112 DR. Е. BORGESEN ON FUCUS SPIRALIS, LINNÉ. 
and writes (Bulletin Torrey Bot. Club, 32, 1905, p. 581) that “ they seem to 
support Bórgesen's position." 
Two specimens are to be found in Linnés herbarium with his inscrip- 
tion “4 spiralis,” and as these specimens have a special interest, I shall 
try to describe them as explicitly as possible, also giving a reproduction of 
them (PI. 9). 
Both the specimens are pasted on to small sheets of paper, which are 
themselves pasted on full-sized sheets, viz. 32 em. x 21 em. — Linné?s writing 
is on the big sheets, but in one case, in writing the word “ spiralis,” his 
реп has passed up with the letter “1”? on to the smaller sheet. 
On the one specimen (upper figure) there is also written in pencil 
“Lightfoot? G,” possibly by Dawson Turner, and furthermore a nearly effaced 
“ spiralis” in what Dr. Daydon Jackson thinks to be Linné’s handwriting. 
Beside this, Dr. Daydon Jackson has also written me the following :— 
“In the herbarium here, is a sheet of memoranda by Dawson Turner (of 
Yarmouth), in which he says: * Fucus spiralis, 2 spec", one very singular 
(see sketch by Mr. Hooker), the other, the common small plant.” I do not 
know where Hooker's sketches are at present ; but it seems quite clear that 
Linné wrote up his species as you still understand it, but pinned something 
else besides, with the same name, to it.” 
The specimen represented by Pl. 9, upper figure, is about 10 em. long ; it 
is badly spread and prepared, the branches are naked at the base, towards the 
top $-3 ст. broad, rather twisted, bearing in the top rounded, sometimes oval 
bifureate receptacles about 5-8 em.long. The plant quite agrees with a smaller 
specimen of the form, which is commonly found on the shores of the northern 
seas, viz. with what I call var. typica. It is an understood thing that any 
examination of this unique herbarium, which necessitates а cut into the 
plant, the specimens of which are so very small, is quite out of. the question, 
and thus a microscopie examination to decide whether these plants are 
hermaphrodite or not, is impossible ; but anybody, having at least some 
knowledge of Fucus spiralis, will, at first sight, admit that it is that plant 
which we have before us. 
The other specimen (Pl. 9, lower fig.) is only a smaller fragment of a some- 
what larger plant, It has an almost even, broad thallus, downwards c. 4 mm. 
broad, upwards a little broader, the margins bent a little upwards, which has 
perhaps been the reason of Linné’s bewildering statement * hine canaliculata.” 
The receptacles vary somewhat in form, those in the middle being broadly 
oval, the others elongated, the longest reaching a length of almost 2 cem., 
while the short ones are only Lem. long and 3 em. broad. The whole length 
of the specimen is 18 ст. 
On sending me а photograph of this plant, Dr. Howe asked for my opinion 
of it, when I answered, “ It may be Fucus spiralis, but it may also very well 
be a form of * Fucus inflatus: ” 
