140 TRICHOMANKS. 



Pr. 'J". Luschuatiamim," Pr. T. ligidiun, Siv. T. finmilum,'* Pr. 

 T. pyramidale, Wall. T. speciosum, Willd. T. hievisetum, Spr 

 VI. Ragatellus, Pr.—R. cvinitus, Pr. (Trichoraanes, Sw.) 

 yil. Cepiui.omenes, Pr. Tab. V. — C. atrovireiis, Pr. — (This would ap- 

 ])c'ar to he a remarkable plant, to judoe from the description and figure : 

 but my astonishment is jrrcat on finding that this supposed new ge- 

 nus is Mr. Cuming's n. 1(59 from the Philippine Islands, identical 

 with Tr'ichomanes Javanicum,M\\.\me, and of Presl himself ; and the 

 T. rhomhoideum, J. Sm. — To such errors must the multiplying of ge- 

 nera on the most trivial characters necessarily lead. The receptacle is 

 not, in my specimens, terminated with the globose apex represented by 

 Presl, tab. 5 ; nor is there any character by which it can be distin- 

 guished specifically from the Trichomancs now mentioned. 



VIII. Nkurophyllum, Pr. Tab. IV. C. — N. Vittaria, Pr. (Trichomancs 

 V itl. DeCand. T. floribundum, ^. Hook, supra, p. 129). N. pinna- 

 turn, Pr. (Trich. floribundum, 11.13. K.) N. pennatura, Pr. (Trich. 

 pennatum, Kaulf. ; too near our T. floribundum). 



IX. MiCROGOKiUM, Pr. Tab. VI. A, B. — M. cuspidatum, Pr. (Trichoma- 

 ncs cusp. Willd.) — It appears to me that there can hardly be a ques- 

 tion of this being our Trichomanes Bojeri, Hook, et Grev. Ic. Fil. 

 t. 155, et supra, and of Presl, from the Mauritius ; and it may be 

 equally the T. cuspidatum, Willd., whose description however is very 

 unsatisfactory. If I am right in my conjecture, the margin in the fi- 

 gure just quote<l. A, is much broader than 1 have seen it. — M. Berte- 

 roanum, Pr. fig. B. — No one can possibly look at this figure and com- 

 pare it with that of Trichomancs muscoides. Hook, et Grev. Ic. Fil. tab. 

 179, without seeing that the two plants are identical, and they are from 

 the same country. The venation and margin are as distinctly and ac- 

 curately laid down in the ' Icones Filicum,' as in the work now under 

 consideration, and the figure was well known to Dr. Presl: yet by a 

 strange inconsistency he makes a new genus of it in the one case, and, 

 in the other, a new species of his own genus Trichomanes, T. Hook- 

 cri, p. 16. 



X. Abrodictyum, Pr. Tab. VII. — A. Cumingii, Pr. Cuming's n. 208 



and 358, from the Philippine Islands. This plant corresponds with 

 our Trichomanes Smithii, a plant certainly very remarkable in the re- 

 ticulation of its leaves. It is the T. anyustatum of J. Sm., as above 

 quoted (p. 138), but not of Carmichael. 



Sect. II. DiDVMOGLOSSEiE, Pr. 



XI. DiDYMOGLOssuM, Desv. Tab. VIII. A. — § I. Eudidymoglossum. 

 A. Flabellata, Pr. D. punctatum, Pr. (Trichomanes punctatum, 

 Poir.) D. sphenoides, Pr. (Trich. sphenoides, Kze. Hymenophyllum 

 Guadeloupense, Spr.) D. Hookeri, Pr. (Trich. reptaus. Hook, et Gr.) 



" T. Lvschuatianum, Pr. Hymen, p. 45 ; " frond sessile oblong-lanceo- 

 late acute pinnate obtuse at the base, pinna; subsessile lanceolate acumi- 

 nate deeply piunatifid, lower segments ovate obtuse lobed below above den- 

 tate, lobes dentate, teeth obtuse, sori immersed, rhizoma terete scandent. 

 Ilio, Brazil, Luschn." This seems to be our sessile variety of T. radicans. 



'8 This would appear from the description to be our Brazilian state of T. 

 rigidum. 



