Howe: ALGAE OF BERMUDA AND THE BAHAMAS 357 
rather than cushion-like habit of growth, the larger cells, etc. 
In general habit, C. Bracei is slightly suggestive of small condi- 
tions of Dictycsphaeria favulosa. 
Disha ssa iaaaes ais nov. 
merely acuminate, emane an extensive sordid-green or subfus- 
s turf or ney aig stratum 3-8 mm. thick and more or less 
once with lime; branches mostly strict, appressed, or sub- 
parallel, often agglutinate; trichomes prasinous or dull yellowish- 
aeruginous, 8-14 y. in diameter, tapering out at apex and be- 
coming obsolete in ravine parts; cells 2-8 u (mostly 5-6 uv.) long, 
soon obscure; sheaths 5-16 yw thick, yellowish, teicetiitkd the 
surface often rough and d elaminating heterocysts basal, solitary 
or geminate, elongate-ellipsoidal, 1 
Littoral; surrounding anna Et of Avicennia nivida 
and forming a turf on mud in association with Avicennia and 
Rhizophora. 
Bahamas: Bimini Harbor, Howe 3268—type, April 17, 
1904; Joulter’s Cays, 3115 and 3116; New Providence, 3087; 
Shroud’s Cay, Exuma Chain, 39409. 
Dichothrix Bornetiana is a plant that has evoked diverse 
opinions from phycologists who have examined it and it may 
continue to be a subject for a divergence of views. No less 
competent authorities than F. S. Collins and W. A. Setchell 
to whom specimens were submitted in 1908 have considered it 
be Polythrix corymbosa (Harv.) Grun., which ‘has burst the 
shell and run riot.’’ The late Edouard Bornet, who also ex- 
amined specimens, wrote under the date of April 27, 1908: 
“Les nos. 3087, 3115, 3116, 3268, et 3949 me paraissent 
appartenir 4 la méme espéce. Les différences d’aspect que 
présentent les échantillons ne sont pas plus grandes que dans 
d’autres espéces plus ou moins encroutées de calcaire. Les 
trichomes sont de méme dimension, les gaines ont la méme 
structure, elles bleuissent également par le chloroiodure de zinc; 
mais surtout les filaments sont réunis en faisceaux anastomosés 
comme on en voit dans le Calothrix panncsa. Cette plante, que 
m’est inconnue, ne se trouve ni dans la Révision, ni dans le 
Sylloge Algarum. J’ignore si des espéces nouvelles de Dichcthrix 
marins ont été décrits récemment. Je la placerais dans le voi- 
