33G 



NOTES ON RECENTLY PUBLISHED DESMIDIE^. 

 By W. West, F.L.S., and G. S. West, A.R.C.S. 



Sph^rozosma Goebelii Racib. {Flora, 1895, 1, p. 32, t. iii.u.iv. 

 fig. 6). This is certainly only SphccrozosDia rcctanyulare Wolle. 

 Wolle's figures and description {Desui. U. S. 31, pi. xlix. fig. 9) are 

 very bad, but specimens obtained in material received from him 

 prove the two to be identical. Raciborsld's figure is also not very 

 good. An accurate description and figures are given in our paper 

 on N. American Desinidiea, which has been in the press for some 

 lime. 



MicRASTERiAs PAPiLLiFERA Brcb, A Variety has been described 

 by Schmidle (Ocstcrr. Bot. Zeitsch. 1896, 23) as var. verrucosa, 

 n. var. (cum fig. zylogr.). We have met with many of these verru- 

 cosc forms of Micraaterias papiUifera from many localities, and the 

 curious character of the membrane is due to the age of the cells, as 

 in the case of M. Jenneri Ralfs. Very often one semicell is typical 

 and the other verrucose. 



EuASTRUM suBcuNEATUM Schmidlc. This is described and figured 

 in the same paper (p. 21) ; it is not an Euastrum, and certainly does 

 not resemble E. cuncatum Jeuner; it is probably a form of Cosmarium 

 pUcatum Reinsch, with two tubercles within the apex of each semicell. 



E. BoLDTii Schmidle (/. c. p. 21). This is only a frequent form 

 of E. denticulatum (Kirchn.) Gay, as first mentioned by Boldt [Desm. 

 Grbnl. p. 8, t. 1, fig. 9). 



Cosmarium Quasillus Lund. var. alpinum Schmidle (Oesterr. 

 Bot. Zeitschr. 1895, 459, t. xvi. fig. 1). This seems to us much 

 nearer a form of C. tetraophthalmum Breb. var. LundelUi Wittr. than 

 to any form of C\ Quasillus Lund., which latter it does not appear 

 to resemble. 



C. OsTERi Schmidle {L c. p. 458, t. xv. fig. 32). This is certainly 

 a form of 0. vogcsiacum Lemaire (Desm. Vosr/es, 1883, p. 20, pi. 1, 

 fig. 2), with rather more granules and a broader isthmus, and we 

 therefore refer it to C. vogesiacum Lemaire as var. Osteri (Schmidle) 

 nob. If the vertical view and the front view of the figures given by 

 Lemaire {I. c.) be compared, it is evident that if the figure of the 

 former is correct, that of the latter should have the papillae at the 

 apex much less pronounced. 



C. ornatissimum Schmidle {Hedwigia, 1894, p. 90, t. vi. fig. 12). 

 This seems to be but a form of C. nasutum Nordst. {Desm. Spetsherrj. 

 1872, p. 33, t. vii. fig. 17). 



C. PsEUDOREGNESii W. & G. S. Wcst in Trans. Linn. Soc, 1895, 

 2ud Ser. v. p. 59, pi. vi. figs. 42, 43. C. Nora-Semlia Wille var. 

 polonkum Eichler & Gutw. De Noun. Spec. Algar. Nov., Krakow, 



1894, p. 170, t. V. fig. 27. C. liegnesii Reinsch var. montanum 

 Schmidle {Hedwigia, 1895, p. 74, t. i. fig. 9 ; Oesterr. Bot. Zeitschr. 



1895, 389. The variety montanmn of C. Begnesii described by 

 Schmidle is stated by him (m litt.) to be precisely the same as 



