66 



L. friit/cosa. M. Sårs: Hyilrotlifkstillcens Vinkel med 

 Muderstilken er 45°— 60", dens Længde ca. '/,, Hydrotliek, og 

 den har 3—4 tydelige Spiralvindinger. Hydrothekerne hnr 

 en Melleniting inellem Ror- og Klokkeform, idet deres øvre 

 Væg er tydelig buet, medens den nedre fortsætter ufor- 

 andret i Stilkens Retning. Hyilrotliekerne blir saaledes 

 videre ved Mundingen end ved sin Basis. — hvad Sårs 

 ogsaa har antydet i sin oprindelige Diagnose (superne lati- 

 oribus, inferne coarctatis). — Deres Endeflade staar lodret 

 paa Liengderetningcii og saaledes ikke ]iarallel Moder- 

 stilken. 



L. sijmuiefrica. n. sp. Hydrothekstilkens A^inkel med 

 Moderstilken lig fiU" — 9U°; dens Længde næsten lig Hy- 

 drothekernes, og den har 6 — 8 skarpt adskilte Ringe. 

 Hydrotliekerne er regelmæssig klokkeformige, udcn nogen 

 Bøining. 



(Om Varietet med spiraldreiet Stilk, se ovenfor). 



Endnu et Middel — og kanske det allersikreste — 

 til at adskille Art erne har man i deres Copijinia, men 

 desværre findes ingen Afbildning eller indgaaende Beskri- 

 velse over denne hos L. r/raciU/ma. Sandsyidigvis vil Cop- 

 jnniatuljerne hos denne Art ved nærmere Undersogelse vise 

 sig at være lige karakteristiske for den. som de er det for 

 de øvrige Arter, og isaafald vil enhver Sammenblanding 

 af Arterne for Fremtiden være udelukket. 



De her omtalte Arter danner en Kjæde. og man "vil 

 ofte i en Koloni af livilkensomhelst af dem finde enkelte 

 Hydrotheker. der synes at staa paa Overgangen til en af 

 de andre Arter. Men heri tinder jeg ikke tilstrækkelig 

 Grund til at slaa Arterne sammen til en, da man altid 

 uden ringeste Vanskelighed kan afgjore til hvilken Type 

 et Exemplar skal henføres, idet kun en meget liden Pro- 

 cejit af Hydrothekerne har en afvisende Form. 



For, om mulig, herved at faa klaret disse Artei's Syno- 

 nymi engang for alle, vil jeg give en Fremstilling af Ar- 

 ternes Historie, og herigjennem ogsaa begrunde min Op- 

 fatning, at L. f nit kosa, M. Sårs og L. ^racilUma. AXåcv, 

 er to forskjellige Arter. 



Prof. J/. Sårs offentliggjorde i 184!) (lUl) en kort, 

 men fuldstændig udfyldende. Beskrivelse af L. (CaDquiiin- 

 Jaria) fruticosa, og i 1857 beskrev ./. Alder (5), nden at 

 kjende Sars's Arbeide — sin L. rjracilliiiia. idet han spe- 

 cielt dvælede ved denne Arts Adskillelso fra L. dumosa. 

 I 1862 (6) udtalte lian i en liden Notits, at han ansaa 

 sin Art for identisk med Sars's C. fruticosa. Senere har 

 de to Forskere korresponderet om Arterne og iidvexlet 

 Exemplarer, og den eneste Udtalelse fra nogen af dem 

 efter denne Sammenligning tindes hos Sårs 1862 (104), 

 hvor han efter en indgaaende Beskrivelse af sin Art og en 

 Sammenligning af Ilegge, udtaler som sin Mening, at Ar- 

 terne er forskjellige. 



of the hydrotlieca generally is parallel to the direction of 

 the parent stem. 



In L. fruticosa, M. Sårs. the angle that the liydro- 

 theca stalk makes witli the parent stalk is between 45° 

 and 60°; its length is about half the hydrotheca, and it 

 has 3 or 4 distinct spiral twists. The hydrothecæ are 

 something between tubular and bell-shaped. their npper 

 wall lieing distinctly curved, while the lower continues un- 

 changed in the direction of the stalk. The hydrothecæ 

 are thus wider at the moutli than at the base, as Sårs 

 has indicated in his original detinition — ,,superne latiori- 

 bus. inferne coarctatis". Their apical surface is ])erpendi- 

 cular to the longitudinal direction. and tims not parallel 

 to the parent stem. 



In L. si/mvietrica. n. sp., the angle whieh the hydro- 

 theca stalk makes with the parent stem is between 60° and 

 90". Its length is almnst that of the hydrotheca, and it 

 has from 6 to 8 clenrly defined rings. The hydrothecæ 

 are of a regular liell-shape. without any bend. 



(Conceruing the variety with a spirally twisted stalk. 

 see above). 



There is yet another means — perliaps the surest — 

 of distinguishing the species. viz. by their Coppinia : but 

 unfortunately there is no drawing or detailed description 

 of them in the case of L. gracillima. It is probable that 

 on a eloser investigation. the Coppinia tulles in tiiis spe- 

 cies vvill prove to be just as characteristic of it, as they 

 are of the otiier species; and if this be so, tliere will be 

 no possibility, in the future, of confonnding the species. 



The species here meutioned form a ehaiii. and in a 

 colonv of any one of tliem. there will frecpiently be found 

 hydrotheca' whicli appear to lie at the point of transition 

 to one of the other species; but I do not see in tiiis fact 

 sufficient ground for nniting the species under one. as it 

 can always, without the slightest difficulty. be decided to 

 which type a specimen is to be referred, the jjcrcentage 

 of livdrothecæ of a different form being very small. 



In order, if possilde. definitely to clear up the syno- 

 nymy of these species, I will give an account of their history, 

 and in so doing also give reasons for my view that L. fru- 

 ticosa, M. Sårs and L. f/raciUima, Alder, are two different 

 species. 



In 1849. Prnf M. Sårs, (101) published a short but 

 full description of L. (CantpHumlaria) fruticosa, and in 

 1857, J. Alder (b). without being acquainted "with Sars's 

 work, described his L. i/ruciUiuui, dwelling especially upon 

 the separation of this species from L. dumosa. In 1862, 

 he stated in a note (6) that he considered his species to 

 be identical with Sars"s C. Jruticosa. Subsequently the 

 two naturalists corresi)onded on the subject. and exchanged 

 specimens, and the only statement from either of them 

 after this comparison was from Sårs iu 1862 (104i. when, 

 after a minnte desciiption of his species. and a comparison 

 of the two, he expresscs it as his opinion that the species 

 are different. 



