mw '1^ 1>f ' m 



J 



WOLLASTON EXPEDITION TO DT TCH NEAV GUINEA, 



505 



plant of Loria at the British Mnscnm, I do not luiow ^vhicli of these 

 Brotherus considered the type of his C.jlajeUifera. Neither is in frnit-j and 

 it is difticnlt to know why the autlior places it in the Section Eu-Campto- 

 eluctej wliile C. porotrichoides and C, suhporotriclwides are placed in the 



Section Tliamniella. 

 tl 



(Tl 



le w^ay, are it must he confessed 



New Gal 



distinctions hetwern these two Sections^ by 



very slight — if not, indeed, illusory. 



Veo-etatively both these plants aj)pear to me exactly identical with the 



5 leaves are usually (though not always) 



distichous in direction, and the branch-leaves are somewhat narrower and 

 more longly pointed than in that, or in C. suhporotrielioides as figured. But 

 it Avould be quire hnpossible to separate them on these grounds from C. suh- 

 2)orotrichoideSj since Mr. Clark's plant, with the wider, shorter-pointed leaves, 

 distichous in direction, combines the characters of the two. Mr. Clark's, 

 like Beccari's, has few of the flagclla which are a marked feature of 

 C^Jiayellifera^ but they occur in both, and their comparative frequency can 

 hardly be considered a specific cliaracter. In the absence of fruiting 

 characterSj therefore, I strongly incline to consider C* JlagelUfera as 

 synonymouswith C suhporotrichoides^ which, again, is extremely close to 

 C porotricJioideSj while apparently rightly separated by the fruiting 

 characters. 



HOOKEIIIACE^.. 



Eriopus REMOTiFOLius, C Muoll. in Bot. Zcit. 1847, ^2S 

 (No. 19.) 



HYPOPTEIIYGIACE^. 



Hypopterygium javanicum (Hanipe), Jaeg., AJunilr. ii. (j(i. 



(No. 32.) In some respects, especially in the asyninietiical leaves, more 

 like //. trichocladon, Bry. Jav., which I do not find easy to separate from 

 .//. javanicum ; but the amphigastria as well as the leaves ai-e strongly 

 bordered, and this seems to relegate it to II. Javanicum. 



LESKEACEyE. 



) 



(N 



here. It has not been recorded from New Guinea^ hut is a plant of such 

 wide distribution in tlie Indian and Malayan areas that it is quite to be 

 expected here. T. longissimiim, Herz.j appears to be of somow 



hat 



near 



branching, the leaves of the primary 

 acuminate), and the ramuline leaves ob 



) 



( 



more })lumulose 



here finely 



