MAXON—-STUDIES OF TROPICAL AMERICAN FERNS. 175 
in the Epimeliae Botanicae,' may antedate the two proposed by Fée. 
The title-page date of 1849 for the Epimeliae is known to be incorrect, 
and recently 1851 has been taken as the true date of publication. It 
has not been shown satisfactorily, however, that the completed work 
appeared earlier than 1852.2? Under these circumstances preference 
should be given to Fée. 
SUMMARY. 
The above notes are intended to show that Neurogramma and 
Gymnogramma, each typified by Acrostichum rufum, are properly 
synonyms of Gymnopteris, itself founded upon the same species; that 
Pityrogramma must replace Ceropteris, as applied to the rather small 
genus of ferns of which Acrostichum calomelanos L. and A. chryso- 
phyllum Swartz are familiar examples; that two of the species included 
under Gymnopteris by Underwood are not properly referable to that 
genus, one being here transferred to Pityrogramma, the other to 
Coniogramme, which is a genus not hitherto recognized from America; 
and that Gymnogramma, as it has been understood by most authors 
in the past, comprises many distinct generic elements, as emphasized 
by Underwood. Whether Bommeria itself can be successfully main- 
tained as distinct from Hemionitis is doubtful. Christensen, indeed, 
transfers it bodily to Gymnopteris and maintains Gymnopteris as 
distinct from Hemionitis. It would have been quite as logical to 
merge both Bommeria and Gymnopteris under Hemionitis. As a 
matter of fact, the satisfactory arrangement of the species of this 
entire group must await the careful analysis and comparison of very 
many and widely divergent forms, many of them from distant regions 
and referred to still other genera. The present notes may be of 
assistance in that connection. 
NEW SPECIES OF LYCOPODIUM. 
The following species of Lycopodium from Guatemala, Costa Rica, 
and Panama appear to be distinct from any hitherto recognized. 
There are at hand also several other collections which probably 
represent undescribed species but which, either on account of insuffi- 
ciency of material for full diagnosis or the need of comparison with 
little known species of South America, must await later study. 
Lack of complete South American material prevented a full treat- 
ment of the tropical American species by Underwood and Lloyd in 
their paper® of 1906, although the North American members of the 
genus are, with a few exceptions, now tolerably well understood. 
1 Page 263. 
2Upon this question see Hooker, Journ. Bot. 4: 286. 1852; J. Miiller in A. DC. 
Prodr. 15: 258. 1862; Barnhart, Bull. Torrey Club 32: 590 (footnote). 1905.; Under- 
wood, Bull. Torrey Club 33: 39 (footnote). 1906. 
5 Bull. Torrey Club 33: 101-124. 1906. 
