A Monograph of the Genus Alaria. J03 



applicable to more than one species in our present conception. 

 In the Agardhian Herbarium, it is represented by a portion of a 

 blade, cleft decussately from the midrib, recalling a Musa leaf 

 (Specimen No. 2105). It may or may not be Alaria PyJaii Geev. 

 In Grönlands Lam. ocli Fucac, p. 23, J. Agaedh brings various 

 " species " to synonymous positions with A. muscefolia (De la Pyl). 

 It is a question how far this synonymization may be relied upon. 

 De Toni^) entirely follows J. Agaedh's view and further adds A. 

 esoulenta f. muscefolia Kjellm. to the synonym list. Kjellman 

 states in Spetzbergens Thallophyter, II, p. 12, " Mellan A. escidenta 

 och muscefolia är skillnaden icke betydlig." This is perhaps w^hy 

 he proposes the forma. But Kjelltman's specimen of f. muscefolia 

 can never be compared with " L. muscefolia De la Pyl " in the 

 Agardhian Herbarium. The specimen from Spitzbergen (No. 2101) 

 bearing the name is beyond doubt to be identified with A. clolicho- 

 rfiachis Kjellm. 



A. tenuifolia Setch. and f. amplior are inseparable from the 

 Greenland form of A. Pylaii. The specimen collected by Lyall 

 at Esquimalt, Vancouver Island, B. C, identified by Haevey as A. 

 Pylaii Geev. and now kept in the herbarium of Trinity College, 

 Dublin, is a young individual with immatured sporophylls, but 

 satisfactorily agreeing w^th A, tenuifolia Setch. f. typica. Setchell 

 states in Fertilizer Resources of the United States, p. 162, " A. 

 tenuifoiia Setch. is to be distinguished by its long, flattened stipe, 

 only moderately broad midrib, short and relatively broad sporo- 

 phylls and blade broadly cuneate at the base." This statement 

 holds equally good for the Atlantic form of A. Pylaii Geev. An 

 examination of the type specimen of A. memhranacea J. Ac. in- 

 duces us to come to the conclusion as Setchell who says that 



1) De Toni : Syll. A]g. m, p. 327. 



