144 ULOTHRICACEAE 
their work might have had a more trustworthy character if it had 
been dealt with more critically during its progress. Indeed, we 
have been keenly sensible of the lack of criticism upon our own 
work. It is, perhaps, too easy to find fault with the work of others, 
and not so easy as one could wish to make great improvement 
upon theirwork. The meagerness of the older and of some recent 
descriptions where the only important characters are size and shape 
of cells, often makes it a matter of great difficulty to determine 
species. We have endeavored to emphasize cytological and espe- 
cially chromatophore characters as much as possible, but often one 
cannot find important distinctions of that nature, and is forced to 
rely largely on cell-measurements to separate species which, after 
careful observation, he is convinced are distinct. It has been par- 
ticularly disappointing, in the attempt to make synopses of species, 
to find that even now the use of cell-measurement is one of the 
most convenient means of separation and has been resorted to in 
a much greater degree than had been expected. 
It is a pleasure to make grateful acknowledgment of the en- 
couragement and counsel, as well as sympathetic companionship 
in laboratory and field, of Professor L. M. Underwood and others 
of the Botanical Department of Columbia University, and to express 
our thanks to those who have furnished specimens for study, and 
given guidance in collection, notably Mr. F. S. Collins, Mr. Isaac 
Holden, Professor G. E. Stone, Dr. David Griffiths, and Dr. M. A. 
Howe. 
ORDER CHAETOPHORALES * 
Family ULOTHRICACEAE 
The thallus consists normally of a simple, unbranched, fila- 
ment of uninucleate cells, which are all (the basal cell only, when 
is new name for the order which has been known as Confervales is proposed 
by Don (Nyt Mag. for Naturvid. 39: 1-22. 1901), because the latter name is ren- 
dered unsuitable in consequence of the removal by recent authors of the genus Conferva 
from the Ulothricaceae. The name of the order Confervales Borzi, including the new 
family Confervaceae, the Ophiocytiaceae, etc., is confusing in view of the older order 
Confervales, and ought, moreover, to be changed because the genus Conferva Lagerh. 
should be known as 7? ilm Derb. & Sol. 
Professor Wille appears to take a backward =: in the زوس‎ cited, in that the 
Ulothricaceae are there placed under the Ulv The two families are closely 
related, and possibly almost overlap, but it seems more convenient to retain bot 
