194 
difficulty whatever in separating these two species by their buds 
alone, even if their external characters were similar. In all of the 
smaller species: the buds are perfectly smooth, and this proves 
conclusively that they cannot be mere modifications of the larger 
species. 
In very young specimens of the smaller species, where the bud 
has not yet developed into its peculiarly distinctive character, there 
is an apparent limit in the extent to which we can rely upon these bud- 
forms, and it may be necessary in some cases, when there is a doubt 
otherwise in regard to the specimens, to examine the spores, which 
never vary. Yet, although in the youngest, undeveloped conditions of 
the plant the bud can hardly be said to have any form beyond a merely 
- simple and erect one, still even in very young buds of corresponding 
specimens there is usually a significant development of the common 
stalk that distinguishes them from each other. - In B. matricariae- 
folium, for example, the matured form of the bud is so distinct 
from that of every other species that one could not possibly 
mistake it for any other, yet, in its earlier stages of development, 
it at one time bears some resemblance to the matured bud of 
B. simplex, at another time to the matured bud of B. Lunaria, and 
_ only gradually assumes with its growth its distinctive character. It 
~ 
will be observed, however, that even in its youngest condition it is 
not only distinguished from the bud of &. simplex by the partially 
curved apex of the sterile portion, but by the significant development 
of the common stalk, that being by far the longest portion of the 
whole bud, whereas in &. s¢mplex the common stalk is usually the 
shortest. In all such specimens that I have examined the common 
stalk in the bud of &. matricariaefolium has been more strongly 
developed than in either of the other species, and in any case, of - 
these three species, in which the greatest difficulties and confusion 
occur, given specimens of an equal and corresponding growth, the 
buds will be found to be distinct and characteristic. Milde states, 
in his description of B. matricariaefolium, that the common stalk in 
the bud of that species is less developed than it is in the bud of B. 
Lunarta, but I have not found this to be the case. After reading 
over again his description I re-examined all of my buds, with the 
same result as before. I can only say that, in every examination 
that I have made, the appearances have been exactly as I have 
described them throughout these notes. On the other hand it is 
quite probable that Milde may have referred to the stoutness of 
the common stalk, as shown in its circumference, when speaking of 
its development, in which case my own observations would come 
nearer to his—though I have sometimes found the stalk in matricariae- 
folium to be as stout as that in B. Lunaria,—but I have construed 
the expression “developed ” here to indicate the comparative length 
of the common stalk in the different buds. 
The buds of all Botrychiums, with the single exception of 2. 
Virginianum, are imbedded in the base of the stipe, as shown in figure 1. 
In B, VirGINIANUM, however, the bud is merely enclosed in a 
smooth upright-cavity at one side of the lower part of the common 
stalk, as shown in figure 2. 
