14 ART. 12. K. YENDO. 



not knowing what I had suggested, established a new genus for 

 this peculiar species. 



Harvey remarks that Amp. gracilis Harv. has some affinity 

 with Metag. stellig er urn, and still closer affinity with A7np. inter- 

 media Harv. Cf. Phyc. Austr. t. 231. I consider that both of 

 Harvey's plants belong to the same species. Madam Weber 

 refers Amp. granifera to the genus Iletagoniolithon reducing Amp. 

 intermedia, Amp. setacea, Amp. similis and Amp. stellata to the 

 position of its spnonymes. I can not decide at present whether 

 Amp. granifera Harv. is the same as Amp. gracilis or not. If 

 it be the same, the name Amp. gracilis Harv. should be kept 

 on account of priority. Amp. similis Sond. was united by Madam 

 Weber to Metag. graniferum. But I could not find the descrip- 

 tion in Bot. Zeitung 1845, which she mentioned as the " quelle " 

 of A7np. similis Sond. 



Gen. III. LITHOTHRIX J. GRAY. 



Lithothrix aspergillum J. Gray. Journ. Bot, Vol. V, p. 33. 

 = Amphiroa aspergillum Anderson, Zoe, II. p. 225. 

 = Amp. nodulosa Farl. (nee Kütz.) Report U. S. Fish, Comm, 



1875. p. 715. 

 = Amp. nodulosa Coll., Hold, et Setch, Phyc. Bor.-Amer. no. 498. 

 f. nana f 



= Amp. aspergillum. f. nana Setch. et Gard. Alg, N. W, A, p, 359. 



The monotypic genus has been established by J. Gray, who 

 does not, however, give clear reason for its establishment. But 

 it is not difficult to understand from his remarks that the plant 

 has some relation to Amphiroa by having wartlike conceptacles 

 and at the same time to Corallina in its general habit. The 

 generic diagnosis given by him is not sufficient to separate it from 

 the other genera. The plant was referred to Amphiroa by An- 



