1923] Evans,—Notes on New England Hepaticae,—XVII 97 
with the environment. The writer, therefore, would regard S. recurv- 
ifolia as nothing more than a simple synonym of S. nemorosa. This 
conclusion is supported by the fact that the ventral leaf-lobes, as 
brought out by the description, are densely dentate and by the 
further fact that the gemmae are unicellular and conform closely 
to the S. nemorosa type. 
In the same paper where Warnstorf described the last two segre- 
gates he reported the occurrence of the arctic S. spitzbergensis (Lindb.) 
K. Müll. in Connecticut, basing his record on a specimen collected 
by the writer at Branford. He intimated also that Müller's S. 
nemorosa forma purpureolimbata, based primarily on a specimen 
collected by T. P. James at the Flume, New Hampshire, might be 
referable to the same species. The writer has examined these two 
specimens with care and finds that they lack the strongly convex 
dorsal lobes of S. spitzbergensis and also the coarsely toothed wings 
on the keels of the leaves; the keels in fact are almost invariably 
quite entire. There seems to be no reason, therefore, for separating 
these specimens from S. nemorosa, although they represent an un- 
usually well-developed form. The only known American station for 
the true S. spitzbergensis is in Greenland. 
5. LEJEUNEA PATENS Lindb. Acta Soc. Sci. Fenn. 10: 482. 1875. 
On trees and wet rocks. Pemetic Mountain trail, 600 ft. alt., Green 
Mountain Gorge, 800 ft. alt., and Southwest Harbor, 90 ft. alt., Mt. 
Desert. Maine, July, 1921, 4. Lorenz. New to New England. In 
1902 the writer? reported L. patens for the first time from North Amer- 
ica, citing specimens from Newfoundland and Nova Scotia. It has 
since been collected in the mountains of North Carolina by Andrews.* 
In Europe it is one of the so-called “ Atlantic” species, its known 
range extending along the coast from Norway to Ireland. It is closely 
related to L. cavifolia (Ehrh.) Lindb., so closely in fact that Müller and 
others regard it as a “small” species. At the same time it can usually 
be distinguished without difficulty. It differs, for example, in its paler 
color; in its more convex leaf-blades, spreading more abruptly from 
the lobules; in its smaller and more nearly orbicular underleaves; 
and in the crenulate margins of its leaf-lobes and underleaves. 
! Rabenborst's Kryptogamen-Flora 62: 504. 1915. 
? See Evans, Bryologist 14: 87. 1911. 
* Mem. Torrey Club 8: 160. 1902. 
*See Bryologist 24: 53. 1922. 
