3 



Lepiocladia Biughamiae is well described and in considerable 

 detail by J. G. Agardh, who lays stress upon a number of characte- 

 ristic point. He was, however, in very considerable doubt as to the 

 systematic position of the plani but placed it for the lime being in 

 his Rhodymeniaceae, comparing it particularly with Byrnenocladia 

 and Plocamìiim. De Toni (Syll. Alg., iv. 2, p. 009, 1909) places it in 

 the Family Rhodymeniaceae and the Subfamily Plocamieae. Schmitz 

 does not mention the genus at ali in his account of the Rhodophy- 

 ceae in the Pfian~enfamilien. From its possession of specialized 

 curved auxiliary ramelli in the fertile portions of the frond, 

 Leptoclaclia Binghamiae seems to belong to the Dumontiaceae, 

 as now limited, and in the immediate vicinity of Pikea, under 

 species of which it may, at times, be found in different her- 

 baria. It may be distinguished from species of that genus (as limited 

 by Schmitz) by having the cystocarps scattered through the upper 

 and not specially swoUen or otherwise differentiated portions of the 

 fertile plants. There are other characters, viz : the subdichotomous 

 branching, and the detail of structure and development of the cy- 

 stocarp which distinguish it from the species of Farlowia, while it 

 is to be readily separated from species of Cryptosìphonia by its 

 complanate and distichously subdichotomous frond. 



Andersoniella Farloivii Schmitz is briefly described by him in 

 Engler et Franti' s Pflanienfamìlien (i Th., Abth. 2, p. 520, 1897). 



The type of Schmitz can be located only by inference. It is, 

 I feel certain, represented by four slides in the Schmitz coUectioh 

 at the British Museum of Nat. Histor., numbered 4. 8ó. The slides 

 purport to have been prepared from no. 28 ot Farlow, Anderson 

 and Eaton' s Algae. Exsiccatae Amerìcae Borealis. This number was 

 probably supplied by D.r C. L. Anderson to Grunow, who, in turn, 

 loaned it to Schmitz No. 28 of the Alg. Exs. Am. Bor. is labelled 

 Farlozuia compressa, but an examination of different copies shows 

 that the specimens were mixed. There were distributed under this 

 number true Farlowia compressa (Herb. Farlow ! Herb. Brit. Mus. 

 Nat. Hist. ! Herb. Univ. Calif. !) and undoubtedly this number was 

 based on the proper plant, but Andersoniella Farlo7vii was also di- 

 stributed (Herb. N. Y. Bot. Garden !) as well as an undescribed 

 species of Leptocladia (to be named L. conferta below) in one copy 



