36 Eucephalozla 



"J", reclusa T. MSS. — Finnehy River, 1843"=/. hicuspidata L. 

 "J", reclusa T. MSS. — Knockavohila Mt."=J. hicuspidata L. 

 "c7. bicus2ndata'L.? no. 1. — Knockavohila' '^^ J. hicuspidata 1j. 

 "J. hicuspidata L.? no. 2. — Banks of the Finnehy, Sept. 1840"=J. 

 catenulata Hiiben.: forma pusilla ftgida. 



When I pointed out to liim that he had sometimes distributed false specimens of 

 "y. reclusa,''- he excused himself by audaciously asserting that "it was very hard to 

 expect an author to know his own species !" Specimens of the true plant sent by 

 Taylor to G-ottsche from Kerry, and others sent to him by myself from Tunbridge 

 "Wells and the Pyrenees, were by that savant unhesitatingly referred to J . hicuspi- 

 data var. ericetorum Nees (vide 'Syn. Hep.'). Being myself well satisfied of its 

 distinctness from y. hicuspidata, and knowing nothing at that time of jf. catenulata 

 beyond the brief description in' Syn. Hep.', I could do no otherwise than give it in my 

 ' Hepaticse Pyi'enaicae ' (1847) as jf. reclusa Tayl. The above description will have 

 made it clear how very different jf. catenulata (or reclusa) is from y. hicuspidata, by 

 the tawny colour and greater rigidity of the whole plant ; by the dioicous inflorescence ; 

 the absence of flagella ; the small subopar|ue closely areolate leaves, and the ciliolate 

 mouth of the perianth. 



The var. pallida is quite possibly a distinct species, for the characters, although 

 slight, are constant. To the same form I am disposed to refer No. 269, G. et E. " J. 

 connivens var. conferta''' : Hungaria ; No. 173, ejusd. '•'■ J .conniveyxs" : Yeadon (Carring- 

 ton); and ''J. catenulata''^ : Oeland (ZetterstedtJ in hb. Stabler. 



Since drawing up the foregoing account, I have had the privilege of examining an 

 original specimen of yung. catemdata, from Hiibener himself, in the herbarium of the 

 late Professor Schimper. It is exactly what I have above considered a " forma pusilla 

 rigida" of C. catenulata, gathered by Taylor on the Finnehy river in Ireland ; and its 

 main characters are as follows. — Plants lurid brown, dwarfed — apparently starved — 

 although a few stems and perianths are of normal size. Leaves acutely patent, sub- 

 a=surgent subimbricated, segments mostly abraptly acute, rarely very acute. Bracts 

 nearly always spinulose, rarely entire. Perianth triquetrous, shortly laciniate at 

 mouth, laciniffl about 12, subdenticulate. ilale plants usually more branched than 

 female ; andi-ascia tenninal ; bract? few, as large as, or larger than, adjacent leaves, 

 monandi-ous. 



In the same herbarium there is a specimen marked "y. rubella N. — In Yogeso," 

 apparently in Nees's handwriting, which is precisely the same species as the foregoing, 

 \iz.: C. Ciitemilata pusilla. It agrees well enough with Nees's description of C. ruhella, 

 except that the lobes of the upper leaves are not toothed but entire. Those toothed 

 "upper leaves," however, may have been bracts of sterile female flowers, which, like 

 those of the feriLle flowers, are serrated in this specimen of Schimper's, and so they 

 are described by Nees. The inflorescence Is truly dioicous — male plants intermixed 

 with female ; whereas Lindberg, who has examined an original specimen of C. ruhella 

 Nees, finds it monoicous. It is jDossible that the " C. ruhella''- seen by Lindberg and 

 that seen by myself are of difterent species, but further evidence is needed. 



