I 2 I 



Frond from a truncate base semicircular, with a radius of about 5 cm. from the stipes, 

 fissile, much and deeply lacerated, with margin lobate and ragged through unequal growth, 

 indistinctly zoned, isabelline, fissile, not much conglutinated, surface fibrous or like appressed nap. 



Filaments of frond mostly 50 — 65 u. in diam., radiating from stipes to margin, pluriseriate, 

 parallel, nearly straight, calcified, porose, with even (never with markedly uneven) constrictions. 



Filaments of stipes bearing lateral appendages dichotomously divided and terminated 

 by cymes of small, short, obtuse or truncate apices. [Figs. 49 — 51]. 



This plant is rather perplexing, and we have only one specimen of it (hg. 49). Though 

 a product of the Indian Ocean, it lacks the markedly uneven supra-dichotomial constrictions, 

 which are so characteristic of the other species of Udotca indigenous to Eastern waters. lts 

 constrictions are even (fig. 50), like those öf mo'st of the West Indian species. Compared with 

 the East Indian species it differs from U. orientalis in having its frond-filaments about twice 

 as thick ; and from U. glaucesccns in having a pluristromatic frond. As to the West Indian 

 species, it differs from U. conglutinata in its larger frond-filaments and its fibrous, fissile, non- 

 conglutinated frond ; and from U. cyathiformis in its purely explanate (not cup-shaped) frond, 

 and in the continuation of the stipes-cortex on to the base of the frond. 



We have alluded on p. 1 1 7 to the striking resemblance between the unique specimen 

 of the present East Indian species and the explanate American specimens of U. cyathiformis 

 collected by Dr. Versluys at S ta Marta in Columbia. Were it not for the widely separated 

 habitats of the two gatherings, we should not hesitate to combine them in one species. But, 

 in view of the limited distribution which characterises all the species of Udotca with the one 

 exception of U. flabellum, we prefer for the present to regard the Celebes and the S ,a Marta 

 plants as specifically distinct. The Celebes plant represents a purely explanate species, viz., 

 U. explanata, while the S ta Marta examples represent an explanate variant of U. cyathiformis. 

 The discovery of cyathiform examples in the East Indian Archipelago would involve the 

 merging of U. cxplanata in U. cyathiformis. And if on the other hand the S ta Marta plants 

 should prove to be always purely explanate, they would have to be referred to U. explanata. 

 In either case we should arrive at a species which in its distribution leaps at one bound from 

 the East to the West Indies or vice versa. 



We have never had the good fortune to see the plant figured by Kützing (loc. cit.) 

 as " Flabellaria Palmctta (in sinu arabico. Herb. Sonder)". Kützing's figure however is so like 

 our plant as to suggest that it is the same species. Both plants came from the waters of the 

 Indian Ocean ; both have a pluristromatic and fibrous, fissile frond ; both have the supra- 

 dichotomial constrictions even and frond-filaments of about the same diameter. We assume of 

 course that Kützing's figure of the filaments is accurate both as to shape and size. We also 

 assume that "in sinu arabico" indicates either the Red Sea or the Arabian Sea. 



S. Udotca indica n. sp. 



Hab. INDIC. Kurrachee, Sind, 1880—3, J. A. Murray in Herb. Mus. Brit.! sub " Udotea Desfontainü 

 Decne." in Dickie's MS. 90, 90 A, 90B 3/82, 90C 3'82, in Herb. Kew J. A. Murray ! — Kurra- 

 chee, sub nom. " Udotea conglutinata' (Harvey's MS.), u Cyclops Dec. 59. C.C.T." in Herb. Kew! 



SIBOGA-ExrEDlTIF. LXII. l6 



