XLViii] DEPARIA 257 



it and the Pteroid Ferns, and that its naked coenosori were derix^ed from an 

 indusiate source: but he expressly excludes the suggestion that the genus 

 is connected phylogenetically with the Pteridinae. In my own view a 

 Blechnoid relation is almost equally probable: but it would be no surprise 

 to find that a loose relation may ultimately appear with some of those Ferns 

 which form that indefinite non-indusiate complex known as the Gymno- 

 grammoid Ferns. 



Deparia Hook, and Grev. 



This genus was founded to receive a P""ern collected by Macrae on the 

 Island of 0\vh)'hee, now known as D. prolifera Hk. Others have since been 

 added: D. coiicinna Baker, from Peru, and D. Moorei Hk., from New 

 Caledonia. The distinctive feature is that the sori, usually stalked, protrude 

 from the margin of the frond, and are protected by a cup-shaped membranous 

 indusium. D. prolifera is^gwred'xn Ylook. 3ind Gvqv., Iconcs Fil.Vl. 154: also 

 in Hooker's Exotic Ferns, PI. LXXXII: D. coucinna in Hooker's Sp. Fil. i, 

 PI. 30, B, and D. Moorei in Hooker's Exotic Ferns, PI. XXVili. The 

 vicissitudes of these species and of the genus itself need not be re-stated 

 here: they are fully set out in Dr Thompson's Memoir {Trans. Roy. Soc. 

 Edin. Vol. L, p. 837, 191 5). It may sufifice to say that the species appeared 

 so diverse to Christ that he speaks of Hooker and Greville's "kiinstliche 

 Genus Deparia^' He placed D. prolifera with Athyrinni Roth, while he 

 included D. Mathewsii (= D. concinna Baker) with Dennstaedtia Bernh., and 

 D. Moorei with Aspidiiim Swartz. He was followed by Diels, and so in 

 Christensen's Index the genus Deparia is sunk. 



There is no sufficient ground for doubting that Deparia, as founded by 

 Hooker and Greville, is a good genus. The differences which appear to have 

 weighed with Christ are such as are seen elsewhere within well-recognised 

 genera, while the distinctive character of the sorus will be found sufficient 

 for holding together the apparently diverse species. D, prolifera and D. Moorei 

 present two types divergent chiefly in their vegetative characters, but they 

 coincide in the structure of the sorus. D. prolifera has a short ascending 

 stock, bearing closely disposed leaf-bases, both covered by scales. The petioles 

 have a binary leaf-trace near to the base. The leaves are glabrous and 

 pinnate, and the pinnae pinnatifid, with numerous projecting sori borne 

 distally on the free veins. The indusium is shallow cup-shaped, and entire at 

 the margin. These characters are such as to point clearly towards Denn- 

 staedtia, with which this species shares the occasional presence of adventitious 

 buds at the bases of certain pinnae. J. Smith {Hist. Fil. p. 265) compares 

 the habit with Athyrinni, but notes the similarity of the sorus to that of 

 Dennstaedtia and Microlepia, though distinguished from them by its exserted 

 position. This is, however, less marked in D. concinna, where the sori are 

 BHi 17 



