i 1914] an Notes on New England Hepaticae,— XI 73 
ments of the Hepaticae. In common with Scapania it has complicate, 
bilobed leaves with a sharp keel and unequal, variously spreading 
lobes; in common with Sphenolobus it has a more or less cylindrical 
perianth, contracted at the mouth and plicate in the upper part. 
Warnstorf! includes Sphenolobus under Diplophyllum. Stephani ? 
excludes Sphenolobus but includes K. Müller's group Plicaticalyx ? 
of Scapania. Warnstorf, therefore, emphasizes its relationship to 
the Epigoinantheae while Stephani emphasizes its relationship to the 
Scapanioideae. Typical members of the genus, such as D. albicans 
(L.) Dumort., are distinct enough from both Spenolobus and Scapania, 
if these genera are defined according to their characteristic representa- 
tives. But in J. ovata there is a clear link between Diplophyllum and 
Sphenolobus, and in Jungermannia ferruginea Lehm. (Scapania fer- 
ruginea Lehm. & Lindenb.), of India, there is an equally clear link 
between Diplophyllum and Scapania. Under the circumstances three 
courses are possible. The genus Diplophyllum might be given up 
altogether and its species divided up among Sphenolobus and Scapania. 
It might be reserved for its typical species, all doubtful forms being 
referred to Sphenolobus or Scapania. It might be more broadly under- 
stood and made to include both typical and doubtful forms, the arti- 
ficial nature of the genus being fully recognized. Perhaps the last 
course would attract the most adherents. If this is followed, and to 
the writer it seems as good a course as any, both Diplophyllum gymno- 
stomophilum and Jungermannia ovata might well be included under 
Diplophyllum. 
With regard to the name of the genus Trevisan‘ substituted Dip- 
lophylleia for the older Diplophyllum of Dumortier® because the 
name Diplophyllum had been previously applied by Lehmann ê to a 
genus of Scrophulariaceae. Diplophyllum Dumort. was therefore a 
homonym of Diplophyllum Lehm. Lehmann’s genus, however, was 
never accepted by many botanists, being regarded as synonymous 
with the genus Veronica L., so that most of the older writers would 
have regarded Dumortier’s use of the name Diplophyllum, in a sense 
entirely different from that of Lehmann, as quite justifiable. Un- 
1 Kryptogamenfl. der Mark Brandenburg 1: 156-162. 1902. ES 
2 Sp. Hepat. 4: 111-116. 1910. 
3 Bull. del'Herb. Boissier II. 3: 36. 1903. 
* Mem. 1st. Lomb. III. 4: 420. 1877. 
ë Recueil d'Obs. sur les Jung. 15. 1835. 
* Berl. Mag. 84: 2. 1814. 
