RADULA 157 
PLATE 110. SCAPANIA HETEROPHYLLA, 
г. An entire plant, 4 the natural size. 
2 and 3. Opposite views of a portion of the stem, showing the often three-ranked 
leaves, Х 15 
4. Doral view of stem and leaves, X 15. 
5. Ventral view of the same wg showing an unlobed underleaf, 15. 
6. The leaf with lobes “а” and “а!” already shown in figures 4 and 5. 
7. A typical underleaf, Х 1 
8. Outline of a deeply lobed leaf, 
9. Apex of a branch of the same plait from which figures 4 and 5 were drawn ; 
leaves here distichous, Х 1 
e leaf ** 4?” from the foregoing, Х 15. 
II. Ventral view of a leaf, 15. 
12. Cells from near base of leaf, Х 2 
13. Cells from the apical margin of one of the upper leaves, 244. 
14. Paraphyses from axils of leaves, Х 244. 
Cross-section of the stem, 32. 
33. RADULA Dumort. p.p. Comm. Bot. 112. 1822. 
Martinellius 5. Е. Gray, р.р. Nat. Arr. Brit. РІ, 1: 690. 1821. 
Stephanina О. Kuntze,* Rev. Gen. Pl. 839. 1891. Schiffn.; 
Eng. & Prantl, Nat. Pflanzenfam. 1°: 113. 1895. - 
* Dr, Otto Kuntze meni E падну in asserting that the original Radula 
of Dumortier (1822) was an equivalent of Ше Martinellius of S. Е. Gray (1821), 
inasmuch as Gray’s Martinellius en a fourth generic element, viz., the Adelan- 
thus of Mitten (Martinellius decipiens S. Е. Gray), which did not appear іп the 
original Raduda, even though it was given a place in the Радија of 1831. N 
the “ method of residues " — which seems to us a natural and logical mode of settling 
er, unde 
and реттесе elements from Gray's tetrameric genus Marfinellius, the Adelanthus 
component was left, which would thus fall heir to the name imposed by Gray. This 
would seem to us a particularly happy circumstance in view of the fact that the la'er 
name Adelanthus was earlier used in a different sense by Endlicher. Again, by the 
** method of residues," the name асија, after the excision in 1833 and 1835 of the 
“© priority of place," too, the name Рафи would descend in the same way inasmuch 
as A. complanata was always the first species mentioned by Dumortier and was appar- 
ently always more ог less clearly in his mind as the type of the genus. But the gen- 
€ral application of the ** priority of place ’’ epic would jejak in attaching 5. F. 
Сгау 5 пате ви to this same species as has already been pointed out by Dr. 
Carrington and o 
The use of м by Fries in 1825 for a genus of fungi cannot disqualify 
Dumortier's Radula of 1822. If either name should disappear, it is the Кафийет of 
es 
