32 JOURNAL, BOMBAY NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY, Vol. XIII. 
asked Mr. Gustav Mann to inquire for them in Germany, and his reply, receiv- 
ed on the 4th January, 1898, gave me the clue I wanted. Mr. Mann found 
that there is a type sheet, of two specimens, in the Botanic Museum, Leipzig, 
and he sent me a pen and ink sketch tracing of the larger of the specimens, 
and copies of Kunze’s two tickets belonging to it, The older ticket bears— 
“ Cystopteris davallioides, Kunze, in litt. ad Moricand, 4/43 ; species insignis 
Leucoslegeis affinis, Presl. Himalaya Fielding, Ex herb. Moricand, 4/42.” 
The newer ticket bears—“ nunc—Davalha (Leuc.) pseudocystopteris, Kze.—= 
chaerophyllum, Hook, Sori et indusia in apire nec in decursu vene ; ita que 
Davallia.’ My, Mann has written on the tracing—“ Rhizome there is none, 
avd the lower part of the stipe is also wanting. The frond is lanceolate as 
shown in this tracing. The sori are not ripe in this specimen, and no sporangia 
developed, the indusia are distinctly pomted (A): the ultimate segments very 
acute and, as well as the other cutting, just like that on a specimen collected 
by Blanford, 16-8-1885, on Summer Hill, Simla, 7000’” ‘The tracing 
shows a lanceolate frond 8” 1. by 22” br., the lowest pair of pinne slightly 
shorter than the two next pairs, but broader. On getting Mr. Mann’s letter 
I recollected that some of my N,-W. Himalayan specimens which I had been 
calling D. pulehra had indusia “* ovate, acute,” though very small, and I found 
I bad been overlooking Kunze’s description of the indusium. I turned up my 
specimens, avd verified my recollection, In immature specimens the ovate, 
acute, membranaceous indusium is quite distinct, bui when the sori develop 
and ripen the indusium is pushed back and shrivels, and the true shape is nob 
seen ; and, als», specimens get damaged in the press. Mr. Mann, in his 
letter to me, says that the ultimate segments of Kunze’s type specimen are 
perbaps a little longer than those of a Mussooree specimen he has from me, 
but that otherwise the cutting is exactly thesame. He also writes—“ The 
remark ‘ ==cherophyllum, Hook., on Kunze’s label was written by Kunze, but, 
as seems to me, at a later date. There is a second sheet of D. pseudocystop- 
feris in the Botanic Museum, | eipzig, which has writven on the label ‘ Davallia 
cherophylla, Wall. Herbar. Sprengelianum, 17260, ab ipso !? bub nob written 
by Kunze. This specimen is pub together with the above type sheet in the 
same wrapper ; ib is the common Indian form of pseudocystopteris, with deltoid 
frond.” The usual shape of frond of the plant I identify as D. pseudocystopteris 
is certainly deltoid, or at least sub-deltoid, but I have a lanceolate frond on the 
same rhizome with deltoid fronds. The rhizome is of course creeping and 
branching, and it appears to have broadly ovate scales, peltately attached, not 
adpressed, smaller than the similar scales of the next species, D. Beddomer ; 
they are, however, rarely present in my material. Underneath the scales the 
