VIII 201 
1910] Evans, — Notes on New England Hepaticae, 
even subgeneric rank. Among those who maintain the distinctness 
of the genus may be mentioned Pearson, Schiffner, and Müller. 
According to Schiffner ! Pedinophyllum shows two important characters 
which necessitate its separation from Plagiochila, and these are the 
characters which Lindberg insisted upon when he first proposed the 
genus. "They are, first, the general habit of the plants and, second, 
the inflorescence. In Pedinophyllum there is no distinction between 
rhizome and leafy shoot, both the stem and its branches being prostrate 
and frequently producing rhizoids; in Plagiochila, on the other hand, 
the plant consists of a creeping rhizome from which the leafy shoots, 
usually destitute of rhizoids, ascend. In Pedinophyllum the in- 
florescence is autoicous, whereas in all accepted species of Plagtochila 
it is dioicous. As a matter of fact, Pedinophyllum is more closely 
related to Mylia (Leptoscyphus) and Chiloscyphus than it is to Plagio- 
chila. It differs from Mylia in the fact that the female inflorescence 
is borne on a short branch instead of on an elongated branch or the 
main stem; it differs from Chiloscyphus in the fact that the perianth 
is laterally compressed instead of being triquetrous. The relation- 
ships and differences are clearly brought out by Schiffner. 
In the field P. interruptum bears a marked resemblance to Chilo- 
scyphus polyanthus and Ch. pallescens. Fortunately, it is usually 
fertile, and the compressed perianth will at once distinguish it. The 
female branch, moreover, although short, is never quite so abbre- 
viated as in Chiloscyphus and may bear several pairs of leaves. In 
the absence of perianths the minute underleaves and the trigones in 
the leaf-cells may serve to separate the Pedinophyllum, the under- 
leaves in Chiloscyphus being much better developed and the leaf- 
cells (in the two species in question) being thin-walled throughout. 
The perigonial bracts in P. interruptum bear a small pouch or lobe at 
the antical base, agreeing closely in this respect with Chiloscyphus. 
8: FRULLANIA INFLATA Gottsche; G. L. & N. Syn. Hep. 424. 
1845. Evans, Trans. Conn. Acad. 10: 10. pl. 3. 1897. On trees 
and rocks. Brookfield, Connecticut (A. W. E.). New to New 
England. A note on the distribution of F. inflata was recently pub- 
lished by the writer,? and the specimens just reported were discovered 
soon afterwards. Those growing on trees were abundant, while 
those on rocks were very scanty. In both cases there was more or 
1 Ber. d. naturw.-med. Ver. in Innsbruck 31: [53]. 1908. 
? Bryologist 13: 36. 1910. 
