192 Alexander IV. Evans, 



and bordered by an entire Imt crispate wing al)out tbree cells wide. 

 Along and near the margin of the wing scattered unicellular cilia 

 (Fig. 13, D) make their appearance and strongly resemble 

 rhizoids. In these fully developed inflorescences as many as four 

 archegonia are sometimes present. The cilia just mentioned are 

 not alluded to in Stephani's description and are certainly absent 

 from young female branches. Whether they represent a constant 

 or inconstant feature of a mature branch can not be decided from 

 the material studied. It is unfortunate that the "calyptras" and 

 sporophytes of this very distinct species are still unknown. 



The tendency of the dorsal surface-cells of R. pallidcvircns to 

 divide by periclinal walls is a very interesting phenomenon. It 

 represents a rudimentary type of secondary growth in thickness. 

 According to Stephani (25, p. 26) secondary growth in thickness 

 occurs in the rolnist axes of certain species of the genus, but the 

 writer has seen nothing to support this view in any of the large 

 Chilean species, such as R. fucgiensis or R. prchensilis. These 

 species certainly do not develop a zone of meristematic cells, and 

 it is difificult to see how continued growth in thickness could be 

 brought about by any other means. It is to be regretted that 

 Stephani did not enter into the subject more fully. 



24. Riccardia granulata (Steph.) comb. nov. 

 Ancura granulata Steph. Hedwigia 32: 21. 1893. 



Specimens examined: on banks of streams, Port Cook, Staten 

 Island, 1882, Spcgacji^iiii I'j (Massal., M., type of Ancura granu- 

 lata) ; Cape Horn, Hooker (M., as Ancura pinguis) ; top of Cape 

 Spencer, Hooker (M.). 



According to Stephani Ancura granulata has been found also in 

 the vicinity of Punta Arenas, Skoftsberg, and on the Falkland 

 Islands (32, p. 7). 



In habit and general appearance R. granulata looks as if it might 

 be a small form of R. pinguis, and it is not surprising that Hooker 

 and Taylor confused the two plants. In its histological features, 

 however, it is amply distinct, not only from R. pinguis and the 

 somewhat similar R. pallidevirens, ])ut frt)in all the other known 

 members of the genus. The plants are brownish green, at least 

 when dry, and grow in thin mats or tufts. When soaked in water 



