the Bt itiJJj Fuel, with particular Dejcriptions of each Species. 163 



baud dubium eft quia cadeni fit ac F. ciliaii — Anne ab illo fatis 

 diftinclus? 



Whoever will be at the trouble of comparing fpecimens of this 

 Fucus with thofe of ciliatus will find a very ftriking fimilarity : 

 however, we diftinguifh this by its cilia being very ramofc — in ciliatus 

 they are fimple and undivided. The cilia are often round — the 

 root, the fubftance, the colour and habit are nearly alike in both. 



We have not found this common. We gathered a fingle fpcci- 

 men at Weymouth, where the ciliatus is very common. But at II- 

 fracombe in Devonfhire, where this fpecies is very frequent, we 

 did not find one fpecimen of ciliatus. 



We have not feen it in fructification ; moft probably it is fimilar 

 in this refpect to F. ciliatus ; and it certainly is to be doubted whe- 

 ther it be abfolutely diftintt from that fpecies. 



The figure FL Dan. 1066, which is molt unaccountably referred 

 to F. pumilus Fl, Ang. appears to be a reprefentation of this plant; 

 but it is not fufficiently exact to allow us to quote it as fuch with 

 certainty. 



Where there is fo much uncertainty concerning a fubjedfc, we 

 wifh to throw out every hint which occurs. Perhaps the ramofity 

 of the cilia in this plant is in confeqnence of its not being exhaufted 

 as to its ftrength by the production of fructification, and thus the 

 efforts of the plant are diverted in this channel. 



33. FUCUS PALMATUS. 



F. fronde membranacea varie divisa palmata. Buddie^ p. 23. 

 & p. 25. &c p. 27. n. 3. Peiker, p. 19. n. 4. Uvedale, vol. 1. 

 p. 2. n. 4. Mori/on, Hi ft. Ox. 646. / 15. t. S.f. I. 



Y 2 Fucus 



