BRITTOX: FLORA OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS 105 



The first species, Radula pallens (S\v.) Dumort., is said to have 

 been found "in St. Crucis insula," the record being based on a speci- 

 men in the Weber herbarium. This specimen was originally referred 

 to Jungermannia complanata L. (Radula complanata Dumort.) by 

 Weber,^ but the later determination is probably correct. 



The second species, Lejeunea Montagnei Gottsche, was based on 

 material from the Mascarene Islands and is now regarded as a species 

 of Euosmolejetinea. A specimen from St. Croix is listed in the. Synopsis 

 but is very problematical and would probably now be referred to 

 some other species. Since the specimen in question has not been 

 available for study, and since no later references to it are to be found 

 in the literature, its status must be left in doubt. 



The third species, Lejeunea bethanica Gottsche, is based qn material 

 collected by Breutel and is said to have come from "prope Bethaniam 

 in Insula St. Christopheri." Many years later Stephani,^ on the basis 

 of a specimen in the Linden berg herbarium at Vienna, quoted the 

 species from St. Jan, referring it to the subgenus Cheilo-Lejeunea. 

 Still later he apparently changed his ideas regarding the habitat of 

 the plant, citing it from St. Kitts and redescribing it under the name 

 Cheilolejeunea bethanica Steph.^ In studying the Lejeuneae in the 

 Lindenberg herbarium, the writer found two specimens labeled 

 Lejeunea bethanica, both of which were collected by Breutel at Be- 

 thania, St. Jan. One of these is very fragmentary but is apparently 

 referable to Rectolej eunea phyllobola (Nees & Mont.) Evans; the other, 

 which is the specimen studied by Stephani, is (in the writer's opinion) 

 referable to Lejeunea rather than to Cheilolejeunea. The species was 

 originally described from a specimen in the Gottsche herbarium at 

 Berlin, not available at the present time, and there is therefore a 

 possibility that the actual type may have come from St. Kitts. The 

 evidence, however, is against this view, and it seems permissible to 

 assume that the specimen in the Lindenberg herbarium is identical 

 with the type and that it formed a part of the same collection. Un- 

 fortunately L. bethanica has not again been collected on either St. 

 Jan or St. Kitts. 



The fourth species, Lejeunea epiphyta Gottsche, was described as 

 "parasitans in Lej. bethanica in Insula St. Johannis prope Bethaniam 

 (Breutel, Hb. G.)." This statement affords further proof that L. 

 bethanica came from St. Jan. According to Stephani'-* the specimen 

 of L. epiphyta in the Lindenberg herbarium should be referred to 



* Prodr. Hist. Muse. Hepat. 59. 1815. 

 ' Hedwigia 29: 86. 1890. 



* Sp. Hepat. 5: 652. 1914. 

 ' Hedwigia 29: 90. 1890. 



