91 



its decidedly longer stipe. The stipe in L. bulletta must be variable 

 in length, since Kjellman (Om Beringhafvets Algflora, p. 46, 1889) 

 says that the stipe is fairly long and may reach a length of 3o cm, 

 while in the young specimen he fìgures (loc. cit., pi. 2, f. 5; it is 

 very short. In herb. J. G. Agardh, I found three cotypes from Kjell- 

 man, under N. 1741, two of which exactly correspond to the f. an- 

 gusta S. & G., while the third corresponds exactly to the f. cuneata 

 S. & G. Ali had comparatively short stipes. None ofthe specimens 

 referred by Gardner and myself to L. buttata have stipes much over 

 8 cm., while the Areschoug plant has a stipe of 20 cm. I was una- 

 ble to examine the stipe for mucilage duets, in the Areschoug plant, 

 but they are described by him as being situated in the inner cortex. 

 In ali of our specimens of L. buttata, the mucilage duets are in what 

 we are inclined to cali the outer cortex, while those of the biade 

 agree in the two sets of specimens. The plants of Kjellman have, 

 according to his description, the mucilage duets as we found them 

 in our plants. It seems therefore that Laminaria Ruprechti is a plant, 

 approaching closely the L. buttata f. cuneata S. & G. in habit and 

 general color, lack of bullae etc, but to be distinguished from it by 

 its somewhat longer stipe and the position of the mucilage duets 

 in the stipe. 



Miyabe has figured in his paper « On the Laminariaceae of 

 Hokkaido », in the Report on the Marine Resources of Hokkaido, 

 III, piate 14 (text in Japanese), 1902, a plant which he calls L. Ru- 

 prechti Aresch. It seems, however, to be a typical digitate species 

 and not at ali related to either the true L. Ruprechti Aresch. or to 

 any form of L. buttata. 



Areschoug (loc. cit., p. 4) doubts whether the specimen he re- 

 ceived from Ruprecht and labelled Laminaria dermatodea may be the 

 same as those received by J. G. Agardh and others, or not. The 

 specimen received from J. G. Agardh is referred by him (De Lami- 

 narieis, p. 18, 1867), to L. slenophyila. This specimen I have not 

 examined carefully. Harvey (Notice of a collection of Algae made 

 on the Northwest Coast of North America etc, p. 166, 1862), kept 

 his specimens (2 in number) under the name given them by Ru- 

 precht. They seem to be the same as L. buttata f. cuneata S. & G. 

 Harvey also referred Esquimalt plants to L. dermatodea. Of these, I 



