336 The Philippine Journal of Science 
spot on the lamina, immediately below the insertion on the main 
rib of the rib of each segment. The glands of the two ferns are 
unmistakably homologous. The two are alike also in being 
pubescent, although the pubescence itself is not identical. Both 
also commonly bear lime-dots on the upper surface of young 
fronds. Aglaomorpha pilosa, however, is still more nearly re- 
lated to A. splendens Copel. (Dryostachyum splendens J. Sm.) ; 
I do not doubt at all the propriety of keeping these two species 
in one genus and maintaining Photinopteris as a separate genus. 
Aglaomorpha as a whole is likewise an unmistakable member 
of the Drynaria group of genera and nearly related to individual 
species currently regarded as belonging in Polypodium. It is 
interesting, in this connection, to note that the fern originally 
described by Hooker as Acrostichum drynarioides, for which 
I have created the genus Merinthosorus, has been included in 
Dryostachyum (which I consider inseparable from Aglao- 
morpha) by Kuhn, and in Photinopteris by Beddome. 
In conclusion, it may be observed that we are dealing with 
a considerable number of ferns, all of which can be regarded 
almost with certainty as descendants of a common group less 
remote than their common ancestor with other Polypodiaceae, 
a group to which Bower has given the name of Dipterideae, but 
which I would prefer to call Matonieae. Different members of 
this group share such characters as the tendency to dichotomy; 
drynarioid venation; harsh hair-like paleae; thin, marginal walls 
of paleae; reddish color of paleae; peculiar teeth on the paleae; 
round, elongate or indefinite collections of sporangia not reaching 
the margin; annulus of about 14 cells; bilateral spores; diplodes- 
mic venation beneath the hymenium; and a peculiar hypodermis 
underlying the upper epidermis. Different groups of species - 
and of genera have maintained different collections of these 
characters. Unless one character be very distinctive and re- 
stricted to few species, as in the case of the peculiar gland of 
Photinopteris, single characters can hardly be trusted to show 
particular affinities within this great group. It seems to me, 
however, that the number of characters exhibited by Platycerium, 
Cheiropleuria, Christiopteris, Hymenolepis, Drymoglossum, 
Cyclophorus, Photinopteris, Aglaomorpha, Merinthosorus, Den- 
droconche, and the paleotropic Polypodia with anastomosing 
veins, and Dipteris, Matonia, and Phanerosorus amply justifies 
regarding these as a group distinct from the other very large 
group of, Polypodiaceae which are descendants of an old group 
now best represented by Balantium, Dicksonia, Dennstaedtia, 
Cystodium, and Cyathea. 
