658 SUMMARY OF CURRENT RESEARCHES RELATING TO 



L. Loeske,* in commenting upon the above, points out that the 

 meaning of xerophyte and hygrophyte is unsatisfactory when applied to 

 mosses, and he proposes the use of combined terms, such as seiophil 

 xerophyte and hygropliil xerophyte, where the adjective refers to the 

 habitat, and the substantive refers to the structure of the moss. For 

 instance, M mum spinosum is a seiophil xerophyte. 



A. A. Sapehinf publishes the second part of his paper cited above, 

 and gives therein an account of the floristic bryogeography of the Crimean 

 mountains ; first some general remarks on the district, and then an 

 enumeration of all the 195 species with notes on their distribution and 

 ecological characteristics. Four species and several varieties and forms 

 are new. He adds a chapter on the origin of the Crimean moss-flora. 

 He finds that 170 of the species are middle European, eight are Alpine, 

 and seventeen are Mediterranean. 



The same writer J also publishes, in Russian, some keys to the Crimean 

 mosses, founded almost exclusively upon the anatomical and morphologi- 

 cal characters of the gametophyte, since more than half the species are 

 sterile and dwarfed. Short descriptions of the species are added. 



Mosses of Libya. § — E. Durand and G. Barratte give a list of twelve 

 mosses recorded for Tripoli and Cyrenaica, with the distribution and 

 synonymy of the species. They were determined by C. Mueller about 

 thirty years ago. The occurrence of an hepatic, perhaps Lunularia, has 

 been indicated by Pacho, but its identity has not been verified. 



North American Bryophytes. — A. J. Grout |j gives a list of fifteen 

 mosses and nine hepatics which are new records for Vermont state, and 

 of nine which are rare or otherwise interesting. 



M. E. Jones 1T gives in his Montana Botany Notes a list of 223 

 mosses and twenty -four hepaticai collected by J. M. Holzinger, by him- 

 self, and others. The local distribution of the species is indicated. 



Mexican Mosses.** — J. Cardot, who, in the past two years, has de- 

 scribed many new mosses for Mexico — 10 genera, 160 species, 30 

 varieties — now gives a list of 62 species unrecorded previously for 

 Mexico. These additions are all the more interesting as proving the 

 mixed character of the Mexican flora, partly temperate, partly tropical. 

 When analysed these species are shown to be 24 belonging to the United 

 States flora, 23 to South America (especially the Andes), 17 to 

 Guatemala and Costa Rica, and 14 to the Antilles. It is surprising to 

 find among them the European Gampylopus flexuosus, otherwise un- 

 known in America; and also Fissidens pallidicaulis, known only from 

 the Atlantic Isles and Italy. 



* Hedwigia, li. (1911) Beibl. pp. 32-3. 



t Engler's Hot, Jahrb., xlvi.(19U) Beibl. pp. 1-34 (3 pis.), 



t Mem. Club Alpin Caucase et Crimee (Odessa, 1910) 80 pp. (2 pis.). 



§ Floris Libycse Prodromus. Geneve : Romet, 1910, pp. 283-5. 



|| Bryologist", xiv. (1911) pp. 52-4. 



•jf Bull, tniv Montana (Biol, ser.) No. 15 (1910) pp. 50-8. 



** Rev. Bryolog., xxxviii. (1911) pp. 79-84. 



