^rrsCEf.LANEA UJ{YOLO(iICA 289 



We must now turn to the Indo-Malayan ])lants. 

 Trichoslomioti Bluniii was published in 18-1 A by Doz. & Molk. 

 In the original description thore is no comparison with T. umhcllatuin 

 or the allied plants. Peristome is not described. The Indo-Malay 

 phmt, a common and widely distributed moss, is recorded from sucli 

 a wide area (including Hawaii), and is so exactly identical with the 

 Hawaiian T. umhcUatuni \V. Arn., that one wonders tliat its identity 

 has not been pointed out. This, however, is no doubt partly due 

 to the fact that C. Mueller in the Synopsis has omitted all mention of 

 T. umhelLatum, which has been overlooked. Hampe, however (teste 

 Bry. jav. i. 81), had arrived at the conclusion that the Javan plant 

 was identical with the S. American T. liichardii — as 1 believe, quite 

 correctly, — for the authors of that work cite " ThymnomUrium 

 Ricliardii major et minor Hmpe. in Sched. Junghuhn " as a syno- 

 nym of Canipi/Iopus Blumii. 



The different forms of T. Hicliardil — e. g. those represented by 

 T. h(f IV alien 7)1 C. M. and T. Baldwinii C. M. — are all included in 

 the various forms of T. Blumii^ in which, as in all its distribution, 

 the blackish colour of the plant is fi'equent, though perhaps it pre- 

 ponderates less than in the Hawaiian and American foi-ms. 



Dicranum nigrescens Mitt., moreover, is precisely the some thing. 

 Here, too, it seems strange that Mitten, who compares it with 

 T. exasperatum, should make no comparison Avith T. Bluiuii, in spite 

 of the fact that Wilson had actually I'ef erred some of Hooker's 

 specimens to that sj^jccies (as I). Dozyaniim). 



I give below an outline of the revised synonymy, without attempt- 

 ing to give the various combinations under which most of the trivial 

 names have appeared. In all probability a considerable number 

 of additions will have to be made to this list. Thus Brotherus gives 

 eight S. American and West Indian species as " sehr nalie verwandt " 

 with T. Bi chard a. 



It is not out of the question that T. exasperatum (Brid.) may 

 ultimately prove to be conspecihc with T. Ricliardii, although the 

 problem runs on quite different lines. The bi'oadly-pointed, often 

 cucuUate, muticous leaves seem at first sight to place it in quite 

 a different category from T. Ricliardii ; and there are other minor 

 characters. Several considerations, however, tend to minimize the 

 value of that cliaracter. Thus, Campylopus hicoJur (Hornsch.), an 

 Australasian moss, has the same form of leaf-apex as T. exasperainm. 

 But I have in recent years received from the Ilev. W. W. Watts 

 Australian specimens of " Campylopus Davaliaiuis Watts," which T 

 lind to be the same thing as C. ericeticola C. M. ; and these are 

 precisely the same thing as C. hicolor, only that they have a short 

 hair-point on some of the leaves. C. alrovirens He Xot., moreover, 

 has the very similar marked var. omtticvs Braithw. Fui-ther, certain 

 plants, such as C. proemorms (C. M.) and C. Tlncaitesii (Mitt.) 

 {cf. Fleischer, M. von Buitenz. i. 116) are admittedly intermediate 

 between T. exasperatum and T. Blumii. And, finally, the very 

 similar geographical distribution of T. exasperatum and T. Blumii 

 lends support to the view, especially if, as seems probable, Dicranum 

 surinamcnse C. M. is the same thing as T. exasperatum. 



