American Species of Marchantia. 307 



extremely young female receptacles. The distinctive characters 

 of the species thus break down, and he reduced it to synonymy, 

 retaining it as a var. cartilaginea (Lehm. & Lindenb.) Schiffn. 

 under M. chenopoda. Stephani quotes it as a simple synonym. 

 Their views are supported by the work of Prescher, who found 

 the distribution of the slime cells the same in M. cartilaginea as 

 in M. chenopoda. 



In M. hrasiliensis the male receptacle is described as peltate, 

 angled and convex, the central portion being thickened and the 

 margin plane and hyaline; the female receptacle is said to be 

 hemispherical, symmetrical and entire. Here again Schiffner 

 showed that the receptacles in the type specimen were immature 

 and that the distinctive characters drawn from the male recep- 

 tacles could be duplicated by young male receptacles of M. 

 chenopoda. He therefore regards M. hrasiliensis as synonymous 

 with M. chenopoda, a view which the writer is disposed to share. 

 Stephani, in maintaining the validity of the Brazilian plant, dwells 

 on the symmetry of the female receptacle and describes it as 

 strongly convex and very shortly four- to six-lobed. He adds 

 that the entire appendages of the ventral scales can easily be 

 distinguished from the dentate appendages of M. chenopoda. 

 Since, however, he assigns both entire and toothed appendages 

 to M, chenopoda in his detailed description of that species, and 

 since the receptacles on some of the West Indian specimens 

 referred by him to M. hrasiliensis are distinctly unsymmetrical, 

 his differential characters can not be regarded as having much 

 significance. 



In the original description of Grimaldia peruviana the female 

 receptacle is said to be subglobose and crenate while the male 

 receptacle is said to be discoid and sessile. Apparently on account 

 of the characters of the so-called male receptacles Montague 

 continued to regard the species as a Grimaldia even after the 

 authors of the Synopsis had correctly transferred it to Mar- 

 chantia.^'^ Probably the sessile structures which Montague 

 observed were immature female receptacles, but unfortunately 

 the type specimen in his herbarium, a portion of which the writer 

 has been able to examine, is sterile, so that these problematical 

 organs could not be studied. The compound pores, however, 



°^ See Montagne, Sylloge 91. Paris, 1856. 



