216 Haynes: THE GENUS SPHAEROCARPOS 
Italy, for excellent specimens from Sardinia and various Italian sta- 
tions. One of the last mentioned, from Florence, the home of the 
illustrious Micheli, the author of the name Sphaerocarpos and the 
first botanist to figure and describe one of the species of this genus, 
has been drawn upon to furnish illustrations of the generic type 
species. Mr. William E. Nicholson, of Lewes, Sussex, England, 
has kindly communicated an English specimen of the best known 
European species. In addition to those already named, one hun- 
dred and nine specimens have been examined in the following 
herbaria: that of the New York Botanical Garden (including those 
of L. M. Underwood and William Mitten), that of the Sullivant 
Moss Society, and that of the writer (including that of M. A. 
Howe). 
Miss Lucy MacIntyre and Miss Julia T. Emerson have 
obligingly aided in making certain translations. 
ne of the results of this study is to exclude S. Sphaerocarpos 
(S. derrestris and S. Micheli of authors) from America, as no 
American specimen has been seen which seems to conform strictly 
to the characters of this European and possibly North African 
species. On the other hand, Sphaerocarpos texanus (S. cali- 
fornicus of authors) appears to have a very wide distribution, speci- 
mens from South America, Europe, and Mediterranean Africa 
being indistinguishable from those of the southern and western 
United States. 
Stephani * gives the following seven species as belonging to 
the genus Sphaerocarpos : S. terrestris (Mich.) Smith, S. Donnell 
Aust., S. ¢exanus Aust., S. Berteroi Mont., S. californicus Aust., 
S. cristatus Howe, and S. /Jamesii Aust. The last mentioned, 
Stephani states, was known to him by name only, a specimen 
being nowhere preserved, though, he adds, it was collected in 
Mexico. As no reference to such a species has been found in 
literature, and as Herr Stephani has been unable to give us any 
clue as to the place of origin of the name, it has been dropped 
from the list. Sphaerocarpos texanus appears to be indistinguish- 
able from S. ca/ifornicus, and, as S. texanus was published two years 
earlier, that name has been adopted. On somewhat similar 
grounds, though in this case the two names were based on speci- 
* Bull. Herb. Boiss. 7 : 656, 657. 1899. 
