GRATELOUPIA 167 
is about 40 cm. long, 6 cm. in maximum width, and 0.4-0.5 mm. 
thick, with a few small marginal proliferations; this thicker tetra- 
sporic plant is, in all probability, the one that furnished the 
material for the detailed illustration of structure that accom- 
panied Kiitzing’s original description of the species and as such 
has good claims to be considered the historic or nomenclatural 
type of the species. The third specimen, which is antheridial 
and appears a little less coriaceous than the other two, is about 
38 cm. long, 8 cm. in greatest width, and 0.32-0.4 mm. thick, with 
numerous small marginal proliferations, the longest of these 
being about 1 cm. long; this plant is well figured in Tab. Phyc. 
(17: pl. 36), except that it is made to appear proportionally too 
broad and some of the proliferations are drawn a trifle longer than 
they appear to be in the dried condition. This habit figure has 
probably furnished the “type” idea to subsequent writers, though 
many plants of widely different habit have been referred to the 
species. The original description, Kiitzing’s habit figure, and the 
specimens now in the Kiitzing herbarium give as a composite type 
idea a plant of simple elongate thallus with short marginal рго- 
liferations, which may be few, numerous, or sometimes entirely 
wanting. 
Iridaea violacea Kütz. (Рћус. Gen. 396. 1843; Tab. Phyc. 17: 
pl. 7. f. a, b. 1867), from Peru, was very briefly described, and 
has remained with "species inquirendae," though J. Agardh and 
others have suspected it to be allied to Grateloupia Culleriae. Тһе 
species, as we have learned through the courtesy of Mme. Weber- 
van Bosse, is now represented in the Kützing herbarium by a 
tetrasporic fragment 4.5 cm. long, 3.0-7.5 mm. broad, and about 
0.3 mm. thick, conforming in general habit to Kiitzing’s figure, 
though smaller in every way; in structure, it appears to be iden- 
tical with Grateloupia Cutleriae, of which the plant probably 
represents a small malformed condition. In the technicalities of 
publication, Iridaea violacea enjoys two pages “priority of place" 
over Grateloupia Cutleriae, but we do not venture to suggest that 
Cutleriae be replaced by violacea, especially as there is a chance 
that future collections may be able to show that both are connected 
specifically with the earlier-published Halymenia (?) doryophora 
ont. 
