th.it it is .ui unnatural ition of thi [*he divisions "I the thallus are however 



such as ma) nd quite commonl) in specimens of U. fiabellum. 1 other plate 



and Solander's l.il.. 24. / label lum was 

 erall) r< irly authors as an animal, and even in later times was placed with 



11 1 encrusted algae in a subdivision of the animal kingdom. 

 In 1812 I founded the genus Udotea (Mém. class. Polyp. coralligènes in Nouv. 



Buil. d Sci. par la Soc. Phil. de Paris torn. III. 1N12. p. 1 86), mi Corallina Fiabellum Milis 

 and placed it among the Corallineae, a famil) of "Polypiers coralligènes oon 



, year Lamo roux published the third part of his paper entitled "Essai 



de la Familie des Thalassiophytes non articulées" (Annales du Muséum 



d'Hi N'aturelle, Paris tom XX. [813 pp. 267 292), in which he shortlj describes his 



new genus Flabellaria, placing in it. as the only species, the Con/erva flabelli/ormis ol 



mn under the name of Flabellaria Desfontainii. And of course he describes it as a 



plant, that is, he includes it among the true vegetable seaweeds. 



Now at t his time the two writers Lamouroux and Lamarck were publishing papers on 

 the same groups «'t' marine organisms, and the similarity of the authors' names and still more 

 of thi vations ol their names, is apt to be misleading; especially as they chance to have 



invented the very same generic name [Flabellaria) at the same time to denote certain species 

 [F. Desfontainii of Lamouroux, as just mentioned above, and F. conglutinata and F. pavonia 

 of Lamarck which 1 )i 1 \1s\1 thirty years later united generically under Udotea. Curiously 

 enough, the very next paper to Lamouroux's is by Lamarck and is entitled "Sur les Polypiers 

 empatés" Annales <lu Museum vol. XX. 1813, pp. 294—312); and in it he too describes a 

 genus, Flabellaria, (1. c. p. 299) which he divides into two sections, one containing organisms 

 with * Articulations réunies", and the other with "Articulations distinctes". In the first section 

 places two species, Corallina conglutinata Eli. et Sol. (see U. conglutinata p. 114) as 

 Flabellaria conglutinata Lamarck, and Corallina fiabellum Eli. & Sol., (which, as shown above, 

 had already been made the type of Lamouroux's genus Udotea) as Flabellaria pav onia Lamarck 

 pro parte. (The second section of Flabellaria is composed of species now known as Halimedd). 

 mention is made by Lamarck of Lamouroux's usc of the name Flabellaria in the paper 

 immediately preceding his own ; and one is therefore justified in supposing that both Lamouroux 

 and Lamarck simultaneously invented the same name, Flabellaria, one to denote a new genus 

 of plants. tli'- other a new genus of animals ; and both. strangely enough, were founded on 

 es which since 1X42 have been included in ('do/ra at the instance of De< usne. I or 

 reasons stated on p. 48 we regard Lamouroux's Flabellaria as sufficiently distinct to be 

 maintained .is a genus distinct frorh Udotea]. Lamarck moreover was apparently ignorant of 

 reation of the name Udotea in the previous year, to designate Corallina Fia- 

 bellum of Ellis and Solander. 



To return to Lamouroux ; in 1816 he published his "Histoire des Polypiers coralligènes 



ement nommés zoophytes", and on p. 310 he gives a fuller description of his 



than he had done four years earlier, and quotes as a synonym of his I'. fla- 



