ROTA ANOLTCA 69 



Whether these characters alone are sufficient to base a genus 

 upon, or whetlier it would be better to consider Roi/a as a subgenus 

 of Closterium^ or even to drop it altogether and include the four 

 known species in Glosferium, depends, of course, upon the degree of 

 inijiortance which observation shows can be attached to such characters. 

 For the present, at any rate, it seems desirable to retain the genus on 

 the following modified basis : — 



KoYA W. & G. S. West in J. R. M. S. 1896, 152, descr. emend. 



Cellulae non constrictie, cylindracea3 vel subcylindracese, rectae vel 

 leviter incurvje, utrinque levissime attenuata3, apicibus plus minusve 

 truncatis vel obtuso-rotundatis ; membrana cellularum sine poris, levi, 

 achroa ; chromato])hora singula, vel, cellulis maturis, in medio in duas 

 partes divisa, axili, extremitatibus vel rotundatis et prope apices 

 attingentibus, qui turn nullum locellum apiealem habent, vel extremi- 

 tatibus concavis, et turn celluhe locellis apicalibus instructse ; nucleo 

 vel laterali, in mediana incisura chromatophora3 singula? posito, vel, in 

 cellulis maturis, centrali, inter duas chromatophoras ; pyrenoidibus 

 pluribus mediana serie dispositis. 



KoTA ANGLiCA West, sp. nov. R. cellulis parvis, cylindraceis vel 

 subcylindraceis, utrinque levissime attenuatis, rectis vel leviter in- 

 curvis, apicibus subtruncatis, diametro 5-15( — 20)-plo longioribus ; 

 membrana cellularum levis, achroa, ad extremitates leviter incrassata; 

 chromatophora axilis, jugis longitudinalibus (4?) prsedita, extremita- 

 tibus concavis, primo singula, postea cellulis maturis in medio in duas 

 partes divisa ; cellulse locellis apicalibus instructae ; nucleus vel 

 lateralis in mediana incisura chromatophorse singulae positus, vel, in 

 cellulis maturis, centralis inter duas chromatophoras; quaeque cellula 

 pyrenoidibus 4-6 medianis instructa. Zygosporae globosae leves. 



Long. cell. 85-80(-112) /x; lat. max. cell 7-5-9/^; lat. apic. 

 5-7 /i- ; diam. zygosp. 20-26 [x. 



Hah. in aqua minime profunda, Quinton, prope Birmingham 

 (April 1916). 



My best thanks are due to Mr. W. B. Grove, M.A., who kindly 

 helped me to look up several obscure references in connection with 

 this paper. 



CEPHALANTHERA Richard or EPIPACTIS Crantz ? 

 By Colonel M. J. Godfert, F.L.S. 



In Oest. Bot. Zeitschrift (1889, pp. 395-9, 422-430) appeared an 

 extremely able and interesting paper by Dr. R. v. Wettstein, the 

 main object of which was to show that the genus Cephal anther a has 

 been wrongly separated from Epipactis, and which further suggested 

 that Gephalanthera, Epipactis, and Limodorum should be re-united 

 in one genus — Epipactis Crantz. 



In 1815 L. Richard (De Orchid. Eur. Adnot. pp. 51-2) first separated 

 Cephalanthera from Epipactis, characterizing the genera as follows: — 



