BENEDICT: GENERA OF THE FERN TRIBE VITTARIEAE 163 
The stem is very slender and dorsiventral in structure. Only 
herbarium material has been obtainable for study and it has not 
been possible to obtain any of this which would soak up well 
enough to allow a good section to be made. The thickness of the 
stems, not greater than that of the simpler species of Monogramma, 
would indicate that the internal structure must be very simple 
and deserving of thorough morphological investigation. 
The leaves as figured (PLATE 4) are sufficiently described as to 
venation, this being merely free and dichotomous. As to soriation, 
apparently any of the ultimate and next larger veins may bear 
sporangia. These are borne quite superficially, an unusual feature 
in this tribe. The only protection to the sporangia is afforded 
by the paraphyses, assuming that these develop earlier than the 
sporangia, as is true in all the species of the tribe in which their 
development has been noted. In this way the young sporangia 
would be partially protected during the earlier part of their 
development. 
The paraphyses are of the type already described for Mono- 
gramma graminea and M. dareicarpa, and further, they are prac- 
tically identical with those characteristic of Vittaria of the group 
of V. remota Fée. The spores are diplanate, another point of 
similarity with the V. remota group. The scales are of the usual 
clathrate type. 
Goebel, by his study of the gametophyte of Hecistopteris, first 
succeeded in convincing botanists that this genus is properly to 
be associated with Monogramma and Vittaria rather than included 
as a species of the ‘‘catch-all”’ genus Gymnogramma as interpreted 
by earlier writers. John Smith, however, had already pointed 
out clearly, in connection with his original description of the genus, 
that it is ‘‘only distinguished from that genus [Monogramma] 
by the cuneiform, usually laciniate character of its fronds, and 
consequent forked venation.” His statement would have been 
more accurate if he had partly reversed the order of the words 
and made the outline of the “fronds” the consequence of the 
forked venation. 
The taxonomic separation of Hecistopteris is simple by reason 
of its free-forking venation. As a matter of fact, however, its 
actual phylogenetic separation from the simpler species of Vittaria, 
especially of the V. remota group, is probably not very great. 
