294 CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE NATIONAL HERBARIUM. 
the species certain Mexican and Indian specimens, These forms, with their re- 
spective ranges, are as follows: a (with no special name), from Hispaniola 
and Corsica; B beyrichiana, from Mexico; y cubensis (based on Lehmann’s 
species), from Cuba; 6 orientalis, from Nepal; and e obtusata, from Mexico. 
The writer suspects that the forms 6 and e represent A. lateralis, to be dis- 
cussed later on, but can make no positive statements in the absence of speci- 
mens; the form 6 would probably now be referred to one of the recognized 
Indian species, although here again the matter must be left in doubt. 
In 1851 Mitten’ listed F. elegans from Ecuador, but this record, according to 
specimens in the Mitten Herbarium, was based on Fimbriaria macropoda 
Spruce. In 1856 Sullivant* listed it from Texas, a record based on A. echinella, 
as Underwood has since shown, In the same year Gottsche® listed the species 
from Australia and in 1863* added a new station for Mexico, but neither of 
these records can be accepted. The Australian plant would undoubtedly be 
referred to one of the many species of that region and the new Mexican record, 
as will be shown, was based on A. lateralis. In 1885 Spruce*® doubtfully re- 
ferred to F’. elegans additional material from Ecuador. His description is 
accurate but makes no mention of the male inflorescence or the capsule. 
Fortunately mature spores and elaters are present in the specimens which he 
afterwards distributed in his Hepaticae Spruceanae and show that they repre- 
sent A. lateralis, 
When Underwood revised the North American species of Asterella in 1895 
he published a new description of A. elegans, citing it from Mexico, but not 
from the West Indies, and noting its occurrence in Europe and South America. 
The variety cubensis of the Synopsis he again elevated to specific rank and, 
further, proposed as new, under the names A. austini and A. wrightii, two other 
species based on Cuban material. Stephani, in his monograph of 1899, accepts 
A. wrightii, A, cubensis, and A. austini without question, transferring them to 
Fimbriaria, and quotes f. elegans from Santo Domingo and Cuba, as well as 
* from Costa Rica, Mexico, Ecuador, and California (the last probably meaning 
Lower California). The writer, however, after a careful study of Under- 
wood’s descriptions and of the specimens upon which his Cuban species were 
based, has regretfully reached the conclusion that they represent forms of A. 
elegans and that they must therefore be reduced to synonymy. 
In Underwood’s descriptions little or nothing is said about the branching, 
the stomata, the green tissue, the ventral scales, or the male inflorescence, and 
the differences brought out are based on variable characters. To all three of 
the Cuban species which he recognizes he assigns a tuberculate female recep- 
tacle, an 8-cleft pseudoperianth (sometimes 9-cleft in A. cubensis) with co- 
herent divisions, a peduncle about 1 cm. high and pilose at the apex, bispiral 
elaters, and a more or less marked purple pigmentation, the extent of which 
is sometimes left uncertain. His most important differences are derived from 
the spores: in A. cubensis these are said to be 95 to 105 uw in diameter, brown 
or purplish brown, opaque, and with a paler margin; in A. austini, 110 to 118 p 
in diameter, yellow, distinctly reticulated, and broadly winged; in A, wrightii, 
dark yellow, otherwise as in A. austini. In his description of A. elegans, which 
was probably drawn from Mexican specimens, the spores are said to be 100 to 
* Journ. Bot. Kew Misc. 8: 361. 1851. 
27In A. Gray, Man, ed. 2. 688. 1856. 
* Linnaea 25: 561. 1856. 
*Dansk. Vid. Selsk. Skrivt. V. 6: 868. 1863. 
'Trans. Bot. Soc. (Edinburgh) 15: 563, 1885. 
