142 RHODOMELACEAE 
POLYSIPHONIA PANICULATA Mont. Ann. Sci. Nat. Bot. 
II. 18: 254. 1842; Voy. Bonite, Bot. Crypt. от. 
pl. 143. f 2. 1846. Kütz. Tab. Phyc. 13: 15. 
pl. 45. ј. с-е. 1863 
Polysiphonia stricta? Mont. Fl. Boliv. 18. 1839. Not P. stricta 
(Dillw.) Grev.; Hook. Brit. Fl. 21: 329. 1833. 
Polysiphonia commutata Endl. Gen. РІ. Suppl. 3: 45. 1843. Not 
Р. commutata Kiitz. Phyc. Gen. 428. 1842. 
Polysiphonia Orbigniana Kiitz. Sp. Alg. 820. 1849. 
On Gigartina Chauvinii offered for sale in the market of Lima, 
Jan. 14, 1907, Coker 26 p.p.; in lagoon at the mouth of the Rio 
Rimac, region of Callao, February 4, 1907, Coker 51 p.p.; dredged 
on muddy bottom in-Ancén Bay, February 13, 1907, Coker 00 
р.р.; with Caulerpa flagelliformis ligulata and Polysiphonia sp. 
Lobos de Afuera, Mar. 18, 1907, Coker 126 p.p.; in a lagoon at La | 
Puntilla, Bay of Paracas, June 29, 1907, Coker 09619 p.p. 
This species appears to have been rarely met with since its 
original collection on the shores of Peru by d’Orbigny and by 
Gaudichaud, but it has been reported from Paita and from the 
Island of San Lorenzo by Piccone.* The 9-11 pericentral siphons | 
are often twisted or spirally disposed, as described by Montagne. | 
Тһе “Polysiphonia stricta?" of Montagne’s Florula Boliviensis | 
has been given new names by Endlicher and by Kiitzing, appar- · 
ently on the strength of Montagne’s description without an 
examination of his plant. Montagne’s doubtful reference of the 
plant to the 4-siphoned P. stricta, together with his description of 
the "articuli" as “уешв quatuor striati," has naturally led sub- | 
sequent writers to suppose that the plant belonged with е 
oligosiphonous species. However, in Montagne's original material | 
of his “Polysiphonia stricta?” (Callao, d'Orbigny), which we have | 
been permitted to examine through the courtesy of M. Hariot, | 
we find only а 9-10-siphoned plant, aside from the associated 
4-siphoned Streblocladia camptoclada, and we think the “venis U 
quatuor striati” of Montagne's description was intended to apply | 
only to the superficial appearance of a segment as ordinaril) 
observed under the microscope. We cannot see that the plant | 
< 
* Alg. Vettor Pisani 83. 1886. 
