536 SYMPHYOGYNA. 
cipue adhzrentes, lato-lineares, plerumque furcatze, raro simplices, 
interdum ramum posticum proferentes, basin versus seepe rotundate 
(itaque stipitatze videantur), toto ambitu distanter spinuloso-serrate, 
dentibus antrorsum directis 2-3 cell. longis, basi 2 cell. latis ; costa 
lata, crassiuscula, subtus carinata, intus filo lignoso opaco percursa ; 
cellule majusculze subpellucidee. 
Antheridia in cost locellis parum profundis interrupte 2—4-seriatis soli- 
taria, majuscula subglobosa bracted parva bi-trifidé concava stipata. 
Subinde advenit bractea major, 2 bracteis connatis constans, anther- 
idia 2 (singulo tamen in suo proprio locello) obtegens. 
A S. Hymenophyllo fronde prostrata radicellosa distat, necnon (fide 
Taylori, quum fructum ipse nondum vidi) calyptra longe obovata. 
4. SympHyocyNA HyMENoPHYLLUM (Hook.) Mont. ? 
Jungermania Hymenophyllum Hook. Muse. Exot. t. 14? 
Hab. Var. heterogena 8. ad Tarapoto, in rival saxis irrigatis. 
Fr. lat 4:0; costa *7; cell 5; wmv 1:9; prstel “7™™. 
Viridis, siecando fuscidula. Rhizoma tenue repens radicellosum, plus 
minus alatum, Frondes suberectie, 5™ longs, bis bifida; lacinic 
seepe elongate, lineari-lanceolate, emarginatee, flexuose undulateque, 
valde distanter denticulatee spinuloseeve ; costa latiuscula tenuiuscula, 
3c. crassa, filo centrali lignoso valido dichotomias versus duplici per- 
cursa, subtus plus minus radicellosa; cellulee majuscule subequi- 
laterze subpellucidee. 
Flores dioici: @ ad fureas necnon hic illic ad medias lacinias, 3 circiter 
cujusque lacinize, positi, stipite perbrevi valido carnoso suffulti. 
Bractea ad medium usque 3-6-fida, laciniis subulatis caudato-acu- 
minatis incurvis, subinde hine vel utrinque basin versus 1-bidentata, 
extus bracteolis parvis adnatis forma varlis seepe lanceolatis integer- 
rimis v. subincisis aucta. Pistillidia plurima (50-60), preelonga. 
Obs. This agrees so well in its vegetative organs with Hooker’s figure, 
above-quoted, that it can hardly be any other species. As I did not find 
it in fruit, and have seen no fertile New Zealand specimens, I cannot 
venture to say whether Dumortier’s genus Hymenophyton, framed to con- 
tain Hooker’s Jungermania flabellata and J. Hymenophyllum, is tenable 
by any good character; for the 9 flowers springing from the forks of the 
frond, as in normal forms of those species, are combined in my specimens 
with lateral (antical) flowers, about 3 on each lacinia, as in typical species 
of Symphyogyna. The dendroid stems, arising from a creeping caudex, is 
a good prima facie distinction, but if no other exist, I suppose we must 
hold Hymenophyton to be a mere section of Symphyoqyna. Moreover, in 
the preceding species, S. leptothelia, the fronds, although quite like those 
of S. Hymenophyllum in texture and in the toothed margin, are prostrate 
and closely rooting, nor is there anything tree-like about them ; so that 
even that distinction fades away. 
XXXVI. PALLAVICINIA, Gray. 
Nat. Arr. Brit. Pl. (1821). Dilana Dum. Comm. Bot. (1823). 
Blyttia Endl. (1840); Syn. Hep. (1846). 
Genus cum Symphyogyna convenit aspectu ; fronde valide costata 
