74 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANT 



those of C. taliitensfiy and differed also from Bowie's New Hebrides 

 plant in the pericha^tial leaves narrower, more plicate, and with the 

 apex still more remarkably ciliate-laciniate than they are there. The 

 seta, just 2 cm. long, is finely papillose about half-way down, though 

 faintly only. 



This appeared to show a distinct difference in both species as 

 regards the leaves, from both C. Gelieehii and the New Hebrides 

 plant, and in O. Deplancliei at least as regards also the fruiting 

 characters. An examination of the specimens of C. Deplancliei in 

 Bescherelle's herbarium, however, put an entirely different complexion 

 on the matter. There ai'e several gatherings represented, of Deplanche's 

 and Vieillard's, from Lifou or New Caledonia (the labelling " Nouv. 

 Caledonie " in some cases and probably in all includes the Island of 

 Lifou) ; and these, while clearly all belonging to the same species, 

 showed a great and unexpected degree of variation. The seta varies 

 from 1 cm. to 1*75 cm. on the same tuft ; the capsule is usually 

 suberect and symmetrical, but may be, on the same plant, also 

 decidedly inclined and curved ; the seta is usually papillose onl}'- near 

 summit, but ma}^ be (as in Hampe's specimen) more or less papillose 

 below. The leaf-point varies much in degree of acumination, &c., 

 one specimen showing many leaves quite identical with Bowie's 

 plant, while others approach very nearly the form and chai-acter of 

 Hampe's specimen and C. taliitense. The perichaetial leaves also 

 exhibit a good deal of variation in width, degree of plication, and in 

 extent of ciliation. I do not find any marked difference in the 

 concavity of the leaves between the various plants. There can be no 

 question at all that both C. Gelieehii and the New Hebrides moss 

 come within the range of C. Deplancliei. 



As to the position of G. taliitense^ I am not quite so clear. As 

 far as the vegetative characters go, it might cei'tainly be identical 

 with C. Deplancliei as represented by the plant in Hampe's herbarium. 

 But Sullivant describes the perichaetial bracts as ciliate-dentate, and 

 as ** very strongly papillose at back." In C. Deplancliei the outer 

 bracts are papillose, and are moderately ciliate-dentate above ; the 

 inner are smooth, and have the margins very strikingly fringed and 

 lacerate with branched and re-branched cilia, frequently ending in a 

 bi- or tri-cuspidate tip, reminding one of the processes of certain 

 s[iecies of Staurastrum or similar Desmids. Sullivant's figure of the 

 perichaetial bract of C. tahitense does not indicate any structure of 

 the sort, and the description, ciliate-dentate, is somewhat ambiguous, 

 If, however, the bract figured were an outer one, and the description 

 of the dorsal papillae applied to that, it would represent very nearly 

 an outer bract of G. Deplancliei. At the most, I think, even if the 

 bract figured represented an inner one, the difference would hardly be 

 sufficient for a specific character, especially bearing in mind the 

 somewhat wide range exhibited b}^ the perichajtial bracts of the New 

 Caledonian moss, and I suggest for it a varietal rank for the present, 

 wliile fully anticipating that further examination of the fruiting 

 plant may finally relegate it to the synonymy of C. Deplancliei. 



