192 Evans: NOTES ON GENUS HERBERTA 
that time he was undoubtedly ignorant of Gray’s writings. Many 
years afterwards, however, in his last published work on the 
Hepaticae,* he quotes Gray’s generic names as synonyms, refusing 
to recognize them as valid on account of their masculine form. 
In the present instance he naturally maintains his genus Schisma. 
Gray’s genera were likewise unknown to Nees von Esenbeck. In 
the first volume of his Naturgeschichte der europdischen Leber- 
moose, published in 1833, he accepted Schisma as valid (p. 107). 
In the third volume, published in 1838, he suggested that it 
might be considered a section of his genus Mastigophora (p. 573)» 
although he continued to employ Schisma as a generic name. 
The inclusion of Schisma under Mastigophora would have been 
quite unwarranted on the basis of priority. The latter genus 
was not published until 1833, and its characters were completely 
revised in 1835. Schisma therefore antedates it by more than a 
decade. As originally defined Mastigophora was essentially the — 
equivalent of the genus Lepidozia Dumort., although no species 
were definitely assigned to it; in its revised form it was made to 
include such species as Jungermannia diclados Brid. and J. Woods 
Hook. At the present time it is accepted by most writers in its 
revised form. 
Nees von Esenbeck’s provisional reduction was adopted 
definitely by the authors of the Synopsis Hepaticarum (1845), 
who went even farther than he and included both Schisma and 
Mastigophora under the genus Sendinera of Endlicher,f a genus 
which had been proposed a few years earlier for the single species 
Jungermannia Woodsii. On account of the high position which 
the Synopsis holds in the literature of the Hepaticae the name 
_ Sendinera was acknowledged for many years as the correet name 
for the combined genus. Now, however, both Schisma and 
Mastigophora are universally regarded as distinct, and the name 
Schisma is employed by those who refuse to sanction the’ use of 
the name Herberta. 
Of the eighteen species of Sendtnera given in the Synopsis only 
six would now be included in the genus Herberia. In Stephani’ 
recent monograph of the genus (under the name Schisma), pub- 
Oe eee 
* Bull. Soc. Bot. Belgique 13: 123. 1874. 
+ Gen. Plant. 1342. 1840. 
