NOTES ON INDIAN FERNS. 341 



Phegopteris late repens (Hope). — This is a question where the importance 

 of the rhizome comes in, distans Don Fl. Nep. 2; paludosum, Blume Fl. Jav. 

 Pa. 192 to 90; Griffithii, Hook, Sp. Fil. IV, 236 ; longipes, Wall. Cat. 333. 

 have all been grouped together under distans as one species, they do not 

 appear to differ as far as the frond goes, but Hope's plant has a widely creeping 

 rhizome like that of Gymnogramme aurita, can it be a form of that fern 

 without the auricles, or is it one or more of the species brought under distans 

 and is the creeping rhizome constant, whilst distans, Don, has it erect, this is a 

 question for Indian botanists (who can examine the plants growing) to decide, 

 or is the rhizome creeping only under certain conditions. Specimens I have of 

 Clark's distans var. glabrata and var. minor have a decidedly erect caudex. 

 None of the others have the rhizome represented in my herbarium or in that of 

 Kew, though I feel sure the Nilgiri and South Indian forms have an erect 

 rhizome. I have only seen one specimen of Hope's fern, it was gathered by 

 Mackinnon at Phedri Gurhwal, 4,500' elevation, it is not separable by its frond 

 from what we call distans ; Hope does not even hint that his fern is a new 

 species, so we do not want another name added to the already numerous 

 synonyms. Mr. Clarke at page 544 of his Review of the Ferns of Northern India 

 says of distans " very difficult to distinguish from Gymnogramme aurita" see 

 also remarks under Gymnogramme at page 24, Supplement to Ferns of Southern 

 India and British India. 



Polystichum auriculatum. — Mr. Hope may be right in separating the South 

 Indian auriculatum from the North Indian forms or varieties, I have always had 

 a doubt on this question ; the Nilgiri plant was described as Polypodium 

 harpophyllum, Zenker, in Linnae XXIV, part II. p. 356 (1851) ; he is however 

 in direct opposition to Hooker and Baker in doing so ; I never liked to dispute 

 these authorities on such a critical question as this. I cannot however agree 

 with Mr. Hope in making 3 species of the 3 North Indian varieties — margin- 

 atum, lentum and ccespitosum (obliquum, Don). 



Polystichum uculeatum and Lastrea Filix-mas. ~ Mr. Hope wishes to make 

 species of the varieties of these well known cosmopolitan ferns ; in this I hope 

 no Indian botanist will follow him, as I am sure any such course would brin^ 

 about great confusion ; varietal names for these forms are all very well for local 

 Floras, particularly when it is understood that these names are given for the 

 extreme forms only of these varieties, as it is well known that when the ferns from 

 very large areas are examined these supposed varieties often run very mucli 

 one into another ; or, to put it in other words, there are various intermediates 

 making it almost impossible to distinguish them. Of Filix-mas I may mention the 

 varieties, odontoloma (Moore), elongata (Hook.), schimperiana (Hochst.), and 

 panda (Clarke) as often very difficult to distinguish satisfactorily even when the 

 collection is from restricted areas; if this species-making is allowed it is difficult 

 to imagine what would become of filix-mas when collections from all the areas 



inhabits were so treated. Sir W. Hooker was the first to check the hair- 

 splitting so much in vogue with foreign botanists, in this he has been followed 



