MICROLEJEUNEA LUCENS 159 
Tracy), Louisiana (Langlois). Widely distributed in tropical 
America.* 
Exsic.: Musc. Alleg. 274 (as Lejeunea cucullata). Hep. Bor.- 
Amer. 98 (as Lejeunea cucullata). 
There has been a great deal of confusion about this little 
species and many specimens have been referred to it which really 
belong elsewhere. The writer ventures, therefore, to relate its 
history in some detail. 
The specimens in the Taylor herbarium, which are presumably 
the type, consist of a few fragmentary stems. In the small en- 
velope which contains them there is written in Wilson’s hand- 
writing: “ Jung. cucullata Nees? Ohio, Sullivant, 147. I have 
very little of it and all barren. W.” On the sheet upon which 
this envelope is pasted Taylor has written: “ Jungermannia lucens 
Tayl. Mss. No. 147. Sullivant, Ohio. Jung. cucullata Nees? No. 
25 Jan.? 1846. W. Wilson.” The specimens are not only 
fragmentary and sterile but on most of the leaves show poorly 
developed lobules, indicating that they grew in an unfavorable 
locality. From the notes it would appear that these specimens 
were collected somewhere in Ohio, and Taylor, in his original 
description of Zejeunea lucens, states that the species came from the 
vicinity of Cincinnati. The evidence, however, is against this view, 
as the following facts will show. The more abundant specimens 
distributed by Sullivant in Musc. Alleg. agree perfectly with those 
in the Taylor herbarium, and the same may be said of Austin’s 
specimens in Hep. Bor.-Amer. Sullivant’s specimens came from 
Cheat Mountain, Virginia, and Austin’s are labeled, “On moist 
rocks in the Alleghany Mountains, Sullivant." In the second 
edition of Gray's Manual, Sullivant limits the range of his “Z. 
cucullata” to the Alleghany Mountains and quotes Taylor's Z. 
lucens asa synonym. Apparently then no one has collected the 
species in the northern United States with the exception of Sulli- 
vant, and, as all of his dicus came from the Alleghany 
* Lejeunea cucullata is listed as a Massachusetts plant by Tuckerman and Frost in 
their ** Catalogue of Plants growing without cultivation within thirty miles of Amherst 
College?’ (1875, p. 53). Unfortunately the specimens are now inaccessible, so that it 
is impossible to say whether they represented Microlejeunea lucens or merely a small 
form of Lejeunea cavifolia, the latter of course being much more probable. 
