the Dillenian Herbarium. 107 



30. Ceramium asperum. Rut/i. — The learned author of the Ga- 

 talecta Botanica quotes No. 28. to this plant with a mark of doubt ; 

 but the specimens of the present number exactly agree with those 

 lie was so kind as to send me. 



31. C. glome rat a. Linn. 



32. C. vagabunda. Linn. 



33. C. sericea. Fl. Aug. 



34. A small variety of the preceding, as Dr. Roth has justly 

 considered it in the second volume of the Cataleeta Botanica : in 

 the first he has adduced it as a synonym to his C. mutabilis, but 

 erroneously, as my friend Mr. Dillwyn has already stated in his 

 account of that plant. 



35. From the difference in Dillenius's three figures of this plant, 

 it is singular that no author has observed that he has blended 

 two distinct species under it. His Herbarium shoAvs that A. is a 

 small variety of C. rubra; B. and C. are C.polymorpha; D., which 

 is not mentioned in the Historia Muscorum, is another variety of 

 rubra. 



36. C. corallinoides. Linn. 



37. C. setacca. Fl. Ang. — Dr. Roth has referred this, with a mark 

 of doubt, to the " vat. /3. atro-puipurea" of his C. diaphana : it 

 must at the same time be admitted that the Dillcnian figure is 

 far from good. 



38. It is well conjectured in theCatalectaBotanica that A. and B, 

 must be different species ; but it would hardly be possible to sus- 

 pect, what appears from the Herbarium, that the former is C. ru- 

 bra, the latter Fucus subfuscus. Dr. Roth has erroneously referred 

 this number to his Ceramium elongation (C elonguta, Fl.Ang.), and 

 still more erroneously quoted C. nodulosa as a synonym. 



39. This plant, the C. tubu'losa, Fl. Ang., appears to be only an 

 unusually thick variety of C. rubra, as was suggested to me many 



p 2 years 



