76 THE JOUENAL OF BOTANY 



Feeling some doubt as to the distinctness of the two, I asked 

 Mrs. Britton to allow me to see a specimen of A. pusillum, and she 

 kindly sent me part of the original gathering. As I rather expected, 

 the nerve is distinctly, though finely scaberulous at back, and the 

 plant is exactly identical wdth A. scahrum Broth. Mitten's mis- 

 description is, I think, easily explained, while unfortunate. He 

 compares his species with A. Ilariei Besch. Now A. Mariei, which 

 according to Cardot (M. de Madagascar, p. 215) is identical with 

 Barhula indica (Schwaeg.) Brid. {Tricliostomum orientale Willd.), 

 is a species with the back of the nerve very highly and strongly 

 scabrous or almost tuberculate, compared with which the nerve of 

 A. picsillu?n might not mireasonably appear smooth. Smooth, how- 

 ever, it is not, and Mitten's description of it as such has not un- 

 naturally led Brotherus, in the absence of specimens (which existed 

 only in Mitten's herbarium), to re-describe the plant as A. scahrum. 

 A. scahrum must, however, fall into the synonymy of A. pusillum 

 Mitt. 



Taxithelium gottscheanum (Hampe) Broth. 



Hampe (in Linnsea, 1874, p. 568) described this Philippine Is. 

 species as Hypnum Gottscheanum. Subsequently he was led to suppose 

 it to be identical with T. capillipes Broth. {H. capillipes Bry. Jav.), 

 and he has corrected the labelling of all the three specimens in his 

 herbarium to " H. capillipes " and " capillipes Bry. jav." I do not 

 know that he ever published this correction, but even if he has not 

 done so it may be well to remark that the identification is certainly 

 erroneous. H. capillipes has the cells scarcely visibly papillose ; the 

 papillae are so delicate, indeed, that they at first escaped the notice of 

 the authors of the Bryologia Javanica, and it is only in a supple- 

 mentary note on p. 228 that they add " Folia quam subtilissime 

 punctulata, nee Isevia." The Philippines plant, on the other hand, has 

 the leaf cells very distinctly, not to say highly, papillose, almost to 

 the base, and it would be quite impossible for this to be overlooked, 

 and Hampe's species may certainly stand. 



Hypnum scabrellum Lac. and its allies. 



Lacoste in the Bryologia Javanica described Hypnum scahrellum 

 from sterile specimens collected by Korthals in Sumatra, and a 

 Celebes specimen in theLeyden Herbarium ; adding " Floreset fructus 

 ignoti." The inflorescence has been considered as probably dioicous. 

 It is the Sematophyllum scahrellum of Par. Ind., but Cardot has 

 shown good reason for considering it identical with the Samoan 

 S. lamprophyllum of Mitten, a name which therefore has the 

 priority. 



Beccari issued No. 37 of his *' Crittogame di Borneo," a fertile plant 

 from Sarawak, as H. scahrellum; and Hampe, in describing Beccari's 

 plants in Nuov. Giorn. Bot. ital. iv. 284, describes the fruit of this 

 plant under that name. An examination of Beccari's plant, however, 

 shows that it is not identical wdth Lacoste's species, and Hampe's 

 description of the fruit must therefore not be taken as descriptive of 

 *S'. scahrellum^ i. e. S. lamprophyllum, Beccari's plant, to begin 



