50 The Botanical Gazette. [February, 
few references to Reinsch’s genus are discoverable. Fischer 
in his recent work? retains the name Waegeléa Reinsch, with- 
out further designation of the species, placing it under the 
insufficiently know genera included by him in the sub-family 
‘“‘APODYE,” with the remark that it cannot be considered 
identical with Rhipidium. Still more recently Schroter*, with- 
out reference to the opinions of Cornu, assumes its distinc- 
ness and places it among the ‘‘LEPTOMITACE#,” proposing asa 
substitute for the pfeoccupied Naegelia the modification 
Naegeliella, with one species, NV. Reinschii n. g.et n. s., equiv- 
alent to the ‘‘species 1” of Reinsch. Lastly Fritsch® calls 
attention to the preoccupation of Naegeliella for a genus of 
fresh water alge and proposes a third name Sapromyces 
nov. gen. distinguishing two species, S. Rezuschit (Schriter) 
Fritsch and S. dubcus nov. sp., the last an equivalent for ‘‘Nae- 
gelia species II.” 
The last three references, for the most recent of which the 
writer is indebted to the kindness of Prof. Farlow, appear to 
be based wholly on the original account of Reinsch, the genus 
not having been observed since its first discovery. In view 
of the fact that this account has been discredited by the criti 
cisms referred to, and is moreover defective in important 
points, the following observations may be of interest, based 
as they are on the examination of fresh material obtained 
during the past season. 
The plant in question was first met with by the writer in the 
vicinity of York, Me., where it was found growing on a pine cone 
that had fallen into a wood pool of clear cold water. On this 
substratum the sporangiferous hyphe were luxuriantly de- 
veloped, forming a layer around it nearly a centimeter thick, 
but not very conspicuous from its transparency. The di= 
charge of zoospores was repeatedly observed in this material; 
but no indication was seen of the presence of any form of Se 
ual reproduction. Later in the season (September) the po® 
was again visited and additional specimens secured growing 
upon submerged fragments of branches, one of which furnished : 
fine examples of the curious oogonia and antheridia. An 
amination of this material has afforded the data for the follow- 
ing account, but unfortunately no observations could be mace 
a 
*Phycomycetes in Rabenh. Kryptogamenfl. (Pilze) 1: pt. 4. 377- 1894. 
*Engler and’Prantl. Naturl, Pflanzenf. 1: 103. 4 
*CEsterr. bot. Zeitschr. 43: 420. 1893. 
