— 284 — 



Alcicornium has never been rite published and described, and is 

 moreover a later name than Fhdycerimn. The botanical volume of the 

 Freyc. Voy. bears on the title-page the year 1826, but as several 

 citations in the book show (pag. 303 is cited Hook, and Grev. Ic. 

 Fil. tab. 21, edited 1827; pag. 307 is cited Desvaux: Ann. Soc. Linn. 

 Paris, juillet 1827,« etc.), the descriptive part of the book was edited 

 later than July 1827, in which month Platy cerium Desvaux was 

 published. Gaudichaud says, pag. 48 in his work, that Acro- 

 stichum ahicorne may form a new genus, provisionally in paren- 

 thesis named Alcicornium, but later, pag. 307, he again withdrew 

 this name. 



CaUipteris Bory (Voy. dans 4 Isles princ. des mers d'Afrique 

 1 : 282. 1804) is not the same as CaUipteris J. Smith 1841 = Aniso- 

 goniimi Presl. Bory names the following species of CaUipteris: 

 C. castaneœfolia, C. st/lvatica, C. proliféra and C. arborescens, out 

 of these the three are true Diplazia, and only C. proliféra belongs 

 to Anisogonium. In consequence of the principles of nomenclature 

 followed by Underwood thus CaUipteris Bory cannot supersede 

 Anisogonium Pr. Bory in 1804 unaware of Swartz in 1801 having 

 founded the genus Diplazium, makes himself in a later publication 

 justly CaUipteris absolutely synonymous with Diplazium. 



Besides these old names Underwood prefers Belvisia Mirbel to 

 Hymenolepis Klf., a very improper name indeed, as Belvisia by 

 Mirbel was applied to five species belonging to five different genera; 

 as the type of Belvisia Asplenium septentrionale should be con- 

 sidered rather than Acrostichum spicatum. At last Underwood 

 proposes the new name Arcypteris instead of Dictyopteris Presl. 

 (1836, not Lamouroux 1809). I cannot separate Dictyopteris from 

 Sagenia, but, however, a new name for this group is necessary. 

 Yet, I find, that Trevisan (Rendiconti Istit. Lombardo sei. et lett. 

 II. 9. 816. 1876) says that he in 1851 had proposed the name 

 Sagenopteris instead of Dictyopteris. I cannot anywhere find that 

 name published in Trevisan's writings on ferns, but, if published, it 

 should probably be preferred to Arcypteris Und. In my search 

 after this name 1 have observed that Trevisan has published a 

 series of works on ferns, works Avhich seem perfectly unknown to 

 most pteridologists ; he has described several new genera of ferns, 

 which are not at all mentioned in „Die natürl. Pflanzenfamilien". 

 As examples I shall here call attention to the following: 



