60 REVUE BRYOLOGIQUE 



the figures of the sections there given (cfr. fig. 1 (1. c.) 

 agree closely with that of C pachijloma. 



Paris (Index BryoL) gives the distribution of C. aqua- 

 ticiis as Europe and Africa (Algeria). There are, however, 

 in the Kew Herbarium, examples of this species from two 

 Asiatic localities: — Syria (Sir J. D, Hooker), and Nestorian 

 Mts.j and Gawar, Kurdistan (Capt. Garden (1857), 



% PohjtHchiim aloides Hedw. 



h 



The distribution of this species is given by Paris (Index 

 Bryolog.) as follows : *' Eiir. : vulgatiss. As. : Japon, 

 China, Kamschatka^ Khasia, Tibet occ. Himalaya^ Nepal, 

 Bengal, M. Neilgherr., Geylan, Caucas. Afr, : Alger., 

 Madeir,, Canaries. " 



In examining Chinese examples of the species, I was 

 surprised to find that the terminal cell of the lamellae (as 

 seen in transverse section) was more or less deeply 

 grooved (see figs. 17, 18). This led me to examine the large 

 series of specimens in the Kew Herbarium In European 

 examples, both of the type and of the var. defluens 

 (Dicksoni ; minus) tlje terminal cell was found to be, as is 

 w^ell known, similar in shape and size to the other cells 

 of the lamella(see figs. 12, 13). The same was alSo the case 

 with the African specimens examined (from Madeira and 

 Teneriffe). In the examples from India, however, where the 

 species appears to be not uncommon, wc find the terminal 

 cell showing a tendency to become grooved. This is the 

 case with all the specimens referred to by Mittem in Muse. 

 Ind. Or.^ p. 151, and also with specimens from Moulmein, 

 and from Coorg (determined by Brotherus). 



Although, sometimes, the groove is very shallow, and 

 although in a section across the whole width of a leaf some 

 lamellae may often be found of which the terminal cell is 

 not grooved, I have nearly always found some amount of 

 grooving tobe characteristic of the Indian plant, and it is 

 usually quite easy, by paying attention to this character, to 

 determine from a section of the leaf if the plant came from 

 Europe or Asia. 



The difference thus shown leads us naturally to ask whe- 

 ther we have not in Asia a plant very similar to P, aloides 

 of Europe, but yet specifically distinct. It is hardly possible, 

 however, to take this view. In all other characters,— habit, 

 wnn^ed columella, papillose capsule, etc. — the Asiatic 

 specimens of P. aloides agree completely with the European 

 ones. It is true that in Asia P, aloides often assumes a 

 much larger size than in Europe, — a fact noticed by 

 Braithwaite (British Moss-Flora. I, page 48), who remarks, 



