ASPLENIUM, >S EUASI'LENIUM. 85 



(lefiiiition, and adds, " Mca autem sciitentia istud iiulusimn supciius ininime est 

 veriiin indiisiuni, sed stria inarginein liheriiiu indusii Asplenioidei pagiiuc iiiferiori 

 arete a(lpressi circuuulaiis, indusio siccitate contracto conspicua." The impres- 

 sion I meant to convey was that the indusium or invohicre does not dehisce as in 

 other Asplenia, leaving no trace on tlie frond, but that it separates into two un- 

 equal portions ; the one (outer) broad, the other (inner) narrow, and thus I used 

 the term subgeminate. Happily another specimen of, I believe, the same species, 

 in a very mutilated state it is true, has reached me from Borneo, in which, how- 

 ever imperfect the fronds, tho sori are far more perfect than in my original plant, 

 in which, I would observe, that where the sorus is most complete, it entirely 

 agrees with those of my Borneo plant. The fust peculiarity here exhibited is that 

 the involucre is of the same firm texture as the frond, and when the broader and 

 inferior portion of the involucre separates, iinthin is a depression on the frond, and 

 the appearance of a membrane lining the cavity, this is more satiny and glossy than 

 the superficies of the frond, its outer edge forming a most distinct elevated ridije, to 

 which in an earlier stage the margin of the larger valve was attached : in short, 

 the appearance is exactly as if the slender j)od of some bivalved leguminous plant 

 were pressed down nj-.on the frond, and which, on its opening longitudinally, ex- 

 hibits the seeds attached to a receptacle in the axis. In other words, we have in 

 this structure what the learned Brown described in his genus AUantodia, an in- 

 volucre which completely surrounds tlie line of capsules, opening longitudinally ; 

 here however of a firm, not membranous, texture, and opening with an entire 

 outline. I have at present seen nothing exactly of this kind in any other Asple- 

 nioid |)lant. 



With regard to the var. I have called /3 elonyafmn, it is so imperfect as regards 

 the fronds (one-half at least of their length apparently broken off), that 1 should 

 hardly have ventured to have referred it here, but for the peculiar nature of the 

 sori. The caudex is long, creeping underground, here and there rooting, as thick 

 as the quill of a writing-pen. 



14. A. (Euasplenium) vittcEforme, Cav. ; "frond linear 

 subcrenate subpilose beneath, sori transverse between the 

 costa and margin nearly equal." Cav. Pirelect. 1801, p. 255. 

 —Sw. Sj/n. Fil. p. 74. Willd. Sp. PL v. p. 306. BL En. Fil. 

 Jav. p. 174 ? Met. Asplen. p. 89 ? 



Hab. Palapa, Marianne Islands {Sw.). — As there is no figure existing of this 

 plant, and nothing in the form of descriptive character beyond that above given 

 by Cavanilles (together with that author's further remark, " Frons scsquipedalis, 

 duodecim vel sedecim lineas lata"); and, since neither Svvartz nor Willdenow, nor 

 any more recent botanist, has identified the ])lant, I dare not venture to refer 

 Mr. J. Smith's Cumingian vittcefornie here: but rather to the following species 

 {A. Sundense), with which we can with more confidence say it is identical. 



The A. vittreforme of Blume may or may not be the same as Cavanilles's viftcE- 

 forme. The following is Blume's definition : " Frondii)us stipitatis lineari-lanceo- 

 latis clongatis acuminatis basi oblique cuneatis subrepandis iuffiqualiter crennlatis 

 mcmbranaceis glabriusculis, venis furcatis, soris remotiusculis, stii>ite glabro." — 

 Can this be A. Fejeense of Brackenridge ? 



15. A. (Euaspleniun)) Sundense, Bl. ; caudex creeping te- 

 rete entirely free from scales or roots a foot long 1 or Ij 

 inch wide oblong- or sublinear-lanceolate submend)ranaceous 

 abruptly caudate at the apex the base rather suddenly and 



