Then, derived from these plants, the ‘secondary’, typical U. dioica with stinging hairs on leaf blades developed. The main selective factor might be a pressure from animals, including domestic ones. As Pollard & Briggs (1984b, p. 507) have shown, “grazing by large mammals could act as a strong selective force for higher stinging hair densities in nettles’. So, the origin of typical U. dioica was, apparently, connected with human activity. ‘““Response to the modification of the habitat by human settlement seems to be indicated by the nettle as early as the time of Mesolithic culture” (Godwin 1975, p. 242). Intermediate forms between typical U. dioica with numerous stinging hairs and U. galeopsifolia are, in fact, mostly primary hybrid forms of U. dioica, which have survived to the present time. *The interval between the Dnepr and Moscow glaciations seems to correspond with the Hoxnian stage (interval between Anglian and Wolstonian ice periods) in Britain. URTICA GALEOPSIFOLIA WIERZB. EX OPIZ IN WICKEN FEN 129 Because there are no classical allopatric races in this case, I prefer to treat U. dioica, U. galeopsifolia and U. sondenii as separate species in the framework of an U. dioica aggregate or ‘complex’. After the most recent glaciation, U. galeopsifolia in Britain survived in damp territories, but in historic times it has become almost extinct due to drainage and now seems to be preserved only in protected wetland areas (like Wicken Fen). Forms intermediate between U. galeopsifolia and typical U. dioica may be found in various seminatural situations. It is necessary also to mention U. pubescens Ledeb., described from the delta of the river Volga (Ledebour 1833). Sometimes this taxon (more frequently at the rank of the variety U. dioica var. pubescens (Ledeb.) Trautv.) has been recorded from various regions of Europe. In my opinion, this taxon is a separate species, closely related to U. galeopsifolia, but differing from it in some minor characters (Geltman 1986). U. pubescens occurs in special wetland territories, mainly in the Volga delta, and recently has been found in lower Dnepr. It may be a relict, which survived in such localities from Tethyan times. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Dr S. M. Walters and Dr J. R. Edmondson for their assistance at the time of my visit to Wicken Fen and also for commenting on the manuscript. My trip to Britain (in which programme a visit to Wicken Fen was included) became possible due to sponsorship from the Royal Society. I am also grateful to the Missouri Botanical Garden, in whose library I worked preparing this publication. REFERENCES CurTEK, J. (1981). Poznamky ke kvetene slovenska. Cas. Narod. Muz., Pad. Prir. 150 (3-4): 209-216. Domin, K. (1943). Filipa Maximiliana Opize “‘Naturalientausch”’ (1823-1830). Praha. GELTMAN, D. V. (1984). Cytotaxonomical studies of the species of the genus Urtica (Urticaceae) in the flora of the U.S.S.R. Bot. Zhurn. 60: 1524-1530. [In Russian] GELTMAN, D. V. (1986). Systematic and ecological-geographic characteristics of the species from the affinity of Urtica dioica (Urticaceae) in the flora of the U.S.S.R. Bot. Zhurn. 71: 1480-1489. [In Russian] GELTMAN, D. V. (1990). Some problems of phylogeny of the species of the subsection Urtica of the genus Urtica (Urticaceae). Bot. Zhurn. 75: 840-845. [In Russian] GELTMAN, D. V. (1992). Urtica L., in Tutin, T. G. et al., eds. Flora Europaea, 2nd ed. 1 (In press). Gopwin, H. (1975). History of the British flora, 2nd ed. Cambridge. LEDEBOUR, C. F. (1833). Flora altaica, 4. Berlin. Minyaev, N. A. (1965). Sibirskie taezhnye elementy vo flore severo-zapada evropeyskoy chasti S.S.S.R. [Siberian taiga elements in the flora of the north-west of the European part of the U.S.S.R.] in Arealy Rasteniy flory S.S.S.R., pp. 50-92. Leningrad. PERRING, F. H., SELL, P. D. & WA rTeERs, S. M. (1964). A flora of Cambridgeshire. Cambridge. PoLLarD, A. J. & Briccs, D. (1982). Genecological studies of Urtica dioica L. I. The nature of intraspecific variation in U. dioica. New Phytol. 92: 453-470. PoLiarD, A. J. & Briccs, D. (1984a). Genecological studies of Urtica dioica L. I. Patterns of variation at Wicken Fen, Cambridgeshire, England. New Phytol. 96: 483-499. PoLLarD, A. J. & Briccs, D. (1984b). Genecological studies of Urtica dioica L. III. Stinging hairs and plant- herbivore interactions. New Phytol. 97: 507-522. (Accepted January 1992) Watsonia, 19, 131-140 (1992) 131 Short Notes RUBUS BLOXAMII (BAB.) LEES (ROSACEAE) WITH RED STYLES Rubus bloxamii, a widespread and locally abundant bramble of central southern England and the central Midlands, normally has styles that are yellowish-green. Towards the south-western limit of its English range, however, at the southern end of the border between N. Somerset, v.c. 6, and S. Wilts., v.c. 8, and abundantly along the Blackdowns astride the border between S. Devon, v.c. 3, and W. Somerset, v.c. 5, A. Newton and L. J. Margetts have respectively come across populations in which the styles are bright red (but which otherwise do not differ from the normal examples of the species in Britain in any significant respect). On the opposite side of the Channel, in various parts of Normandy and (according to Sudre 1911) just to the south in dép. Sarthe, there is a common bramble which has long been known as R. multifidus Boulay & Malbranche. One place it occurs in particular profusion is the Forét de St- Sauveur, 30 km south of Cherbourg, and specimens I collected there in 1991 have proved to match the red-styled R. bloxamii of England. A. Newton and H. Vannerom share my impression that except in this one character R. multifidus is not distinguishable from R. bloxamii and should accordingly be treated as conspecific, a conclusion reached earlier by Friderichsen (MS note by Rogers 1897 on BM sheet), Rogers (1900) and, ultimately, Watson (1958). The name nevertheless seems worth retaining at varietal level in view of the interesting difference in range, and the necessary new combination is accordingly now made: Rubus bloxamii (Bab.) Lees var. multifidus (Boulay & Malbranche ex Corbiére) D. E. Allen, comb. et stat. nov. R. multifidus Boulay & Malbranche MS (Assoc. rub. exsicc.); Corbiere, Nouv. Fl. Normandie 208 (1894); R. menkei subsp. multifidus (Boulay & Malbranche) Boulay in Rouy & Camus, Fl. Fr. 6: 104 (1900); R. menkei microgene multifidus (Boulay & Malbranche) Sudre, Rubi Eur., 160 (1911). Corbiére cites no fewer than ten numbers distributed by the Association rubologique as belonging to R. multifidus. The lectotype must clearly be chosen from the earliest of these (no. 36: Forét de la Londe, dép. Seine-Inférieure, 1873, A. Malbranche) and I designate as that the example of that number which I have examined in Paris (P). ; It is worth adding that R. bloxamii var. bloxamii also occurs in Normandy, but appears to be much the rarer of the two there. In the North Cotentin (dép. Manche) I have so far seen it in only two places, in both cases just a bush or two. H. Vannerom informs me (in litt. 1992) that two of Letendre’s specimens of ‘R. multifidus’ from dép. Seine-Inférieure, Association rubologique nos. 656 and 772, have yellowish styles too. In the Channel Isles, on the other hand, where R. bloxamii is locally common in Guernsey though scarce in Jersey, the populations consist of var. bloxamii exclusively. | REFERENCES Rocers, W. M. (1900). Handbook of British Rubi. London. Supre, H. (1911). Rubi Europae (19). Paris. _ Watson, W. C. R. (1958). Handbook of the Rubi of Great Britain and Ireland. Cambridge. D. E. ALLEN Lesney Cottage, Middle Road, Winchester, Hants., SO22 5EJ RUBUS CORBIERI BOULAY (ROSACEAE) IN THE BRITISH ISLES In 1897 the then leading British authority on Rubus, W. Moyle Rogers, paid a first (and only) visit to the Channel Isles and on two of them encountered quantities of an unfamiliar bramble. While he 132 SHORT NOTES found it ‘‘rather frequent” on Guernsey, on Sark it was “remarkably abundant” (Rogers & Rogers 1898), so much so that, in the words of his companion on that day, it ‘““seemed to monopolise nearly the whole place” (Derrick 1898). And as subsequent batologists have found, these words are indeed no exaggeration: this large, coarse, white-flowered plant is one of the most dominant features of the island’s landscape. | Rogers promptly sent a specimen to Focke, who considered it “very near” R. schlechtendalii Weihe ex Link (Rogers & Rogers 1898), an opinion Focke was later to refine to ““maybe a form of schlechtendalii. Not typical”, when G. C. Druce sent him a specimen he had brought back from Sark in 1906 (now in OXF). Although Rogers initially placed the plant under that name (Derrick 1898, Rogers 1899), within a year he had decided it was best regarded instead as a strong and highly glandular form of R. macrophylloides Genev. (Rogers & Rogers 1898). It was not that species, however, as Riddelsdell was eventually to note on one of Rogers’ sheets (herb. Barton & Riddelsdell 8743: BM) after study of Genevier’s type and description. Nor was it R. adscitus Genev., as Watson first supposed on re-examining Druce’s specimen in 1931 (a determination he subsequently abandoned for R. boraeanus Genev.) — although it is certainly closely related to that species, as A. Newton remarked of a further Sark specimen that was submitted to him by Lady Anne Brewis in 1973 (now in STP). It has always seemed likely that the bramble would prove to be on the neighbouring French mainland; but as the Rubus flora of that area has not been much studied, it might well be one of the many species there as yet undescribed. Fortunately, however, the latter has not proved to be the case. In 1987, on a first reconnaissance of the Cherbourg area, I came across a bramble growing in plenty round the north foot of Le Roule, the high crag which overlooks that city, that proved to match a panicle in BM collected by Corbiére in 1889 from what are today the outskirts of Cherbourg and later distributed under the name Boulay bestowed on the bramble in his honour, R. corbieri. Corbiére tended to interpret Rubus species over-broadly, and his determinations cannot be accepted uncritically; but the very distinctiveness of this particular plant taken together with his published description of R. corbieri (Corbiére 1894) leave no room for doubt in this instance. Moreover, there is a further Cherbourg specimen of his so named in P (Association rubologique no. 894) that clearly belongs to the same entity. Subsequently I discovered that this Cherbourg plant was identical with a specimen in my herbarium that I had collected in Guernsey in 1978, in a deserted garden in the middle of St Peter Port. Because R. corbieri is rather variable, however, it was some time before I began to suspect that this might also be the bramble which occurs more widely in the north of that island and in such ~ profusion on Sark. Fuller exploration of the north of the Cotentin Peninsula in 1991, bringing at the same time wider acquaintance with the variation exhibited by the species in the field, showed conclusively that that suspicion was well-founded. R. corbieri proved to occur conspicuously all along the coast to the west of Cherbourg (though apparently absent to the east), rising to abundance in the vicinity of Cap de la Hague, the headland facing Alderney, the northernmost of the Channel Isles. The comparable abundance of the species on Sark and its presence in much smaller quantity on Guernsey, which is situated farther out to the west, thus represents a natural prolongation, and gradual tailing-off, of its Cotentin range. I did not have an opportunity of following the coastline south from Cap de la Hague, but the discovery of a patch of R. corbieri just outside Carteret, some 40 km in that direction, suggests that the species may similarly prove to extend down to there. Most unusually for a Rubus species, it would appear to prefer the proximity of the sea, the coarseness of its foliage presumably rendering it well fitted to the rigours of that environment. Even so it noticeably avoids the most exposed situations, tending to occur on banks offering some shelter from the wind. Unexpectedly, R. corbieri also turns out to occur in England. In the autumn of 1990, while going through OXF in search of Channel Isles Rubus material, I came across an unmistakable specimen of it collected on Corfe Common in south-east Dorset, v.c. 9, by L. Cumming in 1916 and distributed through both of the exchange clubs that year as a white-flowered form of R. boraeanus (as determined by Rogers). The sheet bears a later determination by Watson, confirming that name. In one of the published notes on the gathering (Rogers 1918) the plant was described as locally abundant in the locality in question, which encouraged the belief that it might still be present there; and a visit to the Common the following July quickly revealed that not only was that the case, but SHORT NOTES 133 also that the population remains very extensive. Later the same day the species was encountered ina second locality in quite another part of Purbeck, along a lane crossing Studland Heath (GR SZ/ 01.84 and SZ/02.84). E. F. Linton has also since been found to have collected it in 1892 in a locality nearly midway from Corfe to Swanage, the specimen (BM) having been dismissed by Rogers and R. P. Murray as R. bloxamii X vestitus. In CGE, too, there turns out to be a gathering of it (no. 64/368) by B. A. Miles as recently as 1964 from the south-west part of Rempstone Heath (GR SZ/983.840), in this case with no name hazarded. Possibly, therefore, the species may prove widespread in the south-east corner of v.c. 9. Although that has been relatively well worked by batologists in the past, the superficial resemblance of R. corbieri to the common R. bloxamii (Bab.) Lees could well have led to its being passed over as the latter. Work on the Rubus flora of Hampshire, v.cc. 11 and 12, and the Isle of Wight, v.c. 10, in recent years has been sufficiently intensive to render it unlikely that so obtrusive a species has escaped notice in those neighbouring counties. Floristically, in any case, the affinity of their Rubus floras with that of the French coastal areas directly opposite appears to be but slight. At least the north end of the Cotentin Peninsula has a Rubus flora with a markedly more western facies than theirs, which makes the presence of R. corbieri in Dorset more congruous and Devon, v.cc. 3 and 4, the likeliest further English county in which the species may occur. The descriptions of R. corbieri by Corbiére (1894) and by Boulay (1900) — the latter of whom reduced the species to a ‘Forme’ of R. multifidus Boulay & Malbranche (a common Normandy bramble) and that in turn to a subspecies of R. menkei Weihe -— are. sufficiently detailed and accessible to render providing a further one unnecessary. It is nevertheless worth emphasising that the species, while unambiguously a member of Series Vestiti (Focke) Focke, varies considerably in the quantity of stalked glands present as well as in the size of the rachis prickles. In addition, the flowers tend to be pinkish on first opening or on plants growing in shade. Sudre in his Batotheca Europaea, fasc. 10, no. 487, relegated R. corbieri to the synonymy listed on the printed label of the bramble he distributed as R. fuscus subsp. retrodentatus (Mueller & Lef.) Sudre. The latter, however, a specimen of Questier’s from dép. Valois, is quite a different plant and it would seem that Sudre had a mistaken idea of the Cherbourg species. Representative material from Dorset, the Channel Isles and the North Cotentin has been deposited in BM. REFERENCES Bou ay, N. (1900). Rubus, in Rouy, G. & Camus, E.-G. Flore de France, vol. 6. Asniéres & Paris. CorsikErE, L. (1894). Nouvelle Flore de Normandie. Caen. Derrick, G. T. (1898). Additions to the Sark flora. Guernsey Soc. Nat. Sci. Rep. & Trans. 1897: 166-169. Rocers, W. M. (1899). The Rubi of Guernsey and Sark. Guernsey Soc. Nat. Sci. Rep. & Trans. 1898: 296-297. Rocers, W. M. (1918). Rep. Watson bot. Exch. Club 3: 14. Rocers, W. M. & Rocers, F. A. (1898). On the Rubi and Rosae of the Channel Islands. J. Bot., Lond. 36: 85- 90. D. E. ALLEN Lesney Cottage, Middle Road, Winchester, Hants., SO22 5EJ A NEW SPIRAL VARIANT OF JUNCUS EFFUSUS L. (SUNCACEAE) The Spiral Rush of gardens, Juncus effusus L. cv. ‘Spiralis’, was discovered as a single plant in Northern Ireland by David Bishop, Curator of the Botanic Garden, Belfast in 1869. It was brought into cultivation and has continued as a curiosity in gardens since then. It differs from the ordinary J. _ effusus in that the stems spiral upwards, often completing six to eight turns. James McNab, Curator ——oe se at that time of the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh and a most intelligent experimenter, obtained plants of the Irish discovery and sowed seeds from them. He reported that the seedlings all showed _ the spiral character (McNab 1873). There seems to be no other record of this variety in the wild. In the autumn of 1988, I noticed on rough croft grazing above Big Sand, Gairloch, W. Ross (v.c. 105), areas of Juncus which at first sight had every appearance of having been flattened by animals lying on the plants. Some of the colonies were 1.3-1.9 m across. Closer examination showed that 134 SHORT NOTES many of the stems were gently spiral and that all of them were only suberect in contrast to the strictly erect habit of normal J. effusus growing nearby. Plants were brought into cultivation. Seed from the ‘spiral’ plants at Big Sand germinated easily and all the seedlings were spiral and suberect. The Irish ‘Spiralis’ differs from the Scottish in that the stems in the Irish are quite erect and are much more obviously spiral six to eight turns as against two to three. There are many other populations in N.W. Scotland between Plockton and Dundonnell: on stfe village green in Plockton, at Flowerdale, Gairloch, at Red Point, Gairloch, at Cove, Poolewe, on the Inverewe peninsula, Poolewe, along the roadside by Loch Tollie between Gairloch and Poolewe, at Slaggan west of Mellon Udrigle and by the roadside at Dundonnell. It has not been found in the eastern or central Highlands, although once known it can be spotted from a moving car. It usually occurs mixed with normal plants and the contrast between the two is quite striking. There seem to be no previous records of this spiral rush on mainland Britain but there are specimens in E from the Northern Isles: Orkney, 1906, M. Spence; Ramsdale, Orphir, 1927, H. H. Johnston; Flotta, Orkney, 1932, J. Sinclair and all are similar to the West Ross plants rather than the Irish. I have also seen a photograph of an Orkney specimen collected by Linton in LIV. However, in 1991, it was evident that the variety had a wide and certainly long established distribution in the Outer Hebrides where I found it on the Island of Killegray (Harris) on the Shiant and Monach Isles just west of Loch Boisdale (Uist) and on Mingulay (Barra). In view of its considerable occurrence as wild populations over a considerable area of N.W. Scotland it seems appropriate to treat it as a distinct variety of Juncus effusus: Juncus effusus L. var. suberectus D. M. Henderson, var. nov. Hovotypus: Big Sand, Gairloch, W. Ross, v.c. 105, on rough croft land with var. effusus, 6 December 1988, D. M. Henderson (E). A varietate typica culmis leniter spiralibus suberectis differt. REFERENCES McNags, J. (1873). Remarks on Juncus effusus spiralis and varieties of ferns. Trans. Proc. bot. Soc. Edinb. 12: 502-504. D. M. HENDERSON Inverewe House, Poolewe, Wester Ross, IV22 2LQ - CONTRIBUTIONS TO A CYTOLOGICAL CATALOGUE OF THE BRITISH AND IRISH FLORA, 2 The only recent, published summary of chromosome counts made on native material of British and Irish vascular plants is contained in Clapham et al. (1987). The source of many of these counts, however, is unlocalised material or untraceable. The present series of notes is intended to | contribute to a properly documented cytological account of our flora (Wentworth ef al. 1991). We | present here chromosome counts of 102 flowering plant species from 122 populations. Only one plant from each population was studied, except where noted. All counts were made from squashes | of root-tips, except where noted; supernumerary chromosomes are designated by the suffix ‘S’. Voucher specimens have been placed in LTR. Achillea millefolium L., 2n = 54: Caerns., v.c. 49, E. of Sarn, SH/24.32; Westmorland, v.c. 69, near Ulpha, c.5 km N.E. of Lindale, SD/44.81. Agrimonia eupatoria L., 2n = 28: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Silverdale, Gait Barrows N.N.R., SD/48.77; W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Warton Crag, R.S.P.B. nature reserve, SD/49.72. 4 Agrimonia procera Wallr., 2n = 56: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Warton Crag, R.S.P.B. nature reserve, SD/ | 49.72. . Ajuga reptans L., 2n = 32: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Forton, SD/48.53. Allium vineale L. var. vineale, 2n = 32 + 0-2S: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Carnforth, SD/49.71. SHORT NOTES 135 Anagallis tenella (L.) L., 2n = 22: Caerns., v.c. 49, Lleyn peninsula, W. end, SH/2.3. Angelica sylvestris L., 2n = 22: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Lancaster, SD/47.59. Anthriscus sylvestris (L.) Hoffm., 2n = 16: Leics., v.c. 55, Rutland, 4 km S. of Oakham, near Brooke, SK/85.06. Apium graveolens L., 2n = 22: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Potts Corner, SD/41.57. Apium nodiflorum (L.) Lag., 2n = 22: Dorset, v.c. 9, near Sydling St Nicholas, ST/63.00. Arum maculatum L., 2n = 56: Leics., v.c. 55, Swithland Wood, SK/53.12. Atriplex portulacoides L., 2n = 36: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Potts Corner, SD/41.57. Barbarea vulgaris R.Br., 2n = 16: Caerns., v.c. 49, Tudweiliog, 1 km to W. on Tyd’dyn road, SH/ 22.36. Blackstonia perfoliata (L.) Hudson, 2n = 40: Co. Durham, v.c. 66, coastal cliffs between Blackhall and Crimdon, NZ/47.38. Centaurea scabiosa L., 2n = 20 + 3-8S: Co. Durham, v.c. 66, coastal cliffs between Blackhall and Crimdon, NZ/47.38. Chelidonium majus L., 2n = 12: Caerns., v.c. 49, Llaniestyn, SH/26.33. Chrysanthemum segetum L., 2n = 18: Caerns., v.c. 49, N. of Botwnnog, overlooking Cellar Farm, SH/26.32. Chrysosplenium oppositifolium L., 2n = 42: Derbys., v.c. 57, Dovedale, SK/14.53. Cichorium intybus L., 2n = 18: Co. Durham, v.c. 66, coastal cliffs between Blackhall and Crimdon, NZ/47.38. Cirsium vulgare (Savi) Ten., 2n = 68: Caerns., v.c. 49, Botwnnog, above Cellar Farm, SH/26.32. Clematis vitalba L., 2n = 16: Surrey, v.c. 17, Silent Pool, near Shere, TQ/06.48. Conyza canadensis (L.) Crong., 2n = 18: Leics., v.c. 55, Leicester University Botanic Garden glasshouse (spontaneous weed), SK/61.01. Corylus avellana L., 2n = c. 22: Leics., v.c. 55, Swithland Wood, SK/53.12. Deschampsia setacea (Hudson) Hackel, 2n = 14: Caerns., v.c. 49, Cilan, near Abersoch, SH/29.24. Digitalis purpurea L., 2n = 56: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Lancaster University grounds, SD/48.57. Euonymus europaeus L., 2n = 32: Westmorland, v.c. 69, Brigsteer Park, 2-5 kmS. of Brigsteer, SD/ 48.87. Eupatorium cannabinum L., 2n = 20: Dorset, v.c. 9, Hartland Moor N.N.R., c. 4 km S.E. of Wareham, SY/96.85; W. Norfolk, v.c. 28, Foulden Common, TL/76.99; W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Carnforth, SD/49.71. Filipendula ulmaria (L.) Maxim., 2n = 14: Leics., v.c. 55, Swithland Woods, SK/53.12; W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Lancaster University grounds, SD/48.57. Galeopsis bifida Boenn., 2n = 32: Caerns., v.c. 49, E. of Sarn, SH/24.32; Caerns., v.c. 49, N. of Botwnnog, overlooking Cellar Farm, SH/26.32. Galium cruciata (L.) Scop., 2n = 22: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Potts Corner, SD/41.57. Galium mollugo L., 2n = 44: W. Cornwall, v.c. 1, Goonhilly Earth Station, SW/73.21; E. Cornwall, v.c. 2, Rame, near church, SX/42.49. Galium odoratum (L.) Scop., 2n = 44: Westmorland, v.c. 69, Brigsteer Park, 2-5kmS. of Brigsteer, SD/48.87. Geranium dissectum L., 2n = 22: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Lancaster, SD/46.62. Geranium lucidum L., 2n = 40: Westmorland, v.c. 69, near Meathop Moss, c.3kmN.E. of Lindale, SD/44.81. Geranium pratense L., 2n = 28: Derbys., v.c. 57, Milldale, SK/14.55; Co. Durham, v.c. 66,2 km N. of Barnard Castle, NY/05.18. Geranium sanguineum L., 2n = 84: Co. Durham, v.c. 66, coastal cliffs between Blackhall and Crimdon, NZ/47.38. Geum urbanum L., 2n = 42: Derbys., v.c. 57, Milldale, SK/14.55. Glaux maritima L., 2n = 30: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, W. of Cockerham, near Bank Houses, SD/42.53; W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Potts Corner, SD/41.57. Glechoma hederacea L., 2n = 36: Leics., v.c. 55, Rutland, Brooke, by the church, SK/85.06; W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Silverdale, E. of Thrang End Farm, SD/49.77. _ Heracleum sphondylium L., 2n = 22: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Lancaster University grounds, SD/48.57. _ Hippuris vulgaris L., 2n = 32: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Forton, by canal, SD/48.53. _ Hydrocotyle vulgaris L., 2n = 96: Caerns., v.c. 49, Llanbedrog, valley W. of Penarwel, SH/32.32. 136 SHORT NOTES Hypericum hirsutum L., 2n = 18: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Carnforth, SD/50.70; Westmorland, v.c. 69, Ravens Lodge, S.E. edge of Whitbarrow, base of Whitescar, SD/46.85. Hypericum perforatum L., 2n = 32: Surrey, v.c. 17, Silent Pool, near Shere, TQ/06.48. Lathyrus nissolia L., 2n = 14: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Lancaster University, SD/48.56. Limonium britannicum Ingrouille subsp. celticum Ingrouille var. pharense Ingrouille, 2n = 35: Caerns., v.c. 49, Bardsey Island, E. of Pen Cristin, Ogof y Gaseg, SH/12.21. Lotus corniculatus L., 2n = 24: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Gait Barrows N.N.R., near Silverdale, SD/ 48.77. Luzula pilosa (L.) Willd., 2n = 62: Co. Waterford, v.c. H6, Nier Valley, S/2.1. Lycopus europaeus L., 2n = 22: Caerns., v.c. 49, Pwllheli, SH/37.34. Lysimachia nemorum L., 2n = 16: Leics., v.c. 55, Swithland Wood, SK/53.12; W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Barkin Bridge, SD/60.63. Lythrum portula (L.) D. A. Webb, 2n = 10: Caerns., v.c. 49, Rhos Botwnnog, SH/26.32. Medicago sativa L. subsp. sativa, 2n = 32: Co. Durham, v.c. 66, coastal cliffs between Blackhall and Crimdon, NZ/47.38. Myosotis sylvatica Hoffm., 2n = 18: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Yealand Conyers, SD/50.74. Oenanthe crocata L., 2n = 22: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Lancaster University grounds, SD/48.57. Oenanthe lachenalii C. C. Gmelin, 2n = 22: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Potts Corner, SD/41.57. Parietaria judaica L., 2n = 26: W. Cornwall, v.c. 1, Newbridge, near St Just, SW/42.31; W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Silverdale, SD/45.74. Paris quadrifolia L., 2n = 20: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Gait Barrows N.N.R., near Silverdale, SD/ 48.77. Pedicularis sylvatica L. subsp. sylvatica, 2n = 16: W. Cornwall, v.c. 1, between Penzance and St Just, SW/39.31. | Phleum arenarium L., 2n = 14: Caerns., v.c. 49, Abersoch dunes, N. part of Porth Fawr, SH/31.27. Pinguicula lusitanica L., 2n = 12: Dorset, v.c. 9, Slepe Heath, c. 2-5 kmS.E. of Wareham, SY/94.86 (count made on integumentary tissue). Plantago lanceolata L., 2n = 12: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Lancaster University grounds, SD/48.57. Plantago media L., 2n = 24: Dorset, v.c. 9, Fontmell Down, c. 5 km S.S.E. of Shaftesbury, ST/ 88.18; W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Lancaster, by dismantled railway, SD/46.62; Westmorland, v.c. 69, Helsington Barrows, c. 3 km S.E. of Kendal, SD/48.89. Primula elatior (L.) Hill, 2n = 22: Cambs., v.c. 29 (no further details known). Primula veris L., 2n = 22: Co. Durham, v.c. 66, coastal cliffs between Blackhall and Crimdon, NZ/ 47.38. Prunella vulgaris L., 2n = 28: Co. Durham, v.c. 66, coastal cliffs between Blackhall and Crimdon, NZ/48.38; W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Lancaster University grounds, SD/48.57. . Pulicaria dysenterica (L.) Bernh., 2n = 18: Dorset, v.c. 9, Hartland Moor N.N.R., c.4kmS.E. of Wareham, SY/96.85. Quercus petraea (Mattuschka) Liebl., 2n = 24: Leics., v.c. 55, Swithland Wood, SK/53.12. Quercus robur L., 2n = 24: E. Norfolk, v.c. 27, Badley Moor, NT/00.11. Radiola linoides Roth, 2n = 18: Caerns., v.c. 49, Cwmistir, near Edeyrn, SH/25.38. Ranunculus auricomus L., 2n = 32: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Yealand Conyers, SD/50.74. Ranunculus bulbosus L., 2n = 16: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Potts Corner, SD/41.57. Ranunculus flammula L. subsp. flammula, 2n = 32: Westmorland, v.c. 69, Killington, SD/61.88. Ranunculus omiophyllus Ten., 2n = 32: Caerns., v.c. 49, Garn Fadryn, SH/27.35. Ranunculus sceleratus L., 2n = 32: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Potts Corner, SD/41.57. Rhamnus catharticus L., 2n = 24: W. Norfolk, v.c. 28, Foulden Common, TL/76.99. Ribes nigrum L., 2n = 16: Leics., v.c. 55, Swithland Wood, SK/53.12. Ribes uva-crispa L., 2n = 16: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Silverdale, E. of Thrang End Farm, SD/49.77. Rubus chamaemorus L., 2n = 56: Derbys., v.c. 57, Snake Pass summit, N. side of car park, SK/ 08.92. Salsola kali L., 2n = 36: N. Somerset, v.c. 6, near Berrow, ST/28.53. Sambucus nigra L., 2n = 36: Leics., v.c. 55, Swithland Wood, SK/53.12. Sanguisorba minor Scop. subsp. minor, 2n = 28: Westmorland, v.c. 69, Brigsteer Park, 2-5 km S. of |} Brigsteer, SD/48.87. Sanguisorba officinalis L., 2n = 56: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Aldcliffe, SD/46.60. SHORT NOTES 137 Sanicula europaea L., 2n = 16: Leics., v.c. 55, Swithland Wood, SK/53.12; Westmorland, v.c. 69, Brigsteer Park, 2-5 km S. of Brigsteer, SD/48.87. Scabiosa columbaria L., 2n = 16: Westmorland, v.c. 69, Helsington Barrows, c. 3 km S.E. of Kendal, SD/48.89. Scrophularia nodosa L., 2n = 36: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Lancaster, SD/47.59. Sedum telephium L., 2n = 24: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Gait Barrows N.N.R., near Silverdale, SD/47.77. Senecio viscosus L., 2n = 40: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Carnforth, SD/49.71. _ Solanum dulcamara L., 2n = 24: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Aldcliffe, close to estuary of River Lune, SD/45.60. _ Spiranthes spiralis (L.) Chevall., 2n = 30: Caerns., v.c. 49, Abersoch Bay, below Marchros, on Abersoch golf-links, SH/31.26. | Stachys officinalis (L.) Trev., 2n = 16: W. Cornwall, v.c. 1, Chyenhal, SW/45.27. - Stellaria holostea L., 2n = 26: Leics., v.c. 55, Swithland Wood, SK/53.12. \ 1 : . | | 7 Tanacetum vulgare L., 2n = 18: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, River Lune estuary, near Lancaster, SD/45.62. _ Taxus baccata L., 2n = 24: Leics., v.c. 55, Swithland Wood, SK/53.12. Teucrium scorodonia L., 2n = 32: Cheviot, v.c. 68, Ingram, River Breamish, NU/01.16. ' Triglochin palustris L., 2n = 24: E. Norfolk, v.c. 27, Badley Moor, NT/00.11, (three plants counted). _Tussilago farfara L., 2n = 60: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Lancaster University grounds, SD/48.57; W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Carnforth, SD/50.71. ) Typha latifolia L., 2n = 30: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Lancaster University grounds, SD/48.57. Valeriana dioica L., 2n = 16: Leics., v.c. 55, Swithland Wood, SK/53.12. _Verbascum nigrum L., 2n = c. 30 + 4 (3-7)S: S. Hants., v.c. 11, near Winchester, SU/4.2. Veronica serpyllifolia L. subsp. serpyllifolia, 2n = 14: Caerns., v.c. 49, Bardsey Is., Chapel garden, feesH/12 22. Vicia sepium L., 2n = 14: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, above Saltmire Bridge, SD/51.75; Westmorland, v.c. 69, Whitbarrow (S.E. edge), Raven’s Lodge, underneath White Scar, SD/46.85. \Wahlenbergia hederacea (L.) Reichenb., 2n = 36: cultivated plant, originally from S. Devon, v.c. 3, Dartmoor, Newbridge near Hone (W. of Bovey Tracy), SX/71.70. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . | from their reserves. _ We should like to thank English Nature and the R.S.P.B. for permission to collect plant material ; ’ ‘A : REFERENCES i CLAPHAM, A. R., Tutin, T. G. & Moore, D. M. (1987). Flora of the British Isles, 3rd ed. Cambridge. _ Wentworth, J. E., BaiLey, J. P. & Gorna_t, R. J. (1991). Contributions to a cytological catalogue of the British and Irish flora, 1. Watsonia 18: 415-417. P. M. HoLiincswortH, R. J. GORNALL & J. P. BAILEY Botany Department, The University, Leicester, LEI] 7RH THE ROSA HERBARIUM OF A. H. WOLLEY-DOD ¢ As far as is known, until last year Wolley-Dod’s Rosa collection in BM had never been examined _vully, and certainly had never in its entirety been examined critically, since Wolley-Dod himself. A _ 2w of the specimens have been remounted, but most are on Wolley-Dod’s original sheets. Large Jumbers are unmounted, many of them between old and yellow sheets of newspaper dating from ie 1920s. The author of this note was asked to go through the collection and label the specimens in je light of modern taxonomic opinion. He received the collection on loan early in 1990, and did { ‘| 4 | j 138 SHORT NOTES most of the routine work himself, with the assistance of G. G. Graham where consultation or a second opinion seemed desirable. The collection contains 3091 specimens. Of these, over 100 were indeterminate, in some cases because the specimens had deteriorated, but mainly because they were too immature or too scrappy for determination. A few in the latter category carried a caustic comment from Wolley-Dod, and as he had not attempted identification one wonders why he bothered to keep them. Pasted on to many of the sheets are comments by Sudre, whose reliability Wolley-Dod came to distrust, and more valuable comments by R. Keller, who wrote in a crabbed hand indiscriminately in English, German, French or Latin. Besides the large numbers of specimens collected by Wolley-Dod himself, he had acquired considerable collections from others, many of them illustrious names in the history of the study of Rosa. These, in alphabetical order, are as follows: C. Bailey, J. G. Baker, W. Barclay, E. B. Bishop, C. E. Britton, R. & M. Corstorphine, E. M. Day, G. Claridge Druce, Rev. A. Ley, Rev. E. F. Linton, Rev. W. R. Linton, Rev. E. S. Marshall, Rev. H. J. Riddelsdell, Rev. W. Moyle Rogers, I. M. Roper and W. A. Shoolbred. There are also a few specimens from other well-known botanists such as Rev. A. Bloxam and A. R. Horwood. Study of the localities from which collections were made would give a fair indication of the distribution of species from north to south. Otherwise, distribution maps compiled from the records would tend rather to show the chosen hunting grounds of the main collectors. Wolley-Dod collected mainly in Devon, Surrey, Derbyshire, Cheshire and the Lake District; Baker from around Thirsk in Yorkshire; Druce from Oxfordshire; Ley from Gloucestershire, Herefordshire and parts of Wales: Moyle Rogers from Devon and Gloucestershire. Other collectors also appear to have concentrated mainly on these same regions, with a plethora of records from Surrey and scattered records from elsewhere in England. Most of the collections in Scotland are from the Perthshire vice-counties, with outlying records by E. S. Marshall from Westerness and Wester Ross, Mrs Corstorphine from Angus and H. Halcro Johnston from Hoy and Mainland, Orkney. There are only about 30 records from Ireland, mostly collected by C. H. Waddell in County Down. The Channel Islands are represented by two specimens from Jersey. There are a few specimens from Europe. The main interest of these lies in the only two specimens of Rosa elliptica Tausch, both from France. These show that Wolley-Dod knew and recognised this species, but presumably had not found it in Britain, which seems to corrobrate the assumption that this is not a native British species (Graham & Primavesi 1990). Allowing for the somewhat patchy distribution of records described above, there appears in general to have been little change in frequency of Rosa species and their hybrids throughout the country between the period during which the collection was made and the present day. Naturally, — there are losses in some areas, principally where there has been expansion of the larger towns and cities. There are, for instance, a number of records which at first sight appear astonishing nowadays because the collections were made in what are now solidly built-up areas of Greater London. Only one species shows a marked change in frequency. This is Rosa agrestis Savi. There are about 20 specimens of this species in Wolley-Dod’s collection, from scattered localities all over the southern part of England. Nowadays this appears to be a very rare species in England, though it is still frequent in parts of Ireland. What has caused this decline in frequency is not known. The other two sweet briar species, R. rubiginosa L. and R. micrantha Borrer ex Smith, appear to have undergone little or no change in frequency since Wolley-Dod’s time. In his Revision of the British Roses, Wolley-Dod (1930-31) repeatedly refers to this herbarium, but he did not re-label the specimens to conform with the nomenclature of that work. The names are those of the multiplicity of species described in his earlier works (Wolley-Dod 1908, 1910). The research which he undertook is reflected in additional comments attached to the sheets. As well as those of Sudre and Keller already mentioned, there are Wolley-Dod’s own type-written or hand- written comments, and cuttings from Botanical Exchange Club reports. One cannot help feeling that in the light of modern opinion the work undertaken to elaborate all the Groups, varieties and forms described in Revision of the British Roses was an unprofitable expenditure of time that could have been more usefully employed. Indeed, Wolley-Dod himself later expressed doubt and dissatisfaction, stating that rarely in the field did one find specimens which corresponded closely or even remotely with the author’s description of a named variety (Wolley-Dod 1936). Keller was more nearly on the right lines, as he frequently suggested the possibility of hybridity. It is a pity that SHORT NOTES 139 Wolley-Dod did not pay more attention to Keller’s comments, but he would not recognize a Rosa hybrid unless the hips showed complete or partial sterility. In the course of the recent examination of this herbarium, we were able to label many specimens as definite hybrids between two species, a large number where there was plainly slight introgression of another named species, some where there was introgression of another indeterminate species, and a few which were such a mixture as to be impossible to determine. As regards the latter category it is not worth spending time on them; there are plenty of roses which can be determined and recorded. Many modern taxonomists allow inclusion of the second and third categories above as permissible variants of a named species (Stace 1975; Webb 1951). There are still unsolved problems in Rosa taxonomy and nomenclature, but the appalling difficulties which Wolley-Dod faced, and with his researches laid the foundations for later work, have now largely been overcome. REFERENCES GraHaM, G. G. & PrimaveEs!, A. L. (1990). Notes on some Rosa taxa recorded as occurring in the British Isles. Watsonia 18: 119-124. Stace, C. A. (1975). Hybridization and the flora of the British Isies, p. 3. London. Wess, D. A. (1951). Hybrid plants in Ireland. Jr. Nat. J. 10: 201-204. ~ Wo ttey-Dop, A. H. (1908). The subsection Eu-caninae of the genus Rosa. J. Bot., Lond. 46 (Suppl.): 1-110. Wo tey-Dop, A. H. (1910). The British roses (excluding Eu-car:nae). J. Bot., Lond. 48 (Suppl.): 1-141. Wo tey-Dop, A. H. (1930-31). A revision of the British roses. J. Bot., Lond. 68 (Suppl.): 1-16 & 69 (Suppl.): 17-111. Wo LLeEy-Dop, A. H. (1936). Some rose notes. Rep. botl Soc. Exch. Club Br. Isl. 11: 68-81. A. L. PRIMAVESI Ratc‘iffe College, Syston, Leicester LE7 8SG ADDITIONAL RECORDS OF SORBUS LANCASTRIENSIS E. F. WARBURG (ROSACEAE) Following documentation of the known sites of Sorbus lancastriensis E. F. Warburg (Rich & Baecker 1986), a number of additional populations have come to our attention, including two on Silurian rock, two about Grange-over-Sands, and one wes: of the Leven Estuary. This note lists the additional sites (we have visited all new localities in June 1991), and updates our previous list. Full details have again been lodged with the vice-county recorders, English Nature, the local Naturalists’ Trusts and the Biological Records Centre, Monks Wood. WW Lanics:. v.c. 60: Gait Barrows N.N.R. (SD/4.7). Three plants have now been found, with Sorbus aria, confirming the Ratcliffe (1977) record queried by Rich & Baecker (1986). Wesimorland, v.c. 69: Farleton Knott, one plant on top of cliff (SD/5.7), and twe plants on cliff face, about 300 m north of the above plant (SD/5.8). These confirm the Ratcliffe (1977) record not found in 1982. Furness, v.c. 69b: Birkrigg Common (SD/2.7). “One small tree in limestone pavement on summit’, F. L. Woodman & K. A. Gunning, 27 May 1982 (LANC). This is the first known site west of the Leven Estuary; we have been unable to re-find the plant. Kirkhead (SD/3.7). About 30-40 plants in scrubby woodland on the west side, with a few Sorbus rupicola. This is probably the same locality as found by C. Bailey in 1881 on ‘exposed limestone ridges near Wray’s Holme Tower” (CGE, BM). Old Park Wood (SD/3.7). We under-estimated the population size of this site; there are over 100 plants mixed with a smaller number of S. rupicola plants. Grange-over-Sands (SD/4.7). One plant by B5277 at west edge of golf course. Witherslack and Yewbarrow (SD/4.8). Isolated plants occur on roadsides, in hedges and on limestone rocks in at least six separate localities around the villages. One plant, to the N.E. of Witherslack, is in a shady hedge on Silurian baserock, a very atypical habitat. 140 SHORT NOTES Poolbank (SD/4.8). One small tree on woodland edge by roadside, first found by G. Halliday in 1974 (LANC). This is a second site on the Silurian slate; the soil pH is about 6-6-5, equivalent to the pH of many of the limestone soils on which it occurs. Latterbarrow Nature Reserve (SD/4.8). At least four plants on the reserve, and about ten on the S.W. edge in woodland above the old A590. This is almost certainly the same locality as plants collected in 1937 by E. F. Warburg near The Derby Arms (BM). Currently, there are thus approximately 2000 plants known from about 35 sites in eight 10-km squares, with one extinct population. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We would like to thank the Keepers of BM, K and LANC for access to specimens, and Eimear Nic Lughadha for help in the field. REFERENCES RATCLIFFE, D., ed. (1977). A nature conservation review, vol. 2. Cambridge. Ricu, T. C. G. & BAEcKER, M. (1986). The distribution of Sorbus lancastriensis E. F. Warburg. Watsonia 16: 83— 85. T. C. G. Rico & M. BAECKER 24 Lombardy Drive, Peterborough, PE1 3TF | Watsonia, 19, 141-154 (1992) 141 Plant Records Records for publication must be submitted to the appropriate Vice-county Recorder (see B.S$.B.J. Year Book for 1992), and not the Editors. The records must normally be of species, hybrids or subspecies of native or naturalized alien plants belonging to one or more of the following categories: Ist or 2nd v.c. record; Ist post-1930 v.c. record; only extant v.c. locality, or 2nd such locality; a record of an extension of range by more than 100 km. Such records will also be accepted for the major islands in v.cc. 102-104 and 110. Only 1st records can normally be accepted for Rubus, Hieracium and hybrids. Records for subdivisions of vice-counties will not be treated separately; they must therefore be records for the vice-county as a whole. Records of Taraxacum are now being dealt with separately, by Dr A. J. Richards, and will be published at a later date. Records are arranged in the order given in the List of British vascular plants by J. E. Dandy (1958), from which the species’ numbers are taken. Taxonomy and nomenclature follow the New Flora of the British Isles by C. A. Stace (1991), except for the genera Rubus and Hieracium. The Ordnance Survey national grid reference follows the habitat and locality; the 100-km square is given in alphabetical form at the start of the grid reference rather than as numerical co-ordinates. With the exception of collectors’ initials, herbarium abbreviations are those used in British and Irish herbaria by D. H. Kent & D. E. Allen (1984). Records are field records if no other source is stated. Records from the following vice-counties are included in the text below: 1, 2, 4,9, 11-15, 17, 22, 25, 26, 28, 29, 35, 36, 38, 39, 41-50, 52, 58, 59, 61-65, 67-71, 73, 75, 77, 79-81, 88, 93, 98, 99, 102, 111. The following signs are used: before the record: to indicate a new vice-county record. before the species number: to indicate that the plant is not a native species of the British Isles. before the record: to indicate a species which, though native in some parts of the British Isles, is not so in the locality recorded. [] enclosing a previously published record: to indicate that the record should be deleted. +b x 1/com. DIPHASIASTRUM COMPLANATUM (L.) Holub *67,S. Northumb.: With D. alpinum under Calluna, William’s Cleugh, NY/639.991. G. A. & M. Swan, 1988, herb. G.A.S., det. A. C. Jermy as morphotype decipiens. 4/9 X 5. EQUISETUM ARVENSE L. X E. FLUVIATILE L. *46, Cards.: Disused railway verge, Pendinas, SN/581.801. A. O. Chater, 1991, NMW. +13/cor. BLECHNUM CORDATUM (Desv.) Hieron. *98, Main Argyll: Rock exposures, Craignish Castle, NM/773.015. A. McG. Stirling & B. H. Thompson, 1991, BM, det. A. C. Jermy. Present since late 1970s. 15/8. ASPLENIUM SEPTENTRIONALE (L.) Hoffm. *43, Rads.: S.-facing rock face, Yatt Wood, Dolyhir, SO/24.58. D. C. Boyce, D. R. Drewett & R. G. Woods, 1991. 21/6 X 7. DRYOPTERIS CARTHUSIANA (Villars) H. P. Fuchs xX D. pitatata (Hoffm.) A. Gray *80, Roxburghs.: Birch wood, Din Moss, Hoselaw, NT/805.316. R. W. M. Corner, 1991, BM, det. A. C. Jermy. 21/8. DRYOPTERIS AEMULA (Aiton) Kuntze *93, N. Aberdeen: Wooded den, Tore of Troup, NJ/832.613. D. Welch, 1991, ABD. 25/cam. X int. POLYPODIUM CAMBRICUM L. X P. INTERJECTUM Shivas *14, E. Sussex: Old walls of ruined Greyfriars Chapel, Winchelsea, TQ/905.170. L. B. Burt & M. Thomas, 1991, BM, det. R. H. Roberts. ¢27/1. AZOLLA FILICULOIDES Lam. *44, Carms.: Ornamental pond, Gellideg Farm, SN/ 423.105. T. S. Crosby, 1991. Inlet to lake, Sandy Water Park, Llanelli, SN/493.005. G. Hutchinson, 1991, NMW. Ist and 2nd records. 49, Caerns.: Reservoir near Pistyll Church, SH/328.422. L. J. Larson, 1991, NMW. Only extant locality. 28/1. BOTRYCHIUM LUNARIA (L.) Sw. 81, Berwicks.: Basaltic outcrop, Hareheugh Craigs, NT/ 687.401. D. G. Long, 1991. 2nd extant locality. 142 PLANT RECORDS 46/7. RANUNCULUS SARDOUS Crantz 46, Cards.: Sandy field, Gwbert, SN/163.498. A. O. Chater, 1991, NMW. Ist localised post-1930 record. 46/9. RANUNCULUS PARVIFLORUS L. 35, Mons.: Thin grass on bank, R. A. F. Caerwent, ST/ 467.919. T. G. Evans, 1991. ist post-1930 record. 46/11. RANUNCULUS LINGUA L. *98, Main Argyll: Swamp, Lochan Iliter, NM/749.102. B. H. Thompson, 1991, herb. B.H.T., conf. C. D. Preston. 46/19 X 22b. RANUNCULUS FLUITANS Lam. X R. PELTATUS Schrank *68, Cheviot: Whiteadder Water at Whiteadder Bridge, Corporation Arms, NT/959.522. J. M. Croft & C. D. Preston, 1991, CGE, conf. S. D. Webster. 46/22a X 21. RANUNCULUS AQUATILIS L. X R. TRICHOPHYLLUS Chaix *50, Denbs.: Farm pond, Penley, SJ/408.412. B.S.B.I. meeting, 1991, CGE, det. S. D. Webster. Ist Welsh record. 46/22c. RANUNCULUS PENICILLATUS subsp. PSEUDOFLUITANS (Syme) S. Webster var. PSEUDO- FLUITANS *77, Lanarks.: R. Clyde, Wolfclyde, NT/01.36. R. C. L. Howitt, 1979, herb. P. Macpherson, conf. N. T. H. Holmes. +50/aqu. THALICTRUM AQUILEGIIFOLIUM L. *79, Selkirks.: Railway embankment between Bowland and Galashiels, NT/4.3. E. P. Beattie, 1969, E. *80, Roxburghs.: Riverbank, Ettrick Water below Bridgeheugh, Selkirk, NT/476.307. E. Middleton, 1988, E, det. D. R. McKean. 57/1. CERATOPHYLLUM DEMERSUM L. *44, Carms.: Lake, Sandy Water Park, Llanelli, SN/ 493.005. I. K. Morgan, 1991, NMW. 70, Cumberland: Recently dug pond, Bowscar, NY/ 522.344. K. Raistrick, 1991, LANC. 2nd record. 58/3. PAPAVER DUBIUM subsp. LEcCoqi (Lamotte) Syme *44, Carms.: Burnt cliff, Dolwen Point, SN/233.078. I. K. Morgan, 1991. 66/4. FUMARIA BASTARDII Boreau *67, S. Northumb.: Waste ground, Mason, NZ/211.735. G. A. Swan, 1990, herb. G.A.S., det. M. G. Daker. +68/1. ERUCASTRUM GALLICUM (Willd.) O. E. Schulz 70, Cumberland: Forestry track, Spadeadam, NY/6.7. M. Gregory & J. Parker, 1991, LANC, det. T. C. G. Rich. 2nd record. +71/1. HIRSCHFELDIA INCANA (L.) Lagr.-Fossat *50, Denbs.: Kinmel Bay, SH/990.808. G. Battershall, 1991. *59,S. Lancs.: Railway siding, Fazakerley, SJ/388.983. V. Gordon, 1991. 79/3. LEPIDIUM HETEROPHYLLUM Benth. 26, W. Suffolk: Farm track, Eriswell, TL/754.764. D. J. & Y. T. Leonard, 1991, herb. E. & M. Hyde, conf. T. C. G. Rich. Only extant locality. +86/2. CAPSELLA RUBELLA Reuter *38, Warks.: Canal towpaths, Rowington, SP/187.699, and Kingswood, SP/187.708. J. C. Bowra, 1991, WAR, det. P. J. Copson. Ist and 2nd records. 88/4. COCHLEARIA SCOTICA Druce *81, Berwicks.: St Abb’s Head, NT/9.6. A. Craig-Christie, 1884, E, det. P. S. Wyse Jackson. +92/1. LOBULARIA MARITIMA (L.) Desv. 50, Denbs.: Colwyn Bay, SH/846.782. G. Battershall, 1991. 2nd post-1930 record. +97/rap. CARDAMINE RAPHANIFOLIA Pourret *49, Caerns.: Bank of Afon Roe near Pont Gorswen, SH/762.714. R. Lewis, 1990, NMW, det. E. J. Clement & T. C. G. Rich. 102/4. RorippA ISLANDICA (Oeder ex Murray) Borbas “46, Cards.: Flat rock by Afon Teifi below Cenarth bridge, SN/269.416. A. O. Chater, 1991, NMW, det. B. Jonsell & T. C. G. Rich. Ist Welsh record, and extension of range 250 km southwards. 102/5. RoRIPPA AMPHIBIA (L.) Besser *44, Carms.: Banks of Afon Llwchwr, Llanedi, SN/ 59.06. I. K. Morgan, 1984, NMW. 102/6 X 3. RORIPPA AUSTRIACA (Crantz) Besser X R. SYLVESTRIS (L.) Besser *58, Cheshire: Edge of lane, Partington, SJ/733.914. A. Franks & P. Newton, 1990, det..T. C. G. Rich. PLANT RECORDS 143 4108/3. SISYMBRIUM LOESELII L. *25, E. Suffolk: Sandy bank behind Marina, Shotley Point, TM/252.343. E. M. Hyde, 1991, herb. T. C. G. Rich, det. T.C.G.R. 111/1. DESCURAINIA SOPHIA (L.) Webb ex Prantl +42, Brecs.: Roadside verge, Llangattock, SO/21.18. A. Newton & M. Porter, 1989. Ist post-1930 record. +48, Merioneth: Disturbed ground by golf links, Morfa Harlech, SH/5.3. P. M. Benoit & D. C. Lang, 1990, NMW. Ist record this century. 113/5 X 4. VIOLA REICHENBACHIANA Jordan ex Boreau X V. RIVINIANA Reichb. “44, Carms.: Roadbank, Garn Fach, SN/571.156. R. D. Pryce, 1985, NMW, det. D. M. Moore. 113/6 X 4. VIOLA CANINA L. X V. RIVINIANA Reichb. *75, Ayrs.: Dune grassland, Lendalfoot, NX/129.898. A. McG. Stirling, 1991. 113/9b. VIOLA PALUSTRIS subsp. JURESSII P. Fourn. *47, Monts.: Bare peat, Dovey Junction, SN/703.982. P. M. Benoit, 1989. ¥113/10. VioLa coRNuUTA L. *77, Lanarks.: Woodland, Cleghorn Estate, NS/8.4. W. A. Scott, 1965. 123/la. SILENE VULGARIS Garcke 93, N. Aberdeen: Disturbed roadside bank, Auchterless, NJ/706.411. D. Welch, 1991, ABD. Ist record since 1930. 123/14 Xx 13. SILENE LATIFOLIA Poiret X S. piorca (L.) Clairv. *75, Ayrs.: Shingle shore, Pinbain, NX/136.913. A. McG. Stirling, 1991. +124/cha. LYCHNIS CHALCEDONICA L. *35, Mons.: Forestry track, Bishop Barnet’s Wood, Godefroy, ST/516.938. T. G. Evans, 1989, NMW. 131/10. CERASTIUM DIFFUSUM Pers. 712, N. Hants.: Abundant on roadside verges, Aldershot military town, SU/870.517. C. R. Hall, 1991, herb. A. Brewis, det. F. Rose. 2nd record. 133/3. STELLARIA PALLIDA (Dumort.) Piré 81, Berwicks.: Basaltic outcrop, Hareheugh Craigs, NT/688.400. R. W. M. Corner, 1991, herb. M. E. Braithwaite. 2nd record. 143/2. SPERGULARIA BOCCONI! (Scheele) Graebner +*15, E. Kent: Roadside verge on chalky soil, Lower Bell near Maidstone, TQ/74.60. E. G. Philp, 1991, MNE, conf. J. Ratter. 144/1. POLYCARPON TETRAPHYLLUM (L.) L. 9, Dorset: Sandy shingle, Ferrybridge, S Y/667.756. S. M. Eden, 1991. Only extant locality, in area where first recorded in 1774. 146/1. HERNIARIA GLABRA L. +*77, Lanarks.: Bare ground, site of 1988 Garden Festival, Glasgow, NS/56.65 and 57.65. P. Macpherson, 1990, herb. P.M. Present in increased quantity in £991: 149/1b. MONTIA FONTANA subsp. MINOR Hayw. 81, Berwicks.: Basaltic outcrop, Hareheugh Craigs, NT/687.399. R. W. M. Corner, 1991, herb. M. E. Braithwaite. 2nd record. *152/1. CARPOBROTUS EDULIS (L.) N. E. Br. *25, E. Suffolk: Shingle beach, Landguard Common, TM/28.31. G. E. Steeds, 1990, det. C. D. Preston. 7153/bli. AMARANTHUS BLITOIDES S. Watson *26, W. Suffolk: Sandy arable field, Icklingham, TL/768.735. E. Milne-Redhead, 1988, det. A. L. Grenfell. 154/14. CHENOPODIUM RUBRUM L. +*43, Rads.: Dung heap near New Radnor Station, SO/ 219.605. D. C. Boyce, D. R. Drewett & R. G. Woods, 1991. 156/4 X pra. ATRIPLEX GLABRIUSCULA Edmondston xX A. PRAECOX Hulph. *68, Cheviot: Saltmarsh, Goswick, NU/054.458. G. A. & M. Swan, 1991, herb. G.A.S., det. J. R. Akeroyd. 160/2. SALICORNIA DOLICHOSTACHYA Moss 44, Carms.: Channel to dock, Llanelli, SS/499.988. _G. Hutchinson, 1987, NMW, det. D. H. Dalby. 1st post-1930 record. ~ 163/4. MALVA NEGLECTA. Wallr. *75, Ayrs.: Car park and shore, Girvan, NX/182.975. A. McG. Stirling & A. Rutherford, 1991, E. | 144 PLANT RECORDS 164/1. LAVATERA ARBOREA L. 50, Denbs.: Kinmel Bay, SH/994.807. G. Battershall, 1991. 2nd record, Ist since 1859. +165/2. ALTHAEA HIRSUTA L. 11, S. Hants.: Short coastal turf on reclaimed land, North Harbour, Cosham, SU/643.050. R. A. Barrett, 1991. Ist record as established population since 1922. 168/12. GERANIUM ROTUNDIFOLIUM L. +*46, Cards.: Waste ground and scrub, Llandbadarn Fawr, SN/598.810. S. P. Chambers, 1991, NMW. 169/1. ERODIUM MARITIMUM (L.) L’Heér. 14, E. Sussex: Bare chalk on cliff top, Flagstaff Point, TV/538.967. R. M. Burton, 1991, herb. P. A. Harmes. Only extant locality. *35, Mons.: Grassy bank near R. Severn, Sudbrook, ST/50.87. T. G. Evans, 1978. Rock garden and drive, La Cuesta, Chepstow, ST/52.93. T. G. Evans, 1981, still present in 1991. Introduced with sand and now well established. Ist and 2nd records. 169/2. ERODIUM MOSCHATUM (L.) L’Heér. 711, S. Hants.: Short turf by pavement, Portsdown Hill Road (B2177), Widley, SU/668.064. D. P. J. Smith, 1991, herb. R. P. Bowman. ist record of established population since 1924. 7170/3. OXALIS STRICTA L. *46, Cards.: Trackside in pasture, Glanrheidol, SN/663.792. A. O. Chater, 1990, NMW. +170/exi. OXALIS EXILIS Cunn. *46, Cards.: Abundant in lawns, Carrog, SN/562.724. A. O. Chater, 1991, NMW. +RHUS HIRTA (L.) Sudw. *70, Cumberland: Derelict industrial land, Mealsgate near Fletcher- town, NY/201.423. M. Porter, 1991. 7183/2. LUPINUS ARBOREUS Sims *75, Ayrs.: Sandy ground near shore, Seafield, NS/328.205. A. McG. Stirling & A. Rutherford, 1991. +184/alp. LABURNUM ALPINUM (Miller) Bercht. & J. S. Presl 70, Cumberland: Damp bank E. of Kershopefoot, NY/481.827. R. E. Groom, 1986, LANC, conf. A. O. Chater. 2nd record. 187/3. ULEX MINOR Roth +*59, S. Lancs.: Embankment of disused railway line, Culcheth, SJ/ 646.950. V. Gordon, 1990. +191/4. MELILoTUsS INDICcUS (L.) All. 12, N. Hants.: Disturbed sandy ground, Aldershot, SU/ 858.508. T. Dove & A. R. G. Mundell, 1990, herb. A.R.G.M. 2nd record. 200/3. ASTRAGALUS GLYCYPHYLLOS L. 35, Mons.: Rough meadow, R.A.F. Caerwent, ST/ 483.917. T. G. Evans and C. & G. Titcombe, 1991. 2nd extant locality. 205/1. ONOBRYCHIS VICHFOLIA Scop. +70, Cumberland: Bank near old railway, Maryport, N Y/ 02.36. N. Botham, 1991, LANC. Ist record this century. +206/6. VICIA VILLOSA Roth 12, N. Hants.: Abundant in disturbed sandy ground, Aldershot, SU/858.508. T. Dove & A. R. G. Mundell, 1990, herb. A.R.G.M. 2nd record. 206/10. VictIa SYLVATICA L. 12, N. Hants.: Wood W. of Appleshaw, SU/296.485. C. Chatters & I. Routh, 1991. Ist record since 1805. +106/14 seg. VICIA SATIVA subsp. SEGETALIS (Thuill.) Gaudin *77, Lanarks.: Grassy verge, Busby near Glasgow, NS/57.56. E. L. S. Lindsay & P. Macpherson, 1984, herb. P.M., conf. A. McG. Stirling. 206/16. VICIA LATHYROIDES L. *1, W. Cornwall: Dry, stony soil on bank, Pendennis Castle, SW/824.317. R. J. Murphy & P. E. Tompsett, 1991, conf. R. M. Walls. 207/2. LATHYRUS NISSOLIA L. +46, Cards.: Railway embankment, Eglwys-Fach, SN/67.96. W. M. Condry, 1968, 1972. 2nd record. +*59, S. Lancs.: Weed amongst planted bushes, Risley Moss, SJ/668.928. V. Gordon, 1991. PLANT RECORDS 145 +ARUNCUS DIoICcUS (Walter) Fern. *70, Cumberland: Lakeshore, Ullswater E. of Lyulph’s Tower, NY/410.203. F. J. Roberts, 1991, LANC. 211/11/32. RUBUS BRITANNICUS Rogers = *29, Cambs.: Woodland margin, Warren Hill, TL/ 660.637. A. L. Bull, 1989, herb. A.L.B., conf. A. Newton. 211/11/51. RUBUS GLANDULIGER W. C. R. Watson *11, S. Hants.: Edge of clearing, Buckland Wood, Lymington, SZ/31.97. D. E. Allen, 1990, BM, conf. A. Newton. 211/11/74. Rusus sitvaticus Weihe & Nees *12, N. Hants.: Wood margin, Sydmonton Common, SU/49.62. D. E. Allen & F. H. Brightman, 1986, herb. D.E.A., conf. A. Newton. 211/11/81. RuBuUs ALBIONIS W. C. R. Watson *12, N. Hants.: Birchwood, Mount Pleasant, Tadley Common, SU/60.62. D. E. Allen, 1990. 211/11/83. RUBUS CRUDELIS W. C. R. Watson “11, S. Hants.: Wood and heath margin, Chark Common, SU/57.02. D. E. Allen, 1990, BM, conf. A. Newton. 211/11/107. RuBUs PAMPINOSUS Lees *12, N. Hants.: Wood margin, Hawley Common, SU/ 83.57. D. E. Allen, 1984, herb. D.E.A., conf. A. Newton. _ 211/11/121. RuBUs cISSBURIENSIS W. C. Barton & Riddelsd. *4, N. Devon: Plantation verge, Challice’s Plantation, Eggesford, SS/68.09. L. J. Margetts & W. H. Tucker, 1991, det, A. Newton. 7211/11/139. RuBus prRoceRrus Muller *81, Berwicks.: Rough bank in village, Coldingham, NT/904.662. D. P. Earl, 1991. 211/11/158. RUBUS CINEROSIFORMIS Rilstone *9, Dorset: Heathy common, Lambert’s Castle Hill, SY/363.987. L. J. Margetts, 1991, RNG. 211/11/198. RUBUS AHENIFOLIUS W. C. R. Watson *12, N. Hants.: Roadside verges near Pamber End, SU/60.58. D. E. Allen, 1990, BM, conf. A. Newton. *22, Berks.: Roadside, Silchester Common, SU/62.62. D. E. Allen, 1990. 211/11/329. RuBus RILSTONE! W. C. Barton & Riddelsd. *9, Dorset: Forestry rides, Champernhayes Plantation, Wootton Hill, SY/355.970. L. J. Margetts, 1991, RNG. 212/3. POTENTILLA STERILIS (L.) Garcke 93, N. Aberdeen: Rocky ground by waterfall, Turriff, NJ/712.511. D. Welch, 1991, ABD. Ist post-1930 record. 7212/7. POTENTILLA RECTA L. *77, Lanarks.: Grassy waste ground, Glasgow, NS/56.64. P. Macpherson, 1991, herb. P.M. : +220/3/12. ALCHEMILLA MOLLIS (Buser) Rothm. *50, Denbs.: Waste ground by farm lane, north-east of Llanrwst, SH/837.655. R. Lewis, 1990, NMW. This record was erroneously attributed to v.c. 49 in Watsonia 18: 425 (1991). +223/2. SANGUISORBA MINOR subsp. MURICATA (Gremli) Briq. *44, Carms.: Llandybie, SN/ 610.145. R. D. Pryce, 1987. Carway, SN/455.067. F. H. Webb, 1991, det. R. D. Pryce. Both records from hedgebanks on restored opencast sites. Ist and 2nd records. *50, Denbs.: Roadside, Redbrook, SJ/508.412. K. Watson, 1991. 4224/inc. ACAENA INERMIS Hook.f. *77, Lanarks.: Stabilised shingle near Culter Water, Coulter, NT/03.33. D. J. McCosh, 1981, herb. D.J.McC. Known here for at least 20 years. _ 225/8 X 7. ROSA CANINA L. X R. sTYLOSA Desv. *46, Cards.: Hedge, Mwldan valley, Penparc, SN/197.486. A. O. Chater, 1991, NMW, det. G. G. Graham. 225/cae. ROSA CAESIA subsp. GLAUCA (Nyman) G. G. Graham & Primavesi 50, Denbs.: Hedge, Plas-yn-rhos, SJ/169.480. K. Watson, 1991. 2nd record. 225/cae. X 8. ROSA CAESIA subsp. GLAUCA (Nyman) G. G. Graham & Primavesi X R. CANINA L. *29, Cambs.: Hedge, Fowlmere Watercress Beds R.S.P.B. reserve, TL/405.458. A. Asher, P. H. Oswald & C. D. Preston, 1991, det. A. L. Primavesi. *46, Cards.: Hedge, Gwaryfelin, SN/595.794. A. O. Chater, 1991, NMW, det. G. G. Graham. 146 PLANT RECORDS 225/8 X 14. ROSA CANINA L. X R. RUBIGINOSA L. *64, Mid-W. Yorks.: Hedge, Micklefield, SE/445.336. P. P. Abbott, 1990, det. G. G. Graham. 225/8 X 15. ROSA CANINA L. X R. MICRANTHA Borrer ex Smith *48, Merioneth: Side of track, © Arthog, SH/6.1. P. M. Benoit, 1991, NMW, conf. A. L. Primavesi. 225/10. ROSA OBTUSIFOLIA Desv. *46, Cards.: Roadside verge S. of Glanrheidol, SN/663.789. A. O. Chater, 1991, NMW, det. G. G. Graham. 225/13 X 12. RoSA MOLLIS Smith xX R. SHERARDII Davies *46, Cards.: Hedge, Coed Cwmhwylog, Nanteos, SN/622.778. A. O. Chater, 1991, NMW, det. G. G. Graham. 225/15. ROSA MICRANTHA Borrer ex Smith *69, Westmorland: Limestone scrub, Heathwaite, SD/451.768. M. Baecker, 1991, LANC, det. G. G. Graham. 225/17. ROSA AGRESTIS Savi 11, S. Hants.: Scrub woodland, South Charford Drove, Breamore Down, SU/139.207. R. P. Bowman, 1991, herb. R.P.B., det. A. L. Primavesi. 1st record since 1891 record at this site. 225/17 X 15. ROSA AGRESTIS Savi X R. MICRANTHA Borrer ex Smith *11, S. Hants.: Scrub woodland, South Charford Drove, Breamore Down, SU/139.207. R. P. Bowman, 1991, herb. R.P.B., det. A. L. Primavesi. +226/7. PRUNUS LAUROCERASUS L. *12, N. Hants.: By cricket ground, Amport, SU/304.438. M. F. Wildish, 1991. +227/3. COTONEASTER HORIZONTALIS Decne. *12, N. Hants.: Water meadows, Winnall Moors N.R. near Winchester, SU/48.30. M.S.C. team, 1986. Chalk cutting on old road, Weyhill, SU/ 304.462. M. F. Wildish, 1991. 1st and 2nd records. +227/atr. COTONEASTER ATROPURPUREUS Flinck & Hylmoe *77, Lanarks.: Scrubby waste ground, Cambuslang, NS/649.602. P. Macpherson, 1987. Old industrial site, Cambuslang, NS/ 646.605. P. Macpherson, 1988. Both herb. P.M., det. J. Fryer & J. R. Palmer. Ist and 2nd records. +227/hje. COTONEASTER HJELMQVISTI Flinck & Hylmoe *77, Lanarks.: Bank of R. Clyde, Glasgow, NS/58.64. P. Macpherson, 1989, herb. P.M., det. J. Fryer. _ ~227/tra. COTONEASTER TRANSENS Klotz *11, S. Hants.: Edge of ride in conifer plantation, Hurn Forest, SU/106.018. R. M. Walls & R. P. Bowman, 1985, herb. R.P.B., det. J. Fryer. Published as C. affinis Lindley in Watsonia 17: 471 (1989). 229/1. CRATAEGUS LAEVIGATA (Poiret) DC. 50, Denbs.: Edge of lane, Isycoed Farm, SJ/ 413.519. P. Day, 1990. 2nd record. *63, S.W. Yorks.: Hedge S.W. of Cawthorne, SE/273.062. P. P. Abbott, 1991. 229/1 X 2. CRATAEGUS LAEVIGATA (Poiret) DC. X C. MoNOGYNA Jacq. *38, Warks.: Hedge, Hampton in Arden, SP/199.829. S. M. Apted, 1991, WAR, det. P. J. Copson & J. C. Bowra. 232/5/1 X 1. SorBus ARIA (L.) Crantz X S. AUCUPARIA L. +*59,S. Lancs.: Field edge, Rimrose valley, Waterloo, Crosby, SJ/327.985. V. Gordon, 1991. 232/5/7. SORBUS RUPICOLA (Syme) Hedlund *102, S. Ebudes: Bagh Uamh Mhor, Beinn na Capull, Jura, NR/67.99. D. J. McCosh, 1991, E, det. A. McG. Stirling. +232/cro. SORBUS CROCEOCARPA Sell 44, Carms.: Open oakwood, Llety-yr-ychen Fawr, Burry Port, SN/455.015. I. K. Morgan, 1991, NMW, det. P. J. M. Nethercott. 2nd record. gr a): Lanarks.: Scrubby wood, Shieldhall, Glasgow, NS/53.65. Laneside, Shieldhall, Glasgow, NS/53.66. Both P. Macpherson, 1990, herb. P.M., det. P. J. M. Nethercott. Ist and 2nd records. 235/2a. SEDUM TELEPHIUM L. subsp. TELEPHIUM +*77, Lanarks.: Roadside west of East Kilbride, NS/59.52. A. C. & P. Macpherson, 1984, herb. P.M., conf. D. R. McKean. 235/10. SEDUM FORSTERIANUM Smith +*39, Staffs.: With S. album on limestone rocks, Milldale, S. of Alstonefield, SK/132.549. B. R. Fowler, 1991, herb. B.R.F. PLANT RECORDS 147 +237/hel. CRASSULA HELMsII (Kirk) Cockayne 2, E. Cornwall: Shallow pool near Lamledra | Farm, SX/011.410. R. E. Lees & R. J. Murphy, 1991. 2nd record. *64, Mid-W. Yorks.: Edge of gravel pit, Ben Rhydding, SE/146.476. Yorkshire Naturalists’ Union meeting, 1991. 239/6 X 5. SAXIFRAGA HIRSUTA L. X S. SPATHULARIS Brot. +*77, Lanarks.: Woodland in old - estate, Hartwood, NS/84.59. P. Macpherson, 1975, herb. P.M., det. C. A. Stace. +240/1. TELLIMA GRANDIFLORA (Pursh) Douglas ex Lindley *79, Selkirks.: Riverside, island at - confluence of Ettrick and Yarrow Waters, NT/447.273. D. Methven et al., 1988, herb. R. W. M. - Corner. ¥241/1. TOLMIEA MENZIEsII (Pursh) Torrey & A. Gray *47, Monts.: Edge of R. Vyrnwy, Pont Llogel, SJ/033.154. R. G. Woods, 1991. +DARMERA PELTATA (Torrey ex Benth.) Voss ex Post & Kuntze *69, Westmorland: Laneside _N. of Endmoor, SD/537.855. C. E. Wild, 1989, still present in 1991, G. Halliday, LANC. 7246/4. RIBES SANGUINEUM Pursh *49, Caerns.: Naturalized in woodland near Gwydyr / Castle, Llanrwst, SH/792.611. R. Lewis, 1991, NMW. +246/odo. RIBES ODORATUM Wendl.f. “Va. Wwananks.: Bonk of R. Clyde, Hutchesontown, NS/ 59.63. P. Macpherson, 1988, E, det. D. R. McKean. 253/1. LUDWIGIA PALUSTRIS (L.) Elliott +14, E. Sussex: Dew pond, South Hill Barn, Seaford Head, TV/505.980. P. D. L. Maurice, 1991, det. J. Wheatley. lst record since c.1876. 254/46 X 3. EPILOBIUM CILIATUM Raf. X E. MONTANUM L. *42, Brecs.: Disused railway, Llanhamlach, SO/08.27. M. Porter, 1987, det. T. D. Pennington. “46, Cards.: Waste ground, Tal-y-bont village, SN/654.893. A. O. Chater, 1990. 254/+6 X 7. EPILOBIUM CILIATUM Raf. X E. TETRAGONUM L. “44, Carms.: Rank vegetation in ‘flood zone of stream, Pentre-cwrt, SN/390.386. G. Hutchinson, 1991, NMW, det. G. D. Kitchener & B. Wurzell. 1st Welsh record. 256/42 X +1. OENOTHERA GLAZIOVIANA Micheli ex C. Martius < O. BIENNIS L. *38, Warks.: | Waste ground, Emscote, SP/298.654. J. C. Bowra, 1988, WAR. | 259/4. MYRIOPHYLLUM ALTERNIFLORUM DC. 61, S.E. Yorks.: Pond, Thornton Elers, Thorn- ‘ton, SE/73.45. D. R. Grant, 1990. Only extant locality. +259/aqu. MyRIOPHYLLUM AQUATICUM (Vell. Conc.) Verdc. *28, W. Norfolk: Pond, Burnham “Market, TF/826.418. G. Beckett, 1989, still present in 1991. *44, Carms.: Dafen Pond, Llanelli, ) SN/531.015. I. K. Morgan, 1991, NMW, conf. G. Hutchinson. | 262/3. CALLITRICHE OBTUSANGULA Le Gall *67, S. Northumb.: Ditch near Healeywood, NZ/ | 232.849. G. A. Swan, 1991, herb. G.A.S., det. Q. O. N. Kay. | }AucuBA JAPONICA Thunb. ~ *99, Dunbarton: Wooded streamside, Millig Burn, Helensburgh, NS/29.82. A. Rutherford, 1985. | 268/1 hib. HEDERA HELIX subsp. HIBERNICA (Kirchner) D. McClint. +*77, Lanarks.: Bank of / North Calder, Maryville, NS/68.62. A. McG. Stirling, 1986. 1st record of naturalized population. 285/4. APIUM INUNDATUM (L.) H. G. Reichb. 80, Roxburghs.: Side of Woo Burn, Ashkirk, 'NT/461.178. R. W. M. Corner, 1991, herb. R.W.M.C. 2nd extant locality. 287/1. SISON AMOMUM L. 44, Carms.: Edge of path, Penclacwydd Wildfowl Centre, SS/ 1 530.986. B. Stewart, 1991, det. I. K. Morgan. Ist record since 1840s. 319/5. EUPHORBIA HYBERNA L. +*46, Cards.: Well established in scrub on slope, Llanbadarn } Fawr, SN/598.810. S. P. Chambers, 1991, det. A. O. Chater. | 320/1/3. POLYGONUM RURIVAGUM Jordan ex Boreau *25, E. Suffolk: Roadside verge, Tunstall, | TM/35.54. A. L. Bull, 1991, herb. E. & M. Hyde, conf. B. T. Styles. 148 PLANT RECORDS 320/1/are. POLYGONUM ARENASTRUM Boreau “75, Ayrs.: Turf paths, Ardneil Bay, NS/18.48. A. Somerville, 1903, CGE, det. B. T. Styles. 320/2. POLYGONUM OXYSPERMUM subsp. RAI (Bab.) D. Webb & Chater 28, W. Norfolk: | Shingle beach, Snettisham, TF/646.329. M. Keene, 1991, conf. K. A. & G. Beckett. 2nd record. | | +320/7. PERSICARIA AMPLEXICAULIS (D. Don) Ronse Decraene 64, Mid-W. Yorks.: Road | verge, Wetherby, SE/406.475. P. P. Abbott, 1991. 2nd record. 320/14. PERSICARIA MINOR (Hudson) Opiz 44, Carms.: Mud in old oxbow of R. Tywi, Bishop’s | ' Pond, Abergwili, SN/443.209. I. K. Morgan, 1991, NMW, det. G. Hutchinson. 1st record this | century. 58, Cheshire: Edge of Oakmere, SJ/575.678. A. Franks, 1991, herb. G. M. Kay, det. | J. R. Akeroyd. 2nd extant locality. *75, Ayrs.: Stoney margin of Loch Maberry, NX/286.759. k i A. McG. Stirling & A. Rutherford, 1991, E. 320/419 X +20. FALLOPIA JAPONICA (Houtt.) Ronse Decraene X F. SACHALINENSIS (F. Schmidt ex | I Maxim.) Ronse Decraene *4, N. Devon: Hedge, Philham, SS/259.234. W. H. Tucker, 1991, herb. W.H.T., conf. L. J. Margetts. *77, Lanarks.: Trackside in wood, Bothwell, NS/69.59. i P. Macpherson & E. L. S. Lindsay, 1991, herb. P.M., conf. D. H. Kent. +320/22. PERSICARIA CAMPANULATA (Hook. f.) Ronse Decraene *48, Merioneth: Edge of i stream near Egryn Abbey, SH/5.1. P. M. Benoit, 1991. 325/2 bif. RUMEX ACETOSA subsp. BIFORMIS (Lange) Valdes-Berm. & Castroviejo. *46, Cards.: With Crithmum on sea cliffs W. of New Quay, SN/373.595. A. O. Chater, 1988. Coastal grassland | S.W. of Aberaeron, SN/426.607. A. O. Chater, 1991, det. P. D. Sell. 1st and 2nd records. 325/11 X 12. RUMEX crispuS L. X R. OBTUSIFOLIUS L. *50, Denbs.: Arable field, Penley, SJ/ | 408.407. D. Tinston, 1991, NMW. 325/15 X 13. RUMEX CONGLOMERATUS Murray X R. PULCHER L. *2, E. Cornwall: Footpath S.W. of Pentire Farm, SW/934.800. G. D. Kitchener, 1989, det. J. R. Akeroyd. 343/2 X 1. SALIX ALBA L. X S. PENTANDRA L. *59, S. Lancs.: Disused railway line, Culcheth, SJ/640.956. V. Gordon, 1991, herb. V.G., conf. R. D. Meikle. 343/2 X 4. SALIX ALBA L. X S. FRAGILIS L. *77, Lanarks.: Waste ground, Braehead, Glasgow, NS/52.67. P. Macpherson, 1987, herb. P.M., det. R. D. Meikle. 343/6. SALIX PURPUREA L. 35, Mons.: Sandy bank of R. Usk, Llanllowell, ST/387.983. T. G. Evans & D. Lewis, 1991, herb. T.G.E. Only extant locality. *351/1. GAULTHERIA SHALLON Pursh *44, Carms.: Edge of conifer plantation, Gelli Aur, SN/ 597.197. I. K. Morgan, 1991, NMW. | +352/1. GAULTHERIA MUCRONATA (L.f.) Hook. & Arn. *46, Cards.: Dry roadside bank, Eglwys Fach, SN/685.952. A. O. Chater & C. D. Preston, 1991, NMW. 1370/5. LYSIMACHIA PUNCTATA L. *79, Selkirks.: Steep bank, Clovenfords, NT/452.367. R. W. M. Corner, 1991, herb. R.W.M.C. 372/1. ANAGALLIS TENELLA (L.) L. 81, Berwicks.: Flush in heather moor, Wheel Burn, NT/ 565.515. M. E. Braithwaite, 1991, herb. M.E.B. 2nd record, Ist since 1853. 382/1. CENTAURIUM PULCHELLUM (Sw.) Druce *67, S. Northumb.: Dune slack, Hadston Links, NZ/273.990. G. A. Swan, 1991, herb. G.A.S., det. F. Ubsdell. 387/1. NYMPHOIDES PELTATA Kuntze +*69, Westmorland: Old clay pit, Barrow-in-Furness, © SD/194.703. P. Burton, 1991, LANC. +*98, Main Argyll: Backwater of R. Awe at Fanans, NN/ 033.293. D. Dugan, 1985, still present in 1991, B. H. Thompson, herb. B.H.T., conf. C. D. Preston. }PHACELIA TANACETIFOLIA Benth. *41, Glam.: Railway cutting, Wingfield Road, Whitchurch, ST/152.795. G. Hutchinson, 1991, NMW, det. R. G. Ellis. 2nd Welsh record. PLANT RECORDS 149 392/6. SYMPHYTUM TUBEROSUM L. 711, S. Hants.: Edge of wood, Hedgemoor Copse, West Tytherley, SU/265.313. R. P. Bowman, 1966, herb. R.P.B., still present in 1988. Ist record since 1929. +59, S. Lancs.: Hedge bank, Formby, SD/308.086. V. Gordon, 1990. 2nd record. +392/7. SYMPHYTUM GRANDIFLORUM DC. *77, Lanarks.: Edge of wood, Carmunnock, NS/ 60.57. P. Macpherson, 1991, herb. P.M. 400/3. MyosoTIS STOLONIFERA (DC.) Gay ex Leresche & Levier *63, S.W. Yorks.: Acidic flush, Hordron Clough, Langsett, SK/175.994. P. P. Abbott, 1991. Southerly extension of range. 80, Roxburghs.: Wet flush, The Schil, NT/866.215. R. W. M. Corner & B. H. Thompson, 1991, herb. R.W.M.C. 2nd record. 406/1 ros. CALYSTEGIA SEPIUM subsp. ROSEATA Brummitt +*46, Cards.: Railway embankment, Eglwys Fach, SN/673.962. A. O. Chater & W. M. Condry, 1991, NMW. Hedgebank, Tresaith, SN/ 279.514. A. O. Chater, 1991, NMW. 1st and 2nd records. +416/3. VERBASCUM PHLOMOIDES L. 46, Cards.: Disused railway, Felin-y-mor, Aberystwyth, SN/581.804. A. O. Chater, 1977, NMW, det. I. K. Ferguson. Still present in 1990. [416/4 x 1. VERBASCU:1 LYCHNITIS L. X V. THAPSUS L. 46, Cards.: Delete record published in Watsonia 12: 173 (1978). specimen in NMW is V. phlomoides L., det. I. K. Ferguson, 1990]. 416/7. VERBASCUM NIG&UM L. +*42, Brecs.: Garden weed, Gilwern, SO/24.14. S. G. & A. Marshall, 1989, det. M. Perter. 1st localised record. 7420/5. LINARIA DALMATICA (L.) Miller *64, Mid-W. Yorks.: Verge of old A65 road south of Settle, SD/813.620. E. Shorrock, 1991, det. N. Frankland. — 424/2. SCROPHULARIA AURICULATA L. 71, Man: Pasture by R. Dhoo, Glenlough, SC/343.779. J. Lamb & P. A. Sayle, 1991, conf. D. E. Allen. 2nd record, 1st as an undoubted native. 7425/cup. X 1 X 2. MIMULUS CUPREUS Dombrain X M. Luteus L. X M. GuTtatus DC. *41, Glam.: R. Rhymney between Llechryd and Rhymney, SO/1.0. T. G. Evans, 1989, NMW, det. A. J. Silverside. 426/1. LIMOSELLA AQUATICA L. 75, Ayrs.: Edge of North Craig Reservoir, NS/437.414. R. L. Griffith, 1991, herb. R.L.G. 2nd record. *93, N. Aberdeen: Mud by dune slack, Sands of Forvie, NK/01.26. J. J. Barkman & C. H. Gimingham, 1990, ABD. Northerly extension of range. | } 430/2 X 3. VERONICA ANAGALLIS-AQUATICA L. X V. CATENATA Pennell *36, Herefs.: Disused gravel pit, Bodenham, SO/52.51. J. M. Croft & C. D. Preston, 1991, CGE. 7430/25. VERONICA CRISTA-GALLI Steven 46, Cards.: Waste ground by Church Hall, Llanba- darn Fawr, SN/598.810. A. O. Chater, 1991, NMW. 2nd record. i 7430/aus. VERONICA AUSTRIACA Subsp. TEUCRIUM (L.) D. Webb *39, Staffs.: Limestone spoil i railway sidings, Waterhouses, SK/072.492. B. R. Fowler, 1991. [434/3. MELAMPYRUM PRATENSE L. 29, Cambs.: Delete record published in Watsonia 18: 429 1991); specimen in CGE is Stellaria holostea L. ] | 435/1/19 X 13. EUPHRASIA ROSTKOVIANA Hayne X E. NEMOROSA (Pers.) Wallir. *35, Mons.: ‘loor of disused limestone quarry, Blackcliff, ST/533.984. T. G. Evans, 1988, herb. T.G.E., det. a. J. Silverside. 1st Welsh record. i 440/2. OROBANCHE PURPUREA Jacq. 26, W. Suffolk: Lakenheath, TL/72.82. M. G. Rutterford, 990, conf. F. W. Simpson. Ist post-1930 record. 45, Pembs.: Dunes over limestone west of {anorbier Church, SS/06.97. M. Higgins, 1991. Only extant locality. 440/4. OROBANCHE ALBA Stephan ex Willd. +*57, Surrey: On Thymus in garden, host planted ) years ago and not disturbed for at least 10 years, Abinger Hammer, TQ/098.460. P. Verrall, 791, conf. F. J. Rumsey. /442/2. UTRICULARIA AUSTRALIS R. Br. *80, Roxburghs.: Branxholme Wester Loch, NT/ 22.110. M. E. Braithwaite, 1991, herb. R. W. M. Corner. 150 PLANT RECORDS +464/rus. PHLOMIS RUSSELIANA (Sims) Benth. *70, Cumberland: Railway embankment, Langwathby, NY/575.324. F. Lawson, 1957, CLE, and R. W. M. Corner, 1990, LANC, both — specimens det. G. Halliday. 472/1 int. PLANTAGO MAJOR subsp. INTERMEDIA (Gilib.) Lange *35, Mons.: Black Rock Point, ST/51.88. A. O. Chater, 1987, NMW. 472/5. PLANTAGO CORONOPUS L. +*43, Rads.: Close-grazed turf on roadside bank, Llannerch Cawr, SN/900.616. M. Porter, 1991, NMW. +475/S5. CAMPANULA PERSICIFOLIA L. 80, Roxburghs.: Railway cutting, Long Newton, NT/— 587.277. R. W. M. Corner, 1991, herb. R.W.M.C. 2nd record. 485/3 X 4. GALIUM MOLLUGO L. X G. VERUM L. *93, N. Aberdeen: Roadside bank, Auchterless, NJ/706.411. D. Welch, 1991, ABD. | 485/6. GALIUM PUMILUM Murray 12, N. Hants.: Isle of Wight Hill, SU/245.373. P. Wilson, 1991. 2nd record. 485/10. GALIUM ULIGINOSUM L. 46, Cards.: Fen, Banc-y-mwldan S.S.S.I., Penparc, SN/ | 197.483. W. Fojt, 1987, conf. A. O. Chater. 494/2. VALERIANELLA CARINATA LOIS. 50, Denbs.: Colwyn Bay, SH/845.782. G. Battershall, 1991. 2nd record. *81, Berwicks.: Rock outcrop, Muckle Thairn, Girrick, NT/665.374. M. E. | Braithwaite, 1991, E, det. D. R. McKean. Northerly extension of range. 4502/3. BIDENS FRONDOSA L. 44, Carms.: Witchett Pool, Laugharne, SN/28.07. V. Gordon, | 1956, NMW, det. G. Hutchinson. 2nd record. 506/+4 X 7. SENECIO SQUALIDUS L. X S. viscosus L. *58, Cheshire: By gravel track, Alsager, SJ/796.548. G. M. Kay, 1990, herb. G.M.K. 506/+4 < 8. SENECIO SQUALIDUS L. X S. VULGARIS L. *45, Pembs.: Waste ground, Goodwick | Harbour, SM/95.38. J. W. Partridge, 1988, NMW, det. C. Jeffrey. 506/6. SENECIO SYLVATICUS L. 111, Orkney: Eroded bank at top of beach, Rackwick Bay, ND/ 197.990. B. H. Thompson, 1991. Only extant locality. +509/3. PETASITES JAPONICUS (Siebold & Zucc.) Maxim. 2, E. Cornwall: Roadside bank, Lower Woon, SX/035.623. B. Molland, 1991, det. R. J. Murphy. 2nd record. 49, Caerns.: Tidal | mudbank, Afon Ro near confluence with Afon Conwy, SH/77.69. R. Lewis, 1991. 2nd record. *79, Selkirks.: Side of R. Tweed below Yair Bridge, NT/462.325. D: Methven, 1991. | 513/1. PULICARIA DYSENTERICA (L.) Bernh. *99, Dunbarton: Ditch bank, Bannachra Muir, | Helensburgh, NS/33.83. K. Futter, 1991, E, conf. A. McG. Stirling. | +518/2. SOLIDAGO CANADENSIS L. 50, Denbs.: Kinmel Bay, SH/990.808. G. Battershall, 1991. | 2nd record. | +518/3. SOLIDAGO GIGANTEA subsp. SEROTINA (O. Kuntze) McNeill *38, Warks.: Disused quarry, Littlke Compton, SP/270.291. J. C. Bowra, 1980, WAR, det. C. Jeffrey & D. H. Kent. | 1519/8. ASTER LANCEOLATUS Willd. *46, Cards.: Tidal river bank, Afon Rheidol, Glanyrafon, SH/612.804. Waste ground near railway, Aberystwyth, SN/589.811. Both A. O. Chater, 1990, NMW, det. P. F. Yeo. Ist and 2nd records. *+519/9. ASTER X SALIGNUS Willd. *46, Cards.: Tidal river bank, Afon Leri, Borth, SN/ 616.898. Railway embankment, Glandyfi, SN/696.976. Both A. O. Chater, 1990, NMW, det. P. F. | Yeo. Ist and 2nd records. +522/1. CONYZA CANADENSIS (L.) Cronq. “77, Lanarks.: Waste ground near R. Clyde, ) Glasgow, NS/56.65. P. Macpherson, 1991, herb. P.M. PLANT RECORDS 151 538/3. ARCTIUM MINUS subsp. PUBENS (Bab.) Arenes *46, Cards.: Disturbed ground by caravan site, Ystrad Teilo, Llanrhystud, SN/546.695. A. O. Chater, 1991, NMW, conf. F. H. Perring. 544/3. CENTAUREA cYANUus L. 61, S.E. Yorks.: Roadside verge, Bursea Lane, SE/803.342. F. E. Crackles, 1991. Only extant locality. 70, Cumberland: Grass verge, lane off Linefoot- Broughton Moor Road, NY/075.341. N. Botham, 1972. Only extant locality. 552/2 X 1b. TRAGOPOGON PORRIFOLIUS L. X T. PRATENSIS subsp. MINOR (Miller) Wahlenb. o25. E. Suffolk: Roadside verge, Tunstall, TM/35.54. P. G. Lawson, 1991. 554/1. LACTUCA SERRIOLA L. *58, Cheshire: Embankment and ditchside, Helsby, SJ/489.774. wie Kay & ©. C2G. Rich; 1991. 558/1/3. HIERACIUM SPELUNCARUM Arv.-Touv. *77, Lanarks.: Spoil heaps amongst scrub near Bishopbriggs Golf Course, NS/59.71. D. J. McCosh & K. J. Watson, 1991, GLAM. ~ 558/1/45. HIERACIUM LASIOPHYLLUM Koch *44, Carms.: Dry rocks above Troed-rhiw-rudd- wen, Rhandirmwyn, SN/7.4. I. M. Vaughan, 1972, NMW, det. J. Bevan. 558/1/99. HIERACIUM GRANDIDENS Dahlst. *93, N. Aberdeen: Dyke along shelter belt, Oyne, NJ/671.262. D. Welch, 1989, ABD, det. D. J. McCosh & P. D. Sell. 558/1/136. HIERACIUM CAESIOMURORUM Lindeb. *93, N. Aberdeen: Rock ledge by waterfall, Craig, NJ/472.247. D. Welch, 1990, herb. D.W., det. D. J. McCosh. 558/1/222. HIERACIUM SALTICOLA (Sudre) Sell & C. West *41, Glam.: Grassy waste ground, Cardiff Docks, ST/205.743. G. Hutchinson, 1986, NMW, det. J. Bevan. 558/1/223. HIERACIUM VAGUM Jordan *41, Glam.: Disused railway line, St Fagans, ST/ 117.768. G. Hutchinson, 1990, NMW, det. J. Bevan. 558/1/mem. HIERACIUM MEMORABILE Sell & C. West 88, Mid Perth: Rocky ledges, N. Coire, Beinn Heasgarnich, NN/41.38. D. J. Tennant, 1991, herb. D.J.T. Ist record since 1891 specimen from this site. 7571/1. LAGAROSIPHON MAJOR (Ridley) Moss *39, Staffs.: Canal N. of Brownhills, SK/ 046.071. J. P. Martin, 1990, K, det. D. A. Simpson. 577/11. POTAMOGETON FRIESII Rupr. *80, Roxburghs.: Branxholme Easter Loch, NT/43.11. P. Macpherson, 1991, herb. P.M., det. C. D. Preston. 577/16. POTAMOGETON TRICHOIDES Cham. & Schldl. *12, N. Hants.: Pond by R. Blackwater, Hawley, SU/855.595. C. R. Hall, 1991, herb. A. Brewis, det. N. T. H. Holmes & C. D. Preston. *36, Herefs.: Recently cleared section of Hereford & Gloucester Canal E. of Skew Bridge, Monkhide, SO/61.43. J. M. Croft & C. D. Preston, 1991, CGE. 579/1. RUPPIA CIRRHOSA (Petagna) Grande *69, Westmorland: Old mine shaft frequently inundated by sea, Blacks Pond, Askam in Furness, SD/207.763. P. Burton, 1991, LANC, conf. C. D. Preston. 601/1. MUSCARI NEGLECTUM Guss. ex Ten. +*70, Cumberland: Quarry, Catlands, NY/2.4. _ M. Porter, 1991. 602/1. COLCHICUM AUTUMNALE L. +*73, Kirkcudbrights.: Mull Island, R. Cree, NX/409.662. J. McCleary, 1989. 7605/2. JUNCUS TENUIS Willd. *67, S. Northumb.: Grassy track, W. bank of R. Allen opposite Plankey Mill, NY/795.622. G. A. Swan, 1972, herb. G.A.S. First recorded in NY/7.6 in 1955; still present in 1991. Waste ground near Albert Edward Dock, NZ/348.671. D. N. Mitchell, 1988, herb. G.A.S. 1st and 2nd records. 605/4. JUNCUS COMPRESSUS Jacq. 35, Mons.: Wet hollow, White House Farm, SO/42.14. P. C. & J. Hall, 1991, NMW, det. P.C. H. & T. G. Evans. Only extant locality. *58, Cheshire: Boggy area by pool, Middlewich, SJ/699.669. J. H. Clarke, 1991, herb. G. M. Kay, det. C. A. Stace. 152 PLANT RECORDS 605/12. JUNCUS FILIFORMIS L. *59, S. Lancs.: Exposed shore of Earnsdale Reservoir, TM/ 669.221. P. Jepson, 1991. 607/6. ALLIUM OLERACEUM L. 26, W. Suffolk: Roadside verge, Shaker’s Lane, Bury St Edmunds, TL/86.64. P. G. Lawson & E. Milne-Redhead, 1991. 2nd extant locality. +616/2. IRIS VERSICOLOR L. 70, Cumberland: Amongst Juncus by lakeside between Fawe Park and Lingholm, Derwentwater, NY/254.224. E. Sterne, 1985, LANC, det. B. Mathew. 2nd record. 628/2. LISTERA CORDATA (L.) R. Br. 46, Cards.: Moorland N. of Cwm Ystwyth, SN/812.778. A. Jones, 1991. 2nd record. 640/3. OPHRYS SPHEGODES Miller 26, W. Suffolk: Open grassland, Lakenheath, TL/7.8. L. Farreli, 1991, conf. J. J. Wood. 1st record since 1793. 643/1 x 3b. DACTYLORHIZA FUCHSII (Druce) Sod X D. INCARNATA subsp. PULCHELLA (Druce) So6 *62, N. E. Yorks.: Calcareous flush, Dalby Forest near Thornton Dale, SE/8.8. F. Horsman, 1991. 643/1 xX 5. DacTyLorHizA FucHsi (Druce) So6 xX D. PURPURELLA (Stephenson & T. A. Stephenson) So6 *46, Cards.: Dune slack, Ynys-las Dunes N.N.R., SN/611.938. F. Horsman, 1991. 643/3b. DACTYLORHIZA INCARNATA subsp. PULCHELLA (Druce) S06 65, N.W. Yorks.: Marsh, Combe Scar, SD/679.875. F. Horsman, 1991. 2nd record. 643/3a X 2b. DACTYLORHIZA INCARNATA (L.) So6 subsp. INCARNATA X D. MACULATA subsp. ERICETORUM (Linton) P. Hunt & Summerh. *46, Cards.: Fen, Mwldan valley N.N.E. of Penparc, SN/201.489. F. Horsman, 1991. 643/4. DACTYLORHIZA PRAETERMISSA (Druce) So6 62, N.E. Yorks.: Streamside, Keysbeck, Stape, SE/798.953. P. Sykes, 1991, det. F. Horsman. Only extant locality. ; 643/6 cam. DACTYLORHIZA MAJALIS subsp. CAMBRENSIS (Roberts) Roberts 46, Cards.: Fen near Cardigan, SN/1.4. F. Horsman, 1991. 2nd record. 643/6 cam. X 5. DACTYLORHIZA MAJALIS subsp. CAMBRENSIS (Roberts) Roberts X D. PURPURELLA (Stephenson & T. A. Stephenson) So6 *46, Cards.: Dune slack, Ynys-las Dunes N.N.R., SN/ 609.939. D. C. Lang & A. P. Fowles, 1990. . 643/7. DACTYLORHIZA TRAUNSTEINERI (Sauter ex Reichb.) So6 *11, S. Hants.: Flushed marshy clearing, Exbury, SU/4.0. R.P. Bowman, 1984, det. F. Rose. 4646/1. ACORUS CALAMUS L. 50, Denbs.: Marchwiel, SJ/355.468. P. Goodhind, 1991. 2nd record. 80, Roxburghs.: Side of R. Teviot below Roxburgh Castle, NT/713.337. J. M. Croft, C. D. Preston & O. M. Stewart, 1991, herb. R. W. M. Corner. Oniy extant locality. 4647/1. CALLA PALUSTRIS L. *47, Monts.: Roadside marsh, Meifod, SJ/160.126. H. Webster, 1989. Known for over 20 years but now almost overwhelmed by Petasites japonicus. 1st Welsh record. +648/1. LYSICHITON AMERICANUS Hultén & H. St John 46, Cards.: Stream bank, Tyglyn, SN/ 498.598. R. N. Stringer, 1991. 2nd record. 650/4. LEMNA GIBBA L. 44, Carms.: Ditch north of Glanrhyd Farm, Pembrey, SN/406.043. I. K. Morgan, 1991, NMW, conf. G. Hutchinson. Ist record since 1840s. Garden pond, Towy View near Ffairfach, SN/640.225. I. K. Morgan, 1991. 2nd extant locality. 650/min. LEMNA MINUTA Kunth *44, Carms.: Ditch between Bury Port and Pwll, SN/462.012. Reed swamp E. of Bury Port, SN/458.010. Both I. K. Morgan, 1991, NMW, det. G. Hutchinson & A. Orange. Ist and 2nd records. 3rd and 4th Welsh records. 653/2 < 1. TYPHA ANGUSTIFOLIA L. X T. LATIFOLIA L. *13, W. Sussex: Ponds, Chichester Gravel Pits, SU/872.032. G. H. Forster, 1991. “14, E. Sussex: Ditch in pasture near R. Ouse, Lewes, TQ/428.055. T. C. G. Rich, 1991, LANC. PLANT RECORDS 153 654/3. ERIOPHORUM LATIFOLIUM Hoppe 81, Berwicks.: Calcareous flush, Lamberton Moor, NT/955.582. M. E. & P. F. Braithwaite, 1991, herb. M.E.B. 2nd extant locality. 655/11. ISOLEPIS CERNUA (Vahl) Roemer & Schultes 47, Monts.: Saltmarsh, Dovey Junction Station, SN/695.984. P. M. Benoit, 1989. Only extant locality; last seen here in 1939. 656/6. ELEOCHARIS UNIGLUMIS (Link) Schultes *17, Surrey: Old sand filter bed, Barn Elms waterworks, TQ/228.774. M. Mullin, 1991. 658/1. CYPERUS LONGUS L. +59, S. Lancs.: By dried-up reservoir, Pilsworth, SD/755.086. A. Franks. 1991. 2nd record. 659/1. SCHOENUS NIGRICANS L. 81, Berwicks.: Calcareous flush, Lamberton Moor, NT/ 955.582. M. E. & P. F. Braithwaite, 1991, herb. M.E.B. 2nd extant locality. 663/23. CAREX STRIGOSA Hudson *63, S. W. Yorks.: Damp ditch in wood, Margery Wood, Cawthorne, SE/278.095. P. P. Abbott, 1991, det. W. A. Sledge. 663/28. CAREX LIMOSA L. 50, Denbs.: Soligenous flush, Pentrevoelas, SH/890.545. J. A. Green, 1991. 2nd record. 663/60. CAREX DISTICHA Hudson *48, Merioneth: Phragmites swamp near Llanaber, SH/5.1. P. M. Benoit, 1991, NMW. 663/61. CAREX ARENARIA L. +77, Lanarks.: Waste ground behind High Street Railway Station, Glasgow, NS/59.65. J. H. Dickson, 1989, GL. 2nd record. 663/81. CAREX DIOICA L. *43, Rads.: Molinia flush below Craig y Bwich, SN/900.619. D. Reed, 1991, NMW, conf. R. G. Woods. 667/1 aru. MOLINIA CAERULEA subsp. ARUNDINACEA (Schrank) K. Richter *58, Cheshire: Roadside ditch, Goostrey, SJ/797.729. G. M. Kay, 1991, herb. G.M.K. +ERAGROSTIS CURVULA (Schrader) Nees “11, S. Hants.: Side of disused railway near Mayflower Park, Southampton, SU/416.111. E. J. Clement & A. L. Grenfell, 1989, herb. R. P. Bowman, det. T. A. Cope. 1670/6 meg. FESTUCA RUBRA subsp. MEGASTACHYS Gaudin *25, E. Suffolk: Earth bank, Landguard Common, TM/28.31. A. Copping, 1987, det. C. A. Stace. *29, Cambs.: Roadside verge, Little Shelford, TL/446.513. P. J. O. Trist, 1991, herb. P.J.O.T. 670/7. FESTUCA ARENARIA Osbeck *44, Carms.: Shingle at foot of calcareous cliff, Llansteffan, SN/3.0. I. M. Vaughan, 1967, NMW, det. A. K. Al-Bermani. 670/9. FESTUCA FILIFORMIS Pourret *47, Monts.: On hummocks in boggy field near Llanfihan- gel-yng-Ngwynfa, SJ/09.15. P. M. Benoit, 1989. 670/10. FESTUCA VIVIPARA (L.) Smith 50, Denbs.: Rocky outcrop at 450 m, Migneunt, SH/ 778.425. G. Battershall, 1991. 2nd record. 671/42 X 1. LOLIUM MULTIFLORUM Lam. X L. PERENNE L. *38, Warks.: Farm track, Upper Shuckburgh, SP/486.603. J. C. Bowra, 1991, WAR, det. P. J. Copson. 672/5. VULPIA CILIATA subsp. AMBIGUA (Le Gall) Stace & Aug. *48, Merioneth: Low hummocks in dune grassland, Aberdyfi golf links, SN/5.9 and 6.9. P. M. Benoit, 1991, NMW. Ist Welsh record. 673/2. PUCCINELLIA DISTANS (Jacq.) Parl. *48, Merioneth: Embankment, Mawddach estuary at Garth Isaf, SH/6.1. P. M. Benoit, 1991, NMW. 673/5. PUCCINELLIA RUPESTRIS (With.) Fern. & Weath. 2, E. Cornwall: Abundant on mud on sides of Millbrook Pond, SX/425.523. R. W. Gould, 1991, conf. L. J. Margetts. Ist record since 1917: 676/11. POA ANGUSTIFOLIA L. 2, E. Cornwall: Penlee Battery, Rame peninsula, SX/440.493. R. W. Gould, 1991, herb. R. J. Murphy, conf. L. J. Margetts & R. J. M. 2nd record. 154 PLANT RECORDS +680/2..BRIZA MINOR L. “13, W. Sussex: Halsey’s Farm, Chichester Harbour, $Z/871.975. G. H. Forster, 1991. 683/1. BROMOPSIS ERECTA (Hudson) Fourr. “43, Rads.: Grassland in base of old quarry, Stanner Rocks, SO/26.58. R. G. Woods, 1988, NMW, det. T. G. Evans. One plant. +683/4. BROMOPSIS INERMIS (Leysser) Holub *14, E. Sussex: Edge of Sports Field, Beving- dean Hospital, TQ/331.061. A. Spiers, 1990, herb. P. A. Harmes. Chalk downs, Castle Hill, Brighton, TQ/367.070. G. Steven, 1991, det. P. J. O. Trist. Ist and 2nd records. +683/13. Bromus LEPIDUS O. Holmb. *44, Carms.: Forestry rides, Pembrey Forest, SN/3.0. I. M. Vaughan, 1965, NMW. +683/19. CERATOCHLOA CARINATA (Hook & Arn.) Tutin *2, E. Cornwall: Roadside verge, Saltermill, SX/430.637. T. Atkinson, 1991. “11, S. Hants.: Sandy roadside verge, Belvidere, Northam, SU/430.129. P. D. Stanley, 1991, herb. R.P. Bowman, det. R. P. B. & P. J. O. Trist. 684/2. BRACHYPODIUM PINNATUM (L.) P. Beauv. *52, Anglesey: Pine plantation on sand dune, Newborough Forest, SH/398.637. N. H. Brown & R. H. Roberts, 1990, NMW. 687/1. HORDEUM SECALINUM Schreber +73, Kirkcudbrights.: Field track E. of Castlecreavie, NX/726.488. O. M. Stewart, 1991, E, det. P. J. O. Trist. Ist record since 1910. 687/jub. HORDEUM JUBATUM L. 49, Caerns.: Sandy beach, Pontlyfni, SH/433.532. L. J. Larsen, 1989, NMW, det. R. G. Ellis. 689/1. KOELERIA MACRANTHA (Ledeb.) Schultes 44, Carms.: Limestone grassland near Llandyfan, SN/647.176. D. Grey & S. Gouch, 1989. 2nd extant locality. *48, Merioneth: Calcareous dune grassland, Aberdyfi golf links, SN/6.9. P. M. Benoit, 1991, NMW. 700/1. CALAMAGROSTIS EPIGEJOS (L.) Roth = 111, Orkney: Tall herb community on cliff top, Hoxa, S. Ronaldsay, ND/40.93. E. R. Bullard, 1989, det. P. J. O. Trist. 700/3. CALAMAGROSTIS STRICTA (Timm) Koeler *59,S. Lancs.: Old pool, Charles St, Darwen, SD/690.227. P. Jepson & N. P. Symonds, 1991, det. H. J. M. Bowen. 701/2b. AGROSTIS VINEALIS Schreber *44, Carms.: Cerrig Cyffion, SN/68.46. R. Walls, 1988, NMW. +701/8. POLYPOGON viRIDIS (Gouan) Breistr. *52, Anglesey: Disused limestone quarry, Benllech, SH/51.81. J. E. Hawksford, 1991, det. R. H. Roberts. +702/1. APERA INTERRUPTA (L.) P. Beauv. *77, Lanarks.: Canal towpath, Maryhill, NS/57.68.. K. Watson, 1988, GL. Princes Dock, Glasgow, NS/56.64. A. McG. Stirling, 1988, GL. Ist and 2nd records. 707/4. PHLEUM PHLEOIDES (L.) Karsten *25, E. Suffolk: Chalky hollow on golf course, Stuston Common, TM/136.786. S. Hooton, 1991, conf. A. Copping. 719/2. DIGITARIA SANGUINALIS (L.) Scop. *2, E. Cornwall: Pavement weed, Saltash, SN/ 432.587. S. C. & P. S. Madge, 1990. Watsonia, 19, 155-164 (1992) 5 Book Reviews Wild plants of Glasgow. Conservation in the city and countryside. J. H. Dickson, with paintings by Elspeth Harrigan and photographs by T. N. Tait. Pp. 208, including black and white illustrations, maps and tables, and 30 pp. in colour. Aberdeen University Press, Aberdeen. 1991. Price £14.95 (ISBN 0—08-041200-9). This book is the first fruits of the Flora of Glasgow survey which has been taking place over the last decade. It is aimed at the general reader, and will be followed later by a more detailed and technical publication. It is an extremely attractive book, which describes some of the extraordinary range of plants, native and introduced, growing in the Glasgow area, including something of their history and ecology, and the problems of conservation. The book is divided into three sections. The first deals with the background and objectives of the survey, and gives an insight into how the data are analysed. Dot maps are used to illustrate some of the different distribution patterns which have been identified, and annotated site lists to indicate the characteristics of different plants. The second and largest section of the book takes a more detailed look at nine contrasting habitats, and at some of the plants typical of each. These include some amazing finds, such as the wild Fig on the Clyde, and the ‘extinct’ Mudwort in a dried-up reservoir, as well as more common plants and some interesting hybrids. The final section consists of a chapter on conservation, and is followed by an extensive bibliography, and notes on Field Guides and Societies to join. In short it is a popular book which also succeeds in being scholarly. Since it is intended for a general audience, popular English plant names are used throughout. Latin names are included for all the plants which receive detailed attention, but not in the captions to the illustrations, which I think is a pity. Personally I like to see both Latin and English used at first appearance even in more technical literature, but this would have made the text too unwieldy in places. Latin plant names are included in the Index (though one or two plants on the site lists have been missed). But these are quibbles. The whole volume is a work of art and beautifully produced on expensive paper; the colour photographs are excellent, and some of the individual flower paintings are quite stunning. In his Introduction Dr Dickson bemoans the unattractiveness of the books available to him as a youngster, when he first took an interest in botany: he has made sure that no future generation of Glaswegians will be able to make a similar complaint. Let us hope he can pull off a double with the more technical publication still to come. J. Muscotr The wild flowers of Luton. J. G. & C. M. Dony. Edited by C. Boon. Pp. 64, with maps. Privately published, Luton. 1991. Price £3.50 (inc. postage), available from P. Ellison, 90 Beverley Road, Ruislip, Middx., HA4 9AS. This, the last work by Dr J. Dony in a line of distinguished books on his local flora, is announced as “an account of the wild flowers known to grow in the immediate past in Luton’’. Having already accounted in detail for the flora of Bedfordshire in general in two books, we might be excused for thinking that this could not be anything new. We would be wrong. In fact, it is two accounts in one, and breaks new ground in several ways. About a third of the book consists of an annotated check-list of the flora of Luton Borough and its immediate environs, covering some 4,803 ha, an area with a remarkable range of habitat types considering its size. The main body of the book, however, consists of a series of concise ‘site reports’ of places which “‘had a vegetation worthy of record”. Some 23 sites are dealt with in detail, each having a description, historical notes, grid reference, and a list of 156 BOOK REVIEWS specially selected species recorded between 1987 and 1990. These selected species are those found in 128 or fewer tetrads in Bedfordshire as a whole (i.e. less than 33%). A special innovation is the use of these species lists to construct a ‘plant rarity factor’ for each site, the higher the resulting score, the greater overall botanical rarity represented by the site. These accounts are rounded off neatly with a clear site map for each site, and there is a coloured general map of the area in the centre spread which can be used both to identify specific sites and to see the extent and location of surviving semi-natural vegetation. Just as Dr Dony’s earlier Floras had pioneered the use of discrete ‘habitat studies’ as a way of providing a factual base-line for describing the typical vegetation of specific habitats, so this takes the process one step further, to provide an outline assessment, in botanical terms, of the conservation value of sites. The result is a mini conservation review of Luton Borough, based on sound facts. Many a consultancy would be incapable of producing such a document for a local authority’s ‘green audit’, so much the current fashion. Luton has one virtually for nothing. T. J. JAMES Fern names and their meanings. A glossary for the fern grower and collector. J. W. Dyce. Pp. iv + 31. British Pteridological Society, London. 1988. Price £3 (ISBN 0—9509806-1-7). ‘What do they mean’? ‘Why do botanists keep changing them?’ This small booklet is an attempt to answer, at least for “‘the amateur grower of British ferns and their varieties and cultivars’’, the first of those questions so frequently asked about Latin plant names. The second problem is also addressed briefly but passionately in the introduction. The booklet has four main parts: an introduction, sections on the etymology of the names of ritish fern genera, and on the meaning of Greek and Latin word elements commonly found in fern varietal names, and the heart of the book, the main glossary of varietal names. The latter runs to 18 sicGes and includes over 700 entries, all listed in the neuter form. The author indicates in his introduction that his basic source of information is the glossary of fern names prepared by Dr F. W. Stansfield and Rev. Canon Kingsmill Moore and published in the British Fern Gazette between 1919 and 1921. What he does not say is that his glossary is almost entirely a simple re-ordering of Stansfield & Moore’s work (where the varietal names were arranged under each species) into a single alphabetical sequence, but in nearly all cases keeping their original definitions verbatim. One or two of Stansfield & Moore’s own, rare, errors have however been corrected: their picturesque definition of gemmatum (‘decked with gems’) has been changed to the prosaic but more accurate ‘provided with buds’. Some epithets are misspelt or malformed; in some instances this is obviously due to error on the part of the original fern grower or author (gracilissimum should be gracillimum, as indicated by Stansfield & Moore) but others (e.g. minum and majum which should be minus and majus) show faulty understanding of Latin. In spite of its deficiencies, this is an admirably useful little book. It makes Stansfield & Moore’s work available once again in a handy, accessible and inexpensive form to a new generation of fern growers and collectors who may not have the early volumes of British Fern Gazette at their disposal. R. R. MILL Atlas Florae Europaeae: Distribution of vascular plants in Europe. Vol. 9, Paeoniaceae to Capparaceae. Edited by J. Jalas & J. Suominen. Pp. 110, 155 maps. Committee for Mapping the Flora of Europe and Societas Biologica Fennica Vanamo, Helsinki. 1991. Price FIM 350 (ISBN 951—9108-08-4). Volume 9 of Atlas Florae Europaeae is of particular interest to British botanists because, in covering mainly the Papaveraceae, it deals with genera such as Papaver, Fumaria and Corydalis (sensu lato) which have species with rapidly changing distributions in this country. Fumaria parviflora, for BOOK REVIEWS 157, example, is in decline throughout Central Europe and is hardly known north of 50°N except in Britain where it reaches 57°N, and the same seems to be true of Papaver hybridum, now apparently extinct in Belgium and Holland. Many of the 24 British species mapped in this part are introductions but their treatment is somewhat arbitrary. Chelidonium majus is accorded native status throughout its range here whilst all records of Berberis vulgaris are regarded as introductions, whereas both are probably best regarded as ‘doubtfully native’. Although a map of Eschscholzia californica is included, no British localities are shown, though it is said by Stace in his New Flora of the British Isles (1991) to be naturalised and perennating on dunes, walls and cliff tops in Guernsey and in quarries and by railways in Kent. There is no map of the ever-spreading Oregon-grape, Mahonia aquifolium. This variable treatment is doubtless a reflection of our own uncertainty and it is an area to which the B.S.B.1., with its wide network of recorders, could surely contribute in advance of future parts. Members may also be able to contribute useful information from visits abroad. I was surprised to find the native status of Laurus nobilis in Majorca questioned: I saw it in February 1991 on a cliff at the mouth of the Torrent de Pareis where it was recorded in my 1880 Flora. The maps in this Atlas will be even more fascinating when put alongside the results of the Monitoring Scheme when they are published. Comparison with that scheme will not be as easy as could be wished because some of the recent name changes are long and unattractive. Corydalis has been split into Pseudofumaria and Ceratocapnos, whilst with Fumaria, F. martinii has been lumped with the more widespread F. reuteri, and orthographic research has decided that F. muralis now has a subsp. boroei rather than subsp. boraei. There are times when one would like to recommend that taxonomists be paid a negative productivity bonus. With this volume the number of maps published since the project began in 1966 has reached 2109 and perhaps 15% of the task is completed. Now is surely a time to salute the efforts of those two botanists from Helsinki, Jaakko Jalas and Juha Suominen, who have masterminded the project as organisers and editors over the 25 years since it began. F. H. PERRING Wild orchids of Dorset. M. N. Jenkinson. Pp. 120, with drawings, maps and 63 colour plates. Orchid Sundries, Gillingham, Dorset. 1991. Price £17.95 hardback (ISBN 1-873035—01-2); £13.95 paperback (ISBN 1—873035—02-0). | This book, by a police officer, is said to be “directed not so much at the committed orchid enthusiast, but seeking to find new converts to the faith”. Indeed much enthusiasm for the field study of orchids is engendered here, even though the perils of looking for Hammarbya paludosa are made abundantly clear. Short introductory sections refer to the objectives of the book, the structure of the orchid flower, the geology of Dorset, the main habitats of orchids in the county (listed under five categories), and the nature reserves. Much of the book is devoted to accounts of some 28 species of orchids which occur regularly. For each species information is given on status, habitat, flowering period, distribution and distinctive features, but there is no overall key. The distribution maps, based mostly on records made during the last ten years, provide more information than previously available, presence being shown within 1-km squares. Although readers are repeatedly reminded not to pick flowers, the wisdom of the publication of such detailed distributions of uncommon species is questionable. Notable features are the full treatment of the helleborines (including the recent discoveries of Epipactis purpurata) and of the dactylorchids, both subjects of special study by the author. In the dactylorchids, nomenclature departs from Flora Europaea, and ‘‘a newly identified form, var. bowmanii Jenkinson” (not validly published) is included under Dactylorhiza majalis subsp. traunsteinerioides. This form, found also in Hampshire, is robust, has a rather dark flower colour and a fairly narrow, very deeply three-lobed labellum. Hybrids are not prominently treated, but the features of the labellum of many forms of the marsh orchids are illustrated. There are a few unfortunate statements, e.g. ‘““physiological”’ features of the landscape, Epipactis 158 BOOK REVIEWS palustris spreading by underground “runners, or elongated roots’, and one may doubt whether | there would ever be ‘‘climax pine forest” in the New Forest. However, the valuable points for field identification, and details of the phenology and occurrence, together with the original colour photographs (for each species a general view and a close-up of flowers, mostly of good quality), make this a useful and attractive book, particularly for those exploring the unspoilt countryside of Dorset. A. J. WILLIS The Chelsea gardener: Philip Miller 1691-1771. H. Le Rougetel. Pp. 212, illustrated in black and white and colour. Natural History Museum Publications, London. 1990. Price £14.95 (ISBN 0—565- 01101-4). Philip Miller is, without doubt, the most celebrated English gardener of the eighteenth century. He was a Sself-educated man, and what he could not learn from his father or other gardeners he learnt from books. Having set up his own nursery in Southwark, he was already established in the small circle of elite gardeners, when, in 1722, he was appointed Gardener (in today’s terminology, Curator) of the Society of Apothecaries’ Physic Garden at Chelsea. He was soon to put the garden on to a sound footing and to establish over the next 48 years an institution of international repute. This is a book not just about Philip Miller and his achievements at Chelsea; it is a masterly analysis of Miller’s influence on gardening and horticulture — and they were by no means synonymous in those days. The author has arranged her account in 20 interlocking chapters, the first three giving background, others discussing Miller’s links with botanists abroad, in Europe and North America, with eminent gardens and gardeners, plant illustrators and the like. His links with Cambridge and the effects his views were having on forestry and agricultural policy are reviewed; and the importance of Philip Miller’s published works to botany at large is discussed in Chapter 20 by William Stearn. His most important work, the Gardeners’ Dictionary, which went through eight editions between 1731 and 1768, contained cultural information for the kitchen, flower and fruit garden, and much descriptive botanical material beside. The last edition appeared after the publication of Linnaeus’ Species Plantarum in which binomial nomenclature was introduced, and Miller followed the convention and thereby validated many pre-Linnaean genera he had used in earlier editions. Miller was also a field botanist and a teacher, collecting in many parts of England from the Cheviots to his home county of Kent. He was able to find the Deptford Pink (Dianthus armeria) in Deptford, Aquilegia vulgaris in Bexley and Narthecium ossifragum on Putney Heath. This book is a ‘must’ for anyone interested in the history of botany or gardening and the kind of book that will be referred to time and time again. Hazel Le Rougetel is to be congratulated in giving us such a delightful, concise account of what must have been many years of fascinating research. A. C. JERMY Shamrock, botany and history of an Irish myth. E. C. Nelson. Pp. xiv + 200 with 5 colour plates and numerous black and white photographs and illustrations. Boethius Press, Aberystwyth & Kilkenny. 1991. Price IR£28 (ISBN 0-86314-200-1 hardback); IR£14 (ISBN 0-86314—199-4 paperback without bibliography, pp. xiv + 158); now only available from the author, 14 Connaught Parade, Dublin 7; p&p extra. The curtain rises on a sentimental discourse of the importance of shamrock to the Irish, resolving to strip away the facts from the fiction. Act I opens on an Ancient Briton, St Patrick, himself of whom little is known, and who certainly has nothing to do with shamrock! Indeed as we pass through the centuries nothing is heard of this blessed plant in Latin, Irish or English, until we realise that shamrock is the anglicised version of seamrog meaning a young clover. Variations on scothsheamrachor or clover-flowered thus abound BOOK REVIEWS 159 in mediaeval manuscripts. The first time the word shamrock made its appearance was in Edward Campion’s The first boke of the histories of Irelande (1577) where he stated that shamrocks were eaten by the Irish! By Act V we have caught up with the Herbalists where in 1571 Matthias de l’Obel wrote a strange passage about the Irish passion for a meal of clover or meadow trefoil. This was followed by John Gerard in 1597 who understood that Shamrock was clover and that seamr6ég covered both the red and white clovers. By the early 1600s, it was the accepted view in England that shamrock was eaten daily by the Irish or only in times of dire necessity (depending on the authors’ own prejudices). Some decades later, seamrog was being defined as wood sorrel in an Irish dictionary. It was not until 1726 that an Englishman, the Rev. Dr Caleb Threlkeld, set the record straight, recognising the tradition around St Patrick and the shamrock as an explanation of the Holy Trinity, and also that seamrog were clovers. He was also the first to record the now renowned ritual of drowning the shamrock with alcohol and food. By Act XI, the shamrock was beginning to be worn not just on 17 March but as a sacred political badge throughout the year. The Volunteers were the first to use it in 1779, followed by the United Irishmen in 1791. The shamrock motif was seen on flags, belts, cockades, glassware and seals, even in a weekly journal The Shamroc and in verse “The Wearing of the Green’. With the dawning of a new century, the romantic, mawkish image of the shamrock blossomed forth. At the same time the ‘Age of Reason’ brought the actual botanical identity of the shamrock into question. The first scientific survey of what plant was worn in Irish buttonholes was undertaken by James Britten in the 1870s. He discovered that the plant mostly in use as the true shamrock was Trifolium minus (now called T. dubium). Unfortunately, not many people took note of his systematic findings. Indeed, ten years later, one Nathaniel Colgan added to the confusion by establishing all the above plants as rivals, plus the red clover (T. pratense). When the Currency Commission of 1926 decided to ban the shamrock motif from the new coinage there was a mass uproar and by the time the Irish Post Office issued the first definitive stamps and one commemorative one in 1933-4, each one had shamrocks in the design. And so we finally come to the late 1980s, when Charles Nelson attempted to assess the present day status of the shamrock in Ireland by means of modern communications. In fact Trifolium dubium was revealed as the most commonly regarded true shamrock, while black medick (Medicago lupulina), red clover, and wood sorrel (Oxalis acetosella) accounted for only a few gatherings. The curtain closes on the fact that “‘shamrock is a young clover, nothing more, nothing less’’. That is what it always meant ‘“‘and what it will mean until the end of time.” Had this book been written by anyone else, it might have been both boring and pedantic, but Dr Nelson’s sparkling dry wit and wicked sense of humour comes through again and again. Accompanied by some delightful colour plates by Bridget Flinn and a hilarious and irreverent forward by Bernard Loughlin, this book deserves to be read by a wide audience. Vivat trefolium! S. ANDREWS The Burren. A companion to the wildflowers of an Irish limestone wilderness. E. C. Nelson & W. Walsh. Pp. 343, with 100 colour and several black and white illustrations. Boethius Press, Aberystwyth, and The Conservancy of The Burren. 1991. Price IR£32 (ISBN—86314-213-3 hardback); IR£19 (0-86314-214-1 paperback); available from 14 Connaught Parade, Dublin 7; pé&p extra. - The Burren of north-western Co. Clare is Ireland’s premier botanical attraction. Remarkably, it was first explored in detail only in 1851, the year that T. H. H. von Heldreich revealed Greece’s Mt Olympus in remotest Thessaly to the botanical world. The two areas are actually very comparable, for they are both karstic landscapes of bare limestone, subterranean water and few human inhabitants, making travel difficult in the days before motorised transport. Each has a rich and diverse flora and is amongst the most precious gems of Europe’s natural heritage. My own view (coloured by my affection for Connemara) had long been that the Burren received too much attention from botanists, especially those visiting from Britain, to the detriment of the study of other 160 BOOK REVIEWS regions of Ireland. However, reading The Burren has successfully prodded me to take a positive view of the region, the book stirring up as it does images of low, mysterious, grey hills, pastures bright with Spring Gentians in May, and the massed flowering of Mountain Avens, Bloody Cranesbill, Hoary Rockrose and other species in the native rock garden that the Burren presents to the visitor in summer. Charles Nelson sets out an eloquent, enthusiastic and erudite portrait of a landscape and its plants. He provides background information to the flowers that make the Burren so special, gleaned from a wide variety of sources, whilst maintaining an unobtrusive personal touch by allusions to his childhood in Co. Fermanagh, his interest in tropical drift-seeds and the genus Fuchsia, and his knowledge of Irish garden history. The style is discursive, the text packed with observational sketches, anecdotes and quotations from the literature of botany, folklore and Irish history. This is not a new Flora of the Burren: there are many references to David Webb and Maura Scannell’s Flora of Connemara and the Burren (1983) — reviewed in Watsonia 15: 148-9 (1984). Nor is it a guidebook; for topographical information the reader is encouraged to refer to Tim Robinson’s excellent annotated map, The Burren, a map of the uplands of North-West Clare, Eire (1977). It is indeed a companion, a book, in the author’s words, to be read by the fireside when “‘a westerly gale hurls stair-rods of rain horizontally across Cappanawalla’’. It will certainly be a useful item in one’s hotel or ‘bed-and-breakfast’ during a visit. I readily forgive the author for ignoring the mundane plants that excite feeble minds like my own - there is, for example, no mention of any docks or knotgrasses! The author defines the region more or less on the basis of the (limestone) geology, although he is sensibly a bit vague about the eastern limits around Kinvarra and Gort, where one can still see a ‘good’ Burren flora. The text is beautifully set out, the words interspersed with water-colour illustrations by Wendy Walsh, deliberately conceived in a sketch format to give a sense of immediacy. There are also black and white topographical scenes and some portraits. I should have been happier with numbers as well as titles at the head of each chapter. Nor am I am at home with the Irish word scailp to describe the deep crevices in the limestone; in Yorkshire, where my family came from, they are grykes (as they are in Scandinavia). Charles Nelson has done us all a considerable favour by his distillation of fact and experience, and I urge the many lovers of the Burren to buy this fairly priced book, not least because all proceeds will go to support the work of The Conservancy of The Burren. The future of this special place is uncertain, the worst threat being increased pressure from tourism, notably the proposal to erect a superfluous and environmentally insensitive ‘visitor centre’, and it is up to botanists above all to promote its conservation. This book is a beginning. J. R. AKEROYD The northwest European pollen flora, Volume 6. Edited by W. Punt & S. Blackmore. Pp: v4 2755 with 103 black and white plates. Elsevier, Amsterdam. 1991. Price D.FI. 240 (ISBN 0-444-891641— 1). This latest volume in the northwest European pollen flora project continues to document systematically the pollen morphology of all families of vascular plants indigenous to, or regularly naturalized in, northwest Europe. In this volume the families covered are Selaginellaceae, Oleaceae, Geraniaceae, Juglandaceae, Cornaceae, Globulariaceae, Buxaceae and Ranunculaceae, with the last family occupying more than half of the book. Each family account contains detailed descriptions of pollen types (i.e. the morphologically discernible groups of pollen species) together with keys to their identification, and is accompanied by excellent scanning electron and light micrographs. The arrangement of the survey is taxonomic and its clearest aim is to provide taxonomic information on the range of form of pollen within families. But pollen identification has become an important aspect of the work of many other plant scientists in disciplines as varied as allergy studies, forensic science and the reconstruction of past vegetation and hence past environments. Palynolog- ists with these interests will look to the Pollen Flora as a valuable source of data on pollen BOOK REVIEWS 161 morphology, but the material contained in these volumes has to be used with caution in these areas. The palaeopalynologist, for example, when faced with an unknown pollen grain, does not normally have the assurance that it belongs to a particular family. A spiny trilete spore, such as that of Selaginella kraussiana (G. Kunze) A. Braun as described in this volume, could also belong to a bryophyte, such as Anthoceros or Riccia. Some pollen grains belonging to members of the Oleaceae are very similar to those of certain Cruciferae; but such similarities cannot, of course, be dealt with in a systematically arranged account. The book will be of greatest value to those concerned with pollen identification when detailed information and illustrations are needed to confirm identity or to provide greater taxonomic resolution in important groups. The Ranunculaceae is of particular note here because most general pollen keys provide limited taxonomic detail, yet distinction between ranunculaceous groups can be of profound ecological value for the palaeoecologist. The ‘Ranunculus acris type’ pollen recognized by most palynologists, for example, covers a multitude of ecologically varied species, and the information provided here for more precise identification will be very welcome. The keys are generally robust, though some expressions are loose and ambiguous, such as the distinction between “reticulum relatively coarse” and “reticulum fine”’ in the distinction between Olea and Phillyrea. This could have been improved by providing a count of lumina density across the mesocolpium, which permits very adequate separation. I remain unconvinced whether some of the fine distinctions, such as that between Erodium moschatum and other members of the genus, can be effected by light microscopy alone. In the identification of fossil pollen using conventional phase contrast microscopy, the work described in this valuable collection of papers will prove useful, but must clearly be applied with great caution and always with the assistance of reference material. P. D. Moore New Flora of the British Isles. C. A. Stace. Pp. xxx + 1226, illustrated. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1991. Price £24.95 (ISBN 0—-521—42793-2). This eagerly awaited and reasonably priced book fulfils almost all expectations and is essential for anyone with a serious interest in the British and Irish floras. It is a manual for identification rather than a descriptive Flora, and so needs to be judged for its usefulness rather than just the information it contains. I make no apology for repeating the words ‘helpful’ and ‘useful’ rather often in this review. Everything in the Flora, from the taxa included (especially non-native taxa) to the nomenclature and the construction of the keys has clearly been worked out afresh. Taking on trust its claim to contain 2990 keyed and numbered species, it thus contains nearly half as many again as the 2030 that are in the 3rd edition of the Flora of the British Isles by Clapham, Tutin & Moore (CTM). This gives some idea of the amount of unfamiliar materials made available by Stace. Most of the extra species are aliens, and in some genera the result is quite startling, Cotoneaster containing 45 keyed and numbered taxa (five in CTM), Crocus containing nine (two in CIM) and even Trifolium 32 (22 in CTM). There are 90 more grasses in Stace. His criteria for inclusion of non-native taxa are eminently helpful, the aim being “‘to include all taxa that the plant-hunter might reasonably be able to find ‘in the wild’ in any one year. Any such plant, whether native, accidentally introduced or planted, affects wild habitats and is part of the ecosystem, and botanists and others might be expected to need or want to identify it”. He thus includes a number of plants that persist rather than regularly naturalise, as well as a wide range of non-persistent but recurrent casuals. The dichotomous keys seem to work well, and many are quite original. The Carex key, for example, broken up into sections like all long keys, differs in many ways from previously available ones, often uses quite different characters, and works at least as well. I personally dislike the layout of the keys, with alternately indented couplets, but one soon gets used to it. Multi-access keys are often provided, but in only a few cases (notably Epilobium) are they the only sort available. The ones in Sorbus, and in the novel account of the cultivars of Populus X canadensis, are especially useful. The species descriptions are mostly less than 30 words, and have a limited value for confirming identifications. As so many unfamiliar species are included for which fuller descriptions 162 BOOK REVIEWS will be unavailable to most readers, this does create problems. The drawings, mentioned later, do however somewhat compensate for this. With more familiar species, too, the brevity of the descriptions can be worrying. Is there, for example, no mention of the hairs at the junction of leaf- blade and sheath in Poa humilis (P. subcaerulea) because the author considers them not to be diagnostic, or because there is just not the room to include this character? Abbreviations are few and easily understood. The text in general contains an immense amount of useful comment. Unnumbered and unkeyed “other genera” and “‘other species” are frequently included, but I cannot help feeling that, as in most other Floras, they do more to salve the author’s conscience than to help the reader. They stand out here because the rest of the Flora is so helpful. Crop species are especially well treated and up-to-date. Red Data Book, scheduled, and Rare species (in fewer than 100 10-km squares) are indicated. English names, many of them new, are provided for all the numbered species. The bibliography is very brief, and it is perhaps a pity that no direct references to more detailed accounts are given anywhere in the text. The taxonomic stance of the book is a good balance between expert and consensus opinion. It is _ comforting to find one’s doubts about identifying segregates of such species as Galium mollugo, Rhinanthus minor and Sedum telephium confirmed, but I am sorry to see the subspecies of Pilosella officinarum so briskly dismissed (many of us record them, even though we may doubt whether they are worth subspecific status). For once in a British Flora though, subspecies are generally very fully treated. Varieties are rarely and rather unpredictably included. In the case of Fumaria the key would probably have worked better if varieties had been included (as P. D. Sell, BSBI News 41: 16 (1985) recommends), and this is one of a number of cases where recourse to the Plant Crib is still essential. All hybrids known to occur in Britain and Ireland are included. More are keyed and described than in our other Floras, but inevitably, alas, the great majority are not. Here, as elsewhere, the continuing need for a comprehensive critical and descriptive Flora of Britain and Ireland is highlighted. Of the apomictic groups, Rubus, Hieracium and Taraxacum are treated only in outline, but Sorbus and Euphrasia are treated in full. Physically the book is about the same size as the 2nd edition of Clapham, Tutin & Warburg’s Flora. The binding is sewn, and the cover is pliable plastic. My copy is still in perfect shape after two months’ daily use. It is printed from camera-ready copy produced by a word-processor, and the type is large and easy to read (though lacking such refinements as accents and italics). Traditional typesetting would probably have reduced the number of pages by about a third and made the book more suitable for the rucksack, but, as the author remarks, would even so have increased the price. Errors of any sort are minimal. Main Argyll is given for Rorippa X hungarica instead of R. X armoracioides. Veronica hederifolia should be cross-referenced to the illustrations instead of V. serpyllifolia. The drawings of Ledum and Vaccinium uliginosum are labelled the wrong way round. Salsola is missing from the index. The second half of dichotomy 8 on p. 564 should lead to 17 not 16. Otherwise there seem few errors likely seriously to mislead the reader. Even the cm scale inside the front cover is only 1% out. The brevity of the distributional information occasionally leads to slight inaccuracy, but this is almost inevitable and detail of this sort is not what one will chiefly come to this — Flora for. There are some 150 pages of illustrations, and it is here that my only serious criticisms of the book lie. The line drawings are mostly by Hilli Thompson and include excellent series of crucifer, umbellifer and Rumex fruits. Her habit drawings of unfamiliar aliens are especially helpful and compensate a good deal for the brevity of the description. Most give a good impression of the jizz of the plants but some, for example those of Cotoneaster, are curiously diagrammatic, and several of the series of drawings of leaves are unsatisfactory. In a few cases poor choice of specimens rather than quality of drawing means that they fail to show, or even contradict, the diagnostic characters, for example the number of intercalary leaves and angle of branching of Odontites vernus subsp. serotinus, the leaf-lobes of Ranunculus omiophyllus, or the apical leaf-lobes of the Veronica hederifolia subspecies. Other artists have also contributed vaiuable drawings, such as those of Dactylorhiza \abella by R. H. Roberts and Oenothera flowers by J. Zygmunt. The many light — photographs often seem to suffer from very poor reproduction, and it is difficult to see why the blurred Potamogeton \eaf-apices were not drawn instead. The Euphrasia silhouettes are too small and murky to be of much use, but those of Sorbus are excellent. There are also many scanning electron micrographs (S.E.M.). Those of Epilobium seeds and Isoetes megaspores are good, and the latter for once show that the sculpturing is not as easily diagnostic as most descriptions imply, but BOOK REVIEWS 163 most of the rest are unsatisfactory. Even the very clear ones of Montia seeds, by the very nature of the process, omit the diagnostic shininess or otherwise of the coats. Those of Tripleurospermum achenes fail to show even the oil-glands, let alone their diagnostic shapes, and the complete series of Carex utricles includes many unrecognisable and often shrivelled examples. S.E.M. pictures are generally unhelpful as identification aids for botanists with a lens or light microscope, and with an artist of Thompson’s ability and versatility to hand it is a mystery why they were used. The New Flora was prepared in close consultation with D. H. Kent who was simultaneously compiling a new nomenclatural check-list of British and Irish plants. Thus the nomenclature, like every Other aspect of the Flora, is uncompromisingly up-to-date according to current knowledge, resulting in a large number of changes to familiar names. These will best be reviewed when the check-list itself is published. Meanwhile the reader’s dismay at them should be largely offset by the fact that they are an integral part of an authoritative and user-friendly Flora that will be our standard for taxonomy, nomenclature and identification for some time to come. A. O. CHATER Pleistocene palaeoecology of central Norfolk — a study of environments through time. R. G. West. Pp. ix + 110, with 44 figures. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1991. Price £40 (ISBN 0- 521—40368-5S). This book continues the Pleistocene history of East Anglia from the author’s earlier book The pre- glacial Pleistocene of the Norfolk and Suffolk coasts, concentrating on a part of the catchment of the River Wensum near East Dereham. Within this area, sections exposed by commercial sand and gravel workings over a period of c. 20 years have provided “‘an extraordinary wealth of evidence” on environmental changes from the time of the first major glaciation of East Anglia. The presentation of this evidence is organised chronologically. Five chapters deal with the local succession of deposits identified as belonging to the Anglian, Wolstonian and Devensian cold stages and the Hoxnian, Ipswichian and Flandrian temperate stages. The geological evidence and palaeobotanical analyses produced by Professor West’s intensive studies are presented in meticulous detail in the form of many clear sections (related to aerial photographs as well as maps), pollen diagrams, and tables of fossil identifications. These numerous sections include glacial tills and gravels and overlying fluviatile deposits with limnic sediments formed in depressions. His synthesis of this evidence supports — through the relative positions of deposits identified by their palaeobotany — the succession of Middle and Upper Pleistocene stages originally proposed for East Anglia by Professor West and co-workers. At the same time he reiterates his caution that it remains possible that additional stages may yet be identified in the terrestrial record. The form of the book is that of an extended scientific paper. It furnishes an excellent example of how primary data of the highest scientific value have been gathered, processed and synthesized to provide the basis for reconstruction of past environmental — including climatic — changes. Not only does this treatment fulfil the author’s claim that “‘the observations have led to a much better understanding of the Pleistocene in Norfolk and are indeed relevant to the wider understanding of the British Pleistocene” but it provides for the more general reader an insight into the methods by which primary data are obtained and used to reconstruct climatic changes in the past. These reconstructions can then be of use in comparison with models of possible climatic change in the future. This book is indeed, as claimed on the fly-leaf, ‘‘a unique ‘case study’ of an investigation of past climatic change’’. Throughout the work there is a new emphasis on the importance to the palaeobotanist of thorough acquaintance with the processes involved in accumulation of each sediment type, in order to reach sound conclusions as to the taphonomy of fossil plant assemblages, whether pollen, spores or larger fossils. The influence of this on the relationship between the fossil assemblage and the vegetation from which it was derived is considered throughout. The presentation of the chronologi- cally arranged botanical evidence is followed by two chapters on stratigraphic questions, related especially to periglacial conditions during the cold stages and to inferred changes in water levels. A further chapter discusses, in a review of the history of the Whitewater, Blackwater and Wensum 164 BOOK REVIEWS valleys, the aggradation of the Beetley Terrace during a non-glacial post-Hoxnian cold stage. This preceded the Ipswichian and therefore seems to coincide in time with the Wolstonian. The final very concise chapter placing the work at Beetley “in the context of the East Anglian Pleistocene” should be required reading for all students of the British Quaternary. The reference list is of a realistic length to encourage further study. Hopefully the work as a whole ~ will stimulate others to undertake this kind of devoted fieldwork and patient study-in-depth in promising areas. W. TUTIN Watsonia, 19, 165-168 (1992) 165 Obituaries ADRIAN LEONARD GRENFELL (1939—1991) Adrian Grenfell was born on 6 April 1939 and died, aged only 52, on 17 November 1991. It was a great shock to hear from Adrian’s wife, Diana, that my good friend had died of a heart attack whilst jogging. We had all known that he was not in the best of health, but none of us realised just how ill he must have been. He and I have known each other for many years. We both attended the same Grammar School together, although at that time Adrian was not interested in botany. He left school to start a career with the Gas Board, later on changing to become an industrial chemist with a major Bristol company. Redundancy in the early 1980s allowed him to become a self-employed printer and later he moved into publishing. During the last seven years his expertise in printing and publishing was put to good use on behalf of the Bristol Naturalists’ Society, the Wild Flower Society and the Botanical Society of the British Isles. He became interested in plants in about 1972 (reference to the B.S.B.I. list of members shows he joined in 1976). At the same time he joined the Wild Flower Society and the local Bristol Naturalists’ Society. He was keenly interested in mammals as well as plants and would often attend meetings of the Mammal Section of the Bristol society. In the early days alien plants became his main interest, brought on possibly by his friendship with Eric Clement, and Adrian became what is known as a “Tip Man’. He and I, often in the company of other botanists including Clive Lovatt and Trevor Evans, would frequently visit such sites as Brislington Tip, Bedminster Tip, Avonmouth, Newport and Sharpness Docks, and other localities where aliens were to be found. Reference to the ‘Bristol Botany’ section in Proceedings of the Bristol Naturalists’ Society and B.S.B.I. News shows the many interesting finds made during that period. He had to wait a long time to get into the now Portbury Docks — so jealously was it watched. We were making comparisons all the time with N.Y. Sandwith’s 1933 adventive plant list from the Port of Bristol — at one time Adrian intended to publish an updated check-list. On the local scene botanists eagerly looked forward to Adrian’s walks in the Bristol area. He would lead us round such famous localities as the Avon Gorge, Leigh Woods, Brean Down and the Mendip Hills. He was always pleased to help both the ‘starters’ and the more experienced botanists with determinations. Adrian’s hybrids caused some amusement: so often, however, they were confirmed by the correct authority. He truly had a remarkable eye for the unusual. In the early 1980s Adrian and I were to enjoy several trips abroad to look at plants, sample local wine, etc. I can always remember Adrian one evening dropping off to sleep in a chair after a hard _day’s collecting and then determining in Portugal, with a volume of Flora Europaea in his lap and a glass of wine in his hand. After that we decided that after one bottle in the evening all _ determinations were suspect! We enjoyed trips to Crete, the Algarve, Mallorca and Scotland; later on Adrian went to Zakinthos and Mt Olympus in Greece, the Alps (where he led B.S.B.I. excursions), the Seychelles and Australia. All the time he was looking for interesting plants and would always bring back something, usually grasses for his friends Ron Payne and Eric Clement. _ From April 1983 Adrian took over the Alien News section in B.S.B./. News from Eric Clement, _ editing it for eight years (see B.S.B.J. News 32-57). Adrian would look forward to his mail and | would eagerly open packages of carefully pressed specimens and examine the soggy contents of , polythene bags to see what was new. Many of these specimens have been kept and are preserved in | his herbarium. Adrian was at the same time helping the Society in other ways. In 1983 he was on the Meetings Committee and helped to organize the A.G.M. in Bristol, arranging accommodation and the field excursions to the Mendips and Sand Point in Somerset, a very memorable day. In April / 1991, his successor as editor of Aliens and Adventives, Brian Wurzell, thanked Adrian for his © ‘valuable contribution and wished him a speedy recovery from the illness which caused him to resign ' from the work. Sadly, Adrian only lived a further six months. _ In 1979, one year after Early Star-of-Bethlehem (Gagea bohemica) was confirmed as occurring at 166 OBITUARIES Stanner Rocks in Radnorshire, Adrian, Trevor Evans and myself went to the site, on a wintry February day with snow in the air, and were rewarded by the sight of two flowers of this plant new to the British flora. We knew that the next weekend Mary Briggs and a party of eminent botanists were to visit the site — so new was it to the British flora. Adrian decided to leave a note addressed to Mary under a stone to record that we had been there and to advise where the flowering plants were to be © seen. Mary found the note. Adrian later remembered this occasion when he found the same plant high up above the Samaria Gorge in Crete. In 1987, Adrian wrote a paper on the notable alien flora of the Avon Gorge, which was included in The Avon Gorge, Special Issue No. 1 of Proceedings of the Bristol Naturalists’ Society. This was elegantly produced by Grenfell Publications and offered for sale to B.S.B.I. members. Other publishing ventures included several editions of the Proceedings, the Supplement of the Flora of Gloucestershire by S. C. Holland, H. M. Caddick and D. S. Dudley-Smith (1986) and The difficult and critical plants of the Lizard District of Cornwall by L. J. Margetts (1988). Every year Adrian would send Professor A. J. Willis, the Bristol Botany recorder, many interesting records — all these © can be found in the Proceedings or in B.S.B.I. News. In the autumn of 1991, Adrian and I had just finished an article on Bristol street trees, which will be published in the Proceedings in due course. We had great fun driving up and down the streets of Bristol, identifying, collecting and tetera ie material of a vast range of trees. There is one plant that will always remind me of Adrian. It is not an alien but the British native, Autumn Lady’s-tresses (Spiranthes spiralis). It was found by him growing on Eric Clement’s Gosport lawn — and Eric had never seen it. Adrian always said with a grin that it would have to be flat or mounted on a sheet for Eric to notice it! On the basis of his work on alien plants, Adrian was elected a Fellow of the Linnean Society of London in 1982. His private herbarium will be transferred to Bristol City Museum (BRISTM) and kept there alongside those of other distinguished Bristol botanists such as I. W. Evans and J. W. White. Over the years Adrian built up a tremendous number of friends, many of whom stayed with him when they visited the Bristol area. He was always willing to help in any way that he could. Adrian’s warm friendship and dry humour will be missed by us all, particularly when we revisit a site where he had shown us a speciality. We extend our sympathies to Diana and his son James. T. TITCHEN WILLIAM ARTHUR SLEDGE (1904—1991) Arthur Sledge was a Leodiensian. He was born in Leeds on 14 February 1904 and died there on 15 December 1991, having lived there all his life. He was educated at Leeds Grammar School and graduated from the Botany Department of Leeds University in 1926. He gained his Ph.D. in 1928, the year he joined the staff of the department as a Demonstrator. He was appointed as a Lecturer a year later and eventually became a Senior Lecturer. After his official retirement in 1969 he retained a room in the department and continued his work there as Honorary Research Fellow, usually walking the 3 km from his home in Headingley. A severe heart attack two years ago restricted his physical activities but he bore the resulting debilities uncomplainingly and with fortitude. His interest in botany was triggered at his junior school by a pressed flower competition, which, of course, he won. While he was out collecting specimens, his vasculum was spotted by Frank Paimer who was taking part in a similar senior school competition. Frank and his father subsequently — introduced the young Sledge to the joys of botanising on the Permian Magnesian Limestones a few kms east of Leeds. From this was born an awareness of habitat and an interest in ecology and he was later to become a founder member and council member of the Yorkshire Naturalists’ Trust (now the Yorkshire Wildlife Trust). Whilst still in his early teens, Dr Sledge had found F. A. Lees’ Flora of West Yorkshire (1888) in OBITUARIES 167 the library and, learning that Dr Lees lived quite nearby, he became a frequent visitor to his home, armed with eggs from his mother’s hens and a vasculum of plants for identification. In 1941, A Supplement to the Yorkshire Floras by the Late F. Arnold Lees, edited by C. A. Cheetham and W. A. Sledge, was published. In 1920 Dr Sledge was introduced to Leeds Naturalists’ Club by the blind botanist, John Wilkinson. Active members of the club at that time, who all helped to further Dr Sledge’s interest, included such famous names as J. H. Priestley, Professor of Botany at Leeds, W. H. Pearsall, Edward Percival, R. W. Butcher, and the bryologist, W. H. Burrell. It was standard practice at Leeds Naturalists’ Club to report on Yorkshire Naturalists’ Union meetings and Dr Sledge was inspired to join the Union. All the most knowledgeable naturalists in the county belonged to the Union and from them much was gleaned. Later he more than repaid what he had gained. In the field he was the ultimate authority who could be relied upon to give a correct identification to all but the most esoteric of critical plants, along with interesting comments on habitat and plant associations. His memory for sites of interest was unfailing, even those he had not visited for 40 years and, when he felt there was good reason to give directions to them, these directions were precise and accurate. All of us were in awe of him, but those who showed an intelligent interest and desire for knowledge were subsequently greeted with a warm smile and questions were answered fully, with quiet enthusiasm. In addition to sharing his experience in the field, Dr Sledge edited the Union’s scientific publication, The Naturalist, from 1943 to 1975. His dedication and skill resulted in The Naturalist being read and respected nationally and internation- ally and, in spite of his modest, unassuming manner, his pride in it and his paternalism towards it were evident. He joined the B.S.B.I. in 1924 and was appointed Recorder for South-east, South-west and Mid- west Yorkshire in 1949. He relinquished South-east Yorkshire to Eva Crackles in 1969 and continued with South-west and Mid-west until 1987, when failing eyesight made him realise he would not be able to cope with the Monitoring Scheme. In 1987 he was made an Honorary Member of the Society for his “‘long and valuable service to Yorkshire botany and to the Society as Recorder and Editor’’. He had edited the Distributor’s Report (Exchange Section), which was a supplement to the Society’s Year Book, in the late 1940s. With our present emphasis on conservation this aspect of the Society’s activities has developed into Plant Records. Dr Sledge was very much a Yorkshireman but he was by no means parochial. During his undergraduate days, much of his travel outside the ‘Broad Acres’ was by bicycle, accompanied by R. W. Butcher. This included visits to East Anglia, the Gower, the Avon Gorge and Dorset in search of their special plants. In those days specimens were picked and contributed to Dr Sledge’s enormous and excellent herbarium. The British sheets were donated several years ago to Bradford Museums Service and they now reside in Cartwright Hall Museum (CMM) along with those of Lees. The foreign material is widely distributed internationally. Dr Sledge was one of those lucky individuals able to combine his interest with his career. His first publication was a contribution to the report of the British Association meeting which was held in Leeds in 1927, for which he wrote sections on the flora of Fountains Abbey, Wharfedale, Nidderdale and Malham. This was followed a year later by his Ph.D. thesis on the rooting of woody cuttings. He travelled widely in Europe and, for research purposes, visited New Zealand, Madeira, Sri Lanka and Samoa. His work was concerned mainly with systematics and, following his first visit to Sri Lanka, he untangled the difficult taxonomy of the native ferns. His paper, written in association with the late Professor Irene Manton, entitled Observations on the cytology and taxonomy of the Pteridophyte Flora of Ceylon, published in 1954, remains a classic. Other papers on the taxonomy of tropical ferns followed, as well as numerous articles on aspects of the Yorkshire flora. All his work was carried out with meticulous care and his ciear systematic presentation made him a first-class teacher. Even during his period of ill-health, Dr Sledge continued to work. He recently completed an excellent historical review for the forthcoming West Yorkshire Plant Atlas to be published by the West Yorkshire Ecological Advisory Service, and he was still collaborating with Professor R. E. Schultes, formerly of Harvard University, on a Symposium to commemorate the centenary of the death of Richard Spruce (1817-1893) pioneer botanist in the Amazon and Andean regions. Professor Schultes and Dr Sledge shared a deep respect for this little-known Yorkshire botanical explorer and they were instrumental in having a commemorative plaque put on the cottage in the Castle Howard estate where Spruce had lived. 168 OBITUARIES We in Yorkshire have lost our most outstanding contemporary botanist, and one of the best in Britain, and we mourn him along with Marjorie, his wife, who has supported him wonderfully since their marriage in 1939. We offer sincere sympathy to her and to their son, Christopher, and his family. P. P. ABBOTT | INSTRUCTIONS TO CONTRIBUTORS Scope. Authors are invited to submit Papers and Short Notes concerning the taxonomy, biosystematics and distribution of British and Irish vascular plants, as well as topics of a more general or historical nature. Manuscripts must be submitted in duplicate, typewritten on one side of the paper, with wide margins and double-spaced throughout. Format should follow that used in recent issues of Watsonia. Underline where italics are required. Names of periodicals in the References should be abbreviated as in the World list of scientific periodicals, and herbaria as in British and Irish herbaria (Kent & Allen 1984). Further details on format can be found in B.S.B.I. News 51:40—42 (1989). Tables, figure legends & appendices should be typed on separate sheets and attached at the end of the manuscript. Figures should be drawn in black ink and identified in pencil on the back with their number and the author’s name. They should be drawn no more than three times final size, bearing in mind they will normally be reduced to occupy the full width of a page. Scale-bars are essential on plant illustrations and maps. Lettering should be done with transfers or high-quality stencilling, although graph axes and other more extensive labelling are best done in pencil and left to the printer. Photographs can be accepted if they assist in the understanding of the article. Contributors are advised to consult the editors before submission in cases of doubt. Twenty-five offprints are given free to authors of Papers and Short Notes; further copies may be purchased in multiples of 25 at the current price. The Society takes no responsibility for the views expressed by authors of Papers, Short Notes, Book Reviews or Obituaries. Submission of manuscripts Papers and Short Notes: Dr B. S. Rushton, Department of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, University of Ulster, Coleraine, Co. Londonderry, N. Ireland, BT52 1SA. Books for Review: Dr J. R. Edmondson, Botany Department., Liverpool Museum, William Brown St, Liverpool, L3 8EN. Plant Records: the appropriate vice-county recorder, who should then send them to C. D. Preston, Biological Records Centre, Monks Wood Experimental Station, Abbots Ripton, Huntingdon, REI) 2LS. Back issues of Watsonia are handled by Messrs Wm Dawson & Sons Limited, Cannon House, Folkestone, Kent, to whom orders for all issues prior to Volume 18 part 1 should be sent. Recent issues (Vol. 18 part 1 onwards) are available from the Hon. Treasurer of the B.S.B.I., 68 Outwoods Road, Loughborough, Leicestershire, LE11 3LY. ee Recorps Book REVIEWS OBITUARIES - UK ISSN 0043. 1582 Filmer by. WILMASET LTD, BIRKENHEAD. MERSEYSIDE Printed in: Great Britain by : EATON PRESS: LIMITED, WES’ PFIELD ROAD. 9. WALLASEY, en \ Botanical Society of the British Isles Patron: Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother Applications for membership should be addressed to the Hon. General Secretary, c/o Department of Botany, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London, SW7 5BD, from whom copies of the Society’s Prospectus may be obtained. Officers for 1992-93 Elected at the Annual General Meeting, 4th May 1991 President, Dr P. Macpherson Vice-Presidents, Mr J. Ounsted, Mr P. S. Green, Dr G. Halliday, Mr A. C. Jermy Honorary General Secretary, Mrs M. Briggs Honorary Treasurer, Mr M. Walpole Editors of Watsonia Papers and Short Notes, J. R. Edmondson, R. R. Mill, E. C. Nelson, B. S. Rushton* Plant Records, C. D. Preston Book Reviews, J. R. Edmondson Obituaries, J. R. Akeroyd “Receiving editor, to whom all MSS should be sent (see inside back cover). - Watsonia, 19, 169-179 (1993) 169 BRITIS: @ RALIS Presidential Address, 1992 P. MACPHERSON Sieeapaihlls TE COLONISATION OF THE GLASGOW GARDEN FESTIVAL SITE THREE YEARS ON: IMPLICATIONS FOR RECORDIN® I have been asked for how long I hesitated before accepting the honour of Presidency of this Society, bearing in mind the custom of there being a Presidential Address. My :-nly was, ‘“‘not half a second — at the time, I had completely forgotten this responsibility”. Once .::. :evelation dawned, search for an appropriate subject became a recurring thought. ‘I felt that the occasion merited original work and, being an amateur field botanist, that had to be amateur field botany. By profession I have been a neuroradiologist, specialising in depth in a small branch of medicine. My inclination was therefore to do the same for this address and during last summer it gradually became apparent to me that an intensive study of the flora then colonising the site of the Glasgow Garden Festival was the most appropriate review that I could undertake. While doing so, I realised that this raised general issues of plant recording. THE FESTIVAL SITE To set the scene, the Festival was held in 1988 in abandoned dockland and quayside on the south side of the River Clyde (Fig. 1). The main area had been the very active Prince’s Dock with a Canting Basin, the latter used by the ships to swing round to enable entry to an individual dock or return to the river. The extension of the site to the east took over the Mavisbank Quay. When the dock complex became redundant it was taken over and the docks filled in with a view to housing, but temporarily let as the site of the Garden Festival. The area is just within v.c. 77 (Lanarkshire), for which I am Recorder. The brochure stated that the Festival was part of a process of regeneration which was transforming the South Side of Glasgow. One million trees and flowering shrubs formed the backdrop to an ever-changing floral carpet of bedding displays and themed gardens. There were six theme sectors in the main section, arranged like the petals on a flower, interlinked by winding pathways and formal avenues. The effect was also likened to a Persian carpet. There were gardens set up by commercial organisations, the National Trust for Scotland, botanic gardens and wildlife groups, and a series of ten International Friendship Gardens from as far apart as Finland, China, New Zealand and Mexico. The Canting Basin was used extensively for water- related activities and referred to in one of the maps as Princes Harbour. Above all however, the Festival was about family fun with concerts, street theatre, exhibits, viewing tower, vintage trams and trains and play areas. The Director called it a festival in a garden rather than a garden festival (Fig. 2). _ Immediately the Festival closed, work was begun in preparation for the further development of this 48 ha site. Some plants were sold, and others taken to form the basis of continuing feature gardens elsewhere. The bulldozers moved in again and although there were a few residual, almost intact borders and remnants, by 1990 practically all trace of the Festival had been removed and looking at the site in 1991 when the main area had largely returned to being waste ground, one could hardly imagine that it had ever been. In addition little hollows looked as though they had been like that for centuries with Compact, Hard, Soft and Jointed Rushes. (I was once told by a professional horticulturist that he wished I would stop pronouncing the scientific names of plants as though they were diseases!) I did not record plants which were at the site of original planting or had simply spread in the neighbourhood. An example is that related to the waterfall which is still bordered by the planted material and the little pond at its base containing such species as Fringed Water-lily (Nymphoides GUTERAL HISTOR) -4 MAR BOTANY LIBRAF 170 P. MACPHERSON Clydeside Expressway Cantin Basin — Ficure 1. The site and environs of the Glasgow Garden Festival in its pre-festival state. V.c. 77, Lanarks.; v.c. 76, Renfrews. peltata), Water-plantain (Alisma plantago-aquatica) and Bulrush (Schoenoplectus lacustris). From the waterfall a stream had been constructed which ran through a series of small ponds to the Canting Basin; again with residual plants such as Wild Angelica (Angelica sylvestris), Yellow Loosestrife (Lysimachia vulgaris) and Reedmace (Typha latifolia). I was surprised to see the size of fish that local lads were catching in the ponds. They were very pleased to be photographed and asked if their photos would be in the papers. I said, ““No, but I am writing an article about the site and might show the pictures in London’’. One asked, ““Are you a famous author we should have heard about?”’!! There will be no point in any of you asking me afterwards what kind of fish these were. My family will tell you that I have a two-track mind, neuroradiology and field botany, and I do appreciate the great honour of being President of the two relevant national societies at the same time. The British Society of Neuroradiology, although a smaller organisation, presents their president with a medal and I take this opportunity of suggesting that you might so honour future Presidents with a badge of office that can be worn at the Annual and Exhibition Meetings and other Conferences. THE PLANT RECORDING As a result of intensive recording the total number of species came to 325, which I have divided into six groups (Fig. 3). PLANTS ON THE SCOTTISH FIELD CARD With regard to those plants which are on the Scottish Field Card (194 species), these in the main are those that might have been expected to have arrived by natural dispersal. However, some could 171 PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS, 1992 ‘TEANSIJ Uspsiey MOBSETD dy} Jo INOAL] SNeWIAYIS *7 AUNDIY ae 2. | \ Ae N (5 * Sa ee 172 P. MACPHERSON 1988 Garden Festival Site: plants recorded in 1991 Nursery Site Plants 3% _ Stowaways 2% Doubtful Status 5% Natural Spread Piants not on Field Card 11% Field Card Plants 60% Spread from Planted Material 19% FiGurE 3. The results of plant recording in 1991 on the Glasgow Garden Festival site. 325 taxa were recorded in all. perhaps more appropriately have been placed in one of the other categories. As examples of spread from planted or presumed planted material, I cite Hemp-agrimony (Eupatorium cannabinum) and Marjoram (Origanum vulgare), which, although common in other parts of the British Isles, are relatively unusual in the area. Perring & Walters (1962) give only one definite v.c. 77 record for each. When I tell you that on a bank were about ten plants of Greater Spearwort (Ranunculus lingua), you may well raise your eyebrows. Greater Spearwort had been planted in and by the pond at the base of the waterfall, i.e. diagonally about 100 m away, with a tree border between. How did it get to the bank? Water Dock (Rumex hydrolapathum) growing happily on the pebbly shore of the Canting Basin was almost certainly a feature of the planting along the stream, the seeds floating down. There is only one other site for this plant in the Glasgow area. Although Tormentil (Potentilla erecta) and Hare’s-tail Cottongrass (Eriophorum vaginatum) are common in the neighbourhood, they obviously arrived at the site with peat. PLANTS WHICH ARRIVED BY NATURAL SPREAD BUT ARE NOT ON THE FIELD CARD By natural spread, at this stage, I simply mean plants not on the Scottish Field Card, which have colonised from the vicinity of the Festival Site or whose introduction has nothing directly to do with the Garden Festival. : | Of the 36 plants in this category some have been wind-blown, like Butterfly-bush (Buddleja davidii) and five species of Hawkweed (Hieracium). I was told by a referee not to bother coming down to the riverside at Kew, but to look for Rumex obtusifolius var. transiens in Glasgow — and at the site I made my first record. Other plants have been bird-sown, such as five species of Cotoneaster. Dense Silky-bent (Apera interrupta) was actually present at another part of the site while the area was still dockland and may have persisted, while Fodder Vetch (Vicia villosa) has been present for PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS, 1992 173 six years across the river and one square down. Large Trefoil (Trifolium aureum) keeps appearing and disappearing at various sites in Glasgow. The rarest species were Canadian Fleabane (Conyza canadensis) and Least Pepperwort (Lepidium virginicum) growing on otherwise bare, gravelly ground and both new v.c. records. _ DEFINITE OR PRESUMED SPREAD FROM PLANTED MATERIAL The complete list of 62 species is given in Table 1. In the main the spread had been wind-blown on to bare ground produced by bulldozing or with soil shifted by the bulldozers. There was only a single plant of some taxa such as Achillea millefolium ‘Cerise Queen’, Anchusa azurea and Artemisia stelleriana growing on bare ground and Saxifraga paniculata on a stony path. Between two and five plants were noted of most species such as Artemisia ludoviciana and Armeria maritima growing on bare ground. What was Thrift doing in the centre of Glasgow unless from planted material? So although Armeria maritima is on the Field Card I have not crossed it off, recording it only as a cultivar. Milk Thistles (Si/ybum marianum) were on a soil heap; Eryngium planum was on a bank; one plant of Hemerocallis was on a soil heap and another was at the sheltered edge of a bare open patch; Japanese Wineberry (Rubus phoenicolasius) was at the edge and _ extending down on to the shore of the Canting Basin. Sahara eR ee Se we RES There were over 50 plants of Pearly Everlasting (Anaphalis margaritacea) scattered widely and about 50 also of Yellow Chamomile (Anthemis tinctoria) but with a more local distribution. By far TABLE 1. DEFINITE OR PRESUMED SPREAD FROM PLANTED MATERIAL ON THE GLASGOW GARDEN FESTIVAL SITE Taxa (62 in all) not on the field card. Achillea millefolium ‘Cerise Queen’ Achillea ptarmica Hyssopus officinalis Lamiastrum galeobdolon subsp. Alchemilla mollis argentatum Anaphalis margaritacea Lamuastrum galeobdolon subsp. Anaphalis margaritacea var. revoluta galeobdolon Anchusa azurea Leucanthemum X superbum Anthemus tinctoria Armeria maritima cv. Artemisia absinthium Artemisia ludoviciana Artemisia stelleriana Astilbe cf. japonica Berberis sp. Borago officinalis Campanula medium Campanula persicifolia Carex pendula Cornus sericea Cotoneaster salicifolius Cotoneaster X suecicus Dianthus barbatus cv. Elaeagnus angustifolia Eryngium planum Festuca brevipila Lychnis coronaria Lythrum salicaria cv. Melissa officinalis Mentha x villosa Narcissus pseudonarcissus cv. Narcissus tazetta Nepeta X faassenii Phalaris arundinacea var. picta Polygonum bistorta ‘Superbum’ Potentilla fruticosa hybrid Pulmonaria officinalis Ribes sanguineum Robinia pseudoacacia Rubus phoenicolasius Saxifraga paniculata Senecio cineraria Silybum marianum Spiraea douglasii x S. salicifolia Geranium endressii X G. versicolor Geranium macrorrhizum Geranium sanguineum Geranium X magnificum Spiraea sp. Symphoricarpos cf. X chenaultii Symphoricarpos albus Tellima grandiflora Geum cv. Tolmiea menziesii Hemerocallis sp. Verbena rigida Hippophae rhamnoides Vinca major Hosta sp. Viola lutea cv. 174 P. MACPHERSON TABLE 2. TAXA OF DOUBTFUL STATUS ON THE GLASGOW GARDEN FESTIVAL SITE Angelica archangelica Oenothera biennis X O. glazioviana Aster sp. Phalaris canariensis Cotoneaster conspicuus Rosa rugosa Ligustrum ovalifolium Rubus cockburnianus Linum usitatissimum Salix alba x S. fragilis Lysimachia punctata Salix discolor Mimulus cupreus X M. luteus xX M. variegatus Solidago gigantea Myosoton aquaticum the most common plant in this category was Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria cv.) which had been a feature of water-side planting but had spread to most parts of the site regardless of soil or moisture. DOUBTFUL STATUS Some of those on this list (Table 2) might have been from planted material but their introduction could equally well have been from other categories. 15 species were of doubtful status. Japanese Rose (Rosa rugosa), White-stemmed Bramble (Rubus cockburnianus) and Early Goldenrod (Solidago gigantea) have been growing for many years in the neighbourhood. With regard to two plants of Garden Angelica (Angelica archangelica) growing well in from the river one can speculate fancifully. The plants grow on top of all the wooden piles near the mouth of the nearby River Kelvin (Macpherson 1984). The docks at the Festival Site were partly filled in with dredgings from the river. However as the seeds are more likely to float than sink to the bottom, then perhaps two were picked up as a bucket broke the surface! Water Chickweed (Myosoton aquaticum) surprised me; one plant in a stony hollow at the edge above the Canting Basin, but then it can be an import and flourish on dry ground, as in London (Burton 1983). The Mimulus cupreus x M. luteus x M. variegatus was less than 2 cm high — the name being much longer than the plant! Flax (Linum usitatissimum) and Canary-grass (Phalaris canariensis) possibly came from bird seed. ‘STOWAWAYS. Plants whose introduction I presume to have been in soil round plants brought for display. Ihave | excluded plants which are on the Field Card, such as those brought in with peat as mentioned above, or with woodland planting such as Wood Speedwell (Veronica montana) which leaves seven species (Table 3). Although there was much planting in and along the waterfall and stream I cannot imagine that Orange Foxtail (Alopecurus aequalis) was brought intentionally, but there it was, one plant on the muddy edge — from whence did it come? Free access was available to only one tiny part of the site in 1990 and on part of a bare trodden pathway there were six plants of Smooth Rupturewort (Herniaria glabra). 40 m farther on (in the next 1 km square) there were a further nine. In 1991 there were more than 50 plants. This species is even rarer than the Alopecurus in the British Isles. I assume that Spiny Restharrow (Ononis spinosa) came with seed for sowing the grassy bank near the waterfall. Like the two mentioned above and Sulphur Cinquefoil (Potentilla recta), also in this group, this plant has not been recorded before in the vice-county. TABLE 3. ‘SSTOWAWAYS’ ON THE GLASGOW GARDEN FESTIVAL SITE Alopecurus aequalis Geranium pyrenaicum Herniaria glabra Melilotus indicus Ononis spinosa Potentilla recta Rumex acetosella var. tenuifolius PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS, 1992 175 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT RESEARCH COUNCIL BOTANICAL SOCIETY OF THE BRITISH ISLES Ka . This is to certify that cesé aot dy | sta mas Dr Peter Macpherson 1s an OFFICIAL PLANT RECORDER Ficure 4. A personal ‘Access’ card designed by the author. NURSERY SITE In addition to the actual Garden Festival Site itself there is an adjacent area, connected by a short tunnel under the intervening road, in which plants were stored, either in containers or shoved into the ground while their sites were being prepared, or in some cases as substitutes to provide flowering - colour throughout the season. It is an area of 3.5 ha. It is still fenced off, but like most such pieces of ground, at least in Glasgow, if one searches one is _ bound to find a gap where someone has cut a way in! With regard to the main site, the Security Officer became interested in my survey and kept asking if I had been to such and such a part where he had seen flowers — as opposed to weeds! At the » Norfolk Recorders’ Conference I suggested that we be issued with a card and that seemed to meet » with general approval, but as none was forthcoming I designed my own (Fig. 4). Of course it has no official standing but never fails to impress. I have included the Nursery Site (Table 4) because it was very much part of the festival complex as far as plants were concerned and had eleven additions to what were seen elsewhere. Agrostis scabra we see in hundreds, if not thousands each year in Glasgow. Crepis setosa reached Glasgow in 1984 but as a casual only (Macpherson 1990). In both 1990 and 1991 there were at least 40 plants on the - bank of the track as it dipped down to go under the road, with two plants having crept into the Garden Festival site. Genista hispanica had definitely spread from planted material as presumably had the Hosta. : | [ had nipped in during 1990 and the most interesting plant was a tufted, reddish sedge identified for me as Carex buchananii, a native of New Zealand and possibly new to Britain as a wild plant. In 1990 one flowering plant was present. In 1991, the colony had increased to four (Macpherson & Macpherson 1992) and a recent check showed that there had now been a further increase to six. This ‘plant plus one small Sensitive Fern (Onoclea sensibilis), more or less hidden away among a group of _Cornus which had been left over near the boundary wall, would qualify for my ‘Stowaway’ category. TABLE 4. TAXA IN THE NURSERY AREA ON THE GLASGOW GARDEN FESTIVAL SITE | | Agrostis scabra Hosta cf. nakaiana Carex buchananii Medicago sativa Cichorium intybus Mentha X villosonervata | Cotoneaster sternianus Onoclea sensibilis Crepis setosa Solidago canadensis Genista hispanica subsp. occididentalis 176 P. MACPHERSON DISCUSSION So now that I have all these records — what are the implications? What do I do with them? With regard to those which have arrived by what could be natural dispersal I have no problem. I — stroke off the Field Card and put.a dot on my index card. However I cannot simply accept all that are printed on the Field Card without comment as some are very rare or absent from my vice-county, and had probably spread from deliberate planting, e.g. Marjoram and Hempagrimony. The next ‘acceptable group’ is comprised of those not on the Field Card, but which I assume have not been deliberately brought to the site. Some are actually reasonably common in Glasgow and could have spread on to any suitable ground. These I have no hesitation in recording without comment e.g. Brassica rapa, Heracleum mantegazzianum, Senecio squalidus. With regard to rarities such as Canadian Fleabane and Least Pepperwort, which I assume ‘fell off the back of a ship’, I have noted the facts, done a drawing of their location and will monitor to see how long they persist as was the case with Agrostis scabra which we first saw as a single plant in 1973 and for which I now have eleven personal 1 km* records (Macpherson & Stirling 1988). The other group not deliberately introduced are my ‘stowaways’. I already know that Herniaria glabra and Carex buchananii are spreading and could easily become established if given a chance. Of the vast majority of planted material, there is now no trace. With regard to the recording of those which have spread or been spread from Garden Festival planting there is more room for argument. I have filled out a card for those such as Anchusa azurea, and even added a dot. These should at least therefore always be available for reference. What of these so-called aliens? How are they to be regarded? For reference I selected books from my bookshelves more or less at random. In no sense is this an exhaustive review: ‘‘Human borne seedlings do not seem to me to deserve much consideration. I am not convinced that we ought not to advocate definite action to prevent their settlement” (Raven 1953). A critical comment taken a little out of context, but which one might argue could apply at least to the Giant Hogweed (Heracleum mantegazzianum). Or with disdain: ‘‘I almost immediately excluded aliens because they are coming and going in an endless stream, occasionally leaving a mark on our landscape as in the case of Senecio squalidus, but more often waifs and strays, left to perish on a dunghill” (Meikle 1953). Or an intermediate view: “The alien flora is of little importance but must be accounted for as many of the familiar plants of the countryside had their introduction either as aliens or as garden ~ escapes” (Dony 1976). Or more tolerantly: ‘The British flora is changing whatever we do but all changes are not always for the worst, some constituting interesting additions to the British flora and not necessarily undesirable” (Brenan 1983). A few years ago I met a fellow Scottish Recorder and reported that I had v.c. records of Chinese _ Ragwort (Sinacalia tangutica) and Peach-leaved Bellflower (Campanula persicifolia), both well established, and which I would pass on. I was told not to bother as they would go straight into the waste-paper basket. Campanula persicifolia is also present at the Garden Festival Site, so do I consign the record, specimen and slide to the bin? For some time I have had a certain reputation for recording ‘non-natives’ which can brighten up dull routine recording (Dickson 1991), and so appreciate the contents of the New Flora of the British Isles which states that ‘‘The aim is to include all taxa that the plant hunter might reasonably be able to find in the wild in any one year”’ (Stace 1991). I do appreciate that there is a pecking order: Native — whatever that is! Swann (1977) stated that no two botanists will ever agree about what constitutes a native species. It has been variously defined as: a species believed to have been in the country before man (Lousley 1953; Ellis 1983); part of the natural vegetation for a long time (Briggs 1990); in a natural locality to which it has spread by natural means from a natural source (Dunn 1905); immigrated without the aid of man (Lousley 1953; Ellis 1983; Dickson 1991; Stace 1991): arisen de novo in the country (Lousley 1953; Ellis 1983). Non-native — unintentional introductions may be regarded as more imereeae than those brought in intentionally. Some authors regard alien and introduction as synonymous while others limit introduction to deliberate acts. | | | PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS, 1992 177 Alien plants have been defined as species introduced by the intentional or unintentional agency of man (Lousley 1953; Ellis 1983; Crackles 1990); species introduced by man and now more or less established (Clapham et al. 1962). Introduced alien — deliberately brought to the area for whatever reason (Dickson 1987). Invading alien — unintentionally brought to the area or arriving in the area by natural means (Dickson 1987). There is then the question of Naturalised vis-a-vis Established. Some authors make a distinction and regard Naturalised as a more important category: a species naturalised in natural habitats (Hyde & Wade 1934); species naturalised in a natural or semi-natural habitat (Lousley 1953). - Others regard them as synonymous: a species which has become self-perpetuating (Stace 1991); an alien plant which has become completely established. Those who differentiate define Established _ Alien as persisting only in a man-made habitat (Hyde & Wade 1934; Lousley 1953); or in absence of competition from native species (Crackles 1990). The criteria have been widened to include an annual which persists or is repeatedly introduced (Ellis 1983). Both Naturalised and Established are regarded as more important than Casual (Temporary; _ Ephemeral; Visitors). There is more unanimity regarding the definition of Casual, the general view being that it refers to a species which does not persist (Lousley 1953; Clapham et al. 1962; Ingram & _ Noltie 1981; Ellis 1983; Crackles 1990; Graham 1988). The terms Ephemeral Alien (Jermyn 1974) and Adventive (Fitter & Fitter 1967) have been used as synonyms for casual. How long does a plant have to persist before it can be regarded as Naturalised/Established? The plants that I have recorded have persisted for two to three years. Lousley (1953) had suggested 25 years. I am unlikely to persist that long, so when may I put them into Plant Records? What is an Escape and are all escapes equal? An escape has been defined as: of cultivated origin but not naturalised (Clapham er al. 1962; Ingram & Noltie 1981); originally from seed or plants | thrown out with garden rubbish (Jermyn 1974); spread vegetatively or by seed from a garden (Stace 21991). I present a classification of introductions in what could be regarded as a pecking order (Fig. 5). Other terms used in the literature include:— Indigenous — native born; originating or produced naturally in a country; opposite of exotic - (Kirkpatrick 1983); Exotic — introduced from a foreign country; alien; not native to a country as a plant, etc; romantically — strange, rich or showy (Kirkpatrick 1983); Denizen — doubtful native in a INTRODUCTIONS NATURAL UNINTENTIONAL INTENTIONAL + Permanent Casual + Permanent Casual a Naturalised Established Naturalised Established Escape from Dumped Sown; Cultivation | planted + Permanent Casual + Permanent Casual + Permanent Casual ee Naturalised Established Naturalised Established Naturalised Established Ficure 5. Different modes of introduction and permanency in (arguably) decreasing importance from left to right. 178 P. MACPHERSON natural habitat (Watson 1870; Lousley 1953); an alien species growing in a natural or semi-natural community (Lousley 1953); species growing wild but originally introduced as cultivated crop or herb (Graham 1988; Crackles 1990); native elsewhere in Britain but not in the area (Hall 1980); Adventive — a plant growing unaided but not yet permanently established (Hyde & Wade 1934); not | deliberately introduced (Crackles 1990); self-sown or bird-sown garden plant (Briggs 1990) or even Colonist, a category implied in the title of this address — doubtful native in a man-made habitat (Lousley 1953); native elsewhere in Britain but not in the area (Whitehead 1976); species which grows only on man-maintained habitat (Lousley 1953; Graham 1988); alien which is established (Jermyn 1974); synonym of Adventive which is a synonym of Casual (Fitter & Fitter 1967). So is Pineappleweed (Matricaria discoidea) more acceptable, having been brought in unintentio- nally, than Oxford Ragwort (Senecio squalidus) which was actively brought to this country; and that in turn more acceptable because it escaped over the garden wall than Dotted Loosestrife (Lysimachia punctata) which was thrown out and is now all over the West of Scotland? It has been recorded in 70 of the 90 Flora of Glasgow tetrads. All three plants are on the Garden Festival Site. If — I stop to think about it, yes, I agree with the pecking order, but while recording never give it a thought. I wish to make a comparison. After the Ice-age Britain was:— a. wholly or mainly a bare area available for colonisation by plants (Heslop-Harrison 1953); and b. a land available for colonisation by people. As there were no people initially in the British Isles all here now are descendants of those who were native elsewhere. The British Isles have been populated by waves of tribes: Iberians, Celts, Picts, Angles, Saxons, Normans and so on. In the eyes of the Iberians the Celts were invasive intruders, in the eyes of the Celts the Anglo-Saxons were incomers and so it went on. There is even the question of being alien to a district. In the cities people are more readily absorbed into the community but in the Highlands it 1s often said that families need to remain for a couple of generations before they cease to be Incomers! There is also antipathy in parts of Wales to ‘white settlers’. In contrast many people in England more or less regard Great Britain as synonymous with England and therefore include the Scots and Welsh as English! In spite of the above no-one would quibble if most if not all of us claim to be natives of the British Isles. I feel that this may have something to tell us about our attitude to plant status. With regard to plant distribution within the British Isles some Floras define Alien as not native to the area under discussion, although it may be native in other parts of the British Isles. What are the geographical limits to which this would apply? If a plant is gradually extending into Scotland from England by natural dispersal, are the offspring which cross the border into Scotland to be regarded as aliens? Or, to narrow it down, if a plant arises from seed blown on to suitable ground in Glasgow from a neighbouring so-called native habitat are we allowed to call it Native in Glasgow, in the Flora of Glasgow. Certainly ‘Alien’ would not seem to be appropriate. In other words are the boundaries not rather arbitrary? Even if the term Alien is acceptable for the newly arrived, in general, afterone _ or two generations of people, or rather more in the case of plants, the term is not appropriate. There is therefore an obvious diversity of opinion regarding the definition of terms or even of their acceptability. ““The various terms are not easily, precisely defined as different botanists use them in different ways” (Briggs 1990). “‘In assessing the status of many species, no two botanists would ever agree, judgement is so much a matter of personal opinion and many of the terms used are themselves arbitrary” (Petch & Swann 1968). As a further example of differing terminology I present these definitions of Introduced Plant — brought accidentally or intentionally (Clapham et al. 1962); deliberately sown or planted (Fitter & Fitter 1967); deliberately brought for whatever reason (Dickson 1987); deliberately sown or planted or garden escape (Graham 1988); brought by man but apparently naturalised (Ingram & Noltie 1981). Some Presidential Addresses end with such statements as: Further work along the lines of my talk | would be a suitable project for the Society (and that is usually the last one hears of it—like my access card and possible Presidential Medals!). I am going to be more positive and ask if I may set up a little sub-committee with a view to producing agreed unambiguous British Terminology. It should be less controversial than the English Names of Wild Flowers which, although many in Scotland object to, I have, with two exceptions (did you notice one in my address?) been prepared to accept for the overall good. PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS, 1992 179 The requirement for clear knowledge of status without ambiguity is clearly indicated by the story - of the young man from the West of Scotland who went into a London establishment that he would - not have patronised had he known its reputation. He chatted to a young lady for some time and eventually she leant forward, touched his arm and said ‘‘You do realise that I am a Call Girl?” He leant back — *“‘Now is that not a co-incidence — I’m from Tiree”’. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am grateful to the following who identified plants in relation to this paper: J. C. Bowra, E. J. Clement, M. G. Daker, J. Fryer, R. J. Gornall, R. M. Harley, I. C. Hedge, A. C. Jermy, D. H. Kent, A. C. Leslie, D. J. McCosh, D. R. McKean, R. D. Meikle, D. M. Moore, A. Newton, H. J. Noltie, J. R. Palmer, T. C. G. Rich, A. J. Silverside, D. A. Simpson, C. A. Stace, A. McG. Stirling, P. J. O. Trist, B. S. Wurzell and to A. & R. Bowden, Hostas Nursery, Okehampton, Devon. Illustrations were provided by N. MacPhee and E. L. S. Lindsay. Permission has been granted by Scottish Enterprise to reproduce Fig. 2 of this article from the Glasgow Garden Festival souvenir brochure. REFERENCES BRENAN, J. P. M. (1983). The British flora — a changing picture. Watsonia 14: 237-242. Briccs, M. (1990). Sussex plant atlas selected supplement. Brighton. Burton, R. M. (1983). Flora of the London area. London. CLAPHAM, A. R., Tutin, T. G. & WARBURG, E. F. (1962). Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge. ~ Cracktes, F. E. (1990). Flora of the East Riding of Yorkshire. Hull. _ Dickson, J. H. (1987). Native v. alien in the flora of Glasgow (or elsewhere). B.S.B.I. News 47: 17-18. Dickson, J. H. (1991). Wild plants of Glasgow. Aberdeen. Dony, J. G. (1976). Bedfordshire plant atlas. Luton. Dunn, S. T. (1905). Alien flora-of Britain. London. Exuis, R. G. (1983). Flowering plants of Wales. Cardiff. _ Firrer, R. & Fitter, M. (1967). Penguin dictionary of British natural history. Harmondsworth. _ GrauaM, G. G. (1988). The flora and vegetation of County Durham. Durham. Ha t, P. C. (1980). Sussex plant atlas. Brighton. _ Hesrop-Harrison, J. (1953). The North American and Lusitanian elements in the flora of the British Isles, in LousLey, J. E., ed. The changing flora of Britain, pp. 105-123. London. Hype, H. A. & Wane, A. E. (1934). Welsh flowering plants. Cardiff. INGRAM, R. & Nortir, H. J. (1981). The flora of Angus. Dundee. JERMYN, S. T. (1974). Flora of Essex. Dunmow. Kirkpatrick, E. M. ed. (1983). Chambers 20th century dictionary. Edinburgh. Lous_Ley, J. E. (1953). The recent influx of aliens into the British flora, in Lous.ey, J. E., ed. The changing flora of Britain, pp. 140-159. London. _ Macruerson, P. (1984). Garden Angelica by the River Kelvin. Glasgow Naturalist 20: 469-471. _ Macpuerson, P. (1990). Bristly Hawk’s-beard eventually identified in the Glasgow area. Glasgow Naturalist 21: 612. Macpuerson, P. (1992). Smooth Rupturewort in the Glasgow Garden Festival site. Glasgow Naturalist 22: 191- 192: Macpuerson, P. & MacpHerson, A. C. (1992). Carex buchananii in Glasgow. Glasgow Naturalist 22: 194. MacpH_erson, P. & StTirLinc, A. McG. (1988). Agrostis scabra in Glasgow. B.S.B.I. Scottish Newsletter 10: 8. _ MEIKLE, R. D. (1953). Recent additions to the British flora, in LousLey, J. E., ed. The changing flora of Britain, pp. 49-51. London. PERRING, F. H. & WALTERS, S. M., eds. (1962). Adlas of the British flora. London. _ Petcu, C. P. & Swann, E. L. (1968). Flora of Norfolk. Norwich. Raven, C. E. (1953). The significance of a changing flora, in LousLey, J. E., ed. The changing flora of Britain, pp. 14-18. London. Stace, C. A. (1991). New flora of the British Isles. Cambridge. SwANn, E. L. (1977). Norfolk and botany. Watsonia 11: 189-194. Watson, H. C. (1870). A compendium of the Cybele Britannica, pp. 61-63, London. WHITEHEAD, L. E. (1976). Plants of Herefordshire. Hereford Botanical Society. Watsonia, 19, 181-184 (1993) 181 The correct Latin names for the Primrose and the Oxlip, Primula vulgaris Hudson and P. elatior (L.) Hill R. K. BRUMMITT The Herbarium, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey, TW9 3AE and R. D. MEIKLE Ranscombe Lodge, Wootton Courtenay, Minehead, Somerset, TA24 SRA ABSTRACT The correct Latin names for the Primrose and the Oxlip are maintained as Primula vulgaris Hudson and P. elatior (L.) Hill (Primulaceae), despite recent assertions that the Primrose should be called P. acaulis (L.) L. and that a question hangs over P. elatior. Additional evidence of Linnaeus’s intentions in his Flora Anglica is provided in different printings of this work which have been previously overlooked. INTRODUCTION It may seem surprising and unfortunate that there should still be disputes over the correct Latin names of the Primrose and the Oxlip after three centuries or more of the study of the European flora and well over two centuries of the adoption of Linnaean binomial nomenclature. However, Greuter (1989a) resurrected the name Primula acaulis (L.) L. for the Primrose. This has been adopted in the Med-Checklist (Greuter, Burdet & Long 1989), and new subspecific combinations have been published by Greuter & Burdet (Greuter 1989b). It has also been maintained that unless the arguments for this are accepted it is impossible to maintain the name P. elatior for the Oxlip. The decisions depend largely on interpretation of Linnaeus’s Flora Anglica (1754), a dissertation defended by his student Grufberg. During preparation of the account of Primulaceae for the Flora of Cyprus (Meikle 1985), we looked into this question and were satisfied that there was no threat to the well-established P. vulgaris Hudson, and we maintain this position now. Re-examination of the facts has brought to light an overlooked significant variation in the typography of the 1754 Flora Anglica, which reinforces our opinions. THE LATIN NAME OF THE PRIMROSE In Species Plantarum (1753), Linnaeus did not provide a specific binomial for the Primrose because he adopted a broad species concept, recognising the Cowslip, Oxlip and Primrose as one species, P. veris, with three varieties, var. officinalis, var. elatior and var. acaulis respectively. (This taxonomic concept persisted in British botany through all editions of Bentham’s Handbook of the British Flora, to Rendle’s 7th edition in 1924.) In 1762 William Hudson published his Flora Anglica, including the Cowslip and Oxslip in P. veris but raising the Primrose to specific rank with the new name P. vulgaris. In 1765 John Hill also gave the Primrose specific rank, but took up Linnaeus’s varietal epithet acaulis as P. acaulis, a name which has occasionally been adopted since. However, at specific rank P. vulgaris Hudson has three years’ priority over P. acaulis (L.) Hill and so has been widely adopted. The current argument is over the rank given to the Primrose in Linnaeus’s Flora Anglica (1754). Greuter (1989a) has concluded that here Linnaeus raised the Primrose to specific rank under the 182 R. K. BRUMMITT AND R. D. MEIKLE Echium vulgare 227-1. Solanum nigrum 205 - 4. Lycop/is 227-2. Duicamara 2665-1-2. Primula verisofficinal.zgge3. Ramnus catharticus 466-1. elarior 2. Frangula 465-1. acaulis 1. Evonymus ewopzus 468-1. farinofa 285-1. Ribes rubrum 456-1, Menyanthes trifoliata 285-1. alpinum 456-2. Nymphoitdces 368-2. nigrum ay6 -4. Hoftonia paluftris 285-1. Hedera helix 459-1. Lysmachia vulgaris 282-1, Illecebrumverssceslatum 160-1. thyr(iflora 183-3. Glaux maritima 285-1. Nummularia 283-1. Thefium Linophyllum 202-1. nemorum 282-5. Vinca minor 268-1. Anagallis arvenfis 232 = 4, major 268-2. Di- Figure 1. Linnaeus’s Flora Anglica (1754); lower part of p. 12, from Ray Society 1973 facsimile. name P. acaulis, so that this name has priority over P. vulgaris Hudson (1762). Stearn (1973, p. 68), however, in collaboration with the late J. E. Dandy, had concluded that Linnaeus merely repeated his taxonomy of Species Plantarum in his Flora Anglica, and that apparent inconsistencies were due to obvious slips of the pen or typographical errors. Greuter reproduced in facsimile the relevant page of Linnaeus’s Flora Anglica (see Fig. 1), and argued that names given there which are neither trinomial nor subordinated by indentation must be accepted as specific binomials. In the case of Primula, ‘veris officinal[is]’ appears on one line, with ‘elatior’, ‘acaulis’ and ‘farinosa’ on successive lines indented only very slightly under ‘veris’. The indentation, or lack of it, may here tend to suggest that all four taxa were given specific rank. As Greuter has noted, the italicisation of acaulis merely denotes that this taxon does not occur in Sweden. However, when we looked again at the Kew copy of Flora Anglica (see Fig. 2) which we had consulted ten years ago, we found that the typesetting is different from that of the Ray Society's facsimile edition (1973), and that ‘elatior’ and ‘acaulis’ are indeed indented under ‘veris’ almost to the position of the varietal epithet ‘officinallis]’, while ‘farinosa’ is indented almost as far. There are similar inconsistencies between copies in indentation on the same page (see Echium, Ribes, Hedera, R[h]amnus, Vinca) and on other pages, and it is clear that there were at least two different printings ~ of this dissertation and that the typesetting indentation was haphazard. We are grateful to Dr J. L. Reveal for informing us that the Natural History Museum, London possesses both printings. It appears that in the version represented at Kew the printer was instructed to remove excessive spaces between some generic names and the following epithets without moving succeeding epithets, so that indentations become quite different. Indentation thus appears meaningless as far as evidence of rank is concerned. It would be false to argue that in the Kew copy the position of the epithets alpinum and nigrum in relation to rubrum under Ribes (see Fig. 2) indicates that they represent infraspecific taxa. But certainly, if the Kew copy alone were considered, the weight of evidence from indentation alone would indicate that Linnaeus still regarded elatior and acaulis as varieties of P. veris and not as separate species, contrary to Greuter’s conclusion. But the clinching evidence of what Linnaeus did or did not do in Flora Anglica is provided by a point already stressed by Stearn (1973, p. 68). For the Cowslip, Linnaeus employed the trinomial Primula veris officinal/is], indicating that he still recognised varieties in the species. If he had raised all three taxa to specific rank he would certainly have dropped the varietal epithet officinalis. To our knowledge, in all his botanical works he never employed a varietal epithet in species in which he did not recognise varieties. The aim of Flora Anglica was essentially to list the known flora of England according to the binomial system, and although he did introduce a few novelties (Stearn 1973, pp. 63-68), in the case of Primula it is clear that he merely retained his taxonomy from Species THE LATIN NAMES FOR THE PRIMROSE AND THE OXLIP 183 Echium vulgare - 227-1. Solanum nigrum 265-4. Lycopfis 227-2. Dulcamara 265-1-2:. Primula veris officinal. 284+ 3. Ramnuscatharticus 466~1.. elatior 2. Frangula 465 -14,. acaulis I. Evonymus europeus 468-r.. farinofa 285-1. Ribes rubrum 456-T.. Menyanthes trifoliata 285-1. alpinum 456-2: Nympboides 368-2. nigrum 456-4. Hottonia paluftris 285-1. Hedera helix 459-1, Lysmachia vulgaris 282-1. Illecebrum verticilatum 160-1. thyrfiflora) 283-3. Glaux maritima. 285 °T. Nummoularia 283-1. Thefium Linophyllum zo02-r. nemorum 282-'s. Vinca minor 268-1. _Anagallis arvenfis 282-1. major 268-2. DI- | Figure 2. Linnaeus’s Flora Anglica (1754); lower part of p. 12, from Kew copy. Plantarum published the previous year. The erratic behaviour of a typesetter in 1754 does not alter the facts and cannot be used as a reason to upset established nomenclature of a well-known plant. Nor is the issue affected by the slightly more orderly, but still inconsistent, typesetting of the reprint » of Flora Anglica in Linnaeus’s Amoenitates Academicae (1759, vol. 4), where all four epithets veris, _ elatior, acaulis and farinosa were equally indented under Primula (p. 97). The inclusion of the | varietal epithet officinalis still indicates that Linnaeus had not changed his taxonomy. Indeed, I throughout all his works Linnaeus kept the Primrose and the Oxlip as varieties of Primula veris. The _ correct name (and relevant synonyms) at specific rank for the Primrose is therefore as follows: iy keveris:var-acaulis L:, Sp. Pl. 1: 143: (1753). i | : | P. vulgaris Hudson, Fl. Angl., 70 (1762). : | P. acaulis (L.) Hill, Veg. Syst. 8: 25 (1765). THE LATIN NAME OF THE OXLIP | | | i 4 | 1 } Having concluded that Linnaeus raised the Primrose and Oxlip from varietal rank in Species Plantarum (1753) to specific rank in Flora Anglica (1754), Greuter (1989a) has cited the correct + name for the Oxlip as Primula elatior (L.) L., Fl. Angl. 14 (1754) instead of the more usual P. elatior | (L.) Hill (1765). He has warned that, if this is not accepted, the specific name for the Oxlip will have _to change. The reason for this conclusion is that he considers that when Hill in 1765 published the ) name Primula elatior he did not make a new combination based on Linnaeus’s P. veris var. elatior ) but described a new species, which, according to Schinz & Thellung (1907, p. 333), is not the Oxlip but the hybrid between the Cowslip and Primrose, the False Oxlip. This would then mean that the i name P. X elatior Hill would have to be applied to the hybrid, that any later combination of | Linnaeus’s elatior at specific rank would be an illegitimate later homonym, and that a new name /} would have to be found for the Oxlip. Fortunately we cannot agree with this sequence of | conclusions. | ‘The fact that Hill may have described and illustrated the hybrid P. veris < vulgaris under the j}name P. elatior is irrelevant if the latter is a combination based on Linnaeus’s var. elatior | Unternational code. . . Berlin 1987, Art. 7.12). The question therefore is whether Hill made a new _; combination or described a new species. Throughout the 26 volumes of the quarto edition of The _ Vegetable System (1759-1775), in which the name appeared, Hill never cited any authors for the _) binomials he used, nor did he cite any basionyms. He was, however, clearly using the Linnaean “fl # 5 a ~~ 184 R. K. BRUMMITT AND R. D. MEIKLE system, to which he referred directly in his introduction (Hill 1759, vol. 1, p. 24) with a comment that “‘it will live . . . so long as there is science’’. It would be ludicrous to argue that the names he used were independent of those published previously by Linnaeus simply because he used no author citations. Such a conclusion would require that every name in all 26 volumes of the Vegetable System should be listed in Index Kewensis as new species attributed to Hill. Article 33.2 of International code. . . Berlin 1987 requires that a full and direct reference be given in valid publication of a new combination after 1 January 1953, surely with the implication that before 1953 such a reference is not necessary. All the circumstantial evidence, and in particular the coincidence of all the epithets officinalis, acaulis, elatior and farinosa under Primula in the relevant publications of both Linnaeus and Hill, points to the fact that Hill was merely taking up the earlier Linnaean epithets and was not describing new taxa. The coincidence of the epithets themselves refers us back to Linnaeus, which is confirmed (if it were necessary) by Hill’s direct reference to Linnaeus in his introduction, as noted above. Publication of the combination by Hill, not Linnaeus, was accepted in the original volume of Index Kewensis (1895) and by generations of botanists since. It is comparable with the combination Helianthemum nummularium (L.) Miller, Gard. Dict. (ed. 8), [sub]. Helianthemum no. 12 (1768), also published with a passing reference to Linnaeus himself in the introduction to the book, and with a reference under the generic riame, but without any reference to the basionym Cistus nummularius L., Sp. Pl. 1: 527 (1753), and nonetheless universally accepted as a new combination at the present time. To maintain today, when the need for nomenclatural stability is being much discussed, that such names should be treated as newly described species, with consequent new typifications, rather than new combinations, would not only be highly undesirable, it would be contrary to the /nternational code. We are happy to conclude that the correct name for the Oxlip should be maintained as follows: P. elatior (L.) Hill, Veg. Syst. 8: 25 (1765). P. veris var. elatior L., Sp. Pl. 1: 143 (1753). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We are grateful to Werner Greuter for helpful discussion of the matter. We also thank Professor W. T. Stearn for discussion, and are happy to have his full support for our conclusions above. We are also grateful to Dr C. E. Jarvis and Dr J. L. Reveal for helpful comments and support. Thanks are also due to the Library, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew for permission to reproduce Fig. 2. REFERENCES GreEuTER, W. (1989a). Med-Checxlist Notulae Bibliographicae, 15. Primula acaulis, Primula elatior and the “Flora Anglica”’ of Linnaeus. Candollea 44: 562-567. ; GREUTER, W. (1989b). [Primula], in GREUTER, W. & Raus, T., eds. Med-Checklist Notulae, 15. Willdenowia 19: 42 GREUTER, W., BurpDET, H. M. & Lona, G. (1989). Med-Checklist 4: 378. Genéve. HILi, J. (1765). The Vegetable System, 8: 25. London. MEIKLE, R. D. (1985). Primula in Flora of Cyprus 2: 1075-1076. Kew. SCHINZ, H. & THELLUNG, A. (1907). Begriindung vorzunehmender Namensanderungen an der zweiten Auflage der ‘Flora von Schweiz” von Schinz und Keller. Bull. Herb. Boiss., ser. 2, 7: 331-346. STEARN, W. T. (1973). Ray, Dillenius, Linnaeus and the Synopsis methodica Stirpium Britannicarum, in Ray, J. Synopsis methodica Stirpium Britannicarum, editio tertia, 1724, & LINNAEUS, C. Flora Anglica, 1754 & 1759 (Ray Society facsimile edition) pp. 1-90. London. (Accepted July 1992) Watsonia, 19, 185-193 (1993) 185 Short Notes DIANTHUS ARMERIA L. NEW TO IRELAND AND OTHER RARE PLANTS IN WEST CORK This note presents a preliminary report of extensive floristic research on Sherkin Island and adjacent islands in Roaringwater Bay to the west of Baltimore, West Cork (vice-county H3). During field- work from March to September 1992, based at Sherkin Marine Station, K.C. (joined by J.R.A., 25 August—-4 September) made so many significant records of rare native and ruderal species that it seemed pertinent to make the most interesting results available. All data have been lodged at Sherkin Marine Station. Some of our herbarium voucher specimens of the plants are fragmentary or even lacking, as many of the plants are extremely rare and protected by Irish law. Nomenclature follows Stace (1991). Dianthus armeria L. Horse Island, rocky pasture near the sea, 1 September 1992, J. R. Akeroyd & K. Clarke, DBN, herb. Sherkin Marine Station. Six plants in all were found, severely grazed by sheep and goats. The plants had anomalous few- flowered inflorescences with secondary growth below, but could be distinguished by the annual/ biennial habit and flowers c. 1 cm in diameter, bright reddish-pink and scentless. The leaves, bracts and stems were reddish. Dianthus armeria, a plant of grasslands on sandy soils, has not previously been reported from Ireland. It occurs over much of southern and central Britain, but is now rare and decreasing (Perring & Walters 1976; Stace 1991). The Irish station is an area of some 12 X 3 mona south-facing slope of submaritime grassland interspersed with a few outcrops of Old Red Sandstone. The species-rich sward, dominated by Agrostis vinealis Schreber, Cynosurus cristatus L. and Koeleria macrantha (Ledeb.) Schultes, is grazed to 5—8 cm, with grass-stems and chewed inflorescences of D. armeria up to 18 cm. Further down the slope the grassland is coarser and enriched, with patches of nettles and thistles. On adjacent rock outcrops a more heathy flora, dominated by Ulex gallii Planchon, includes a large, unrecorded population of Ornithopus perpusillus L., a rare but often overlooked plant in Ireland (fide J. R. Akeroyd & R. FitzGerald). No soil analyses have been carried out, but it may be significant that the site is adjacent to old copper workings. D. armeria has a wide distribution in Europe, where it extends northwards to southern Norway and westwards to Galicia, Cornwall and mid-Wales (Jalas & Suominen 1986). Its occurrence in southern Ireland, although a welcome surprise, is perhaps therefore not too unexpected. It should certainly be sought elsewhere in W. Cork and on coasts from Co. Cork to Co. Dublin. It is the only member of the genus Dianthus that is apparently native to Ireland. Allium ampeloprasum L. var. babingtonii (Borrer) Syme Sherkin Island, road from church towards Sherkin Point, garden of deserted cottage, July 1992, obs. K. Clarke. This distinctive leek has long been known from the Aran Islands and the coasts of Clare, W. Galway (Webb & Scannell 1983) and from Donegal, and is also widespread in Scilly and the coast of mainland Cornwall. It is considered to be a relic of ancient cultivation, probably introduced from ‘the Mediterranean region where the species has its centre of distribution, but perhaps a native species (Webb & Scannell 1983). Var. babingtonii, endemic to western Ireland and south-western England, is frequently associated with human habitation and old ruins. The Sherkin plants might have been introduced, but they do provide a geographical link between the two main areas of distribution of this variant. Asplenium obovatum Viv. subsp. lanceolatum (Fiori) P. Silva Cape Clear Island, South Harbour, damp stonework, 3 September 1992, obs. K. Clarke & J. R. Akeroyd. 186 SHORT NOTES We observed a single plant of this rare fern at South Harbour, where it had last been recorded, as A. lanceolatum Huds., in 1896 (Colgan & Scully 1898). The warden of the Cape Clear Bird Observatory later kindly directed us to a second locality to the west of South Harbour where the plant had been rediscovered by another botanist on a damp stone wall just a few days previously, allowing us to confirm the identity of our own plant. Centaurium pulchellum (Sw.) Druce Horse Island, damp grassland above patch of scrub on east coast, 10 m, 19 June 1982, L. C. Wright LW0045, herb. Sherkin Marine Station. We were unable to refind this species ourselves, but the herbarium material represents the only recent record from Co. Cork. It is apparently the first record of this species from Roaringwater Bay since 1818 when it was reported on Cape Clear Island (Colgan & Scully 1898). C. pulchellum has recently been rediscovered at several old stations in Co. Wexford (fide J. R. Akeroyd & R. FitzGerald), so may be overlooked. Kickxia elatine (L.) Dumortt. Sherkin Island, Foardree, open peaty ground on south-facing slope above sea, obs. J. R. Akeroyd & K. Clarke, 29 August 1992. A very rare, submaritime plant in Ireland, now restricted to Counties Cork and Wexford and | usually found on cultivated land. It was found at Foardree whilst examining a population of Lotus subbiflorus Lag. discovered there earlier (fide K. Clarke). However, we failed to find K. elatine, described by Polunin (1949) as “frequent on cultivated ground’’, elsewhere on Sherkin or Cape Clear Islands, although fragments of a formerly rich weed flora (cf. Polunin 1949, 1950) have | survived in the islands. Rumex pulcher L. Sherkin Island, above Horseshoe Bay, obs. 28 June 1990, 25 August 1992, J. R. Akeroyd. Ten plants of this rare Irish dock were located in two small colonies at the eastern end of Sherkin Island. This confirms reports from the area by Polunin (1950) and earlier workers. As the species has persisted for nearly 100 years on Sherkin, has been repeatedly recorded in Co. Wexford and is a member of native plant communities (fide J. R. Akeroyd), it cannot be regarded as merely ‘“‘casual”’ (Perring & Walters 1976) and is probably native in Ireland. Tuberaria guttata (L.) Fourr. E. Calf Island, rock outcrops in heathland, 20 May 1992, K. Clarke C198, herb. Sherkin Marine | Station. This confirms an old record of the species from E. Calf, where it was not refound by Polunin | (1950). The other Irish stations are all on islands or peninsulas in the extreme west of the country: on | the coasts of W. Mayo and W. Galway and on Sheep’s Head and Three Castles Head, Co. Cork | (recorded by J. R. Akeroyd & D. A. Webb in July 1987), respectively some 25 km to the north-west | and west of E. Calf Island. In addition to the above reports, we have made or confirmed records on Sherkin Island or adjacent islands of many rare or local Irish plants, including Althaea officinalis L., Artemisia absinthium L., Lotus subbiflorus, Trifolium striatum L. (cf. O’Mahony 1979), T. micranthum Viv., T. arvense L., Torilis nodosa (L.) Gaertner and Viola lactea Sm. The total number of flowering plants and ferns on the islands of Roaringwater Bay, including Cape Clear and Sherkin Islands, now stands at about 500, at least ten of them among the rarest of Irish plants — a flora of remarkable richness. A full Flora of the area is currently being prepared. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We are grateful to Matt Murphy, Director of the Sherkin Island Marine Station, for providing accommodation and facilities for our research, and to Michael and Robbie Murphy for their skillful and cheerful ferrying of us around the waters of Roaringwater Bay. Our work in 1992 on Sherkin SHORT NOTES 187 Island would never have been possible without the solid groundwork provided by the studies of Lucy Wright (1981-2) and Jennifer Shockley (1990). REFERENCES CoLGAN, N. & ScuLLy, R. W. (1898). Cybele Hibernica, 2nd ed. Dublin. JALAS, J. & SUOMINEN, J. (1986). Atlas Florae Europaeae 7. Helsinki. O’Mauony, T. (1979). Inula crithmoides L. and Trifolium striatum L. in the Cork flora. Bull. Ir. biogeog. Soc. 3: 7-10. PERRING, F. H. & WALTERS, S. M., eds (1979). Atlas of the British flora, 2nd ed. Wakefield. Po.unin, O. (1949). The Flora of Sherkin Island, S. W. Cork. Typed draft of Polunin’s paper (1950), with letter from editor E. F. Warburg. Sherkin Island Marine Station. PoLuNIN, O. (1950). Notes and additions to the flora of the islands of S.W. Cork. Watsonia 1: 359-363. Stace, C. A. (1991). New Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge. Wess, D. A. & SCANNELL, M. J. P. (1983). Flora of Connemara and the Burren. Cambridge. J. R. AKERoYD & K. CLARKE 24 The Street, Hindolveston, Dereham, Norfolk NR20 5BU PILOSELLA X FLORIBUNDA (WIMMER & GRAB.) ARVET-TOUVET (ASTERACEAE) IN THE BRITISH ISLES Stewart (1903) recorded Hieracium auricula L. from an old limestone quarry at Cave Hill, Belfast, and remarked: “I have known this plant growing on the debris of the Whitewell limestone quarries, Cave Hill, for at least six years. During that time it has neither increased nor decreased. It partially occupies an area of about two square yards. The district around it is uncultivated, save for grass. There are few gardens in the vicinity — none close at hand. I consider it an alien, but how it has reached here is not easily understood”’. It was first recorded there in 1897 and last seen in 1910 (Wear 1923). Pugsley (1946, 1948) renamed it H. helveolum (Dahlst.) Pugsley. Sell and West (Sell 1967) made H. helveolum a subspecies of Pilosella lactucella (Wallr.) P. D. Sell & C. West. The Same authors, when writing the account of Hieracium for Flora Europaea (Tutin et al. 1976), decided it was better put under Hieracium xX floribundum Wimmer & Grab., i.e. Pilosella floribunda (Wimmer & Grab.) Arvet-Touvet which is where H. helveolum was originally placed by Dahlstedt as subsp. helveolum. P. floribunda 1s almost certainly a hybrid between P. lactucella (Wallr.) P. D. Sell & C. West and P. caespitosa (Dumortrt.) P. D. Sell & C. West, which can spread vegetatively as well as by seed. It differs from P. caespitosa by its glaucous, less hairy leaves, and from P. lactucella by its much taller habit. On 21 June 1991, R. P. Bowman discovered 45 or more plants occupying an area of about 4 xX 2m, in grass heath with Calluna vulgaris — Erica tetralix tussocks, on the wide verge of the B3056 between Stephill Bottom and Pig Bush in the New Forest, S. Hants. v.c. 11, GR SU/35.05, herb. R.P.B. It was the site of military emplacements during the 1939-1945 war, and P. x floribunda may have been introduced during that period. It is a good match with the eight plants from the Belfast locality in CGE, and with continental material in that herbarium. Pilosella < floribunda (Wimmer & Grab.) Arvet-Touvet in Bull. Soc. Dauph. 1880: 280 (1880). Syn. Hieracium floribundum Wimmer & Grab., Fl. Siles. 2(2): 204 (1829); Hieracium floribundum subsp. helveolum Dahlst., Hier. Exsicc. 4: nos. 14 & 15 (1891); Acta Horti Berg. 2(4): 13 (1894); Hieracium helveolum (Dahlst.) Pugsley inJ. Ecol. 33: 347 (1946); Pilosella lactucella subsp. helveola (Dahist.) P. D. Sell & C. West in Watsonia 6: 314 (1967). Rootstock rather thick, sometimes producing leafy stolons. Stems 10—35(—45) cm, erect, rather Slender, green below, darker above, with numerous long (to 7 mm), pale, dark-based simple eglandular hairs throughout and with numerous to dense, small stellate hairs and numerous, short, dark glandular hairs in the upper part. Leaves 50-180 x 6-20 mm, glaucous-green with a whitish 188 SHORT NOTES midrib; the basal numerous, in a rosette, narrowly elliptical or narrowly oblanceolate, the outermost rounded at apex, the inner obtuse or subacute and mucronulate, long attenuate at base to a broadly winged petiole, with few to numerous, long (to 4mm), pale simple eglandular hairs on or near the margin, and similar ones with red bases along the midrib (sometimes the hairs are found on the surfaces and sometimes small stellate hairs are present on the lower surface); the cauline 0-3, similar to basal but smaller; when stolons are present they bear numerous leaves which are similar to basal but small. Inflorescence of 3-7 capitula, compact; peduncles 3-25 mm, with dense, white stellate hairs, numerous, short, dark glandular hairs, and few to numerous, long simple eglandular hairs. Capitula 15—20 mm in diameter. Involucral bracts 6-9 x 1-0-1-5 mm, dark green with whitish margins, linear-lanceolate, rounded-obtuse at apex, with numerous, very small stellate hairs particularly on the margins, numerous, short, dark glandular hairs down the centre, and few to numerous, long, whitish, dark-based simple eglandular hairs. Ligules bright yellow, paler beneath, glabrous. Styles yellow or slightly discoloured. Margins of receptacle pits shortly dentate. Achenes 2-3 mm, purplish-black. In Stace (1991) it will key out to P. caespitosa, but differs from that species in its bluish-green rather than yellowish-green leaves which are not as hairy on the surface. In Europe it occurs in the north and centre southwards to north Switzerland and the east Carpathians. It is a triploid with 2n = 27. Little is known about its biology. REFERENCES Puas.Ley, H. W. (1946). List of British species of Hieracium. J. Ecol. 33: 345-347. Pucs.ey, H. W. (1948). A prodromus of the British Hieracia. J. Linn. Soc. Lond. (Bot.) 54: 1-356. SELL, P. D. (1967). Taxonomic and nomenclatural notes on the British flora. Watsonia 6: 292-318. SELL, P. D. & West, C. (1976). Hieracium L., in Tutin, T. G. et al., eds. Flora Europaea 4: 358-410. Cambridge. Stace, C. (1991). New Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge. STEWART, S. A. (1903). Hieracium auricula, Linn. Rep. botl Soc. Exch. Club Br. Isl. 2: Sie WEAR, S. (1923). A second supplement to, and summary of, Stewart and Corry’s flora of the north-east of Ireland. Belfast. R. P. BOWMAN & P. D. SELL 22 Kennedy Road, Maybush, Southampton, SOI 6DQ REGENERATING BALSAM POPLAR (POPULUS CANDICANS AIT.) X BLACK POPLAR (P. NIGRA L.) (SALICACEAE) AT A SITE IN LEEDS In 1983 poplar regeneration was observed on a patch of waste ground at a site in central Leeds, Yorkshire. Vegetation surveys carried out in other towns over the next eight years failed to reveal further examples and it gradually became clear that this was a most unusual occurrence. A literature search revealed only one other incidence in the UK; this involved different poplar taxa at a sewage works at Hackney, East London (Wurzell 1985). During 1991 the Leeds population, which is now very well established, was investigated in more detail. The parents, which are growing on a traffic roundabout at the junction of Kirkgate and Crown \ Point Road, are 20 well grown specimens of the Balsam Poplar (P. candicans Ait., all female) and two similar sized Black Poplars (P. nigra L., both male). The origin of P. candicans is unknown; it | may be a hybrid between P. balsamifera L. and P. deltoides Marshall and, if so, the regeneration | could well be tri-clonal, a most unusual occurrence. The large quantities of seed which are shed in late June collect as piles of white ‘fluff’ wherever there is a little shelter. Following rain, they | germinate within 24 hours to produce extensive, dense swards of seedlings with dark blue-green ~ elliptic cotyledons. Most of these are subsequently killed by drought. In many years however a number survive, particularly where the substrate contains fine material. This has led locally to very dense stands of uneven aged young poplars up to several metres high; hundreds of individuals are involved. SHORT NOTES 189 The community they are invading is typical of dry, brick rubble demolition sites all over the country (Gilbert 1989). Leading herbaceous species are Agrostis stolonifera L., Artemisia vulgaris L., Chamerion angustifolium (L.) Holub, Poa annua L., Senecio squalidus L. and Taraxacum officinale Wigg. which provide an open vegetation into which woody plants such as Buddleja davidii Franchet, Fraxinus excelsior L., Malus domestica Borkh., Salix caprea L., Sambucus nigra L. and the poplars readily self-seed. The only remarkable feature of the vegetation is the presence of the poplars, now up to 3 m high and visually dominant. The climate of Leeds is not unusual in any way and open, competition-free conditions are a universal feature of urban areas so the reason behind this regeneration episode is enigmatic. The hybrid plants are too young for features such as canopy shape, sucker development or trunk morphology to be assessed, and to date none has flowered so their sex is unknown. However it is already clear that they show a greater range of variability in leaf characters than either parent. A hundred leaves were collected from strong shoots of each parent population and compared with a similar number from the progeny (Table 1). The results suggest that by using combinations of leaf characters it should be possible to identify populations that have arisen as hybrids between the black and balsam poplar. The range of variation in leaf characters is wider than in either parent; the mean expression of this variation is intermediate between that shown by the parents and new characters are present such as the subpallid colour of the underside of the leaf (34%), rounded leaf base (20%) and subacute leaf tip (17%). The variability of the parents needs to be fully understood before such determinations are made (see Jobling 1990). The opportunity was taken to investigate seed viability which is reported to drop to zero after only a few days (Brendell 1990). A large sample of seed, collected from bursting capsules on 29 June 1991, was stored in daylight at room temperature. Initially, then at seven day intervals, subsamples of c. 200 seeds were moistened and placed on damp filter paper in a petri dish. Germination occurred within 24 hours but the dishes were left for seven days before being scored. The results TABLE 1. A COMPARISON OF THE CHARACTERS OF POPULUS NIGRA, P. CANDICANS AND THEIR HYBRIDS Character P. nigra Hybrid P. candicans Leaf shape Triangular 80% Triangular 28% Heart-shaped 80% Diamond 20% Diamond 39% Ovate 20% Ovate 26% Heart-shaped 3% Elliptic 4% Leaf base Cuneate Cuneate 80% Cordate- Rounded 20% subcordate Leaf tip Acute through Acute through Acute through Colour of underside Serration -Gland(s) at top of petiole Hairiness of petiole Cross section of petiole* Scent of unfolding foliage acuminate to cuspidate Green Crenate Absent Hairy 80% Subglabrous 20% Flattened Unscented * This character was difficult to assess. acuminate to cuspidate 83% Subacute 17% Green 31% Pallid 35% Subpallid 34% Crenate 52% Serrate 47% Entire 1% Present 52% Absent 48% Hairy 49% Subglabrous 4% Glabrous 47% Flattened 25% Rounded 75% Scented to some extent acuminate to cuspidate Pallid (whitish) Serrate Present 68% Absent 32% Subglabrous 84% Glabrous 16% Rounded Balsamic 190 SHORT NOTES showed that a germination rate of 80% is maintained for the first week, after a fortnight it had dropped to 25%, after three weeks to 1%, and after five weeks to zero. In this instance it would be correct to record that germination dropped to zero after a few weeks. At the London site, where hundreds of selfsown poplars have established at two adjacent disused sewage works (the Middlesex and the Essex Filter Beds) ecological conditions are very different. Here the substrate is mud in the bottom of seasonally waterlogged lagoons. The parents involved are two varieties of black Italian Poplar which have crossed to produce abundant regeneration of the hybrid P. X canadensis Moench ‘Serotina’ (male) X ‘Marilandica’ (female); the former has also crossed with Balsam Poplar to produce the hybrid P. X canadensis ‘Serotina’ (male) x P. candicans Aiton (female). These examples from Leeds and London are the only recorded instances of alien hybrid poplars, which are usually present as single sex clones, regenerating in Britain and are a further example of how new taxa, with their dispersal centre in urban areas, are being added to our flora. In the Ruhr district of Germany, I have observed that Black Poplars and Balsam Poplars hybridise freely, their progeny are a conspicuous feature of dry urban wasteland sites in industrial areas. It would appear that unlike Black Poplar regeneration, which is currently limited by a lack of suitably muddy germination sites (Milne-Redhead 1990), regeneration involving alien poplars may be controlled by the chance juxtaposition of compatible genotypes. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am grateful to E. Milne-Redhead for confirming the identity of Black Poplar and to B. Wurzell and | A. Beaton for useful discussion. REFERENCES BRENDELL, T. (1990). Poplars of the British Isles. Princes Risborough, Buckinghamshire. GILBERT, O. L. (1989). The ecology of urban habitats. London. JoBLING, J. (1990). Poplars for wood production and amenity. Forestry Commission Bulletin 92. London. MILNE-REDHEAD, E. (1990). The B.S.B.I. Black Poplar survey 1973-88. Watsonia 18: 1-5. WuRZELL, B. (1985). The remarkable tree flora of the Middlesex Filter Beds. Manuscript. The London Wildlife Trust. O. L. GILBERT | Department of Landscape Architecture, The University, Sheffield, S10 2TN SEXUAL DIMORPHISM IN ERIOPHORUM VAGINATUM L. (CYPERACEAE) In Britain, Eriophorum vaginatum L. is one of the major dominants in ombrotrophic pS vegetation and comes into flower in early spring, before most other bog species. On 22 March 1991, we had an opportunity to observe its floral characters in a central part of Borth Bog (Cors Fochno) in Cardiganshire (v.c. 46), one of the largest intact raised mires in Britain. Tussocks of E. vaginatum | are a prominent component of the vegetation at Borth Bog, so there was an abundance of material on which to make observations. The florets of E. vaginatum are wind-pollinated and strongly protogynous. Following pollen | liberation, anthers are shed leaving the more persistent filaments protruding from the glumes. Eventually, the filaments too are abscised, and the perianth bristles elongate rapidly and massively to form the familiar cotton-like heads which aid seed dispersal. What seemed curious about the floral biology of E. vaginatum at Borth Bog was that no stamens were visible on the flowering spikes of some tussocks, even though they were at the appropriate ontogenetic stage, with withered stigmas on the one hand and no sign of remnant filaments or developing ‘cotton’ on the other. Suspicion that these plants were male-sterile was confirmed by closer inspection; three tiny vestigial stamens, or staminodes, were clustered around the base of the | ee a = ——— SHORT NOTES ol t a v 4 SS Ase 4 A Mt) u . te ’, aa x = ; Ww S Rid Ww we eur Tay a4 ‘ a eh oh % S is %, He Sy w ied RY: My Y 4 ps na we iy, ™% Uf te rd ‘* e "5 va Wes / ¥ ¥ ve V7 ys fy v ve Nea tS v % oF 1 2 Ny ve % % va ine: 7% Yoo ae henry y Y .) 7 ie ¥ 5 BS Bee Bn \ <. Q ey Ne Se ‘ % x Ver Vw wy af os De pS gaat ~ se we OY nu Me M4 w 4 Nee ¥ “ wv ae ae ay ATA % i= Me yD We RY As AY Mt dite | : ¥ vi S4 y 4 /. Hie De if Vi / ie Wp Ye Gif /y 2mm Figure 1. Flowers of Eriophorum vaginatum collected from Borth Bog in March 1991: (a) hermaphrodite; (b) male-sterile (glumes and bristles removed). Ovary in every floret. These staminodes were clearly non-functional, with minute, empty, non- dehiscent anthers, white or brown in colour, on filaments which had failed to elongate. The striking difference between these structures and those of male-fertile plants is illustrated in Fig. 1. Several male-sterile and male-fertile tussocks were examined in the field, and no variation in stamen development was detected, either within or between inflorescences on the same tussock. However, no thorough search for plants of intermediate phenotype was carried out. Similarly, no attempt was made to assess the abundance of male-sterile tussocks on 22 March 1991, but they were obviously frequent in the study area. No marked ecological separation of the two sex phenotypes was apparent. We re-visited the same section of Borth Bog on 21 June 1991 to see whether the two phenotypes were setting seed. It was past the optimum time to make such an assessment as fruiting spikes were disarticulating. Sexing had to be carried out with great care because staminodes were being shed from male-sterile florets, as were remnant filaments from male-fertile spikes. Many of the remaining intact fruiting heads of both phenotypes were barren. However, several florets in both male-sterile and male-fertile spikes were found to contain ripening nuts. It appears therefore that the Borth Bog population of E. vaginatum is gynodioecious (sensu Darwin 1877), with co-existing female and hermaphrodite tussocks. The only previous record of sexual dimorphism in E. vaginatum of which we are aware was reported in a talk on pollination and seed dispersal in Danish Cyperaceae given by the eminent botanist C. Raunkiaer to the Botanical Society of Copenhagen at a meeting on 14 May 1892 192 SHORT NOTES (Anonymous 1893). Raunkiaer stated that he had found EF. vaginatum to be completely gynodioecious on a small island in the Hvals@lille Sea; unfortunately, no further description of the sexual characteristics was transcribed. Male-sterility has been reported for other species of Eriophorum by several authors, including Dickie (1865) and Knuth (1906), but not for E. vaginatum by Wein (1973). Further investigations into the distribution of gender in FE. vaginatum and other British cottongrasses are in progress. ACKNOWLEDGMENT We thank Anna Williams for translating the account of Raunkiaer’s talk. REFERENCES Anonymous (1893). Meddelelser fra den Botaniske Forening i Kj@benhavn. Bot. Tidsskr. 18: 18-29. Darwin, C. (1877). The different forms of flowers on plants of the same species. London. Dickie, M. D. (1865). Notice of two forms of Eriophorum angustifolium. J. Linn. Soc. Lond. (Bot.) 9: 161-162. KnutTH, P. (1906). Handbook of flower pollination. Translated by J. R. Ainsworth Davies. Oxford. WEIN, R. W. (1973). Eriophorum vaginatum L., in Biological Flora of the British Isles. J. Ecol. 61: 601-615. D. P. STEVENS & T. H. BLACKSTOCK Countryside Council for Wales, Ffordd Penrhos, Bangor, LL57 2LQ CORYNEPHORUS CANESCENS (L.) BEAUV. (POACEAE) ON THE WEST COAST OF SCOTLAND There are three records between 1895 and 1961 of Corynephorus canescens (L.) Beauv. on the Morar coast. In 1948 R. C. L. Burges collected ‘‘on sands one and a half miles south of Morar’’, Westerness v.c. 97 in E. If this distance is stretched a little, is there similarity between this record and that of S. J. P. Waters, 1961, “‘sand dunes by Camusdarach”’ which is slightly more than 3 km by road from Morar? Or is it more likely that the Burges record refers to the earliest known site at Toigal which by road is 2:5 km south of Morar? This site of C. canescens was found by F. Townsend, as Weingaertneria canescens Bernh., on “Sand Dunes by the sea between Morar river and Arisaig, Scotland, July 1895”’, in herb. Druce, OXF with duplicates in CGE, E, K and LIV. There has been no further report of this site, except the reference to Burges above, until 24 July 1991 when Alfred Slack, Elizabeth Norman and John Trist found the remains of the colony. Beeby (1897) reported that one Eneas R. Macdonnel of Morar introduced Ca canescens to this site; but this ‘introduction’ is Beeby’s interpretation of Macdonnel who in /itt., 1896 to Townsend wrote “‘it is not indigenous but was introduced direct here and not by accidental admixture’. This does not imply that Macdonnel introduced either seed or plant. In 1991, after a thorough search of the dunes, we found a single plant of C. canescens within the area described by Townsend. He reported to Beeby (1897) that ‘‘the grass occurs in plenty on the sand-hills’. At Morar the dunes are highly mobile and bare of vegetation except for Ammophila arenaria (L.) Link, which is largely confined to the crests, and a little Carex arenaria L. At the site of the single C. canescens there was one plant each of Aira praecox L., Rumex acetosella L. and Carex arenaria which were within 10 m of a small dune crested with Calluna vulgaris (L.) Hull. Marshall (1967) reports that Corynephorus canescens is a plant of substrates which are extremely low in mineral nutrients, and this is true of this site at Toigal, which showed available phosphorus 4 mg/l ', potassium 9 mg/l” ' and magnesium 7 mg/I_'. These values are very low and would offer minimal plant nutrition. The pH of the Toigal sand is high at 8-3. It was treated with dilute hydrochloric acid and shown to have no calcium carbonate present, indicating that there must be another source of calcium. This was confirmed by the detection of ammonium acetate extractable calcium in moderate quantity. SHORT NOTES 193 This sand consists of multi-faced subangular particles of quartz, some of which are transparent, opaque and ferrugineous; minute black particles of a mineral are also present and may represent 1— 2% of ferro-magnesian minerals. The instability of these dunes has probably been a major influence in the past history of this Corynephorus colony. Consideration may also be given to Marshall (1967) who has shown that this taxon can thrive in a wide range of pH (3-7-8-5). Perhaps in this case we should only regard the high pH value as one of several factors which have influenced the gradual decline of this grass colony. C. canescens has a shallow rooting system of 7-5—10.cm in depth (Marshall 1967). In this site on the coast it is subject to high winds which puts further stress on the sand to retain moisture. However this area has an annual rainfall of c. 1500 mm (Met. Office 1991) which to some extent will offset the disadvantages of a medium which lacks moisture storage. C. canescens grows best where up to 10cm of sand accretion per year takes place though Marshall points out that where this exceeds 2 cm at germination too much sand may be trapped and seedlings are smothered. Even in this event some young plants may survive which have not germinated from seed and which owe their existence to vegetative internodal growth. Rabbits may have contributed to the decline. The single plant of C. canescens of 1991 had twelve culms of which only three panicles survived the rabbits. Reference has been made to the sparse vegetation of the dunes which would not attract rabbits. There are no rabbit-grazed swards about the dunes but they are found around the settlement. As rabbits have probably been present here for a long time, it would be difficult to assess their part in the decline of the C. canescens colony which has survived for 97 years and now appears to be reduced to a single plant. ACKNOWLEDGMENT I thank Dr Bryan Davies for soil analysis and guidance in unfolding the calcium source. REFERENCES Beesy, W. H. (1897). Weingaertneria canescens Bernh. Rep. Botl Soc. Exch. Club Br. Isl. 1: 501-502. MarsHaLL, J. K. (1967). Corynephorus canescens (L.) Beauv. J. Ecol. 55: 207-220. METEOROLOGICAL OFFICE (1991). Rainfall statistics. Bracknell. P. J. O. TRist Glovers, 28 High St, Balsham, Cambridge, CBI 6DJ Ler eioas 2 é i‘ Watsonia, 19, 195-200 (1993) 195 Book Reviews The correspondence of Charles Darwin. Vol. 7: 1858-1559. Edited by F. Burkhardt & S. Smith. Pp. xxxv + 671. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1991. Price £35 (ISBN 0-521—38564—4). 463 pages of this volume are taken up with the correspondence during the dates given; a further 34 pages record letters located or re-dated since the publication of Correspondence vols |—6 (covering the years 1821-1857). The eight appendices include a chronology, an abstract of Darwin’s theory of natural selection and a copy of Wallace’s ‘On the Tendency of Varieties to depart indefinitely from the Original Type’, which forced Darwin’s hand into publishing the Origin. Of the other appendices, one concerns a memorandum to H. M. Government about the status of the nation’s premier natural history collections vis-a-vis the British Museum — plus ca change . . . In addition, there are comments on the manuscript, a bibliography, a biographical register and an index. Of course, the nub of this volume is Darwin’s preoccupation with his book On the Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection, the publication of which (1859) had to be brought forward as a result of Wallace’s letter from the island of Gilolo in the Moluccas. As ever, there is much correspondence with his friend Joseph Hooker and his mentor, Charles Lyell, which reveals Darwin’s doubts about rushing into print over his theory — would that some modern workers might so reveal their innermost feelings about their pet ideas. Nor does Darwin seek succour solely from his great contemporaries; many of his letters seek information on points of detail from a host of less noteworthy correspondents. Apart from the scientific ‘dynamite’ enshrined in this correspondence, however, the reader continues to be given access to a view of a stratum of Victorian life scarcely touched upon by Dickens, for example. Nevertheless, the death, from scarlet fever, of his youngest child, Charles Waring, at the age of two years is a reminder of the universal perils of the age. The agony of this event, revealed in a letter to Hooker, is counterpointed by a letter to Darwin’s eldest child, William, about a younger (George) son’s prowess at billiards. With its revelations of the ways in which a great scientist arrived at one of the seminal biological theories of this or any other age, together with a view of the society within which such ideas developed, this volume is of widespread interest and value. It continues the feast of high scholarship which is epitomised by this distinguished editorial and publishing treatment of Darwin’s Correspon- dence. D. M. Moore Genetics and conservation of rare plants. Edited by D. A. Falk & K. E. Holsinger. Pp. xviii + 283. Oxford University Press, Oxford. 1992. Price £35 (ISBN 0—19-506429-1). Rare species are on the increase; the public expects botanists, who have highlighted the problem for so long, to develop workable schemes that prevent the extinction of endangered species. This book, resulting from a 1989 conference convened by the Centre for Plant Conservation in St Louis, helps -to ensure that such schemes have a strong scientific basis. The complementary approaches of ‘off- site’ and ‘on-site’ conservation are examined. Limited space is given however to the complexities of re-introduction. Building on what is known of rare plant population biology, the book then considers methods for sampling, assessing and conserving their genetic variation. Finally the conclusions are drawn together into a set of practical guidelines for conservation programmes. One of the strengths of the book is that it calls on expertise in the fields of zoology, forestry and crop genetic resources. Here the authors have successfully focussed their expertise on the specific problems faced in conserving rare plants. It is a pity, however, that the chapter on germplasm management failed to emphasise such practical problems as ‘empty’ seeds in seedlots of wild species. 196 BOOK REVIEWS There are some very valuable contributions from leaders in the field of plant population genetics. Hamrick ef al. point out the relative benefits of using morphology, isozymes and DNA studies in assessing genetic diversity. In these ‘high tech’ days, it is comforting to know that measurements on ‘real’ plants still have a valuable part to play in such assessment. Not surprisingly, the book draws mainly on examples from the Developed World. In the. Developing World, the ratio of botanists to species means that the biology and even rarity of a species is often not known. This makes development of conservation programmes difficult. Broad generalities help. Biodiversity within wet tropical forests will be best conserved ‘on-site’ (see contribution from Bawa & Ashton). In the dry tropics, however, where desertification threatens, long-term conservation may often only be achieved through ‘off-site’ activities. The broad statement on page 114 that tropical species’ seed cannot withstand drying and cold storage is erroneous; many dry tropical species are quite amenable to seed storage. With the clock ticking, there will be little time left for detailed studies in many cases to determine the best conservation strategy. Indeed, many of these studies will only be possible once material has been taken into safe keeping in seed banks and botanic gardens; so by using the sampling guidelines given in this book we should conserve something now and worry about the precision of the approach later on. In summary, this volume has been well edited, has a wealth of information bringing together some 850 references and has been produced to a high standard. A proportion of the book is accessible to the general reader; the more genetical elements might have been more so had a glossary been included. The book is an important step towards practical action. Botanists and conservationists will find it a useful addition to the literature. S. H. LININGTON The Hamlyn photographic guide to the wild flowers of Britain and Northern Europe. R. Gibbons & P. Brough. Pp. 336, including 163 pp. of colour plates. Hamlyn Octopus, London. 1992. Price £20 (ISBN 0-600-57452-0). Here is yet another illustrated Wild Flower book, but this time it is hardly a field guide. Its size, 22 x 29 cm, is too large for most pockets, and its weight, 1-63 kg, is too heavy for most rucksacks after packing waterproofs, food, camera, etc. It must therefore be considered as an indoor reference book, as even a quick glance showed it to be more useful than the proverbial coffee table book. After the general acknowledgments and bibliography are two pages of introduction and explanations on using the book, and two pages of glossary terms with diagrams. Then follow 320 pages with descriptions of over 1,900 species and 1,500 colour photographs, 1,000 distribution maps and more than 400 line drawings of important identification characters. The text and illustrations are arranged according to the systematic order used in Flora Europaea, and with a few minor exceptions the nomenclature also follows Flora Europaea. Grasses, sedges and. | rushes are not included. The distribution maps, text, line drawings and photo index on the left-hand page and 8-12 | relevant photographs on the right-hand page do make reference easy. The photographs are lettered | in a diagram of the plate layout, and the letter identifies the map, text and index of photographs. Where possible the English name ts used in the marginal photographic index. Both the scientific and _ | English names are given in the text. On the whole the photographs are good. Some appear to have been selected to show important characters separating ‘look-alikes’ such as Potentilla sterilis and P. micrantha. It is a pity that a few photographs are enlarged more than other members of the same genus on the same plate. This could be confusing to a beginner, even though size may be given in the text. Two examples are the smaller species of Cerastium, and Sedum villosum is so much smaller than S. telephium. The distribution maps, though of necessity tiny, are an added interest and the colour codes give an idea of the status of the species where it does occur. The area covered is about the same as in previous Floras of Britain and Northern Europe. The line drawings are necessary for some species as even good photographs cannot show smaller critical features, but there is space in the margins for a few more. A beginner with an unknown flower and no knowledge of plant families will be faced with the daunting task of turning page after | ma ee a a BOOK REVIEWS OG, page in search of a photographic match. There is no key, but descriptions of families appear in systematic order in the text and species in the larger genera are grouped under headings of similar characters. The last six pages contain a combined index of English and scientific names, which makes for easy reference. A few errors are inevitable in such a work, but the index has over 20 omissions. While I find the book too large and heavy for use in the field, I certainly enjoy the photography and find the distribution maps interesting, though a few do not agree with the distributions given in the text. V. GORDON Bob Press's field guide to the trees of Britain and Europe. J. R. Press; photographic consultants E. & D. Hosking, artwork by M. Tebbs. Pp. 247, with numerous colour plates and black and white illustrations. New Holland, London. 1992. Price £17.95 hardback (ISBN 1—85368—103-—2); £9.99 paperback (ISBN 1—85368-104—0). Field guides are a popular theme for publishers, and this is a fine example of the category. Richly illustrated with colour photographs and line drawings, in a format which allows the inexpensive production of versions in other languages, and with enough information to allow a reasonable chance of successful tree identification, this book is likely to prove very popular. The simplicity of style is similar to that of Oleg Polunin’s, but Bob Press has been able to use the pick of the photographic agencies rather than relying mainly on the work of one person. The coverage of tree species is wide, with over 450 species treated; native and naturalised species are given equal emphasis, with all the main species illustrated by at least one colour photograph. Line drawings in the left hand margin emphasise smaller features helpful for identification, and there is a short glossary of terms. Keys are in two forms: a numbered dichotomous key relying on both foliar and floral characters, and a synoptic key based entirely on leaf characters. The 52 families are described briefly in the introductory pages, facilitating comparisons and avoiding interruptions to the text. Text descriptions include a rather generalised indication of the distribution of the tree in Europe, followed (for naturalised species) by an indication of their country of origin. There is an appendix with information on arboreta, and a short bibliography. Separate indexes to common names and scientific names are provided. The high quality of reproduction of colour photographs now achievable by modern publishers is well displayed in this inexpensive book, which was printed in Singapore. Taxonomically up-to-date, and concisely written, the book is unfortunate only in its title. Why, in 1992, does a publisher choose to refer to “Britain and Europe’’? J. R. EDMONDSON Biology of plants. 5th edition. P. H. Raven, R. F. Evert & S. E. Eichhorn. Pp xvii + 791; lavishly illustrated. Worth Publishers, New York. 1992. Price $59.95 (ISBN 0-87901—52-2). This substantial book is the latest in a long tradition of all-embracing introductory Botany textbooks. It is a marvellous introduction to botanical science, with a well organised and very teadable text supported by excellent diagrams and photographs, almost all in colour, on nearly every page. Biology of plants has 31 chapters divided into six sections covering cell biology, genetics, diversity, anatomy, physiology and ecology. Scattered throughout the book there are also essays, separated from the main text, discussing topical themes such as ‘The Great Yellowstone fire’ or “Jobs versus owls’. The level of treatment is generally aimed at the first year university student, and is designed primarily for its North American home market. This is only really noticeable in the chapter covering vegetation types, which perhaps leans too heavily on North American case histories to the exclusion of more representative examples elsewhere in the world. As would be expected, recent advances in plant physiology and molecular biology are well 198 BOOK REVIEWS covered, but there are also some interesting reinterpretations of long-known phenomena; for example, the ‘infection’ of grasses by ergot is now seen as a partnership in which the grass receives protection from herbivores by the toxic fungus. My main criticism of the book concerns the authors’ definition of what is a plant. They exclude algae from their Kingdom Plantae, leaving only the bryophytes and vascular plants. The green algae. are thus separated from their descendants, and giant kelps are left as odd bedfellows to the unicellular Protista. Despite this divorce, the actual coverage of the algae, as well as the more traditional ‘non plants’ — viruses, bacteria and fungi — is one of the most comprehensive of any introductory textbook I have seen. At around £40 for 800 pages Biology of plants is an excellent value textbook from A-level onwards, but it would be a shame if its only audience were students. It is an excellent introduction to the world of plants for anyone, and with superb plant paintings by Rhonda Nass and a beautiful cover, courtesy of Van Gogh, it might even find its way on to one or two coffee tables. A. S. GUNN British plant communities. Vol. 2: Mires and heaths. Edited by J. S. Rodwell. Pp. x +. 628. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1991. Price £95 (ISBN 0—521-39165-2). In 1989, I was, for all too brief a period, the last appointed Chief Scientist of the Nature Conservancy Council (R.I.P.). While in the post, however, my most pleasant task was to bring the National Vegetation Classification to its triumphal climax as a manuscript to be transmitted to the publishers, Cambridge University Press. Last year I saw with pleasure the first volume (reviewed in Watsonia 19: 49, 1992). Unlike volume 1, which dealt with woodlands and scrub, this second volume is a truly ‘British’ volume, in that it deals with vegetation that is centred on Britain, and which makes Britain special. Here is a tremendous compendium of information on mires and heaths — long needed, but it will also be long used. The format seems well suited to the task. The community descriptions ilo not lend themselves readily to review, except for the passing comment that they are very thorough. The separate introductions to mires and heaths are well crafted, and excellent synopses, although there are some dense passages. For example, “The perspective looking towards the Continent from our own generally oceanic standpoint is rather different from that hitherto proclaimed as normative from the opposite direction” (p. 350). At 38 plant communities, one might query if the mire classification were not too fragmented. The difficulty of identifying homogeneity in mire vegetation, as well as the variation in substrate and climate across Britain, all contribute to mires being such rich systems, and explain why so many units are described, I found the ‘block’ diagrams gave an instant clarity of view for ecological position. The discussion of the changing community context of Schoenus nigricans is also of interest to illustrate that communities are but spatial and temporal kaleidoscopes of species. But here is also a weak spot — for it would be marvellous to see that discussion set in a broader context of Ireland and the western fringe of Europe north and south. Given the 20 year support from the (J.)N.C.C., and the fact that they have an international branch, it would be good if future volumes could take a wider view. Even if that is not possible, I hope someone will eventually fund and produce a synthesis of British plant communities in their European context. With regard to heaths, the point is well made that without appropriate management heaths become very hard to distinguish, and tend to a uniform Callunetum; which has clear conservation implications. It also underlines the very dynamic nature of these communities. Again, the introductory description is sound, and the block/circle diagrams are helpful to explain lines of variation. However, I believe it is simplistic to suggest that lowland dry heaths are a linked circle; for my money there are two clear groups corresponding to the Ulicetalia minoris and Vaccinio- Genistetalia, as discussed by Bridgewater (1980) in Phytocoenologia 8: 191-235. The Ulicetalia minoris is a southern and western order and the Vaccinio- Genistetalia an eastern and northern order, with some overlap between. Boundaries between wet and dry heaths probably deserve more discussion throughout the volume. So too does the position of Erica ciliaris heaths, which are given rather short shrift in this | eerste eer tect er o—_ ee > ae ed ee = CARDAMINE BULBIFERA IN THE BRITISH ISLES 245 Druce, G. C. (1926). The flora of Buckinghamshire. Arbroath. Epess, E. S. (1972). Flora of Staffordshire. Newton Abbot. Exus, R. G. (1986). Tetrads. B.S.B.I. News 43: 9. FerroussaT, K. (1982). Cardamine bulbifera at Old Park Wood. Herts and Middlesex Trust for Nature Conservation Newsletter 56: 4. Forster, T. F. (1816). Flora Tonbridgensis. London. GarRNER, R. (1844). The natural history of the county of Stafford. London. HALL, P. C. (1980). Sussex plant atlas. Brighton. Hansury, F. J. & MARSHALL, E. S. (1899). Flora of Kent. London. Hea, G. (1958). Illustrierte Flora von Mittel-Europa 4(1). Minchen. Hooker, J. D. (1870). Student’s Flora of the British Islands. London. Hueues, D. P. (1988). Buckinghamshire inventory of ancient woodland. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough. Hutton, D. (1990). Kent inventory of ancient woodland. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough. Jackson, B. D., ed. (1887). A Flora of Hertfordshire. London. Jackson, P. J. (1983). Cardamine bulbifera (L.) Crantz — A first record for Ireland? Jr. Nat. J. 21: 49. JERMYN, S. T. (1974). Flora of Essex. Colchester. Jones, B. M. G. (1964). Cardamine L., in Tutin, T. G. et al., eds. Flora Europaea 1: 285-289. Cambridge. KELLER, W. (1988). Cardamine bulbifera (L.) Crantz am Bruggerberg (Kanton Aargau). Botanica Helvetica 98: 207-214. Kent, D. H. & ALLEN, D. E. (1984). British and Irish herbaria. London. Lams, J. G. D. (1983). Cardamine bulbifera in Co. Dublin. Ir. Nat. J. 21: 136. — Linton, W. R. (1903). Flora of Derbyshire. London. Lous ey, J. E. (1976). Flora of Surrey. Newton Abbot. ~ Martin, W. K. & Fraser, G. T. (1939). Flora of Devon. Arbroath. Murray, R. P. (1896). The flora of Somerset. Taunton. PEATFIELD, W. (1943). Plants. Hastings E. Sussex Nat. 6: 136. PEATFIELD, W. (1944). Plants. Hastings E. Sussex Nat. 6: 151-152. PERRING, F. H. & WALTERS, S. M., eds (1962). Atlas of the British flora. Cambridge. Puivp, E. G. (1982). Atlas of the Kent flora. Maidstone. Pitr, W. (1796). General view of the agriculture of the county of Shropshire. London. PrIMAVESI, A. L. & Evans, P. A. (1988). Flora of Leicestershire. Leicester. Rayner, J. F. (1915). Plant Record. Rep. botl Soc. Exch. Club Br. Isl. 4: 257. Rayner, J. F. (1929). A supplement to Frederick Townsend’s Flora of Hampshire and the Isle of Wight. Southampton. Ricu, T. C. G. (1991). Crucifers of Great Britain and Ireland. B.S.B.I. Handbook No. 6. London. RipcE, W. T. B. (1922-1929). The flora of north Staffordshire. Stafford. Rosinson, D. P. (1988). Hertfordshire inventory of ancient woodland. Nature Conservancy Council. Peter- borough. Rose, F. (1966). Distribution maps of Kent plants. Proc. botl Soc. Br. Isl. 6: 279-281. RosE, F. (1981). The wild flower key. London. SaLmon, C. E. (1931). Flora of Surrey. London. Scuu1z, O. E. (1903). Monographie der Gattung Cardamine. Engl. Bot. Jahrb. 32: 280-623. SHOWLER, A. J. (1988). Fruiting in Coralroot, Cardamine bulbifera (L.) Crantz. B.S.B.I. News 48: 26-28. ’ SInKeR, C. A., PACKHAM, J. R., TRUEMAN, I. C., OSWALD, P. H., PERRING, F. H. & PREstwoop, W. V. (1985). Ecological flora of the Shropshire region. Shrewsbury. Stace, C. A. (1991). New Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge. } STEWART, A. & PEARMAN, D. (1991). Scarce plants project. B.S.B.I. News 57: 17-21. TOWNSEND, F. (1904). Flora of Hampshire. London. TrIMEN, H. (1862). Dentaria bulbifera near Horsham. Phytologist, N.S. 4: 224. WALLACE, E. C., ed. (1954). Plant Records. Proc. botl Soc. Br. Isl. 1: 161-185. Watson, H. C. (1873). Topographical botany. London. Wess, D. A. (1985). What are the criteria for presuming native status? Watsonia 15: 231-236. Wess, R. H. & CoLeman, W. H. (1849). Flora Hertfordiensis. London. WEBSTER, M. McC. (1978). Flora of Moray, Nairn and East Inverness. Aberdeen. | WHITEBREAD, A., Barton, J. & Hutron, D. (1989a). East Sussex inventory of ancient woodland. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough. | WHITEBREAD, A., BARTON, J. & Hutton, D. (1989b). West Sussex inventory of ancient woodland. Nature Conservancy Council, Peterborough. | WoLteEY-Dop, A. H. (1937). The flora of Sussex. Bristol. (Accepted October 1992) Watsonia, 19, 247-257 (1993) 247 Orobanche reticulata Wallr. populations in Yorkshire (north-east England) Medio Y¥e-FOLEY Division of Biological Sciences, University of Lancaster, Lancaster, LAI 4YQ ABSTRACT In the British Isles, Orobanche reticulata Wallr. (Orobanchaceae) has only been recorded with certainty from Yorkshire. Its distribution and abundance within this area are reviewed, and the circumstances surrounding its original discovery and those of other early records are described. The plant, a protected species, has been recorded from at least 68 separate populations in ten 10-km squares, and 52 of these populations are extant, although many are very small; it is particularly frequent in two separate but limited riverside areas. INTRODUCTION Orobanche reticulata Wallr. (Orobanchaceae) occurs in the British Isles as a root parasite of thistles, especially Cirsium species (Asteraceae). All confirmed records are from Yorkshire (v.cc. 61, 62, 64, 65) where it occurs mainly, but not exclusively, on the magnesian limestone. In Europe its principal area of distribution is in the alpine region but there are also many outlying, isolated localities in northern Europe, including Scandinavia, the Baltic states, Holland, and north Germany (Hegi 1965; Chater & Webb 1972; Meusel et al. 1978). The plant also occurs in Russia, the Balkans, North Africa, and extends eastwards into western Asia. Its restriction to such areas of Yorkshire is unique amongst British native plants, and perhaps because of this, doubts have been raised about its status (e.g. Pugsley 1926). Roman roads and settlements occur near some of the earliest known localities and so an early introduction is a possibility. However, when its British distribution is considered in the context of its overall European pattern, where similar fragmented occurrences are frequent, especially near the limits of its range, it seems most likely that the plant is genuinely native in Britain. Variability witnessed in some populations (Foley 1992) supports this view, whilst an apparent reliance on a limited host range suggests a persistent, isolated group of native populations. O. reticulata is confirmed from 68 separate populations in ten 10-km squares, mainly in central Yorkshire (v.c. 64) where there are two principal areas of distribution: between Leeds and Wetherby and near Ripon. It also occurs at an isolated locality in v.c. 61, as well as on the extreme south-western borders of v.c. 62 and v.c. 65, but has not been recorded from v.c. 63. In the few large populations, the number of plants varies from one year to the next, but many populations are very small, often with less than ten flowering plants annually. Owing to its rarity and very limited distribution, it is a scheduled species protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1981 and has been given a Red Data Book rating of 11E — Endangered (Perring & Farrell 1983). Unfortunately, the host species are a great nuisance to farmers and landowners, and consequently are frequently destroyed. O. reticulata therefore comes under an additional threat to that from which other plants suffer. In the field, confusion with other Orobanche species is unlikely although this may occur with robust O. minor Sm. which occasionally shares the same host. Nevertheless, O. reticulata is quite distinctive, being tall (up to c. 70 cm) and robust, with a fairly dense inflorescence, especially in the upper part, and with cream-coloured corollas marked distally with blue-purple glands. The corolla is cylindrical-campanulate and has a curved dorsal line which is especially characteristic amongst British broomrapes. The stigma lobes are mauve-purple and the filaments glabrous to sparsely hairy proximally, but can be somewhat glandular above. Even as a herbarium specimen, the plant is still 248 MJ. Y. FOLEY distinctive, particularly with regard to its corolla shape, and in this state confusion is really only likely to occur with O. rapum-genistae Thuill., or with O. elatior Sutton. Many infraspecific taxa have been described from populations in continental Europe, and these are summarised by Beck-Mannagetta (1930) and Gilli (1966), although none was recognised by Chater & Webb (1972). British plants have been referred to O. reticulata var. procera (Koch) Beck, which was differentiated from other varieties by its shorter, curved (not nearly straight) corollas. However, further work may reveal that var. procera cannot be maintained even at varietal level. Colour variants and forms of O. reticulata are much less frequent in Yorkshire than in Europe, but some records have been noted recently (Jones 1989; Foley 1992). In Britain, typical habitats are those of its hosts, rough pastures, road verges, and especially river banks, river flood plains and associated light scrub. Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. appears to be the most frequent host, but C. vulgare (Savi) Ten., C. eriophorum (L.) Scop., C. heterophyllum (L.) Hill and Carduus nutans L. are recorded, and also occasionally Cirsium palustre (L.) Scop. (e.g. 1932, Vachell, NAW). Scabiosa, Knautia (Dipsacaceae) and Cistus (Cistaceae) species are also said to be parasitised in Europe. As with other Orobanche species, some claims for host can be erroneous, since actual attachment to the roots is difficult to establish in the field. O. reticulata seems to be at least partially perennial in Britain, flowering in early July, with the dead flower spikes persisting for several months afterwards. The account given below is based upon field work carried out over several years during which all extant populations were visited by the author, many on several occasions. Estimates of plant numbers were made and the various habitats assessed. Many herbarium specimens have also been examined and if necessary re-determined by the author or by F. J. Rumsey. Relevant archival records have also been consulted. THE ORIGINAL DISCOVERY AS A BRITISH PLANT In August 1907 H. E. Craven, a pharmaceutical chemist of Roundhay, Leeds, found an Orobanche at Hetchell Crags, south-west of Wetherby, which he was unable to name. It appeared to be parasitic on Cirsium eriophorum and was closest to O. minor. The following year, on seeing a letter from G. C. Druce in the Pharmaceutical Journal in which he referred to the Botanical Exchange Club, Craven wrote to Druce, asking for further details and enquiring whether membership of the Club would enable him to get doubtful plants named as he had a few puzzling plants, one of which was an Orobanche. Craven offered to send Druce some fresh specimens and this he did on 31 July 1908, having kept two plants in water, which had apparently become rather shrivelled. He also offered to send a spike pickled in formalin, as well as duplicates from his previous year’s (1907) collection, for Druce to forward to Beck-Mannagetta of Prague, the authority on European Orobanche. A detailed description of the fresh plant and some duplicates were sent to Druce in August 1908, and Druce exhibited the Orobanche at the Linnean Society that autumn, convinced that it was not a known British species. During the summer of 1908, Craven also sent plants to E. M. Holmes for naming. Holmes agreed that it was not previously known in Britain but suggested it might be a hybrid; he also showed a specimen to the herbarium curator at Kew who was unable to identify the plant. However, some months later, apologising for the delay due to illness, Beck- Mannagetta replied to Druce (9 January 1909) naming the plant Orobanche reticulata f. procera (Koch) Beck (= O. procera Koch). An original specimen sent to Beck-Mannagetta is in his herbarium (PRC) and Beck-Mannagetta’s letter is appended to a sheet in Druce’s herbarium (OXF) on which the latter mounted a specimen described “‘First as British” — presumably one of Craven’s original specimens. Other early collections by Craven are in BM and MANCH. During the summer following Beck-Mannagetta’s determination of the Hetchell plants as O. reticulata, Craven (17 July 1909) despatched most of his remaining duplicates for Druce’s retention, along with a map and a detailed sketch of the habitat at Hetchell stating that the Orobanche grew there and nowhere else. He also remarked that the tenant farmer had mown down all the thistles during the previous summer (1908) and that he was concerned for the future of the plant. (This point is also made in subsequent annotations to another sheet (1909, Lees & Pickard, YRK).) ~ Another Yorkshire botanist involved in the early recognition of the plant in Britain was F. A. Lees. On receiving Beck-Mannagetta’s determination from Druce, Craven informed Lees and OROBANCHE RETICULATA IN NORTH-EAST ENGLAND 249 presumably sent him a specimen, since one is preserved in Lees’ herbarium (July 1908, Craven, BM); on the label, in Lees’ handwriting is the comment ““Orobanche procera, Koch (teste Dr Beck, per Druce ad Craven 12.1.09)”. Also attached to the sheet are three photographs of the plant at Hetchell Crags taken by J. H. Gough on 19 July 1913. On 29 July 1909, Lees, with J. F. Pickard, went to see the plant at Hetchell, and one of the three specimens which they collected is preserved (29 July 1909, Lees & Pickard, YRK). Writing to Druce on the following day, Lees commented that the parasitised Cirsium eriophorum appeared to be very unhealthy, and that he had established the connection from the Orobanche to the roots of the thistle. In this same letter Lees asked Druce to publish a description of the plant which he subsequently did (Druce 1909a), and also offered to send him specimens. Despite this, and Craven’s offer of a map on 17 July, Druce, along with A. H. Evans, had already visited the site the previous month since a specimen exists which he collected at the time (30 June 1909, Druce, OXF). This is added to a sheet of material collected by Craven in 1908, although Druce (1909a) stated that his visit was in July. From his correspondence with Druce, it appears that Lees was the first person to raise the suggestion that the plant could be a Roman introduction. He was aware that close to Hetchell Crags is the Pompocali, where the Romans had their summer camp, and that there were also Roman roads and earthworks nearby. Whilst the credit for the discovery of O. reticulata in Britain (and at Hetchell Crags) goes to Craven, this is perhaps not strictly correct. The plant was first found there on 16 August 1902 by J. F. Pickard (Lees’ companion in July 1909) but the specimen which he collected was erroneously identified as O. elatior by Pickard and Lees (see notes on herbarium sheets: 1909, Pickard, BM; 1909, Lees & Pickard, YRK; 1910, Pickard, BM), and considered to be ‘“‘O. major” by Lees (quoted by Cheetham & Sledge (1941)). Shortly afterwards, Pickard was away on business for two years (see annotation, 1909, Lees & Pickard, YRK) and presumably did not question this identification further. Craven subsequently re-found the plant at Hetchell, and not satisfied with these diagnoses (Lees 1909), had it re-determined as described above. Pickard’s 1902 specimen has so far not been traced. Although evidence points to the contrary, Druce appears to have indicated that the first correct determination of the plant was his own, given directly on receipt of Craven’s original specimens (Druce 1909a, 1911). However, in another statement, Druce (1909b) stated only that he was convinced it was not a British plant, and had therefore sent a specimen to Beck-Mannagetta for identification (see also Druce’s letter in herb. Beck (PRC)). Beck-Mannagetta’s reply to Druce (9 January 1909) reads as a determination rather than a confirmation, and that is probably the case. Shortly after Craven’s letter to Druce on 17 July 1909, it was thought that the Orobanche had been exterminated at Hetchell. This resulted from a report in the Yorkshire Weekly Post of an address given by J. G. Wilkinson, who was blind, to a Leeds Naturalist Club meeting. To disprove this, on 25 August 1909, Pickard and Wilkinson went to the place where Pickard saw the plant in 1902 (and also in July 1909 with Lees) and found two in flower and eleven in fruit. Pickard stated that Wilkinson considered that this locality was a different one “higher up on the slope and further on than Craven’s’’, and Pickard was of the opinion that Craven’s population had been exterminated. Even though Wilkinson was blind, he was considered reliable, and it is likely that there had been two separate populations, with Craven’s being lost shortly after discovery. Examination of the general area around the present site at Hetchell, together with the sketch which Craven sent to Druce, contemporary notes on the flora, and Druce’s description (1909a) of Craven’s site — ‘‘a grassy slope with bushes” — all support this view. Ironically, immediately after his visit in 1909, Druce had received assurances from the landlord at Hetchell, that the thistles would be preserved. OTHER EARLY RECORDS Although the acceptance of O. reticulata as a British plant dates from the Pickard/Craven find, specimens exist from other localities well before this date. These were, however, erroneously referred to other Orobanche species. In the Leeds/Wetherby area a specimen was collected in 1868 from Roundhay Lime Hills (Lees & Abbott, CMM); it was identified as O. major (= O. rapum- genistae) and thought to be growing on whin (Ulex europaeus), but is undoubtedly O. reticulata. Roundhay is only a few kms from Hetchell Crags. Shortly after the Hetchell discovery, the plant was also recognised from the large and already known broomrape colony at Hook Moor, Aberford (a few kms south-east of Hetchell) whence it had variously been recorded as O. major and O. minor. 250 M. J. Y. FOLEY Several specimens exist from here which are thus mistakenly labelled, with one collected as O. major as early as 1878 (Webster, CMM). Despite assertions about the host for this specimen — ‘“‘One root especially was only one or two inches from the gnarled stem of Ulex being far advanced to ripeness. I did not trace any actually to the root of Ulex, altho’ I have no doubt” — and another identified as O. minor “on Trifolium’ (1883, Williamson, YRK), both are nevertheless O. reticulata. This illustrates the difficulty in being positive about which plant is actually parasitised. The first contemporarily confirmed record at Hook Moor may be that of F. Ashwell (1916, LES) and there is also a specimen from the previous year (1915, Cockerline, LES), but which may not have had contemporary confirmation. Another early record for O. reticulata is from Linton Common (again quite near Hetchell Crags) where it was described by the finder as O. major. The date on the sheet (Pickard, CMM) is unclear, being either 1901 or 1907. By 1907, Pickard might have been wary of this plant, following his involvement at Hitchell in 1902 with what he thought was O.elatior, and so 1901 is perhaps the more likely date. There is also a later annotation to a herbarium sheet (1909, Lees & Pickard, YRK) stating that Pickard had also found and pressed the plant at Linton Common, where it was rare, but that it was still there in 1936. A second main centre of distribution is in the Ripon area of v.c. 64. In contrast to the Leeds/ Wetherby localities for which many early records can be confirmed by herbarium specimens, there is little similar from here. The only specimen of O. reticulata so far traced which approximates to the date of the Pickard/Craven find at Hetchell is one described as O. major “‘on gorse?’’, collected by C. A. Cheetham on 18 July 1903 (C.A.C., BM). Unfortunately the label simply states ‘““Ripon”’ with no further details of the locality. This specimen is erroneously referred to O. rapum-genistae by Lees (Cheetham & Sledge 1941). It was not until 1939 that a localised Ripon area specimen was preserved — from Bridge Hewick (Rob, YKN), although possible evidence for the plant’s early presence in the area can be gained from the old Floras. In the Ripon area, nearly all modern records for O. reticulata have been from riverside habitats, and the plant is now especially frequent there along an 8 km stretch of the Ure, where at least 38 separate populations are extant. This lends credence to the suspicion that some of the nineteenth century riverside Flora localities for other Orobanche species in this area were misidentifications for O. reticulata. Those given for O. minor near Nunwick, at Sleningford, Howe-upon-Swale, Ure Banks, Burnistone, and Bishopton (Baker & Nowell 1854; Baker 1863; Slater 1883/4; Lees 1888), and for O. rapum-genistae below Tanfield (Cheetham & Sledge 1941) are mostly close to extant O. reticulata populations, and may well have been mistaken for that plant. Misidentifications for O. reticulata have already been shown to occur for some nineteenth century specimens collected elsewhere as O. major and O. minor. Flora records from | Roundhay and from Lotherton Moor (Hook Moor) both given by Lees (1888) must, in fact, have been O. reticulata, and it is very likely that the same applied near Ripon. Unfortunately it is rare for specimens of Orobanche to have been preserved from localities near Ripon; ironically one of the few traced is undated (but prior to 1922) and was collected close to the Ure between Ripon and Hutton Conyers (Lees, CMM). Lees finally determined this specimen as O. reticulata but it is in fact O. elatior. An isolated occurrence lying to the east of the main area of distribution was at Backhouse’s Nurseries, York (1886, Backhouse, K) where it was found in a garden on Cirsium heterophyllum, presumably a casual occurrence. This is probably the first correct identification of the host plant in Britain. The first record from south-east Yorkshire (v.c. 61) was made in 1953 at North Grimston (Sledge 1954), at which site the plant is extant. In the same year it was also found at a nearby quarry (W. A. Sledge, pers. comm.), but was not seen there again until 1992 during this survey; it is not known elsewhere in v.c. 61. There are apparently only three instances of the plant being definitely recorded from v.c. 62, and two of these are rather obscure. The first is an 1852 specimen (the earliest so far traced from Yorkshire) of atypical O. reticulata collected from near Thirsk as O. elatior (Fowler, OXF). Interestingly, there is also a collection (two sheets as O. minor) made in the previous year from Sowerby, also near Thirsk (Baker, 1851, herb. Boswell-Syme, BM); the specimens are intermediate between O. reticulata and O. minor and may possibly represent the hybrid. This record deserves further investigation since natural hybrids of O. reticulata are not recorded in Britain although they have recently been deliberately cultivated (Jones 1989). Whilst Fowler’s 1852 plant is distinct from those collected by Baker, it is quite possible that they could be from the same population. (Dead flower spikes, similar to the Sowerby plants, and again possibly of hybrid origin, OROBANCHE RETICULATA IN NORTH-EAST ENGLAND 251 were seen near the Ure in 1992.) The second vice-county collection of O. reticulata is slightly more recent and is typical, although labelled O. minor (1881, Webster, BM) but is unfortunately unlocalised simply as ‘““N.E. Yorkshire” (see also Bennett 1917). Thereafter, it was not until 1984 that the plant was found in a riverside habitat in the extreme south-west of the vice-county, where a flourishing colony survives. Before about 1980 there were apparently no records from v.c. 65, but nine populations are now known, all on river margins, where only the past vagaries of the river channel have resulted in their inclusion within that vice-county. Outside Yorkshire, there are several dubious or erroneous records for O. reticulata. One which may be significant is that given as O. major from Nottinghamshire (1835, Cooper, in herb. H. C. Watson, K). The magnesian limestone does extend southwards into that county, but some of Cooper’s specimens are considered to be of dubious provenance (Rumsey & Jury 1991) and this one would benefit from independent verification. A record from Cheshire (v.c. 58) (Druce 1918; Perring & Walters 1962; Perring & Farrell 1983) is erroneous since the specimen is O. minor (1918, Dallman, OXF), as is an earlier one from Guildford (v.c. 17) quoted by Druce (1918) (1916, Kennedy, OXF). Another error is that for Falmouth Dock (v.c. 1) in 1917 which again was O. minor (F. J. Rumsey, pers. comm.). A record for var. pallidiflora (Wimm. & Grab.) Beck based on a specimen collected from Brecon (v.c. 42) in 1905 (Knight, BM) has also been shown to be an error (Pugsley 1940; Graham 1957; Rumsey & Jury 1991); a duplicate from this collection is in PRC. Reports from E. Norfolk (v.c. 27) (Jones 1989) including one of an Orobanche parasitising Cirsium vulgare are thought to be errors for other species (A. L. Bull, pers. comm.). DISTRIBUTION AND HABITAT The magnesian limestone formation occurs as a narrow band running north-south from Durham to Nottinghamshire. In the area of distribution of O. reticulata it is rarely more than 10 km wide, and is crossed in a roughly eastwards direction by the rivers Swale, Ure, Nidd, Wharfe and Aire. Magnesian limestone is well-known for :ts species-rich flora. 10-km squares and tetrads (2 xX 2-km squares) for which there are confirmed records for O. reticulata are mapped in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 respectively, and fall within an area approximately 50 km square. The two principal centres of distribution in the vicinity of Leeds/Wetherby and Ripon, the disposition of the magnesian limestone formation and the principal rivers of the area, can all be clearly seen. Following the recognition of O. reticulata as a British plant there was a lull in the discovery of new localities until the 1930s find by the river at Bridge Hewick, Ripon. Since then, other riverside ones have been found some distance upstream from this site, many of which survive, and the plant is particularly frequent in that area. Downstream also, new localities have occasionally come to light, including one on the Ouse (formed by the confluence of the Ure and the Swale) found in 1984, the first confirmed modern record for v.c. 62; there are, however, no definite records near the Swale itself. Apart from a small population just south of Ripon and away from the Ure, all other post-1930 colonies in this northern (Ripon) area are on river banks or flood plains, and it seems clear that rivers play an important role in dispersing seed. Also, plants often occur close to river banks and eventually may be dislodged by water erosion. It is quite possible that these together with their host will sometimes become established elsewhere. Favoured habitats for O. reticulata are near the upper flood limit by the river bank, and especially the flat pasture borders nearby; occasionally they grow some distance from the river but in places where winter flooding occurs. These are also the - areas where the host species are plentiful. In the southern (Leeds/Wetherby) area most newly-found localities are again in similar habitats on the banks of the Wharfe, where propagation or dispersal has presumably occurred in a similar manner. Population sizes can vary, but some appear to persist for many years with just a few plants annually. The Linton Common locality is such an example. Here, even at the beginning of this century only a few plants were recorded, and the same is the case today. Similarly at Hetchell Crags where the plants occur on the magnesian overlay of the gritstone substrate and well away from the river, numbers have apparently never been high. Cheetham & Sledge (1941) quoted a contempor- ary account of F. A. Lees in which he stated that an increase in thistles had been observed at Hetchell Crags between 1870 and 1879 but that he was certain that the broomrape was not present 252 M. J. Y. FOLEY Ficure 1. The British distribution of O. reticulata shown on a 10-km square basis for which there are confirmed records: @ 1991 onwards; © 1901-1990; x up to 1900. during that time; this suggests a relatively recent colonisation just prior to its discovery there in 1902. During the 1920s about 20 plants were known at Langwith Scrub (W. A. Sledge, pers. comm.) and today similarly small numbers still persist close by. At Hook Moor, the classic site was unfortunately ploughed out about 1940, but surprisingly, and despite reservations expressed at the time (Sledge 1942), what is still the largest British population occurs on road embankments within the vicinity. Earth from the former site may have been removed and used in construction of the present embankments and thus led to the plant’s presence there, although natural recolonisation cannot be ruled out. Being on steep slopes, this is very well drained and is also multi-aspect. It is rather different from the moister riverside localities favoured elsewhere, and as the plant thrives here, it suggests that it may be a preferred habitat to the more opportunistic riverside ones. Close to this re-colonised area, there is at least one, more natural, yet very small population on an arable field border, probably a remnant of the former pre-1940 colony. OROBANCHE RETICULATA IN NORTH-EAST ENGLAND 253 40 50 Ficure 2. The British distribution of O. reticulata showing tetrads from which there are confirmed records: @ 1991 onwards; © 1901-1990; x up to 1900; the major river pattern and the disposition of the magnesian limestone (hatched) are also indicated. Roundhay limehills are mainly commercially developed nowadays and the plant is presumably long extinct. Craven, the original discoverer in Britain, lived at Roundhay at the turn of the century and would presumably have recorded it if he had known it there, and so it had perhaps gone even in his day. Nothing is known of the plant’s habitat or frequency there, but Roundhay and Hook Moor are both well away from major rivers, and could be remnants of an earlier area of distribution, from which it has subsequently expanded. All the localities mentioned occur on, or just eastwards of, the magnesian limestone formation. Those to the east of it are usually close to major rivers and their occurrence there is likely to be a result of downstream dispersal by water into habitats rich in alluvial deposits. No records for O. reticulata have been traced to the west (upstream) of the magnesian limestone, and this reinforces the argument for the downstream river dispersal through and away from this formation. However, a _ magnesian limestone soil is not an essential requirement as shown by the plant’s occurrence in v.c. 61 on the chalk at North Grimston, where it formerly thrived (W. A. Sledge, pers. comm.) but is now much less abundant. This locality is separated from all others and distant from any rivers, and its presence there could possibly be from accidental introduction, since it has only been known since 1953. Within the last 60 years or so, O. reticulata appears to have become more widely distributed in Yorkshire than formerly, but whether this is due to a genuine expansion of range or results from being previously overlooked, is uncertain. Some populations are highly stable, appearing on the same area of thistle year after year, but others are more dynamic. These latter may change in size and spatial distribution, apparently dying out (at least temporarily) in one part of the population, only to appear a short distance away. Whether this depends on the vigour of the host or on some 254 M. J. Y. FOLEY other local factor, is not clear. Observations in the field indicate that it is not the most dense stands or the most robust thistles which are parasitised, but often smaller plants in scattered groups, although it is not clear whether this state is caused by, rather than the cause of the parasite’s distribution. However, even in the most favoured localities O. reticulata can remain highly localised, with vast numbers of the host plant remaining un-parasitised, and it is assumed that critical ecological factors control its ultimate viability. SUMMARY Of the 68 recorded populations of O. reticulata, at least 52 survive. The majority are on the magnesian limestone formation and whilst this might not be an essential ecological requirement, calcareous soils are favoured. Many populations have been found recently, but it is uncertain whether these are newly-formed, or are much older and had been overlooked or even misidentified. Many are small in numbers, but this is no indication of length of colonisation, since some colonies are known to have persisted for over 70 years whilst consisting of only a few plants. Of the extant populations, more than 85% are within the influence of river flood water and dispersal and population formation by such means must clearly take place. Interestingly, these are mostly restricted to two short reaches of the Ure and Wharfe and it 1s difficult to explain the absence of similar records from the Nidd, which crosses the magnesian limestone between these two rivers. Maybe a population has never developed sufficiently close to the Nidd to allow other riverside ones to become established by water-borne means? Two other Yorkshire rivers which cross the magnesian limestone also lack confirmed records in their vicinity, but the Swale does so over a very narrow exposure and well to the north of the plant’s restricted area of distribution, whilst the Aire although closer, is heavily industrialised. It is interesting that Potamogeton X suecicus K. Richter is apparently also restricted in England (excluding the River Tweed on the Scottish border) to largely similar reaches of the Ure and Wharfe, and is again not recorded from other rivers within the area. New populations of O. reticulata will doubtless continue to form in favoured riverside localities but colonisation elsewhere is likely to be rare, and if it occurs off the limestone, may originate from inadvertent introduction. The main threats to its survival result from the deliberate destruction of its hosts, from adverse agricultural practices, and through engineering operations such as road construction. Some populations may be lost when river banks are eroded, whilst gravel extraction is yet another threat. Nevertheless it appears to be relatively resilient, occasionally reappearing at sites from which it was thought to be extinct. There is much scope for investigation of the autecology and population dynamics of O. reticulata. RECORDED LOCALITIES AND RELEVANT HERBARIUM SPECIMENS Whilst it is recognised that the number of flowering spikes can fluctuate annually and that two or more may sometimes represent just a single plant, an attempt has been made to estimate a typical size for each population. This is indicated using the following notation: A = 1—10 plants; B = 11-50; C = 51-200; D = 201-1000; E = 1000+; X = probably extinct. Even if in fairly close proximity to others, populations are considered to be separate if they are clearly observed as such in the field even when consisting of just one or two plants. All populations shown as extant (A—E) have been checked since 1991. Localities which are not on the magnesian limestone formation are indicated by (*); those well away from the influence of river flood water by (#). Being a protected species, precise details of the populations are not given here, but have been deposited at English Nature, York, and the Biological Records Centre, Monks Wood. Herbarium specimens quoted earlier in the text are not usually repeated here, but their existence is indicated by the code (Hb) inserted after the locality name. Others of relevance are listed after each locality entry and although not exhaustive, they represent the majority of the more interesting, historical specimens held in major national, or locally important herbaria. The fact that O. reticulata is a Red Data Book plant is stressed and therefore further collections should not be made, but the OROBANCHE RETICULATA IN NORTH-EAST ENGLAND 255 specimens quoted used for reference or examination. Where specimens have been redetermined these are shown in this section as follows: (i) by F. J. Rumsey, (ii) by M. J. Y. Foley. Notts., v.c. 56: J Based upon the single unlocalised (Hb) record of a specimen of doubtful provenance. Seo Vorks.. V.c.-ol: SE/8.6, North Grimston (* #), found in 1953 (Sledge 1954) on chalk, well away from magnesian limestone and river influence. Recently decreased, but still survives (B); herbarium specimens: 1953, Sledge (CMM, RNG). In 1953 also recorded at a nearby quarry but not seen again until 1992 (B). It is possible that there has been a recent introduction nearby at Wharram. N.E. Yorks., v.c. 62: SE/4.6, Linton-on-Ouse (*), first found in 1984, probably formed from a population further upstream (B). There is also an unlocalised herbarium specimen from north-east Yorkshire (Hb) collected as O. minor (ii). SE/4.8, near Thirsk (* #) in 1852, based upon atypical specimens (Fowler, OXF). Two other sets of specimens collected near here (at Sowerby) in 1851 (Baker, BM) may be of hybrid origin and are possibly from the same population. Apparently not recorded since (X). Mid-W. Yorks., v.c. 64: SE/3.3 Roundhay Lime Hills (#), the early specimen as O. major (ii), (1868, Lees & Abbott, CMM) is the only record traced. The site is now mostly developed and industrialised (X). SE/3.4, East Keswick A, first noted in 1990 in a rough pasture (C). The following year several interesting variants were observed (Foley 1992); East Keswick B, overgrown scrub, known since about 1985 (B); Hetchell Crags (Hb), calcareous grassland above the gritstone escarpment, the locality from which the first identified British O. reticulata specimens were collected by Craven in 1907 (B). It is probable that two populations formerly existed here, one becoming extinct in 1909 (X); herbarium specimens from Hetchell include: 1907, Craven (MANCH); 1908, Craven (OXF); 1908, Druce ex Craven (PRC); 1908, Craven (BM, CGE); 1908, Craven (OXF); 1909, Lees & Pickard (CMM); 1909, Pickard (LES, CGE); 1910, Palmer (BM); 1913, Horrell (LES); 1919, Cockerline (LES); 1951, Boniface (NMW); 1966, Hodgson (LANC); Whitwell, north bank of river, first found in 1991 by P. P. Abbott (A); Langwith Scrub, known from this riverside locality since the 1920s (W. A. Sledge, pers. comm.) and thought extinct, but a few plants were found close by in 1991 (A). Lees’ (1888) record for O. major at Langwith Woods is very likely an error for O. reticulata and there are also herbarium specimens probably from here: 1917, Horrell (OXF, LES); Linton Common (Hb), recorded just after the beginning of this century, and still present in small numbers (A). SE/3.6, South Ripon (#), an area of limestone grassland, where occasional plants have been found since 1989 including a single plant in 1992 (A); Roecliffe (*), a rough riverside pasture, first recorded in 1969 in small numbers. Thought to be extinct, but four plants were found close by in 1992 (A). SE/3.7, near Queen Mary’s Dubbs, five populations found in 1992, but a further one lost to ploughing some years earlier (A, A, A, A, B, X); Ripon Parks, formerly several populations with five still remaining on the flood plain of the Ure on Ministry of Defence land. Two others were lost when the ground was ploughed in the early 1980s. Fasciated plants have been recorded from this locality (A, A, A, A, C, X, X); Norton Conyers A, east bank of the Ure, ten populations mostly found in 1992, one of which possibly contained hybrid piants (x O. minor) (A, A, A, A, A, A,B, B, B, B); near Nunwick, four populations found recently (A, A, B, B); north of Ure Bank found in 1992 (A); Bridge Hewick (Hb) where two separate populations flourished about 1940-1950 on opposite banks of the Ure. Rob (1953) commented that the plant had decreased here, but there were about 70 plants at one population in 1954 (H. J. M. Bowen, pers. comm.). Apparently extinct at one of the old localities but four populations were found near the other in 1992 (A, A, _ A,B, X). Herbarium specimens from Bridge Hewick include: 1952, Bangerter (BM); 1954, Rob (YKN); 1954, Bowen (RNG). Other specimens only partially localised and probably from near here are: Ripon, as O. major (i), 1903, C.A.C. (BM); near Ripon, 1956, Branson (E, RNG). SE/4.3: Hook Moor (#) (Hb), one of the classic sites from which specimens can be found in most major herbaria (often under the alternative locality names of Micklefield or Lotherton Moor), one such early specimen dating from 1878. Formerly widéspread prior to the site being ploughed 256 M. J. Y. FOLEY in about 1940. Since then good populations have developed on road embankments within the vicinity, plants or seed possibly having been brought in with the soil during road construction, or even formed by natural re-colonisation. Probably the strongest British population (D, possibly E); there are two other nearby localities: a probable relict population on an arable field border. (A), and another on a road embankment to the north (A). Three other records in the period 1952-1972 from other areas of Hook Moor (#) have not been recently confirmed (X, X, X). Herbarium specimens include: as O. eu-minor (ii), 1881, Webster (BM); as O. minor (i), 1881, Webster (E); 1892, Foggitt (BM); 1919, Sledge (CMM); 1922, Barnett (LES); 1922, Roper (LDS); 1929, Jones (LDS); 1930, Foggitt (BM); 1932, Vachell (NMW); 1932, Vachell & Knowling (NMW); 1936, Sledge (LIV, RNG); 1936, Jackson (K); 1937, Lousley (LIV, RNG, K); 1937, Woodhead (LANC); 1938, Chapple (OXF); 1939, Lousley (NMW); 1946, Lousley (E, RNG); 1946, Libbey (LTR); 1949, Raven (LTR); 1953, Frankland (three sheets) (LIV); 1988 (photo- graphs only), Rumsey (RNG). There is an unlocalised specimen probably from here: near Leeds, as O. rubra (i), 1922, Rogers (CGE). SE/4.4, near Tadcaster, the sole record is based upon a semi-localised herbarium specimen collected in 1935 (W.R.W., K) and now presumed extinct (X); near the Dunsforths, rumoured to have been found here in the mid-1980s, but no definite records traced. SE/5.5: The Nurseries near York (* #), based on Backhouse’s 1886 specimen (K). At this date, Backhouse’s nurseries were in what are now the south-western suburbs of the city. Presumably a casual introduction with no records since (X). N. W. Yorks., v.c. 65: SE/3.7, Badger Bank, five separate populations on the east bank of the Ure (A, A, A, A, B); Norton Conyers B, east bank of the Ure, first found in 1988, including one broken, fasciated plant, Norris & Lloyd-Evans (LES) (A); North Stainley, on a nature reserve on the west side of the Ure. Recorded here in 1984, this population has apparently died out, but a second one appeared close by in 1992 (A). There is a further population a short way downstream (A); Low Batts, discovered here about 1980 (B). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS In the compilation of information for this paper, I am very grateful to many people for their help. These include the herbarium curators at BM, CGE, CMM, E, HAMU, K, LANC, LDS, LES, LIV, LTR, MANCH, NMW, OXF, PRC, RNG, YKN, YRK, as well as the following who have assisted with details for some of the localities or with other information: P. P. Abbott, J. Deane, D. L. Grant, D. E. Haythornthwaite, T. F. Medd, B. Molesworth, A. Norris, C. D. Preston, F. J. Rumsey, C. Slater, W. A. Sledge, M. Thallon and S. Warwick. I am also grateful to M. S. Porter for help in the field and to English Nature for sponsoring part of the work. REFERENCES BAKER, J. G. (1863). North Yorkshire: studies of its botany, geology, climate, and physical geography. London. Baker, J. G. & NowELL, J. (1854). A supplement to Baines’ Flora of Yorkshire. London. BrEcK-MANNAGETTA, G. R. (1930). Orobanche L. in A. Engler, ed. Das Pflanzenreich 4 (261): 1-348. Leipzig. BENNETT, A. (1917). Orobanche reticulata Wallroth. Naturalist 42: 165. CuaTer, A. O. & Wess, D. A. (1972). Orobanche L., in Tutin, T. G. et al., eds. Flora Europaea 3: 290. Cambridge. CHEETHAM, C. A. & SLEDGE, W. A., eds. (1941). Supplement to the Yorkshire Floras by the late F. Arnold Lees. London. Druce, G. C. (1909a). Plant notes, etc., for 1908. Rep. botl Soc. Exch. Club Br. Isl. for 1908, 334-337. Druce, G. C. (1909b). Short notes. J. Bot., Lond. 47: 110. Druce, G. C. (1911). Short notes. J. Bot., Lond. 49: 301. Druce, G. C. (1918). Rep. botl Soc. Exch. Club Br. Isl. for 1917, 392. Fotey, M. J. Y. (1992). Some British Orobanche variants. B.S,B.I. News 60: 64. Git, A. (1966). Bestimmungsschlissel der mitteleuropaischen Varietaten und Formen von Orobanche. Verhandlungen der Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellschaft in Wien. Sonderabdruck aus Band 105 u. 106: 179. OROBANCHE RETICULATA IN NORTH-EAST ENGLAND 257 GraHaM, R. A. (1957). Plant notes. Proc. bot. Soc. Br. Isl. 21: 243. Heci, G. (1965). Ilustrierte Flora von Mittel-Europa 6, 2nd ed. Miinchen. Jones, M. (1989). Taxonomic and ecological studies in the genus Orobanche L. in the British Isles. Ph.D. thesis, University of Liverpool. Lees, F. A. (1888). The flora of West Yorkshire. London. Legs, F. A. (1909). Additional Note. Naturalist 34: 99-100. MEUSEL, H., JAGER, E., RAUSCHERT, S. & WEINERT, E. (1978). Vergleichende Chorologie der Zentraleuropiis- chen Flora. Karten 2: 412. Jena. PERRING, F. H. & FARRELL, L. (1983). British red data book: 1. Vascular Plants, 2nd ed. Lincoln. PERRING, F. H. & WALTERS, S. M., eds. (1962). Atlas of the British flora. London. Pus ey, H. W. (1926). The British Orobanche list. J. Bot., Lond. 64: 16-19. Pucs_ey, H. W. (1940). Notes on Orobanche L. J. Bot., Lond. 78: 105-116. Ros, C. M. (1953). Field meetings 1952. B.S.B.I. Year Book: 49. Rumsey, F. J. & Jury, S. L. (1991). An account of Orobanche L. in Britain and Ireland. Watsonia 18: 257-295. SLATER, H. H. (1883/4). The flora of Ripon and neighbourhood. Botanical Transactions of the Yorkshire Naturalists’ Union 1: 155. SLEDGE, W. A. (1942). Yorkshire Naturalists’ Union Eightieth Annual Report. Naturalist 67: 10. SLEDGE, W. A. (1954). Yorkshire Naturalists’ Union: Annual Report 1953. Naturalist 79: 27. (Accepted January 1993) Watsonia, 19, 259-263 (1993) 259 Skunkweed (Navarretia squarrosa (Eschsch.) Hook. & Arn.) and other Polemoniaceae in Britain E. J. CLEMENT 54 Anglesey Road, Gosport, Hants, PO12 2EQ and M. F. GARDNER and S. G. KNEES Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, EH3 5LR ABSTRACT The discovery of a large population of Skunkweed, Navarretia squarrosa (Eschsch.) Hook. & Arn. (Polemoni- aceae) in Windsor Great Park, Berks. (v.c. 22) has prompted further investigation into this little known alien, which is described, illustrated and discussed in conjunction with related species. A key is given to separate four relevant genera. INTRODUCTION Skunkweed, Navarretia squarrosa (Eschsch.) Hook. & Arn. (Polemoniaceae), has a long history of periodic occurrence in Britain but is not treated in recent Floras (Clapham et al. 1987; Stace 1991). In early July 1990, M.F.G. was informed that a large population of N. squarrosa had been discovered on private land within Windsor Great Park (v.c. 22, Berks.). On investigation it was found that the colony of several thousand plants was thickly scattered on more or less bare sandy ground which had until recently been a rubbish dump. This site had been sown the previous autumn with a grass and wild-flower amenity mixture, the grass seed of which had originated from Oregon. Germination of the sown mixture had been almost non-existent and instead the area was sparsely covered by mainly mosses and several early colonising species such as Spergularia rubra (L.) J. & C. Presl and Gnaphalium uliginosum L. It was interesting to note that grasses were almost absent. The whole area was almost flat with a few slight hollows which presumably held water during the winter. In June these were covered with the annual White Forget-me-not Plagiobothrys scouleri (Hook. & Arn.) I. M. Johnst., a member of the Boraginaceae which is also a native of western North America (Stace 1991). In 1991 both N. squarrosa and P. scouleri reappeared in considerable numbers suggesting that seed had been successfully set the previous year. However, long-term persistence is unlikely, as the ground will probably become overgrown again. In mid-June only small seedlings of N. squarrosa were present and on walking through these plants their foetid smell, resembling petrol or rotten eggs, was very prominent. DESCRIPTION OF NAVARRETIA SQUARROSA The genus Navarretia (Polemoniaceae) contains 30 annual species of which 29 are native to western N. America and one is native to Chile and Argentina (Mabberley 1987). Many species of Navarretia look somewhat similar and the following description defines N. squarrosa. Navarretia squarrosa (Eschsch.) Hook. & Arn., Bot. Beechey’s Voy. 8: 368 (1839). Fig. 1. Synonyms: Hoitzia squarrosa Eschsch., Mém. Acad. Sci. St Pétersb. 10: 283 (1826); Gilia pungens 260 E. J. CLEMENT, M. F. GARDNER AND S. G. KNEES No? ! RE e Y ~W gh Ooms NAVARRETIA SQUARROSA ca Ficure 1. Navarretia squarrosa (Eschsch.) Hook. & Arn., Skunkweed. Douglas ex Hook., Bot. Mag. 57: t. 2977 (1830); Gilia squarrosa (Eschsch.) Hook. & Arn., Bot. Beechey’s Voy. 4: 151 (Oct. 1833); Aegochloa pungens (Douglas ex Hook.) Benth., Edward’s Bot. Reg. 19: sub pl. 1622 (1 Oct. 1833); Navarretia pungens (Douglas ex Hook.) Hook., Fl. Bor. Am. 2: 75 (1838). Erect annual 5—35 cm, with usually one main stem, rather stout and rigid, the lateral branches more or less well developed producing a top-heavy plant narrowing to a slender base; all parts except flowers glandular-viscid, with a strong, unpleasant odour (hence the vernacular name). Leaves alternate, sessile, 1-5—3-5 x 1-2-5 cm, varying from bipinnate to pinnately and palmately dissected, | c : | | | | | —_——~ ee SKUNKWEED IN BRITAIN 261 the linear lobes spinescent. Flowers in capitate, bracteate clusters; calyx tube 7-10 mm, scarious between the ribs, with unequal, subulate, spinescent lobes; corolla 7-13 mm, infundibuliform, blue to whitish, barely exceeding the calyx; stamens 5, slightly unequal, inserted in corolla throat; stigmas 3. Capsule ellipsoid, 3-locular, each loculus with 6-8 or more ovules. Seeds 0-6-0-8 mm, dark brown, irregularly angled-ovoid, rugose. Native to western N. America, from Vancouver Island in the north, south to California (Hitchcock et al. 1959). Cantua pungens Torrey, Ann. Lyc. Nat. Hist. N. York 2: 221 (1828) was described on the basis of a specimen collected by Edwin P. James in 1820, in the valley of the Loup Fork (Nebraska). This is obviously not the same specimen as the type of Gilia pungens Douglas ex Hook. (collected by David Douglas on the Multnahomack River, California); because the respective type descriptions of C. pungens and G. pungens differ in several important points (e.g. C. pungens: flowers solitary, axillary; G. pungens: flowers in capitate clusters), C. pungens is not considered to be synonymous with Navarretia squarrosa, although Index Kewensis considered it to be so (R. R. Mill, pers. comm.). The type locality of C. pungens is also far outside the geographical range of N. squarrosa. Voucher specimens of Navarretia squarrosa and Plagiobothrys scouleri have been deposited in RNG, E, herb. E.J.C. and herb. M.F.G. Specimens of N. squarrosa were also collected and distributed by the University of Reading through the Société pour |’Echange des Plantes Vasculaires de l Europe et du Bassin Méditerranéen. It is interesting to note that the oils within the plant are volatile and pressed specimens soon totally lose their foetid odour. N. squarrosa seems to be very poorly represented in the literature and in herbaria as a British adventive. For example, there are no specimens held by BM, CGG and K. HISTORY OF OCCURRENCE IN BRITAIN 1828-1830 The species was probably first cultivated in Britain in 1829 or 1830, when plants were raised by the Horticultural Society of London from seed collected by David Douglas in North America. He collected seed from plants growing on moist ground in mountain valleys near to the sources of the Multnahomack river, one of the southern branches of the Columbia river in western North America. Plants from this collection were subsequently illustrated in the Botanical Magazine, tab. 2977 (Hooker 1830) and although not garden worthy, references to Navarretia squarrosa have persisted in horticultural literature to the present day (Huxley 1992). 1915-1933 The species was first collected as an alien by Miss I. M. Hayward in August 1915 under Ladhope Bridge, Galashiels, Selkirks., v.c. 79, where it was growing on shingle beside Gala Water and had presumably been introduced with wool shoddy (Druce 1916; Hayward & Druce 1919). It was determined by A. Thellung as Gilia pungens Douglas ex Hook. & Arn. Some eight years later it was collected from Sleaford, S. Lincs., v.c. 53, by Miss Landon where it was thought to have been introduced with chicken corn (Druce 1924); again determined by Thellung, this time as G. squarrosa Hook. & Arn. (OXF). The same year it was also collected from Hythe Quay, Colchester, N. Essex, v.c. 19, where it was thought to have been introduced with malting refuse. Plants were still being recorded from the same locality the following year (Brown 1930, OXF). The next recorded occurrence was reported by Miss C. M. Rob from Topcliffe, near Thirsk, N. E. Yorks., v.c. 62, where it came up in a newly made lawn. In this case the plant may have been introduced with sawn. wood which originated from California and was used for constructing the doors of the house (Pearsall 1934). 1978-1979 Nearly half a century passed before the species was seen again in Britain, this time as a weed in a rose bed by Mrs M. Baecker at Carr Bank, Milnthorpe, Westmorland, v.c. 69, in 1978 and 1979 (Clement 1979, herb. E.J.C.). 262 E. J. CLEMENT, M. F. GARDNER AND S. G. KNEES OCCURRENCE ELSEWHERE Navarretia squarrosa has also been recorded as a bird seed alien in the Netherlands (Ooststroom & Reichgelt 1963) and as a ruderal in Denmark (Hansen 1979). Outside Europe it is recorded in the floras of New Zealand and Australia, having first been noted early in the century by Black (Robertson 1957); it persists there to the present day (Toelken 1986; Webb et al. 1988). OTHER POLEMONIACEAE IN BRITAIN There is only one member of the Polemoniaceae native to Britain and Ireland. Jacob’s Ladder, Polemonium caeruleum L., occurs in limestone grassland, on screes, on rock ledges and on the borders of woodland in northern England and is reported (Stace 1991) as a sporadic garden escape elsewhere. However, B. Wurzell (pers. comm.) warns that since a number of similar Polemonium species, varieties and hybrids are grown in gardens, no wild plant of such provenance should be attributed to P. caeruleum without careful verification. Stace (1991) also lists Phlox paniculata L.., another North American species, as sporadically naturalised on rough and waste ground in England. At the last published tally (Druce 1928), twelve alien Polemoniaceae were listed, the genus Gilia contributing most taxa. None of these was included in the two more recent lists of British plants (Dandy 1958; Kent 1992). Phlox drummondii Hook. and P. subulata L. have been observed as adventives on urban wasteland (B. Wurzell, pers. comm.) KEY TO THE GENERA OF POLEMONIACEAE OCCURRING IN BRITAIN The following key may aid the identification of three of the commonest genera most likely to be confused with Navarretia: ft... Calyx green'and herbaceous throughout 2.3.20 .i00 5... eects oe eg ee eee 1. Polemonium 1. Calyx with prominent scarious or hyaline intervals between the green and more herbaceous a) 9 1S) 2: | gee cain a Sr aa RRND Ke saleell UNS RUMI ARP Fi). MMMM, NEMO ME NN G50. dann omooaeeseoasuce oes 2 2. Staminal filaments very unequally inserted; leaves opposite ............... cece ceeeee eee 2. Phlox 2. Staminal filaments equally or almost equally inserted; leaves alternate ........................... 3 3. Calyx-lobes obviously unequal; leaf segments spine-tipped .................... petals 3. Navarretia 3. Calyx-lobes equal or nearly so; leaf-segments not spine-tipped .....................eee ee ee 4. Gilia ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors are grateful to the following for their assistance in the accumulation of information for Mr M. C. Tebbitt and Dr P. F. Yeo. Thanks are also due to Dr J. R. Akeroyd and Dr R. R. Mill for their helpful comments on earlier drafts of the paper and Mr B. Wurzell for providing further useful | information on other alien Polemoniaceae. Mrs O. M. Stewart is especially acknowledged for preparing the drawing. this paper: Miss S. Andrews, Mrs M. C. Foster, Dr S. L. Jury, Miss S. K. Marner, Miss A. M. Paul, | REFERENCES Brown, G. C. (1930). The alien plants. of Essex. The Essex Naturalist 22: 41. CLapHaM, A. R., Tutin, T. G. & Moore, D. M. (1987). Flora of the British Isles, 3rd ed. Cambridge. CLEMENT, E. J. (1979). Adventive news 15. B.S.B.I. News 23: 12. Danpy, J. E. (1958). List of British vascular plants. London. Druce, G. C. (1916). Plant notes, etc., for 1915. Rep. botl Soc. Exch. Club Br. e 4: 203. Druce, G. C. (1924). Plant notes, etc., for 1923. Rep. botl Soc. Exch. Club Br. Isl. 7: 46. Druce, G. C. (1928). British plant list, 2nd ed. Arbroath. SKUNKWEED IN BRITAIN 263 Haywarp, I. M. & Druce, G. C. (1919). The adventive flora of Tweedside. Arbroath. Hansen, A. (1979). Floristiske meddelelser. Urt 4: 122-124. Hitcucock, C. L., Cronquist, A., OwnBEY, M. & THompson, J. W. (1959). Vascular plants of the Pacific Northwest, 4: Ericaceae through Campanulaceae. Seattle. Hooker, W. J. (1830). Gilia pungens. Sharp-leaved Gilia. Curtis’s Botanical Magazine 57 (n.s. 4): plate 2977. Huxtey, A. J. ed. (1992). Navarretia, The new Royal Horticultural Society Dictionary of Gardening 3: 296. London. Kent, D. H. (1992). List of vascular plants of the British Isles. London. MaBBERLEY, D. J. (1987). The plant book. Cambridge. OoststTRooM, S. J’ & REICHGELT, T. J. (1963). Aanwinsten voor de Nederlandse adventief-flora, 5. Gorteria 1: 141-143. PEARSALL, W. H. (1934). New county and other records, 1933. Rep. botl Soc. Exch. Club Br. Isl. 10: 533. RoseErtson, E. L. (1957). Polemoniaceae. Flora of South Australia 4: 707. Adelaide. Stace, C. A. (1991). New Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge. ToELKEN, H. R. (1986). Polemoniaceae. Flora of South Australia 3: 1133. Adelaide. Wess, C. J., SYKES, W. R. & GARNOCK-JoNnES, P. J. (1988). Polemoniaceae. Flora of New Zealand 4: 957-961. Christchurch. (Accepted January 1993) Waisonia, 19, 265—267 (1993) 265 Who was the author of Montbretia crocosmiiflora? E. C. NELSON National Botanic Gardens, Glasnevin, Dublin 9, Ireland ABSTRACT Montbretia crocosmiiflora, the basionym of Crocosmia X crocosmiiflora (Iridaceae) was published by Victor Lemoine in The Garden, 1880, not by E. Morren; the correct citation of the current name is Crocosmia X crocosmiifiora (Lemoine) N.E.Br. INTRODUCTION Montbretia crocosmiifiora is the basionym of the currently accepted name for the well-known garden plant, Crocosmia X crocosmiiflora (Iridaceae), which has escaped and become widely naturalized in coastal parts of the British Isles (Stace 1991; Nelson 1993). Although the generic name Montbretia has long since been abandoned, it remains in everyday use as the vernacular name especially for the naturalized plant. C. X crocosmiifiora is an artificial hybrid created by Victor Lemoine of Nancy, France, who pollinated C. pottsii (Baker) N. E. Br. with pollen from C. aurea (Hook.) Planch.; the seedlings first bloomed in August 1880. For many years standard botanical accounts (e.g. de Vos 1984) credited publication of Montbretia crocosmiiflora to C. J. Edouard Morren (1881), and the usual citation of the hybrid’s name was Crocosmia X crocosmiiflora (Lemoine ex E. Morren) N. E. Br. (cf. de Vos 1984). Kostelijk (1984) pointed out that Morren’s account, published in La Belgique Horticole 31 late in 1881 to accompany plate 472, was predated by a note printed in the October 1881 number (118) of The Floral Magazine, edited by Richard Dean, but Kostelijk (1984) and Wijnands (1986) omitted to note that the September issue of the same periodical had an earlier account, reading as follows **.. . Montbretia crocosmaefiora, a novelty sent by Mons. Lemoine, Nancy, France; much the same in colour as M. Pottsii, but perhaps a little more yellow, and the flowers larger.” Kostelijk (1984) proposed altering the citation to C. x crocosmiiflora (Lemoine ex Burb. & Dean) N. E. Br.; this was noted by Wijnands (1986), and taken up by Trehane (1989), Stace (1991) and Kent (1992) among others. EARLY DESCRIPTIONS OF LEMOINE’S HYBRID Kostelijk’s bibliographic search was not exhaustive. The following are even earlier accounts in which the binomial Montbretia crocosmiiflora was used: The Garden 21 August 1880 (p. 188) ~ “New Hybrid Montbretia. — Mons. V. Lemoine, of Nancy, sends us a new bulbous plant, which he has obtained by fertilising Montbretia Pottsi . . . with Tritonia (Crocosma [sic]) aurea. The progeny Mons. Lemoine proposes to name Montbretia crocosmaeflora. The flowers, he says, are four or five times the size of M. Pottsi; and this successful cross he considers to be the starting point for the production of a race of beautiful hardy varieties. The flowers sent are borne in the same manner on the spike as those of M. Pottsi, but they are much larger and of a deeper colour. The cross seems to be precisely intermediate between the two parents.” The Garden 30 July 1881 (p. 125) : “Montbretia crocosmaeflora, similar in every respect to M. Pottsi [sic] . . . but more robust in habit, and having larger flower-spikes.”’ 266 E. C. NELSON The Gardener’s Chronicle 30 July 1881 (p. 153) “Mr Barron also showed Montbretia crocosmaefiora [sic], one of Mons. Lemoine’s novelties, much the same colour as M. Potsii [sic], perhaps a little more yellow, but the flowers larger — a very good plant...” The Garden 27 August 1881 (p. 203) “MONTBRETIA CROCOSMAEFLORA - A very promising plant with orange and red flowers, very bright, but somewhat withered owing to its journey from Nancy . .. From M. Lemoine.” DISCUSSION The first quotation from The Garden (18: 188, dated 21 August 1880) must have been written very shortly after the seedlings bloomed for the first time; it contains a diagnosis that is adequate under the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (Greuter et al. 1988; Art. 32.2) to validate the — binomial Montbretia crocosmiiflora. It must be stressed that both the binomial and at least part of the description are explicitly attributed to Lemoine, and the passage is written in the present tense. But, by including the clause ““Mons. Lemoine proposes to name . . .”’, does the author perhaps fall foul of Art. 34.1, that a name is “not validly published ... when it is merely proposed in anticipation of . . . a particular circumscription’’? The two subsequent notes, both published almost one year later on 30 July 1881, do not contravene any articles of the current /.C.B.N. and thus the binomial was validly published as early as 30 July 1881 — unless description in the issue of The Garden of 21 August 1880 is not ruled out. Deciding which of the 30 July 1881 issues of the separate periodicals was the first published seems a pointless exercise, but they predate The Floral Magazine notices by at least one month, so that the protologue of Montbretia crocosmiiflora may be credited to one or other of these, or both. At this period The Gardener’s Chronicle was edited by M. T. Masters, and The Garden by its founder, William Robinson, and thus possible citations might include ‘Lemoine ex Masters’, and ‘Lemoine ex W. Robinson’. The publication of names in reports of horticultural shows is a matter that is not addressed by the I.C.B.N. There is no reason to reject names, accompanied by diagnostic statements, when included in such reports, except when they contravene particular articles of the code. Under the J.C. B.N. (Art. 29, Berlin 1988), publication in non-scientific newspapers was forbidden after 1 January 1953; thereby there is the implication that before that date publication of binomials in such periodicals is valid. The descriptions of Montbretia crocosmiiflora quoted above appeared in reports of the Royal Horticultural Society’s exhibition on 26 July 1881, and it is possible that London newspapers of 27 July contained reports in which there were descriptions — I have made no attempt to trace any such reports. It is even possible that French periodicals and newspapers contained even earlier reports of the first flowers in August 1880, for example. . The consequences of this conundrum is that it is impossible unambiguously to assign Montbretia crocosmiiflora to a single author. Both Masters and Robinson were describing the same plant, having seen the same specimens on the same day, although it cannot be established that Masters or Robinson personally wrote the news items concerned; they were the editors of the respective periodicals, and one of their journalists could have contributed the show reports. Furthermore, because of the real possibility that newspapers printed in August 1880 and July 1881 carried descriptions and the binomial, it may be impossible to determine if the original place of publication was really The Gardener’s Chronicle or The Garden. CONCLUSIONS Each of the quoted descriptions is of the same, indeed the original hybrid, so the best solution to this conundrum is to accept that the name was first devised and used by Victor Lemoine, that it was published validly in The Garden on 21 August 1880, and that because the clause “proposes to name” is in the present tense this diagnosis need not be regarded as provisional and thus contrary to Art. 34.1. Thus the citation should read: ‘ Hl ri ‘ it ae | | | THE AUTHOR OF MONTBRETIA CROCOSMIIFLORA 267 Crocosmia X crocosmiiflora (Lemoine) N. E. Br., Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa 20: 264 (1932). Basionym: Montbretia crocosmiiflora Lemoine, The Garden 18: 188 (21 August 1880) [as ‘crocosmaeflora |; The Garden 20: 125 (30 July 1881); The Gardener's Chronicle 16 (n.s.): 153 (30 July 1881); The Garden 20: 203 (27 August 1881); The Floral Magazine no. 117 (September 1881); The Floral Magazine no. 118, tab. 472 (October 1881); La Belgique Horticole 31: 229, tab. 14 (1881) [with formula ‘x Montbretia aureo-pottsi’’|. TYPIFICATION OF MONTBRETIA CROCOSMIIFLORA de Vos (1984) designated the illustration published in La Belgique Horticole 31 (tab. 14) as the lectotype of Montbretia crocosmiifiora Lemoine ex Morren, but this is not acceptable (see I. C. B.N. Art. 7) and must be rejected. In this instance the published illustration cannot be a lectotype but could be selected as a neotype, as long as there are no herbarium specimens preserved of the original materials received from Lemoine by Robinson in August 1880. However, better candidates for selection as neotypes would be herbarium specimens prepared from the material displayed at the Royal Horticultural Society in July 1881. ORTHOGRAPHY The earliest notes used either ‘crocosmiaeflora’ or ‘crocosmaeflora’. These are improperly formed compounds; under the J.C. B.N. (Art. 73), the epithet should be corrected to ‘crocosmiiflora’, as is standard practice. ACKNOWLEDGMENT My thanks are due to Dr R. K. Brummitt, for his helpful comments. REFERENCES DE Vos, M. (1984). The African genus Crocosmia Planchon. JI S. Afr. bot. 50: 463-502. GREUTER, W. et al. (1988). International code of botanical nomenclature adopted by the Fourteenth International Botanical Congress, Berlin, July-August 1987. K6nigstein. KENT, D. H. (1992). List of vascular plants in the British Isles. London. KosTELuK, P. J. (1984). Crocosmia in gardens. The Plantsman 5: 246-253 MorreNn, C. J. E. (1881). Notice sur le Montbretia crocosmiaeflora (hybrida) de M. V. Lemoine. X Montbretia aureo-pottsi. La Belgique Horticole 31: 299-303, tab. 14. NELson, E. C. (1993). Ergasiophygophytes in the British Isles — plants that jumped the garden wall, in ELus, R. G. & Perry, A. R., eds. Plants wild and garden. Cardiff. Stace, C. A. (1991). New Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge. TREHANE, P. (1989). Index hortensis. Vol. 1, Perennials. Wimborne. WunNanps, D. O. (1986). The correct citation of Montbretia crocosmiiflora. Bothalia 16 (1986): 51. (Accepted February 1993) Watsonia, 19, 269-278 (1993) 269 Short Notes CONTRIBUTIONS TO A CYTOLOGICAL CATALOGUE OF THE BRITISH AND IRISH FLORA, 3 This note continues our series presenting the results of a cytological survey of British and Irish vascular plants (Hollingsworth et al. 1992). Here we report the chromosome numbers of 88 species from 95 populations. A suffix ‘S’ denotes supernumerary chromosomes. Only one plant per population was counted, except where stated. All counts were made on squashes of root-tips. Voucher specimens have been deposited in LTR. Ajuga reptans L., 2n = 32: Leics., v.c. 55, Swithland Wood, SK/53.12. Alchemilla glaucescens Wallr., 2n = c. 110: Westmorland, v.c. 69, Crosby Gill, NY/61.11. Alchemilla xanthochlora Rothm., 2n =c. 107: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Carnforth, SD/507.706. Allium scorodoprasum L., 2n = 16: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Potts Corner, SD/41.57. Andromeda polifolia L., 2n = 48: Westmorland, v.c. 69, Meathop Moss, 3km N.E. of Lindale, SD/ 44.81. Apium inundatum (L.) Reichb.f., 2n = 22: Caerns., v.c. 49, Cilan, near Abersoch, SH/29.24. Barbarea vulgaris R.Br., 2n= 16: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, River Lune, near Lancaster, SD/488.640. Brassica napus L. subsp. oleifera (DC.) Metzger, 2n = 38: Dorset, v.c. 9, c. 1-5 km W. of Burton Bradstock, SY/47.89. Calystegia soldanella (L.) R.Br., 2n=22: Caerns., v.c. 49, Pwllheli, SH/37.34. Cardamine amara L., 2n = 16: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Carnforth, SD/507.706. Carex acutiformis Ehrh., 2n = 38: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Lancaster University campus, SD/48.57. Chrysosplenium oppositifolium L., 2n=42: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Millbeck footbridge, SD/ 648.638. Circaea lutetiana L., 2n=22: Dorset, v.c. 9, Kingcombe Meadows, c. 1:5 km N.E. of Toller Porcorum, SY/55.99; W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Millbeck footbridge, SD/648.638. Crataegus monogyna Jacq. subsp. nordica Franco, 2n = 34: Caerns., v.c. 49, Penarwel valley, near Llanbedrog, SH/32.32. Crithmum maritimum L., 2n = 20: Dorset, v.c. 9, Weymouth, landward side of Fleet Lagoon, SY/ 66.76. Dactylorhiza purpurella (T. & T. A. Stephenson) So6, 2n = 80: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, SD/5.7. Daphne laureola L., 2n = 18: Dorset, v.c. 9, Todber, ST/79.19. Dryopteris filix-mas (L.) Schott, 2n = 164: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Yealand Conyers, SD/509.745. Equisetum telmateia Ehrh., 2n = c. 216: Caerns., v.c. 49, track from Carreg to Porth Oer (Whistling Sands), SH/16.29. Eryngium maritimum L., 2n = 16: Caerns., v.c. 49, Pwilheli, south beach, SH/37.34. Euonymus europaeus L., 2n = 32: Dorset, v.c. 9, Winterborne Kingston, SY/86.97. Euphorbia peplus L., 2n = 16: Dorset, v.c. 9, Portland, Church Ope Cove, SY/69.70. -Fraxinus excelsior L., 2n = 46: Leics., v.c. 55, Outwoods, Jubilee Wood, SK/511.165; Leics., v.c. 55, Swithland Wood, SK/53.12; W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Gait Barrows N.N.R., near Silverdale, SD/ 480.776. Geum rivale L., 2n = 42: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Forton, SD/486.534. Geum urbanum L., 2n = 42: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Lancaster, SD/473.594. Glaucium flavum Crantz, 2n = 12: Dorset, v.c. 9, c. 1-5 km W. of Burton Bradstock, SY/47.89. Hydrocotyle vulgaris L., 2n=96: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Leighton Moss R.S.P.B. reserve, near Silverdale, SD/488.757. Hypericum androsaemum L., 2n = 40: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Lancaster, SD/473.594. Hypericum elodes L., 2n = 16: S. Devon, v.c. 3, Dartmoor, SX/66.80. 270 SHORT NOTES Kickxia elatine (L.) Dumort., 2n = 36: Dorset, v.c. 9, near Blandford Forum, ST/88.06. Lamium album L., 2n = 18: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, W. of Heysham, SD/427.616. Lemna gibba L., 2n = 40: Cambs., v.c. 29, River Delph, bridge c. 6 km E. of Chatteris, TL/470.858. Lemna minor L.,2n = 40: Cambs., v.c. 29, River Delph, bridge c. 6 km E. of Chatteris, TL/470.858. Ligustrum vulgare L., 2n= 46: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Gait Barrows N.N.R., near Silverdale, SD/ 483.775. Lithospermum officinale L., 2n=28 + 1S: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Gait Barrows N.N.R., near Silverdale, SD/479.776. Littorella uniflora (L.) Asch., 2n = 24: Caerns., v.c. 49, Mynydd Cilan, SH/29.24. Lotus pedunculatus Cav., 2n = 12: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, River Lune, near Lancaster, SD/483.628; Westmorland, v.c. 69, Lowick Common, SD/292.847. Luzula pilosa (L.) Willd., 2n = 66: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Millbeck footbridge, SD/648.638. Lysimachia nummularia L., 2n = 43: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Capernwray, SD/528.714. Lysimachia vulgaris L., 2n = 84: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, River Lune, near Lancaster, SD/484.641. Malva sylvestris L., 2n = 42: Dorset, v.c.9,c. 1-5 km W. of Burton Bradstock, SY/47. 89; W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Bank Houses, W. of Cockerham, SD/430.531. Marrubium vulgare L., 2n = 34: Dorset, v.c. 9, Bats Head, SY/79.80. Medicago lupulina L.., ‘On = 16: Dorset, v.c. 9, c. 1-5 km Ww. of Burton Bradstock, SY/47.84 (two plants); W. Lancs., v.c. 60, River Lune estuary, edge of new sports centre, near Lancaster, SD/ 463.624. Menyanthes trifoliata L., 2n =54: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Lancaster, SD/458.612. Myosotis stolonifera (DC.) Gay ex Leresche & Levier, 2n = 24: Westmorland, v.c. 69, Lowick Common, SD/292.847. Myrica gale L., 2n = 48: Dorset, v.c. 9, Hartland Moor N.N.R. (W. side of road), c. 4kmS.E. of | Wareham, SY/96.85. Nepeta cataria L., 2n = 36: Dorset, v.c. 9, between Blandford Forum and Thornicombe, ST/87.04. Nymphoides peltata Kuntze, 2n = 54: Cambs., v.c. 29, Block Fen gravel pit, near Chatteris, TL/ 431.839. Oenanthe crocata L., 2n = 22: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, estuary of River Lune, near Lancaster, SD/ 460.621. Ononis repens L. subsp. repens, 2n = 60: Caerns., v.c. 49, Abersoch, N. end of Porth Fawr, SH/ 31:27: Oxalis acetosella L., 2n=22: Dorset, v.c. 9, Kingcombe Meadows, c. 1:5 km N.E. of Toller Porcorum, SY/55. 99. Parietaria judaica L., 2n = 26: Dorset, v.c. 9, Portland Church Ope Cove, SY/69. 70. Persicaria amphibia . ) Gray, 2n= 96: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Carnforth, SD/507.706. Persicaria bistorta (L.) Samp., 2n = 48: S. Lancs., v. c. Dos Rochdale Norden, Lower Mancroft Gate Farm, SD/841.148; Westmorland, v.c. 69, near Arnside, SD/457. 767. Persicaria maculosa Gray, 2n = 22: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Lancaster, SD/465.624. Petasites hybridus (L.) P. Gaertner, B. Mey. & Scherb., 2n=60: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Quernmore, SD/508.599. Pimpinella saxifraga L., 2n = 40: Dorset, v.c. 9, Fontmell Down, c. 5kmS.S.E. of Shaftesbury, ST/ 88.18. Polystichum aculeatum (L.) Roth, 2n = 164: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Lancaster, SD/473.594. Populus nigra L. subsp. betulifolia (Pursh) W. Wettst., 2n = 38: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Lancaster, SD/454.615. Potentilla palustris (L.) Scop., 2n = 35: Westmorland, v.c. 69, Lowick Common, SD/292.847. Primula veris L., 2n = 22: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Silverdale, SD/470.749. Prunella vulgaris L. (white-flowered), 2n = 28: Westmorland, v.c. 69, Broughton Beck, SD/ 285.825. Ranunculus flammula L. subsp. flammula, 2n = 32: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Heysham Moss, dismantled sidings, SD/422.604. Ranunculus penicillatus (Dumort.) Bab. subsp. pseudofluitans (Syme) S. Webster var. vertumnus C. Cook, 2n = 48: Mid-W. Yorks., v.c. 64, Bishop Monkton, SE/32.66. | Ribes nigrum L., 2n = 16: Westmorland, v.c. 69, near Arnside, SD/477.782. Ribes rubrum Li. 2n = 16: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Lancaster, $D/473.594. i : i Tee a a SHORT NOTES 271 Rosa arvensis Hudson, 2n = 14: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Lancaster, SD/459.613. Rumex obtusifolius L. subsp. transiens (Simonkai) K. H. Rech., 2n=40: Surrey, v.c. 17, Richmond, River Thames, TQ/1.7. Ruppia maritima L., 2n = 20: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Carnforth, SD/482.702. Salix viminalis L., 2n = 38: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, W. of Heysham, SD/428.612. Samolus valerandi L., 2n = 26: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, near Carnforth, SD/483.704. Sanguisorba minor Scop. subsp. minor, 2n = 28: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Leighton Moss R.S.P.B. Reserve, near Silverdale, SD/489.758. Sanicula europaea L., 2n=16: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Leighton Moss R.S.P.B. Reserve, near Silverdale, SD/489.759. Scirpus sylvaticus L., 2n = 62: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, River Lune, near Lancaster, SD/485.638. Sedum forsterianum Smith, 2n =c. 90: Rads., v.c. 43, Stanner Rock, 4 km N.W. of Kington, SO/ 26.58. Silene vulgaris Garcke subsp. vulgaris, 2n = 24: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, River Lune, near Lancaster, SD/ 488.640. Sonchus oleraceus L., 2n = 32: Dorset, v.c. 9, c. 1:5 km W. of Burton Bradstock, SY/47.89. Sorbus aucuparia L., 2n=34: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Gait Barrows N.N.R., near Silverdale, SD/ 481.776. Spirodela polyrhiza (L.) Schleiden, 2n = 40: Cambs., v.c. 29, River Delph, bridge c. 6 km E. of Chatteris, TL/470.858. Stachys arvensis (L.) L., 2n = 10: Dorset, v.c. 9, Chamberlayne’s Heath, c. 8 km N. of Wool, SY/ 83.91. Stachys officinalis (L.) Trev., 2n = 16: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Gait Barrows N.N.R., near Silverdale, SD/478.773. Taxus baccata L., 2n = 24: Dorset, v.c. 9, Hod Hill, near Biandford Forum, ST/85.10. Thalictrum flavum L., 2n = 84: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, estuary, near Carnforth, SD/493.714. Trifolium medium L., 2n= 80: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, Gait Barrows N.N.R., near Silverdale, SD/ 478.772. Valeriana dioica L., 2n = 16: W. Lancs., v.c. 60, above Saltmire Bridge, by canal, SD/519.754. Veronica anagallis-aquatica L., 2n = 36: Dorset, v.c. 9, near Sydling St Nicholas, ST/63.00. Veronica beccabunga L., 2n = 18: Westmorland, v.c. 69, near Arnside, SD/477.782. Veronica officinalis L., 2n = 36: Caerns., v.c. 49, Garn Fadryn, SH/27.35. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We should like to thank English Nature and the R.S.P.B. for permission to collect plant material from their reserves. REFERENCES HOoLiincswortH, P. M., GorNALL, R. J. & Bamey, J. P. (1992). Contributions to a cytological catalogue of the British and Irish flora, 2. Watsonia 19: 134-137. A.-K. K. A. AL-BERMANI, K. I. A. AL-SHAMMARY, J. P. BAILEY & R. J. GORNALL Botany Department, The University, Leicester, LE] 7RH POLYGONUM MARITIMUM L. IN EAST SUSSEX (V.C. 14) On 18 June 1992 a number of plants of Polygonum maritimum L. (Polygonaceae), Sea Knotgrass, were discovered growing on the beach at Brighton, East Sussex by one of us (A. S.). This was an exciting find as this very rare plant has never before, to our knowledge, been recorded from East Sussex (v.c. 14) and was last recorded in West Sussex (v.c. 13) by W. Borrer, although no station is given and there is apparently no specimen in his herbarium. A previous record from Bognor in 1854 272 SHORT NOTES by Professor I. B. Balfour was thought by H. C. Watson to be Polygonum oxyspermum C. A. Meyer & Bunge ex Ledeb. subsp. raii (Bab.) D. A. Webb & Chater, and consultation of the herbarium of the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh (E) confirms this. Following notification to English Nature, under the terms of the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981, as a fully protected species under Schedule 8, a specimen was collected (herb. P. A. Harmes) and confirmed by Dr J. R. Akeroyd. About 14 plants were found, of which eleven or so were growing together in a clump, seeming at first glance to be a single plant. They ranged in size from seedlings, with stems no more than 8 cm, up to mature plants with stems 60 cm in length. The plants were procumbent and were in flower and fruit, which continued throughout the summer and they were still flowering in late November. They grew well above the high tide mark and seemed to have a preference for areas of fine shingle. The presence of a number of plants growing in a clump suggests that this species may have been flowering here un-noticed in previous years, and had seeded itself. The small shingle beach where the plants were found was already well-known for its botanical interest and supports a number of plants found nowhere else along this coast. Species recorded here already include Atriplex glabriuscula, A. littoralis, A. portulacoides (Halimione portulacoides), Crambe maritima, Cakile maritima, Raphanus raphanistrum subsp. maritimus, Beta vulgaris subsp. maritima, Honkenya peploides, Spergularia media, Calystegia soldanella, Crithmum maritimum, Glaucium flavum, Tripleurospermum maritimum, Parapholis strigosa, Elymus atherica (E. pycnan- thus) and Catapodium marinum. Nomenclature follows Stace (1991). The beach is largely composed of flint pebbles with patches of fine shingle or sand, as well as areas with some humus cover. It is only about 110 m in length and, at its widest, about 50-60 m down to the high tide mark, with vegetation restricted to about half of the area. For such a small site it has a surprisingly rich maritime flora. The beach is enclosed on three sides by a groyne, the sea wall and the western breakwater of Brighton Marina. This breakwater is about 640 m long and was completed in about 1972. The beach in its present form and position probably dates from this time and if this is the case, then all the plants here are recent colonists. A build-up of shingle above the high tide mark has probably occurred here as the western breakwater prevents its eastern drift. It seems also that this breakwater traps great amounts of jetsam which is washed or blown on to the beach above the shingle ridge, where it tends to accumulate. The jetsam consists of plastic, polystyrene, wood, ropes, nets, tar and cans as well as plant material, including Fucus vesiculosus L. (Bladder-wrack), fruit and seeds, and accumulates in lower-lying parts of the beach to form a rich mulch in which seeds can be seen germinating. As the Channel current (North Atlantic Drift) and the prevailing wind through the summer come from the south-west, it seems quite possible that seed of P. maritimum could have originated from sites in Cornwall or S. Hants., or from the Channel Isles or Northern France. Less likely is the possibility that seeds were brought in by birds; Greenfinches are the only seed-eating species (apart from Sparrows) which frequent the beach. P. maritimum is a characteristic species of the coasts of the Mediterranean region and is at the northerly edge of its range in southern England. The recent confirmation of this plant at three other stations in mainland Britain, together with records from S. E. Ireland and the Netherlands, suggest that it may be extending, or at least consolidating, its range and this might be related to the hotter, more Mediterranean-type summers that we have experienced in the south of England in recent years (Akeroyd 1991). If this is the case, then we may see it turning up on other suitable beaches in this country in the future. Table 1 shows the number of plants known in mainland Britain (excluding the Channel Isles). TABLE 1. POLYGONUM MARITIMUM L. IN BRITAIN Location Number of plants in colony W. Cornwall (v.c. 1), Gunwalloe 250 E. Cornwall (v.c. 2), Lantic Bay 1 S. Hants. (v.c. 11), Christchurch 49 E. Sussex (v.c. 14), Brighton 14 SHORT NOTES 273 There are other factors which have enabled coastal plants to become established at this locality. Unlike many other shingle beaches in Brighton, this one is not regularly bulldozed, perhaps because there is no access. It is not used much by the public and the amount of sea-borne rubbish as well as the tar deter most people. Past threats to the beach have come from plans to extend Volk’s Electric Railway, from Southern Water’s proposal to dump chalk, as well as from over-zealous beach cleaning. These are hopefully no longer a threat, though beach parties and camp fires still occur. Brighton Borough Council has, however, recently declared the beach a Site of Nature Conservation Importance and there is a proposal to extend the adjacent S.S.S.I. to include this site. We hope these measures will protect the plants here and we will be monitoring the site to see if P. maritimum survives and increases. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We should like to express our gratitude to the following for their assistance in the compilation of this note: Dr J. R. Akeroyd, Mrs M. Briggs, P. Bowman, Miss R. Murphy, D. Pearman, Mrs O. M. Stewart and R. Walls. Mrs C. J. Tatar kindly typed the manuscript. REFERENCES AKEROYD, J. R. (1991). Wildlife Reports. Higher Plants. British Wildlife 2: 182-183. Stace, C. A. (1991). New Flora of the British Isles. Cambridge. P. A. HARMES 10 Hillcroft, Mile Oak Road, Portslade, East Sussex, BN4 20D A. SPIERS 69 Elm Grove, Brighton, East Sussex, BN2 3ET WHITE-BLOSSOMED PINGUICULA GRANDIFLORA LAM. (LENTIBULARIACEAE) IN THE BURREN, COUNTY CLARE, IRELAND Pinguicula grandifiora Lam. (Leith Uisce, Kerry (or Large-flowered) Butterwort) has been reported occasionally from Ireland with white flowers. There are late 19th century records, the earliest by “Veronica’ (a nom-de-plume used by Frederick W. Burbidge, curator of Trinity College Botanic Garden, Dublin (cf. Nelson 1987)) being published in The Garden on 11 September 1886: “As peculiar to Ireland, or nearly so, we have . . . Pinguicula vulgaris var. grandiflora [i.e. P. grandiflora|, in white, rosy lavender and dark violet forms’ ({Burbidge] 1886). Scully (1916) recorded that in Co. Kerry while “colour variants are very rarely met with . . . forms with pure white flowers are . . . occasionally seen and have been gathered in the Gap of Dunloe by Lady Godfrey and on the east side of Caragh Lake by Capt. Creaghe-Haward . . . pale lilacforms. . . by Mrs. Jenner from the Gap of Dunloe, and are recorded in the Irish Nat[uralist] 1906, p. 154, as occurring also on the shores of the Lower Lake, Killarney.” No one has reported white-blossomed Kerry Butterwort in more recent decades. In 1903 P. grandiflora was discovered by Professor Ambrose Birmingham at Lisdoonvarna, Co. Clare (Nelson & Walsh 1991), a habitat to the north of the long-known ones in counties Cork and Kerry. In 1949, even further north, near Ballyvaughan, another colony was found (Heslop-Harrison 1949), and in 1973, at about the same latitude, yet another (Roden 1984). These latter colonies, growing in the environs of springs issuing from Carboniferous limestone, are within the region known as The Burren (Webb & Scannell 1983; Nelson & Walsh 1991). In 1956, D. A. Webb collected a plant of P. grandiflora “‘with very pale, almost white flowers’”’ near Ballyvaughan and sent it to Steiger (1987) — nothing more is recorded about this plant, although Webb & Scannell (1983) reported that “for several years around 1970, a small proportion of the plants . . . had flowers of a very pale lilac colour, but searches in 1974 and 1975 failed to rediscover them.” 274 SHORT NOTES During the summers of 1989, 1990, and 1991 in one of The Burren populations, white-flowered plants were seen and photographed by the present author, on the first occasion in company with Mr and Mrs J. Leonard. The flowers were entirely white, without any purple or pink marks or tints; however in 1990 a very young bud of one particular plant, just as it began to rise above the rosette, had a light pink flush but this was not apparent on the fully open flowers at anthesis. In 1989 and 1990 plenty of seed was produced and shed by the white-blossomed plants. Steiger (1987) published a photograph of a series of flowers of P. grandiflora variants, including examples named P. grandiflora f. pallida (Gaudin) Casper and P. grandiflora subsp. rosea (Mutel) Casper. In f. pallida the corolla throat was purple, and in subsp. rosea not only was the calyx purple but the corolla throat was lined with darker pink. The white-blossomed Burren examples did not have coloured markings on the corolla and the calyx is entirely devoid of red pigment. A search of the literature (see e.g. Casper 1962, 1966) suggests that no entirely white variant of P. grandiflora has been described hitherto. P. grandiflora subvar. albescens Rouy (1909: “‘corolle blanche lavée de rose’) could be interpreted as including The Burren variant. (Schlauer (1986) listed ‘‘P. grandiflora Lam. var. albescens Rouy” but I can find no trace of any legitimate publication of the combination at varietal level.) However Rouy’s subvariety has been relegated to synonymy under P. grandiflora subsp. rosea (Casper 1962, 1966) which certainly cannot encompass white-flowered plants (‘‘corollae . . . fauce violacea vel pallida violacea-pilosa . . .”; Casper 1962: 85). To designate the variant with a white corolla as a variety is extravagant, and thus I proposed elsewhere (Nelson & Walsh 1991: 214, 318) that these occasional white-flowered plants should be placed within a distinct form, P. grandiflora f. chionopetra. I suggest (without having any specimens to confirm the proposition) that f. chionopetra may also still occur in Co. Kerry, having been reported from that county before 1903 by Scully (1916). Pinguicula grandifiora Lam. forma chionopetra E. C. Nelson forma nova. Corolla candidissima, vel aliquando alabastrum novellum colore roseo suffusum; calyx flavovir- ens nihil rufescens vel purpurascens. Corolla pure white, or at most the very young unopened flowers tinted pink; calyx yellow-green without red or purple tints. Hototypus: 35 mm Kodachrome 64 colour transparency (no. 16, 25.05.90; accession number 1991.1) [precise locality withheld], County Clare, 12 May 1990, E. C. Nelson (DBN). The epithet chionopetra is derived from chion (snow) and petra (rock), alluding to the white flowers and the unique rocky habitat; it is equally appropriate for plants from Co.. Kerry should this form be collected there again. A colour photograph is designated as the holotype because, for conservation reasons, I considered it was unacceptable to remove material from the solitary plant for preservation as an herbarium specimen. This is permissible under the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, Art. 9, whereby an illustration may be a type of an infraspecific name. REFERENCES [BuRBIDGE, F. W.] ‘Veronica’ (1886). The Irish flora . . . The Garden 30: 239. Casper, S. J. (1962). Pinguicula grandiflora, in Revision der Gattung Pinguicula in Eurasien. Feddes Repertorium Specierum novarum 66: 74-87. CaspER, S. J. (1966). Pinguicula grandiflora, in Monographie der Gattung Pinguicula. Bibliotheca botanica 127- 128: 163-168. Hes.op-Harrison, J. (1949). Pinguicula grandiflora Lam. in N. Clare. Ir. Nat. J. 9: 311. NELSON, E. C. (1987). Who was Veronica of The Garden? Garden History Society Newsletter 20: 3-4. NEtson, E. C. & Watsu, W. F. (1991). The Burren. A companion to the wildflowers of an Irish limestone wilderness. Aberystwyth & Kilkenny. RopENn, C. M. (1984). New stations for Pinguicula grandiflora Lam. and Saxifraga X polita (Haw.) Link in the west of Ireland. /r. Nat. J. 21: 369. Rouvy, G. C. C. (1909). Pinguicula grandiflora, in Flore de France 11, 199-200. Paris. SCHLAUER, J. (1986). Nomenclatural synopsis of carnivorous phanerogamous plants. A world carnivorous plant list. Carnivorous Plant Newsletter 15: 59-117. SHORT NOTES 275 ScuLLY, R. W. (1916). Flora of County Kerry. Dublin. STEIGER, J. F. (1987). Pale-flowered varieties of Pinguicula grandiflora. Carnivorous Plant Newsletter 16: 104— 105. Wess, D. A. & SCANNELL, M. J. P. (1983). Flora of Connemara and the Burren. Cambridge. E. C. NELSON National Botanic Gardens, Glasnevin, Dublin 9, Ireland CORKSCREW RUSH (JUNCUS EFFUSUS L. FORMA SPIRALIS (J. McNAB) HEGI) (JUNCACEAE) IN IRELAND AND BRITAIN Henderson (1992) suggested that the spiral-stemmed variant of Juncus effusus L. (Juncaceae), found in western Scotland and the Northern Isles of Scotland, represents a taxon different from the “original”, long-cultivated one variously called, in common parlance, Corkscrew Rush, Irish Rush, or Spiral Rush. He also stated, incorrectly, that the latter had only been reported once from the wild. The corkscrew rush (J. effusus var. spiralis J. McNab) was first collected by David Bishop (a Scot, one-time curator of Belfast Botanic Garden — see Anon. 1849; Nelson 1984, 1987) in ‘“‘the wilds of Connemara’’, western Ireland, before 1849 and not in “Northern Ireland. . . in 1869” as noted by Henderson (1992) repeating McNab’s (1873a, 1873b) faulty recollection. The exact date of discovery cannot now be ascertained but Bishop died in 1849, so he must have collected the Corkscrew Rush some time earlier. Indeed, the first report of the variant appeared in an obituary of Bishop (Anon. 1849): “this extraordinary plant was exhibited at a meeting of the Botanical Society of Edinburgh, from the collection at Dalkeith, by Mr. James M’Nab, and created great interest .. .” I cannot trace a report of this particular exhibit. Several decades later, in April 1873, James McNab read a brief account of the Corkscrew Rush to the Botanical Society in Edinburgh (McNab 1873a, 1873b), and indicated that it had been on display at the British Association for the Advancement of Science’s 1871 meeting in Edinburgh; again I cannot trace any specific mention of the rush’s appearance at the Association. Henderson (1992) separated the western Scottish Spiral Rush from the Irish one by stating that the latter has “quite erect [stems] . . . much more obviously spiral six to eight turns as against two or three [in Scottish plants]’’, but this is not the case. I have examined living individuals of the Irish Corkscrew Rush, as cultivated in the National Botanic Gardens, Glasnevin, and nursery-grown plants (source unknown) (September 1992); these possessed stems with as many as 14 complete rotations in the spiral, ranging to stems with a single attenuated rotation (the stem was merely curved), as well as erect, untwisted stems. The largest proportion of the spiral stems (50%) had fewer than five rotations; only 33% had 5—9 rotations. The stems projected at all angles, the less spiralled ones tending to spread almost horizontally (i.e. these were suberect) because of the spiral. Thus cultivated plants, propagated vegetatively from long-established Irish stock, do not have the characteristics suggested by Henderson (1992); his variety is dubiously distinct from the cultivated plant. Several herbarium specimens in the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh (see below), have remarkable corkscrewing stems, but clearly these particular stems were selected because of their form; they do not represent accurately the habit and range of spiralling in the original clone. The - earliest illustration of the Corkscrew Rush from Ireland (The Gardeners’ Chronicle and Agricultural Gazette, 10 May 1873: 647 (McNab 1873a; reprinted in McNab 1873b: 503)) showed a plant with erect and spreading stems, some markedly spiralled but many merely curved (Fig. 1), exactly as in those cultivated plants I have examined. A photograph published by Tutenberg (1905) also clearly displays variation in habit. Those authors presumably had plants derived from Bishop’s original collection. As for Irish populations, Praeger (1934: 406), repeating records of this taxon from Inishturk (Co. Mayo, v.c. H27) off the Connemara coast (Praeger 1907: 123 — ‘“‘the form with spreading stems was several times observed’’), stated that it had “‘spreading loosely spiral stems . . . The spiral rush just mentioned would appear to be an Atlantic 276 SHORT NOTES VEN ) Va) 4 \ (Sah Ul a TST TA Figure 1. Corkscrew Rush, Juncus effusus L. forma spiralis (McNab) Hegi; illustration published in The Gardeners’ Chronicle and Agricultural Gazette, 10 May 1873: 647 (designated as neotype herein). form: it is common on many of the Irish western islands, and is stated to be abundant in Orkney...” Praeger (1934: 424) also repeated records from Inishmurray (Co. Sligo, v.c. H28) — ‘Perhaps the most curious plant of the island was a diffuse form of Juncus conglomeratus [= J. effusus; fide Praeger (1934)], the stems of which, instead of growing erect in a compact clump as usual, spread out at every angle, from horizontal to vertical, giving the whole plant a very strange appearance. . . this curious rush was abundant in damp places with the typical form.” (Praeger 1896: 178) —and from Achill Island (Co. Mayo, v.c. H27; Praeger 1934: 408) — “Near Sraheens village occurred a form with widely spreading stems, many of them spirally curved, with several convolutions. I have gathered the same form from Inishmurray, Co. Sligo. Mr Beeby informs me that in Orkney these spiral forms are frequent.”’ (Praeger 1904: 285) Spence (1906, 1914, 1919) reported spiral-stemmed J. effusus from Orkney (v.c. 111), and Druce (1922: 524) and Scott & Palmer (1987: 343) recorded this variant from Shetland (v.c. 112); the latter authors suggested that the spiralling stems are deformed by wind — “Juncus effusus var. spiralis McNab’, recorded from various localities by Druce [1922], was surely no more than a wind-blown state with slightly curved stems, not the monstrosity with corkscrew-like stems which James McNab grew .. .” The Spiral Rush has been recorded in Surrey (v.c. 17) (see list of specimens below, and Leslie 1981), and collected in Carmarthenshire (v.c. 44, see below). SHORT NOTES 277 For at least a century, botanists have assigned to McNab’s variant all plants of J. effusus producing spiral stems. Having examined herbarium material and living plants, I have been unable to detect any difference between the variable Irish original and Henderson’s newly described taxon. Perhaps a case can be made on the basis of habit — that western Scottish plants lack any erect stems — but the range of variation within ‘populations’ of vegetatively propagated plants is so substantial that such an argument could not be justified. I conclude, therefore, that all plants of this species with spiral stems, irrespective of the degree of spiralling or angle of inclination, should be placed, as generally done by previous authors, within the same taxon. Henderson’s varietal epithet is deemed unnecessary and is here relegated to synonymy. The status of the Spiral Rush is debatable. McNab (1873b) and Henderson (1992) reported that seedlings have spiralling stems so it is a distinct genotype. While horticulturists have considered it little more than a cultivar (J. effusus ‘Spiralis’ is then the valid name; cf. Nelson 1984), its occurrence in the wild, especially in western Ireland and Scotland, suggests that it deserves recognition as a botanical variety or form. As the variant is clearly distinguished from the common rush only by its spiral stems, both erect and spreading, I suggest it is best treated as a botanical form; it does not warrant recognition at varietal level. _ Hegi (1909: Bd 2: 147, fig. 274) was the first author to employ the epithet ‘spiralis’ at form level (Juncus effusus f. spiralis). Hegi did not attribute the epithet to any author and did not cite McNab’s original paper, but it is unlikely that he was doing anything other than employing McNab’s well- known epithet for the cultivated Irish plant at a revised rank; he was not describing a new taxon. To argue that Hegi was describing a new taxon is unhelpful, because his epithet ‘spiralis’ becomes illegitimate (Arts. 24. note 1: 64.4) and a new epithet becomes necessary for the form. Praeger (1934: entry no. 406) also used J. effusus f. spiralis; he did not acknowledge Hegi but did refer to Spence’s note (1919) which in turn referred to an earlier account (Spence 1906) that contains explicit mention of McNab’s description (1873b). The synonymy may be summarised as follows: Juncus effusus L. forma spiralis (J. McNab) Hegi, I/lustrierte Flora von Mittel-Europa, 1909: Bd. 2(16), 147. Basionym: J. effusus var. spiralis J. McNab, Gard. Chron. 10 May 1873: 647, fig. 125; Trans. bot. Soc. Edinb. 11 (1873): 502-504. Neotype: [here designated] icon in Gard. Chron. 10 May 1873: 647, fig. 125. Synonym: J. effusus var. suberectus D. M. Henderson, Watsonia 19 (1992): 133-134. Holotype: Big Sand, Gairloch, W. Ross, v.c. 105, 6 December 1988, D. M. Henderson (E!). Other specimens examined: Sandy edge of site of Frensham Great Pond, Surrey, v.c. 17, [19 August 1943], A. J. Wilmott 19430819 (BM); ‘“‘grouse moor . . . Carmarthenshire Vans”, v.c. 44, 12 August 1904, E. Milner- Jones (K); Orkney, v.c. 111, 1 September 1906, M. Spence (E); Deerness, Orkney, v.c. 111, September 1908, M. Spence (BM); Rannsdale, Orphir, Mainland, Orkney, v.c. 111, 10 September 1923, H. H. Johnston 2474 (E, BM, K); Sutherland, Flotta, Orkney, v.c. 111, 15 August 1932, J. Sinclair 762 (E); Mainland, Shetland, v.c. 112, June 1890, R. M. Barrington (DBN); roadside, Lax Firth, Mainland, Shetland, v.c. 112, 27 July 1950, J. E. Lousley (K); by burn of Sandibanks, Scalloway, Mainland, Shetland, v.c. 112, 25 July 1950, J. E. Lousley (K); near Sraheens, Achill Island, v.c. H27, 30 July 1904, R. Li. Praeger (DBN); boggy place centre of island [Inishtrahull, Co. Donegal], v.c. H34, 16 August 1939, D. J. Sullivan (DBN). Cultivated specimens: Edin[burgh] Bot. Garden, September 1876, F.M.W. (E); Botanic Garden [Edinburgh], 1886, (E); Wakehurst Place, Sussex (acc. no. 000-69-19251), 20 July 1980, S. Andrews (K); sine loc. (‘Herb. Hort. Kew’), Aug. 1881 (K). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I must express my gratitude to Arthur Chater, Dr R. K. Brummitt, C. D. Preston and Dr John Edmondson for their helpful comments on a draft of this paper, and to the Royal Botanic Garden, 278 SHORT NOTES Edinburgh, the National Museums & Galleries on Merseyside, Liverpool, the Royal Botanic | Gardens, Kew, and the Natural History Museum, London, for loans of herbarium specimens. REFERENCES Anonymous (1849). ‘“‘Mr David Bishop . . . [obituary]’’. Cottage Gardener 2: 306-307. Druce, G. C. (1922). Flora zetlandica. Rep. botl Soc. Exch. Club Brit. Isl. 6: 457-526. Heci, G. (1909). [Juncus effusus f. spiralis]. Illustrierte Flora von Mittel-Europa. Bd. 2(16): 147, fig. 274. Munich. HENDERSON, D. M. (1992). A new spiral variant of Juncus effusus L. (Juncaceae). Watsonia 19: 133-134. LesuiE, A. C. (1981). The flora of Wisley and Ockham Commons, with Chantley Heath, Surrey. London Naturalist 60: 21-26. McNas, J. (1873a). Remarks on Juncus effusus spiralis and the varieties of ferns. Gard. Chron. 10 May 1873: 647. McNas, J. (1873b). Remarks on Juncus effusus spiralis and the varieties of ferns. Trans. bot. Soc. Edinb. 11: 502-504. NELSON, E. C. (1984). [Juncus effusus ‘Spiralis’| in An Irish flower garden, pp. 23-24. Kilkenny. NELSON, E. C. (1987). Scottish connections in Irish botany and horticulture. Scottish Nat. 1987: 3-31. PRAEGER, R. L. (1896). The plants of Inishmurray, Co. Sligo. Irish Nat. 5: 177-178. PRAEGER, R. L. (1904). The flora of Achill Island. Irish Nat. 13: 265-289. PRAEGER, R. L. (1907). The flora of Inishturk. Irish Nat. 16: 113-125. PRAEGER, R. L. (1934). The botanist in Ireland, entry number 406. Dublin. Scott, W. & PALMER, R. (1987). The flowering plants and ferns of the Shetland Islands. Lerwick. SPENCE, M. (1906). Note on Juncus effusus, var. spiralis. Trans. bot. Soc. Edinb. 23: 233. SPENCE, M. (1914). Flora orcadensis, p. 78. Kirkwall. SPENCE, M. (1919). Juncus effusus spiralis. J. Bot., Lond. 57: 69. TUTTENBERG, F. (1905). Juncus effusus var. spiralis. Gartenflora 54: 406-407, abb. 53. E. C. NELSON National Botanic Gardens, Glasnevin, Dublin 9, Ireland Watsonia, 19, 279-295 (1993) 279 Plant Records Records for publication must be submitted to the appropriate Vice-county Recorder (see B.S.B.I. Year Book for 1993), and not the Editors. The records must normally be of species, hybrids or subspecies of native or naturalized plants belonging to one or more of the following categories: 1st or 2nd v.c. record; Ist post-1930 v.c. record; only extant v.c. locality, or 2nd such locality; a record of an extension of range by more than 100 km. Such records will also be accepted for the major islands in v.cc. 102-104 and 110. Only 1st records can normally be accepted for Rubus, Hieracium and hybrids. Records for subdivisions of vice-counties will not be treated separately; they must therefore be records for the vice-county as a whole. Records of Taraxacum are now being dealt with separately, by Dr A. J. Richards, and will be published at a later date. Records are arranged in the order given in the List of vascular plants of the British Isles by D. H. Kent (1992), from which the species’ numbers, taxonomy and nomenclature are taken. The B.S.B.I. is to set up a procedure to register changes to this list, and a number of records of additional species have been held over until the new arrangements are in place. The Ordnance Survey national grid reference follows the habitat and locality. With the exception of collectors’ initials, herbarium abbreviations are those used in British and Irish herbaria by D. H. Kent & D. E. Allen (1984). Records are field records if no other source is stated. Records from the following vice-counties are included in the text below: 2, 4-6, 9, 11, 14, 17, 21, 22, 24-30, 35, 38, 39, 41-53, 57-59, 64, 67-73, 75, 77-81, 83, 85-87, 89, 93, 98-103, 108. The following signs are used: * before the record: to indicate a new vice-county record. + before the species number: to indicate that the plant is not a native species of the British Isles. + before the record: to indicate a species which, though native in some parts of the British Isles, is not so in the locality recorded. [] enclosing a previously published record: to indicate that the record should be deleted. 4/1.1. EQUISETUM HYEMALE 42, Brecs.: Stream-bank near Hay-on-Wye, SO/243.404. W. J. H. Price, 1992. 2nd record. 98, Main Argyll: Stony flush, Coire Dearg, Fraochaidh, NN/043.518. R. Leishman et al., 1992. 2nd record. 108, W. Sutherland: Banks of burn, Allt na h-Airbhe, NC/ 12.23. P. A. & I. M. Evans, 1992, herb. I.M.E. 2nd confirmed post-1930 record. 4/1.8 X 9. EQUISETUM PALUSTRE X E. TELMATEIA (E. X FONT-QUERI) *11,S. Hants.: Roadside, South Baddesley, Boldre, SZ/349.966. M. W. Rowe, 1991, E, det. C. N. Page. 9/1.1. PILULARIA GLOBULIFERA *108, W. Sutherland: Loch Borralan, NC/26.10. E. Charter, 1983. Shallow water, Cam Loch, NC/22.12. P. A. & I. M. Evans, 1992, herb. I.M.E. 1st and 2nd records. 11/1.1 x 2. PoOLYPODIUM VULGARE X P. INTERJECTUM (P. X MANTONIAE) *64, Mid-W. Yorks.: Hackfall Wood, Grewelthorpe, SE/23.77. D. J. & J.S. Tennant, 1991, det. R. H. Roberts. wey Ayrs.: Cliffs, Ailsa Craig, NX/02.99. B. Zonfrillo, 1992, det. A. McG. Stirling. 11/1.2. POLYPODIUM INTERJECTUM *64, Mid-W. Yorks.: Near Beezley Falls, Ingleton, SD/ 70.74. D. J. Tennant, 1979. Scotton Banks, Knaresborough, SE/33.57. D. J. Tennant, 1985. 1st and 2nd records, both det. R. H. Roberts. 15/2.5c. ASPLENIUM TRICHOMANES subsp. PACHYRACHIS *67, S. Northumb.: Calcareous rock wall, Hareshaw Linn near Bellingham, NY/842.854. J. M. Ide, 1992, BM, det. A. C. Jermy. 15/2.6. ASPLENIUM TRICHOMANES-RAMOSUM *46, Cards.: Wheelpit and shafts of leadmine, Esgair-Fraith, SN/741.912. S. P. Chambers & J. A. Martin, 1992. 17/1.1. POLYSTICHUM SETIFERUM 59, S. Lancs.: Base of wall near Chorlton Brook, Chorlton, SJ/813.931. D. Bishop, 1991. 1st post-1930 record. 17/3.2 X 3. DRYOPTERIS FILIX-MAS X D. AFFINIS (D. X COMPLEXA) *58, Cheshire: Trackside, Roman Lakes, Marple, SJ/968.876. B. Porter, 1992, NMW, det. H. Corley. 280 PLANT RECORDS 17/3.3b. DRYOPTERIS AFFINIS Subsp. CAMBRENSIS *83, Midlothian: Rocky moorland slope N. of | White Craig, NT/072.543. D. R. McKean, 1992, det. A. C. Jermy. 17/3.8 X 9. DRYOPTERIS CARTHUSIANA X D. DILATATA (D. X DEWEVERI) *83, Midlothian: Marshy area in wood, Hermands Birchwood S.W.T. Reserve near West Calder, NT/0.6. A. F. Dyer, 1986, E, conf. C. N. Page. 26/2.2. NUPHAR PUMILA *73, Kirkcudbrights.: Kirriereoch Loch, NX/364.866. O. M. Stewart, 1991. B: +28/6.1 X var. ACONITUM NAPELLUS X A. VARIEGATUM (A. X CAMMARUM) *44, Carms.: Roadside verge, Llangunnor Road, Carmarthen, SN/422.196. G. Hutchinson, 1990, NMW. *50, Denbs.: Roadside, Trefnant, SJ/056.712. G. Battershall, 1992. 28/13.7. RANUNCULUS PARVIFLORUS 24, Bucks.: Grazed turf by old gravel pit S. of Ritchings Park, TQ/038.782. D. Green, 1992. 1st post-1930 record. 28/13.14. RANUNCULUS REPTANS *98, Main Argyll: Sandy silt on loch shore, Loch Awe near Collaig, NN/022.204. B. H. Thompson, 1992, LTR, det. R. J. Gornall. 28/17.3. THALICTRUM FLAVUM 45, Pembs.: Tall fen, Castlemartin Corse, SR/899.997. F. A. Abraham, 1992. 2nd record. 729/2.1. MAHONIA AQUIFOLIUM *77, Lanarks.: Roadside bank between Biggar and Coulter, NT/0.3. A. C. & P. Macpherson, 1992. +30/1.1. PAPAVER ORIENTALE *73, Kirkcudbrights.: Disused quarry E. of Haugh of Urr, NX/ 805.673. O. M. Stewart, 1992. +31/2.2 CORYDALIS CAVA 6, N. Somerset: Dominant plant in ground flora, Terrace Wood, Ston Easton, ST/630.540. S. Preddy, 1992. ist record since 1922 record from Ston Easton. 40/2.1 X +2. ALNUS GLUTINOSA X A. INCANA (A. X PUBESCENS) *46, Cards.: Wet alder wood and adjacent waste ground, Llanilar railway station, SN/628.752. A. O. Chater, 1992, NMW. +40/2.2. ALNUSINCANA *50, Denbs.: Roadside wood, Llanfair Dyffryn Clwyd, SJ/169.506. J. A. Green, 1992. +43/3.1. ATRIPLEX HORTENSIS *58, Cheshire: Shore just above tideline, Hoylake, §J/210.890. V. Gordon, 1992. 43/3.4. ATRIPLEX LONGIPES *77, Lanarks.: Tidal shore of R. Clyde, Linthouse, Glasgow, NS/ 53.66. P. Macpherson, 1985, herb. P. M., det. J. M. Mullin. Not refound. 43/4.1a. BETA VULGARIS subsp. MARITIMA 75, Ayrs.: Shingle near mouth of Pinbain Burn, Lendalfoot, NX/138.916. A. McG. Stirling, 1992. Only extant locality. 43/6.4. SALICORNIA OBSCURA *6, N. Somerset: Bare mud of lower salt marsh, St George’s Wharf, Easton-in-Gordano, ST/495.779. M. A. R. & C. Kitchen, 1991, det. F. Rose. 43/6.6. SALICORNIA FRAGILIS *6, N. Somerset: Pebbly, sandy bare area in lower salt marsh, St George’s Wharf, Easton-in-Gordano, ST/492.775. M. A. R. & C. Kitchen, 1991, det. F. Rose. +46/1.4. ARENARIA BALEARICA 43, Rads.: Silty concrete top of unfinished dam, Dolymynach Reservoir, SN/909.619. R. G. Woods, 1992. 2nd record. 46/7.11. CERASTIUM PUMILUM 50, Denbs.: Limestone grassland, Rhyd y Foel, SN/917.777, and Colwyn Bay, SN/830.799. Both G. Battershall, 1992. 1st and 2nd post-1930 records. 46/9.1. MOENCHIA ERECTA *41, Glam.: By paths through Agrostis curtisii heath on S.-facing hillside E. of Nottill, SS/537.885. Q. O. N. Kay, 1992, NMW. 44, Carms.: Dry, S.-facing bank near Cynghordy, SN/820.390. I. K. Morgan, 1992, NMW, conf. G. Hutchinson. 2nd post-1930 record. 46/17.3. SPERGULARIA MARINA *80, Roxburghs.: Edge of A6088 road near Southdeanrig, NT/ 646.085. Edge of A68 road near Mossburnford, NT/663.155. Both M. E. Braithwaite, 1992, herb. PLANT RECORDS 281 R. W. M. Corner. ist and 2nd records. 81, Berwicks.: Edge of A697 road near Carfraemill, NT/ 517.526. M. E. Braithwaite, 1992, herb. M.E.B. 1st inland record. +46/18.1. LYCHNIS CORONARIA *51, Flints.: Track leading to disused sand pit near Ddél Uchaf N.R., Ysceifiog, SS/140.715. J. Hughes, 1992. 746/22.2. SAPONARIA OCYMOIDES *28, W. Norfolk: Steep wooded bank, King’s Lynn, TF/ 625.189. R. M. Payne, 1992. 46/25.5. DIANTHUS DELTOIDES *79, Selkirks.: Rocky basic pasture, Tinnis Top, Old Tinnis, NT/383.292. D. J. Methven, 1992, conf. R. W. M. Corner. 747/1.7. PERSICARIA AMPLEXICAULIS *39, Staffs.: Rough grassland by A515, Draycott in the Clay, SK/159.295. J. Clarke, 1992, herb. B. R. Fowler. 47/1.11 X 14. PERSICARIA MACULOSA X P. HYDROPIPER (P. X INTERCEDENS) *30, Beds.: Bank of R. Great Ouse, Great Barford, TL/13.52. J. G. & C. M. Dony, 1987, LTN, conf. J. Timson. 47/1.12. PERSICARIA LAPATHIFOLIA 80, Roxburghs.: Field margin, Clarilaw, Hawick, NT/ 525.184. M. E. Braithwaite, 1992, herb. R. W. M. Corner, det. J. R. Akeroyd. 1st confirmed post- 1930 record. 47/1.16. PERSICARIA MINOR 44, Carms.: Edge of pond, Gwaith Go-Bach Pond, Dinefwr Castle Woods, SN/619.221. I. K. Morgan, 1992, NMW, det. G. Hutchinson. 2nd record. 67, S. Northumb.: Stony lake margin, Greenlee Lough, NY/772.695. G. A. & M. Swan, 1992, herb. G.A.S., det. J. R. Akeroyd. 2nd record. 47/4.1. POLYGONUM MARITIMUM *14, E. Sussex: Stable shingle beach, W. side of Brighton Marina, TQ/33.03. A. Spiers, 1992, herb. P. A. Harmes, conf. J. R. Akeroyd. 15 plants. (see pp. 271-273.) 47/4.5. POLYGONUM BOREALE *73, Kirkcudbrights.: Vegetable patch, New Abbey, West Maryfield, NX/970.664. O. M. Stewart, 1991, conf. D. R. McKean. Still present in 1992. Turnip field, Milnmark, NX/657.820. O. M. Stewart, 1992, E, conf. J. R. Akeroyd. 1st and 2nd records. 103, Mid Ebudes: Ground trampled by cattle, The Reef, Tiree, NM/006.449. B. H. Thompson, 1990, GLAM, det. B. T. Styles. 2nd record. 47/5.41 X +2. FALLOPIA JAPONICA X F. SACHALINENSIS (F. X BOHEMICA) *50, Denbs.: Waste ground, Wrexham, SJ/338.490. K. Watson, 1992, conf. V. Gordon. *59, S. Lancs.: Waste ground beneath Pier, Southport, SD/833.177. V. Gordon, 1992, det. A. P. Conolly. 47/8.13b. RUMEX CRISPUS subsp. LITTOREUS *58, Cheshire: Boulder clay sea-cliffs, Thurstas- ton, SJ/23.83. G. M. Kay, 1992. *98, Main Argyll: Coastal shingle and rock, Loch Gilp, NR/ 86.85. A. McG. Stirling & B. H. Thompson, 1992. Rocky shore, W. coast of Kerrera, NM/80.29. B. H. Thompson, 1992. 1st and 2nd records. 47/8.13b X 18. RUMEX CRISPUS subsp. LITTOREUS X R. PULCHER (R. X PSEUDOPULCHER) 725, E. Suffolk: Stable shingle, Aldeburgh, TM/46.56. G. D. Kitchener, 1992, herb. G. D. K., conf. J. R. Akeroyd. Recorded here in 1976 by J. R. Akeroyd & C. D. Preston. Ist ever record of this hybrid with subsp. littoreus as R. crispus parent. — 47/8.13 xX 19. RUMEX cRISPUS X R. OBTUSIFOLIUS (R. X PRATENSIS) *103, Mid Ebudes: ‘Garden, Isle of Erraid, NM/30.20. J. W. Clark, 1992, E, det. D. R. McKean. 47/8.20. RUMEX PALUSTRIS *24, Bucks.: Dry, overgrown ditch between Colnebrook and Sutton, TQ/025.781. D. Green, 1992, AYM. 48/1.10d. LIMONIUM BRITANNICUM subsp. CELTICUM *69, Westmorland: On limestone, Frith Hall, estuary of R. Leven, SD/3.7. W. H. Pearsall, 1916, YRK. Stonework of Arnside railway viaduct, SD/4.7. C. Webb, 1988, LANC. 1st and 2nd records of species, both det. M. Ingrouille. 51/1.7b. HYPERICUM MACULATUM subsp. OBTUSIUSCULUM *81, Berwicks.: Woodland edge near Carfraemill, NT/510.529. M. E. Braithwaite, 1992, herb. M.E.B. 1st record since 1938 and only extant locality. 282 PLANT RECORDS 51/1.12. HyPERICUM PULCHRUM 75, Ayrs.: Ailsa Craig, NS/01.00. B. Zonfrillo, 1992, GL. 1st record from Ailsa Craig. 52/1.1. TILIA PLATYPHYLLOS +*50, Denbs.: Hedge, Colwyn Bay, SH/837.778. G. Battershall, 1992. 53/1.1. MALVA MOSCHATA +*98, Main Argyll: Area of hard-standing, Loch Ederline, NM/ 870.029. A. McG. Stirling & B. H. Thompson, 1992. 753/1.2. MALVA ALCEA *41, Glam.: Waste ground, Sully, ST/163.679. S. G. Lambert, 1991, NMW, det. D. McClintock. 1st Welsh record. +53/1.6. MALVA PUSILLA *28, W. Norfolk: Waste ground by track in Oxborough Wood, TF/ 722.012. J. E. Caffney, 1992, det. N. K. B. Robson. 53/3.1. ALTHAEA OFFICINALIS 28, W. Norfolk: Dikeside, Marshland St James, TF/503.103. R. M. Payne, 1992. 2nd record. 57/1.4 X 6. VIOLA RIVINIANA X V. CANINA (V. X INTERSITA) *73, Kirkcudbrights.: Disused railway, Waterside, NX/723.676. O. M. Stewart, 1992, det. A. J. Silverside. 57/1.6. VIOLA CANINA 83, Midlothian: Forest ride, Gladsmuir, NT/919.572. J. Muscott, 1992. 1st post-1930 record. 457/1.11 xX 12 X alt. VIOLA X WITTROCKIANA *71, Man: Dumped garden rubbish, Ramsey Mooragh, SC/451.955. L. S. Garrad, 1989. 61/2.2 X 3. SALIX FRAGILIS X S. ALBA (S. X RUBENS) *47, Monts.: River bank, Cilcewydd, Welshpool, SJ/227.034. I. C. Trueman, 1991, det. C. A. Sinker. +61/2.6. SALIX DAPHNOIDES 44, Carms.: Coastal dunes, Pembrey Forest, SN/405.012. R. D. Pryce et al., 1992, NMW, det. G. Hutchinson. / 61/2.9 X 12. SALIx VIMINALIS X S. AURITA (S. X FRUTICOSA) *47, Monts.: River bank, Cilcewydd, Welshpool, SJ/226.033. I. C. Trueman, 1991, det. C. A. Sinker. 61/2.10 X 12. SALIX CAPREA X S. AURITA (S. X CAPREOLA) *46, Cards.: Scrub on riverbank, Afon Rheidol by Glanyrafon Industrial Estate, SN/614.804. A. O. Chater, 1991, NMW, conf. R. D. Meikle. 61/2.12 x 15. SALIX AURITA X S. PHYLICIFOLIA (S. X LUDIFICANS) *83, Midlothian: Marsh by Gala Water, Heriot House, NT/40.54. R. Learmouth, 1992, herb. R.L., det. R. D. Meikle. 761/2.13. SALIX ERIOCEPHALA *46, Cards.: Amongst Molinia caerulea on bank of Afon Ystwyth, Llanfarian, SN/588.778. S. P. Chambers & A. O. Chater, 1992, NMW, conf. R. D. Meikle. +62/7.1. ERYSIMUM CHEIRANTHOIDES *46, Cards.: Newly reconstructed verge of A44(T), Lovesgrove, SN/631.811. A. O. Chater, 1992, NMW. 62/12.5. RORIPPA SYLVESTRIS *93, N. Aberdeen: Waste ground, Insch, NJ/629.278. D. Welch, 1992, ABD, conf. T. C. G. Rich. +62/16.1. AUBRIETA DELTOIDEA 50, Denbs.: Disused quarry N. of Bryn Euryn, SH/8.8. R. Lewis, 1992. 2nd record. 62/21.4. DRABA MURALIS +*52, Anglesey: Disused limestone quarry near Llangoed, SH/60.81. D. F. Evans, 1991. 62/22.3. EROPHILA GLABRESCENS *79, Selkirks.: Rocks by R. Tweed below Yair Bridge, NT/ 459.325. *80, Roxburghs.: Rocky pasture, Smailholm Craigs, NT/637.347. Both R. W. M. Corner, 1991, herb. R.W.M.C., det. T. T. Elkington. 62/30.3. LEPIDIUM HETEROPHYLLUM 28, W. Norfolk: Field edge, Marham, TF/732.103. J. Williamson, 1992, det. K. A. & G. Becket. 2nd record. PLANT RECORDS 283 62/30.5. LEPIDIUM RUDERALE 70, Cumberland: Gullery, S. end of Rockcliffe Marsh, NY/ 310.626. D. Hawker, 1992, LANC. Disturbed roadside verge, Brunstock, Carlisle, NY/426.592. P. Burton, 1992, LANC. Ist records since 1908. +62/30.8. LEPIDIUM DRABA 81, Berwicks.: Railway bank, Reston, NT/878.619. A. R. Jermyn, 1992. 1st record since 1892. Side of A6112 road between Duns and Grantshouse, NT/812.645. M. E. & P. F. Braithwaite, 1992. 2nd extant locality. 762/30.8b. LEPIDIUM DRABA subsp. CHALEPENSE *6, N. Somerset: Salt marsh, St George’s Wharf, Portbury, ST/500.780. M. A. R. & C. Kitchen, 1991, det. T. C. G. Rich. *29, Cambs.: Waste area at corner of arable field, Morden Grange chalkpit, TL/295.401. A. Showler, 1992, det. TFaGsG Rich: +62/36.1. ERUCASTRUM GALLICUM *5, S. Somerset: Disturbed roadside bank, Bayford, ST/ 728.290. I. P. Green, 1992. Gravel heap, Henstridge Marsh, ST/754.200. I. P. Green, 1992. 1st and 2nd records. 762/37.1b. CoINCYA MONENSIS subsp. RECURVATA 44, Carms.: Penrhyngwyn, Machynys, Llanelli, SS/517.973. I. K. Morgan, 1992. NMW, det. G. Hutchinson. 2nd record. +62/38.1. HIRSCHFELDIA INCANA *42, Brecs.: Roadside verge near Brecon, SO/067.278. M. Porter, 1991. *71, Man: Tip S.W. of Point of Ayre, NX/460.040. B. A. Tregale, 1988. 63/1.3. RESEDA LUTEA *93, N. Aberdeen: Disused gravel pit, Memsie, NJ/985.620. D. Welch, 1991, ABD. 64/1.1b. EMPETRUM NIGRUM subsp. HERMAPHRODITICUM 73, Kirkcudbrights.: Rocky ground on E. side of Carlin’s Cairn, Corserine, NX/498.882. R. W. M. Corner, 1992, E. 2nd record. 65/13.2. VACCINIUM MICROCARPUM *93, N. Aberdeen: Sphagnum flush, Buck of Cabrach, NJ/ 417.238. R. W. M. Corner, 1991, herb. D. Welch. 2nd record. 66/1.3. PYROLA ROTUNDIFOLIA *93, N. Aberdeen: Acidic flush, Buck of Cabrach, NJ/413.239. R. W. M. Corner, 1992. ist localised record. 67/1.1b. MONOTROPA HYPOPITYS subsp. HYPOPHEGEA +58, Cheshire: Large colony in old tree nursery, Priory Gardens Reserve, Sale, SJ/802.926. A. & S. Bell, 1992. Only extant locality. 69/1.2. PRIMULA ELATIOR *24, Bucks.: Ancient woodland over calcareous clay, Bovington Great Wood, TL/002.052. R. Mabey, 1977. Heather Grove, SP/994.055. R. Mabey, 1977-1989. 1st and 2nd records. 69/1.3. PRIMULA VERIS 73, Kirkcudbrights.: Short turf near shore, Burnfoot, NX/742.446. O. M. Stewart, 1991. Only extant locality. +69/4.4. LYSIMACHIA CILIATA 98, Main Argyll: Damp ground by Loch Ederline, NM/870.029. A. McG. Stirling & B. H. Thompson, 1992. 2nd record. 69/8.1. SAMOLUS VALERANDI *24, Bucks.: Margin of lake formed after gravel extraction, Great Linford, SP/845.439. C. Machaddie, R. Maycock & A. Woods, 1991. 172/1.1. ESCALLONIA MACRANTHA *49, Caerns.: Woodland edge, Coed Tan yr Allt between Pontwgan and Rowen, SH/761.717. R. Lewis, 1992, NMW, det. R. G. Ellis & G. Hutchinson. +72/2.4. RIBES SANGUINEUM *98, Main Argyll: Forest roadside, Minard Castle, NR/970.951. B. H. Thompson, 1992. +73/1.3. CRASSULA HELMSII *30, Beds.: Pond near Podington, SP/937.628. M. Powell, 1988, LTN, conf. C. R. Boon. *70, Cumberland: Water 70 cm deep, Lord’s Bay, Derwent Water, NY/266.218. G. Halliday, 1992, LANC, det. C. D. Preston. +73/5.7. SEDUM SPURIUM *28, W. Norfolk: On concrete, Ickburgh, TL/823.950. K. A. Beckett, 1992. 284 PLANT RECORDS +73/5.10. SEDUM RUPESTRE *98, Main Argyll: Steep bank between road and seashore near Kilchoan, Loch Melfort, NM/803.131. B. H. Thompson, 1992. Churchyard wall between North Connel and Ardchattan, NM/944.359. B. H. Thompson, 1992. Ist and 2nd records. +74/4.1. DARMERA PELTATA *73, Kirkcudbrights.: Marshy ground, Carruchan, NX/949.734. O. M. Stewart, 1992. +75/3.1 X 3. SPIRAEA SALICIFOLIA X S. DOUGLASII (S. X PSEUDOSALICIFOLIA) *29, Cambs.: By footpath leading from road between Swavesey and Over, TL/368.701. J. C. A. Rathwell, 1992, CGE. 1st confirmed record. +75/3.2. SPIRAEA ALBA 70, Cumberland: Roadside hedge, Aikshaw, Westnewton, NY/ 124.463. E. Marper, 1992, LANC, det. A. J. Silverside. 1st record since 1876 collection from same site. +75/3.2 X 3. SPIRAEA ALBA X S. DOUGLASII (S. X BILLARDI) *75, Ayrs.: Side of A736 at Bloak Moss, Kilwinning, NS/36.45. J. Flanagan & K. Cruikshank, 1976, herb. A. J. Silverside, det. A.J. S. Overgrown river shingle, R. Stinchar near Colmonell, NX/1.8. A. McG. Stirling, 1991, E, det. A. J. Silverside. Ist and 2nd records. 775/3.6. SPIRAEA CANESCENS *46, Cards.: Rocky scrub, Allt Goch quarries, Cwrtnewydd, SN/ 491.483. A. O. Chater, 1991, NMW. +75/8.6. RUBUS PARVIFLORUS *50, Denbs.: Deciduous wood, Gresford, SJ/340.542. K. Watson, 1992, det. V. Gordon. +75/8.8. RUBUS PHOENICOLASIUS *4, N. Devon: Sourton Quarry, SX/523.896. L. J. Margetts, 1992, herb. W. H. Tucker. *77, Lanarks.: Pebbly shore of Canting Basin, Old Princes Dock, Glasgow, NS/56.65. P. Macpherson, 1991, herb. P.M., det. A. Newton. 75/8.16. RUBUS BRIGGSIANUS *5, S. Somerset: Forest ride, Staple Hill, ST/23.16. L. J. Margetts, 1991, det. A. Newton. 75/8.45. RUBUS CRUDELIS *27, E. Norfolk: Hedgerow by lane near woodland, Saxthorpe, TG/ 11.32. A. L. Bull, 1992, herb. A.L.B., det. A. Newton. Extension of range c. 160 km northwards. +75/8.55. RUBUS LACINIATUS *4, N. Devon: Car park, Tiverton, SS/960.128. B. Benfield, 1992. 75/8.98. RUBUS CURVISPINOSUS *21, Middlesex: Bushy slope and open woodland, East Heath, Hampstead. TQ/28.86. D. E. Allen, 1992, BM, conf. A. Newton. 75/8.117. RUBUS POLYANTHEMUS 75, Ayrs.: Shingle shore near the pier, Ailsa Craig, NX/ 02.99. B. Zonfrillo, 1992, GL, det. A. McG. Stirling. 1st Ailsa Craig record. 78/8.123. RUBUS SEPTENTRIONALIS *11, S. Hants.: Under gorse, Rockford Common, SU/ 17.08. D. E. Allen, 1986, herb. D.E.A., det. A. Newton. 75, Ayrs.: Ailsa Craig, NX/0.9. B. Zonfrillo, 1992, GL, det. A. McG. Stirling. 1st Ailsa Craig record. 75/8.134. RUBUS ARMENIACUS *98, Main Argyll: Side of road to Bonawe Ferry, Taynuilt, NN/- 0.3. A. McG. Stirling, 1992. 75/8.136. RUBUS HYLOPHILUS *11, S. Hants.: Among gorse, Hamble Common, SU/484.059. D.E. Allen, 1992, BM, det. A. Newton. 75/8.142. RUBUS ULMIFOLIUS 75, Ayrs.: Near the lighthouse, Ailsa Craig, NX/024.997. B. Zonfrillo, 1992, GL, det. A. McG. Stirling. 1st Ailsa Craig record. 75/8.156. RUBUS LEUCOSTACHYS *25, E. Suffolk: By path through woodland, Martlesham, TM/257.464. A. L. Bull, 1991, herb. A.L.B., conf. A. Newton. *27, E. Norfolk: Secondary woodland, Pretty Corner, Sheringham, TG/15.41. A. L. Bull, 1992, herb. A.L.B., conf. A. Newton. 75/8.172. RUBUS MUCRONATOIDES *42, Brecs.: Deciduous wood, Llandefaelog-fach, SO/ 028.324. M. Porter, 1990, herb. M.P., conf. A. Newton. PLANT RECORDS 285 75/8.206. RUBUS ANISACANTHOS *27, E. Norfolk: Tilia cordata wood, Hockering Wood, TG/ 0.1. A. L. Bull, 1992, herb. A.L.B., det. A. Newton. 75/8.224. RUBUS BLOXAMII *42, Brecs.: Ride in plantation, Crychan Forest N. of Glan Dulas, SN/87.42. M. Porter, 1991, herb. M.P., det. A. Newton. 75/8.270 RUBUS HYLOCHARIS *11, S. Hants.: Wood margin, Johnston’s Coppice, Purbrook, SU/689.078. D. E. Allen, 1992, BM, det. A. Newton. _ 75/8.305. RUBUS BRITANNICUS *11, S. Hants.: Gundymoor Wood, Havant, SU/69.07. D. E. Allen, 1992, BM, det. A. Newton. *27, E. Norfolk: Wood margin, Wolferton Park, TG/16.31. A. L. Bull, 1992, herb. A.L.B., det. A. Newton. 75/8.313. RUBUS NEMOROSUS *42, Brecs.: Riverbank, Llanhamlach, SO/078.274. M. Porter, 1991, herb. M.P., conf. A. Newton. 75/9.2. POTENTILLA PALUSTRIS 5, S. Somerset: Elworthy, ST/065.240. P. R. Green, 1992. 2nd record. 75/9.13 X 15. POTENTILLA ERECTA X P. REPTANS (P. X ITALICA) *73, Kirkcudbrights.: Steep grassy bank, Little Raebury, NX/704.436. O. M. Stewart, 1991, E, det. D. R. McKean. +75/18.3. ACAENA OVALIFOLIA *98, Main Argyll: Forest roadside above Benmore Gardens, NS/137.856. B.H. Thompson, 1990, conf. P. F. Yeo. 75/19.10b. ALCHEMILLA FILICAULIS subsp. VESTITA 46, Cards.: Neutral grassland in meadow by Ddol-wen, S.E. of Aberaeron, SN/467.611. A. O. Chater, 1992, NMW. 2nd record. 75/21.4 X 11. ROSA ARVENSIS X R. STYLOSA (R. X PSEUDORUSTICANA) *29, Cambs.: Narrow ride, Triangle Ride, Hayley Wood, TL/291.532. C. D. Preston & A. L. Primavesi, 1992, CGE, det. A.L.P. | 75/21.4 X 12. ROSA ARVENSIS X R. CANINA (R. X VERTICILLACANTHA) *29, Cambs.: Parish boundary hedge S.E. of Wood Farm, Hardwick, TL/365.571. C. D. Preston & A. L. Primavesi, 1992, CGE, det. A.L.P. *46, Cards.: Roadside bank N.W. of Blaen-twrch, SN/677.501. A. O. Chater, 1990, NMW, det. A. L. Primavesi. 75/21.5. ROSA PIMPINELLIFOLIA *29, Cambs.: Swaffham Prior, TL/5.6. Dr Jermyn, 1826 & 25.6.1827, CGE, det. A. L. Primavesi. Confirmation of records hitherto thought dubious. *75/21.7. ROSA “HOLLANDICA’ *46, Cards.: Scrub on waste ground near site of Llanilar Station, SN/625.753. A. O. Chater, 1992, NMW. 75/21.11. ROSA STYLOSA 35, Mons.: Rough grassy common, Snowball Common, Portskewett, ST/499.884. T. G. Evans, 1991, conf. G. G. Graham. Trackside, Minnetts Wood, ST/453.895. T. G. Evans, 1992, herb. T.G.E., conf. G. G. Graham. Ist and 2nd post-1930 records. 75/21.11 X 12. RoSA STYLOSA X R. CANINA (R. X ANDEGAVENSIS) *29, Cambs.: Side of ditch, Fen Road, Bassingbourn, TL/325.449. P. D. Sell, 1982, CGE, det. A. L. Primavesi. *35, Mons.: Streamside and grassy bank, S. E. Carleon below Christchurch, ST/342.897. T. G. Evans, 1990, herb. T.G.E., det. G. G. Graham. Ist Welsh record. 75/21.11 X 14. ROSA STYLOSA X R. OBTUSIFOLIA *29, Cambs.: Hedge N.W. of Park Farm - Cottages, Stetchworth, TL/660.565. C. D. Preston & S. E. Yates, 1992, herb. A. L. Primavesi, det. Ale P.. 75/21.12 X 13a. ROSA CANINA X R. CAESIA subsp. CAESIA (R. X DUMALIS) *46, Cards.: Hedge S. of Blaenpistyll, Tremaen, SN/232.475. A. O. Chater, 1985, NMW, det. A. L. Primavesi. 75/21.12 X 13b. ROSA CANINA X R. CAESIA subsp. GLAUCA (R. X DUMALIS) *28, W. Norfolk: Edge of track N. of Hockwold cum Wilton, TL/739.893. C. D. Preston, 1992, det. A. L. Primavesi. *35, Mons.: Lower White Castle, SO/38.16. T. G. Evans, 1992, herb. T.G.E., det. G. G. Graham. *47, Monts.: Hedge, Llanwnog, SO/04.94. A. Franks & J. Clarke, 1991, det. A. L. Primavesi. 286 PLANT RECORDS 75/21.12 X 14. ROSA CANINA X R. OBTUSIFOLIA (R. X DUMETORUM) *29, Cambs.: Hedge along footpath between Burton End and Leys Wood, TL/626.494. C. D. Preston & A. L. Primavesi, 1992, CGE, det. A.L.P. 75/21.12 X 18. ROSA CANINA X R. RUBIGINOSA (R. X NITIDULA) *29, Cambs.: Milton Country Park, TL/48.62. G. M. S. Easy, 1992, CGE, det. A. L. Primavesi. 75/21.13b. ROSA CAESIA subsp. GLAUCA *35, Mons.: Parkland, E. Blackwood, ST/17.96. R. Fraser, 1990, herb. T. G. Evans, det. G. G. Graham. 75/21.15. ROSA TOMENTOSA *35, Mons.: Narrow wood, Llantarnam Abbey, ST/305.927. T. G. Evans, 1992, herb. T.G.E., det. G. G. Graham. 2nd post-1930 record. 75/21.15 X 16. ROSA TOMENTOSA X R. SHERARDII (R. X SUBERECTIFORMIS) *46, Cards.: Hedge, Derlwyn W.N.W. of Tregaron, SN/662.605. A. O. Chater, 1992, NMW, det. G. G. Graham. 75/21.16. ROSA SHERARDII 9, Dorset: By old track, Stalbridge, ST/74.17. L. J. Margetts & J. Ounsted, 1992, det. G. G. Graham. 2nd record. 75/21.16 X 19. ROSA SHERARDH X R. MICRANTHA *46, Cards.: Hedge W. of Capel Maen-y- groes, New Quay, SN/384.589. A. O. Chater, 1992, NMW, det. G. G. Graham. +75/22.3. PRUNUS CERASIFERA *49, Caerns.: Copse between Tan-y-groes and Tal-y-cafn Bridge, SH/783.718. R. Lewis, 1992, NMW, det. R. G. Ellis & G. Hutchinson. +75/22.12. PRUNUS SEROTINA *26, W. Suffolk: Scrub on grass heath, Barnham Cross Common, TL/867.817. K. A. Beckett, 1992. +75/22.14. PRUNUS LAUROCERASUS *49, Caerns.: Edge of woodland opposite Maenan Abbey Hotel, SH/79.65. R. Lewis, 1992. Small copse between. Tan-y-groes and Tal-y-cafn Bridge, SH/ 78.71. R. Lewis, 1992. 1st and 2nd post-1930 records. +75/28.21. SORBUS CROCEOCARPA *47, Monts.: Trackside hedge. Brooks, SO/146.996. P. J. M. Nethercott, 1991. $75/28.23. SORBUS LATIFOLIA *25, E. Suffolk: Between road and dyke, Wolsey Bridge, Wangford, TM/47.76. Suffolk Wildlife Trust member, 1990, CGE, det. P. D. Sell. +75/32.40. COTONEASTER STERNIANUS *11, S. Hants.: Foot of gravelly bank of A35, Markway Hill, SU/244.026. R. P. Bowman, 1992, herb. R.P.B., det. J. Fryer. *83, Midlothian: Edge of golf course, Levenhall, Musselburgh, NT/35.73. D. R. McKean, 1988, E, det. J. Fryer. 75/35.7 X 8. CRATAEGUS MONOGYNA X C. LAEVIGATA (C. X MACROCARPA) *77, Lanarks.: Overgrown hedge, Sunnyside, S.E. of Hamilton High Parks, NS/74.51. A. McG. Stirling, 1979: herb. P. Macpherson, conf. B. Wurzell. 177/7.1d. ANTHYLLIS VULNERARIA subsp. CARPATICA +*77, Lanarks.: Grassy waste ground, | Garden Festival site, Glasgow, NS/56.65. P. Macpherson, 1992, herb. P.M., det. J. R. Akeroyd (as var. pseudovulneraria). 77/7.1e. ANTHYLLIS VULNERARIA subsp. LAPPONICA *75, Ayrs.: Coast, Ardrossan, NS/2.4. G. A. C. Macpherson, 1963, herb. P. Macpherson, det. J. R. Akeroyd. 77/14.1. VIcIA OROBUS 75, Ayrs.: Slown’s Cairn, Glenmuck, NS/510.033. E. L. Birse, 1958. 2nd record. +77/15.6. LATHYRUS TUBEROSUS *58, Cheshire: Canal bank, Hassall Green, SJ/771.587. J. E. Hawksford, 1992. +77/15.7. LATHYRUS GRANDIFLORUS *58, Cheshire: Bank of old railway, Portwood, Stockport, SJ/904.915. E. & O. Kearns, 1992, det. G. M. Kay. T7/15.12. LATHYRUS NISSOLIA +42, Brecs.: Roadside verge near Brecon, SO/073.275. M. Porter, 1991. 2nd record. +58, Cheshire: Railway embankment, Wardle, Nantwich, SJ/ 603.580. G. M. Kay, 1992. Only persistent population. PLANT RECORDS 287 77/18.2a. MEDICAGO SATIVA subsp. FALCATA +*50, Denbs.: Colwyn Bay by-pass, SH/823.787. J. A. Green, 1990, NMW. 77/19.1. TRIFOLIUM ORNITHOPODIOIDES 44, Carms.: Colliery tip, Morlais Colliery, Llangen- nech, SN/571.021. I. K. Morgan, 1992, NMW, conf. G. Hutchinson. 2nd record. +77/19.19a. TRIFOLIUM INCARNATUM subsp. INCARNATUM 52, Anglesey: Disturbed soil above shore E. of Amlwch Port, SH/46.93. J. Clarke, 1991. 2nd record. *80, Roxburghs.: Turnip field N. of Synton Mossend, NT/478.213. M. E. Braithwaite, 1992, herb. R. W. M. Corner. Ist record except for wool aliens. ; +77/22.2. LABURNUM ALPINUM 44, Carms.: Hedge along B4333 E. of Dangoilan, SN/342.332. I. K. Morgan, 1992, NMW, det. A. O. Chater. 2nd record. +77/23.2. CyTISUS MULTIFLORUS *81, Berwicks.: Rocky bank above railway, Penmanshiel, NT/796.671. M. E. & P. F. Braithwaite, 1992, herb. M.E.B. 77/26.2. ULEX GALLI 80, Roxburghs.: Bank above Rule Burn E. of Ruletownhead, NT/ 619.129. M. E. Braithwaite, 1992, herb. R. W. M. Corner. 1st confirmed record for over a century. +79/2.2. MYRIOPHYLLUM AQUATICUM *29, Cambs.: Ditch, Willingham, TL/408.703. C. D. Preston & S. E. Yates, 1992. 79/2.4. MYRIOPHYLLUM ALTERNIFLORUM 24, Bucks.: Recently cleared pond, Naphill Common, SU/845.964. D. Showler, 1992. 1st post-1930 record. 84/1.1 eae “Pep res ae core asa ns re Serb eran cad ents pee eraeanee aaa pe etek’ ese me nay cr eal Sree!