70 Rhodora [APRIL 
larger than the others and give the leaf a bifid appearance. This 
is especially striking on shoots with poorly developed leaves, and 
many of the specimens produce a great many branches of this char- 
acter, perhaps on account of the deep shade in which they grow. "The 
perichaetial bracts and perianths of the species, as well as the androecia, 
are still unknown. There seems to be likewise no development of the 
slender flagilliform branches which grow out of the leaf-cells in many 
species of Plagiochila and act as organs of vegetative reproduction. 
The stems and branches, however, are extremely fragile, and the 
leaves readily become detached, especially when dry. "Through their 
regeneration they probably play an important part in the dissemination 
of the species. 
6. CrPHALOZIA MEDIA Lindb. Medd. Soc. F. et Fl. Fenn. 6: 242. 
1881. Jungermannia lunulaefolia Dumort. Syll. Jung. Eur. 61. 1831? 
Cephalozia lunulaefolia Dumort. Recueil d'Obs. sur les Jung. 18. 
1835? Jungermannia connivens, forma symbolica Gottsche; G. &. R. 
Hep. Europ. No. 624. 1877 (note under J. lacinulata Jack). Cephalozia 
catenulata, var. pallida Spruce, On Cephalozia 33. 1882. C. multiflora 
Spruce, l. c. 37. 1882. C. symbolica Breidl. Mitt. Naturw. Ver. Steier- 
mark 30: 330. 1894. C. pallida Spruce; Pearson, Hep. British Isles 
146. pl. 55. 1900. C. symbolica, var. pallida Massal. Malpighia 21: 
[18]. 1907. The synonymy of this common and widely distributed 
specles has long been in confusion, and even at the present time 
writers disagree about the name which it ought to bear. "The confusion 
is largely owing to the fact that the older writers failed to distinguish 
between C. media and C. connivens (Dicks.) Lindb. Gottsche was 
apparently the first to recognize the distinctive characters of the two 
plants, although he continued to regard them as forms of a single 
variable species. In 1881 Lindberg described his C. media and brought 
out its most striking differential features, but for some reason his 
species remained unrecognized for a long time outside of Scandinavia. 
In 1882 Spruce published his C. multiflora as a new species, appar- 
ently in ignorance of the C. media of Lindberg, which he does not 
quote at all. Fortunately Spruce's name is antedated by Lindberg's, 
otherwise it might have caused a good deal of trouble on account of 
its being a homonym of C. multiflora Lindb.', published several years 
1 Acta Soc. Sci. Fenn. 10: 501. 1875. See Howe (Bull. Torrey Club 29: 281. 1902.) 
for a discussion of C. multiflora Lindb. and of Lindberg's views on Jungermannia multi- 
fora Huds., upon which it was presumably based. 
