Celastrus scandens, Sarothra gentianoides, Oenothera biennis, Isnardia palustris, Cornus alternifolia, Epigaea, Gaultheria, Fraxinus americana, Diospyros, Obolaria, Gentiana crinita, Bartonia, Asclepias syriaca, Convolvulus Sepium, Verbena hastata, V. urticaefolia, Prunella vulgaris, Linaria canadensis, Pedicularis canadensis, Melampyrum, Plantago Rugelii, P. virginica, Houstonia caerulea, Sambucus canadensis, Lonicera sempervirens, Micrampelis lobata, Specularia perfoliata, Ambrosia trifida, A. artemisiaefolia, Xanthium canadense, Eupatorium perfoliatum, Chrysopsis falcata, Solidago canadensis, Aster Novae-Angliae, Antennaria plantaginifolia, Anaphalis, Erechthites, and the various species of Panicum, Chaetochloa, Carex, Sisyrinchium, Rubus, Fragaria, Crataegus, Viola, Physalis, Lactuca, Solidago, Euthamia, and Aster?

Are Pinus echinata, P. virginiana, P. Strobus, Larix, Picea, Tsuga, Eriocaulon decangulare, Betula nigra, Quercus acuminata, Q. Phellos, Morus rubra, Platanus, Prunus serotina, Rubus occidentalis, Acer saccharinum, A. pennsylvanicum, Diervilla (and various other species) native on Long Island? If so, where? (Many supposed native species in other regions should be subjected to similar inquiries.)

All

Some of the above questions may seem at first to be of no earthly use, but if studied conscientiously their bearing on other important problems will become evident, and at the same time entirely unexpected lines of inquiry may be developed. of nature's laws are worth knowing, whether they seem to have any immediate practical bearing or not. Of course most of us do not have much time for field work, but what time we do have might as well be spent in studying some of the newer phases of botany, and making distinct contributions to knowledge, as in merely collecting and identifying plants as our predecessors did a hundred years ago. If in all our field work the structures and adaptations of plants are studied in relation to environment and distribution many interesting correlations can be made, and we will gradually come to understand why each species grows where it does, which ought to be the aim of every field botanist.

The following discussions of the past, present and future prob

lems of American botany will be found full of valuable suggestions along the lines above indicated. Most of them are public addresses by well-known men, and nearly all can be found in the library of the New York Botanical Garden. The arrangement is chronological.

Brendel, F. Historical sketch of the science of botany in North

America from 1635 to 1840. Am. Nat. 13: 754-771. D 1879;

Do. 1840 to 1858. Am. Nat. 14: 25-38. Ja 1880.
Gray, Asa. Remarks concerning the flora of North America.

Am.

Jour. Sci. III. 24: 321-331. N 1882; Bot. Gaz. 7: 129-135, 139-143. 1882; Proc. A. A. A. S. 31: 449-460. 1883. Farlow, W. G. The task of American botanists. Pop. Sci. Mo. 31: 305-314. Jl 1887. Abstract in Bull. Torrey Club 14: 173-174. Au 1887.

McCarthy, G.

The study of local floras. Jour. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc. 42: 25-29.

1887.

Coulter, J. M. The future of systematic botany. Proc. A. A. A. S. 40: 293-304.

1892.

MacMillan, C. On the emergence of a sham biology in America. Science 21: 184-186. 7 Ap 1893. (Discussed by four other persons in later numbers of the same volume.)

Trelease, Wm. Botanical opportunity. Bot. Gaz. 22: 193-217. S 1896.

Kearney, T. H. The science of plant ecology. Plant World 2: 158-160. Jl 1899.

Barnes, C. R. The problems and problems of plant physiology. Science II. 10: 316-331. 8 S 1899; Proc. A. A. A. S. 48: 263-288. D 1899.

See especially pages 327–329 and 282–286, on ecology and plant names. Halsted, B. D. The new field botany. Pop. Sci. Mo. 56: 98-105. N 1899.

Trelease, Wm. Some twentieth century problems. Science II. 12: 48-62. 13 Jl 1900; Proc. A. A. A. S. 49: 249-272. 1901. Underwood, L. M. The last quarter -a reminiscence and an outlook. Science II. 12: 161–170. 3 Au 1900.

Hitchcock, A. S. A brief outline of ecology. Trans. Kan. Acad. Sci. 17: 28-34. 1901.

Robinson, B. L. Problems and possibilities of systematic botany. Science II. 14: 465-474. 27 S 1901.

Trelease, Wm. The progress made in botany during the nineteenth century. Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis II: 125-142. 26 N 1901.

Haddon, A. C. The saving of vanishing data. Pop. Sci. Mo. 62: 222-229. Ja 1903.

Spalding, V. M. The rise and progress of ecology. Science II. 17: 201-210. 6 F 1903.

Ganong, W. F. The cardinal principles of ecology. Science II. 19: 493-498. 25 Mr 1904.

Cowles, H. C. The work of the year 1903 in ecology. Science II. 19: 879-885. 10 Je 1904.

Reed, H. S. A brief history of ecological work in botany. Plant World 8: 163-170, 198-208.

1905.

Robinson, B. L. The problems of ecology. Cong. Arts & Sci. (St. Louis, 1904) 5: (1-13). 1906.

Underwood, L. M. The progress of our knowledge of the flora of North America. Pop. Sci. Mo. 70: 497-517. Je 1907.

Some suggestions as to interesting and unusual ways of working up a local flora can also be found in Beal & Wheeler's Michigan Flora (1892), and on the first thirty pages of Beal's Michigan Flora (Fifth Report Mich. Acad. Sci., 1904).

OTHER TERATOLOGICAL NOTES

BY S. B. PARISH

1. Foliar fission in Polystichum munitum. —A plant of this fern, growing in the San Bernardino Mountains, exhibited in its different fronds a wide range in the extent to which they were affected by fission. This was very slight in some, but in others the normal form of the pinnae was greatly modified. The accompanying figure, from a drawing by Mrs. C. M. Wilder, renders further description unnecessary.

2. Polyphylly of the Gynecium in Washingtonia. — The ovary of Washingtonia consists of three conjoined carpels uniting in a common style. In a flower of W. gracilis two such ovaries, entirely distinct throughout, were included in the same calyx.

This organ was consequently oblong in section, instead of circular, and it was irregularly 6-lobed in place of 3-lobed. The petals and stamens were broken off, so that their number could not be certainly ascertained, but apparently it was not augmented.

Foliar fission in Polystichum munitum. The same monstrosity is common in southern California in budded peaches. As many as half the flowers on a tree may exhibit an increase in the number of pistils. Usually there are

two, but not seldom three, four, or five in number. In most instances but one matures. In these trees the petals are much reduced. In unbudded trees, which bear flowers having well developed petals, I have not observed this deformity.

3. Syncarpy. - Two flat, disc-like fruits of summer squash were united at the edges for the distance of about two inches, and thence by a narrow process running to the base. The two fruits were fully grown, and of equal size.

Syncarpy also occurs in the peach, but is confined, so far as I have observed, to the fusion of but two carpels. The sarcocarps are only imperfectly fused, being more or less separated by epidermis, although the general outline may be regular. The two putamens are united by their margins below, and are separate and divergent above. The seeds and seed-cavities are unconnected. This also has been observed only in budded fruit.

4. Floral Deformations in Lepidium Menziesii. — In each of two specimens of this plant, collected in the San Bernardino Mountains, the following deformations were present :

Some short branches terminated in naked condensed clusters of imperfect flowers, resembling minute cauliflower heads.

Other stems bore more diffuse clusters of fewer flowers, which were composed of organs resembling the filaments of stamens, destitute of anthers. These were white in color, indefinite in number, but mostly more numerous than the sum of the members of a perfect flower. Some were naked; others had small foliaceous green sepals, and these again were elongated and bract-like.

Below these terminal clusters the stems bore pedicellate flowers, as in normal plants, and of about the ordinary size, but also variously deformed. The two outer floral cycles were green and foliaceous. Some were oval and concave, the inner (petals) purple-margined; others were linear, or linear-spatulate, and up to 3 mm. long. In these flowers the inner cycles were either entirely wanting, or were represented by clusters of filaments, either sessile or elevated on a short prolongation of the axis; or they contained antheriferous stamens, the anther cells sometimes separated, or stamens which were more or less foliaceous.