26o Alexander W. Evans. 



figure which he^'^ afterwards published show almost beyond a 

 doubt that the species represents a synonym of M. paleacea. 

 This conclusion seems further warranted by the fact that the 

 true M. paleacea is now known from several Mexican localities. 



Nees von Esenbeck, in describing M. paleacea, places it in the 

 section Chlamidium and calls especial attention to the features 

 of the female receptacle. He gives the normal number of rays 

 as nine and mentions the median protuberance of the disc and 

 the dilated apices of the rays. Among the synonyms of the 

 species he includes M. nitida without question, basing his opinion 

 on specimens received directly from Lindenberg. He quotes 

 a statement of the latter author to the effect that M. nitida is 

 very close to the Italian M. paleacea and perhaps identical with 

 it, accompanied by the remark that M. paleacea had not been seen 

 by him when he published M. nitida as a new species. Nees von 

 Esenbeck hesitates somewhat in the case of Taylor's M. paleacea 

 but inclines toward the opinion that this plant also must be the 

 same as Bertolini's species. 



In spite of these statements M. nitida is reinstated as a valid 

 species in the Synopsis Hepaticarum and Taylor's M. paleacea, 

 so far as the Nepal specimens are concerned, is given as a 

 synonym under it, the range of M. paleacea being again restricted 

 to Italy. Both M. nepalensis and M. squamosa are likewise 

 accepted as valid and these two species, together with M. paleacea 

 and M. nitida, are included under the section Chlamidium. Many 

 years later, in 1899, Stephani,^'^ in recognizing these four species, 

 placed M. nitida and M. nepalensis in his section with unsym- 

 metrical receptacles, while he placed M. paleacea and M. 

 squamosa in the section with symmetrical receptacles. 



In 1898 doubt was again thrown on the validity of M. nitida 

 by Schiffner,^^ who stated that it was probably synonymous with 

 M. paleacea. Two years later he reaffirmed this idea and added 

 that M. calcarata Steph., according to a specimen in his herba- 

 rium, was surely identical with M. nitida}^ In the following year 



^"Handb. Bot. Term, und Systemk. 2: pi. 55, f. 2727. 1842. 



" Bull. Herb. Bossier 7 : 402, 522. 1899. 



"^ Conspect. Hepat. Archip. Indici 50. Batavia, 1898. 



"°F1. de Buitenzorg 4:31. 1900. A specimen in the writer's herbarium, 

 collected by the Abbe Faurie at Tokyo, Japan, and distributed (Hep. du 

 Japon 2360) under the name M. calcarata, represents M. polymorpha. 

 Stephani himself now regards the true M. calcarata as a synonym of M. 

 dipfera Mont., a species which evidently requires further study. 



