MAXON—STUDIES OF TROPICAL AMERICAN FERNS, 49 
Presl’s Actinophlebia obtusa was founded wholly upon Hooker’s plate 14A which 
was clearly a misidentification of H. obtusa Kaulf., 1824. Hooker’s figure, moreover, 
which is here regarded tentatively as typifying H. spectabilis, is itself one of the 
several original elements of Kunze’s H. subincisa; but it can scarcely apply to that 
species as typified here on the basis of Péppig’s Peruvian plant. Kunze, in publishing 
H. spectabilis, writes: ‘Est quasi media inter meam H. subincisam et H. obtusam,?’— 
with mention of his earlier (1844) reference of Hooker’s plate I4A. 
5. HEMITELIA SUBINCISA Kunze, Bot, Zeit, 2: 296, 1844, 
Cnemidaria speciosa Presl, Tent. Pterid. 57. pl. 1. /. 16. 17. 1836, not Cyathea speciosa 
H. & B.; Willd. 1810. 
Hemistegia speciosa Fée, Gen. Fil. 351. 1850-52. 
Type Locauity: Peru, Péppig. 
Distripution: Venezuela to northern Brazil and Peru (according to Underwood 
MS.). 
ILLustTRATION: Presl, loc. cit. pl. 7. f. 16. 17. 
The ground taken by Kunze, in his long review ! of Hooker’s treatment of Hemitelia 
in the Species Filicum, for establishing Hemitelia subincisa is essentially that taken 
by Presl, both authors agreeing that Kaulfuss erred in his identification of Cyathea 
speciosa H. & B. (See under /. speciosa, page 30). But just what herbarium material 
Kaulfuss had in hand in transferring Cyathea speciosa H. & B. to Hemitelia can not be 
stated, nor can the source of Presl’s information. In the Presl herbarium at Prague, 
however, is a specimen of ‘‘ Cnemidaria speciosa” collected in Peru by Péppig. This 
very likely not only formed the basis of Presl’s figures 16 and 17, but is probably a 
plant of the same Péppig number which gave Kunze many of the data for his new J/. 
subincisa. A fragment in the Underwood Fern Herbarium does not agree with Presl’s 
figure 16, but accords perfectly with figure 17. Possibly figures 16 and 17 belong to 
different individuals or different species. In any case, it seems desirable for present 
purposes to typify the species on figure 17, which apparently represents Péppig’s 
Peruvian plant as found in Presl’s own herbarium. The Brazilian plant, as repre- 
sented by Martius’s figure,” seems to be the same. 
Hooker’s plate 14A, published as ‘‘//. obtusa” is also cited by Kunze for his 7H. 
subincisa; but it is drawn from a Trinidad specimen and represents a species distinct 
from H. subincisa, as the latter is typified in this paper. It is here regarded as repre- 
senting H. spectabilis. 
Hemitelia subincisa has been credited to Guatemala and other parts of tropical 
North America, but so far as can be ascertained it is altogether South American. 
FURTHER NOTES ON THE WEST INDIAN SPECIES OF 
POLYSTICHUM. 
Since the writer’s revision of the West Indian species of Poly- 
stichum in the last paper of this series (1909) considerable addi- 
tional material has been received, some of it showing extension of 
ranges, as here recorded. The single new species to be described is 
rather closely related to P. dissimulans, yet offers differences which 
seem to be specific. 
Polystichum ambiguum Maxon, sp. nov. PLATE 27. 
Fronds 4 or 5, laxly arching, 60 to 74 cm. long, long-stipitate (the stipe as long as 
the lamina or longer), Rhizome decumbent, about 5 cm. long, 1.5 cm. in diameter, 
woody, bearing numerous coarse freely branched roots, and sparingly clothed with thin 
dark to light brown oblong-lanceolate scales about 1 cm. long; stipes stoutish, 31 to 38 
1 Bot. Zeit. 2: 294-299, 1844, 2 Icon. Pl. Crypt. pl. 48. f. 2. 
