154 



Rhipsalis suareziana. Furthermore, I found here also the bifid 

 stigma which I observed on the plant of Diego-Suarez. 



The more I observe and compare the two plants, the more 

 firmly convinced I am that they belong to one and the same ^ 

 species. 



I have failed thus far, in my researches, to find Rhipsalis 

 (Hariota) prismatica Lem. from Brazil (111. Hort. 1863) which 

 Weber supposed to be a synonym of his Rhipsalis tetragona. 

 Lemaire's species seems to be absolutely lost. 



Rhipsalis erythrocarpa K. Sch. (Monogr. Kact. p. 623) is a 

 species from Kiliman-Djaro, described from dried specimens and 

 not introduced into cultivation, belonging to the same class and 

 close to Rhipsalis Cassiitha and R. virgata Web. 



Rhipsalis Lindbergiana K. Sch. (Monogr. Kact. p. 624), a 

 Brazilian plant, is one of the same group and does not differ 

 from R. virgata Web. except in the rose-color of its fruit. I believe 

 that these two plants are identical specifically. Schumann was 

 not opposed to this idea in his correspondence with Weber and 

 was disposed to unite the two plants under Rhipsalis virgata 

 of which they may constitute a variety or two on account of the 

 difference in the relative size of the berries. 



I have passed in review all the species of Rhipsalis from Africa. 

 None are in my opinion indigenous to this part of the world, as all 

 are found in the flora of America. 



What modifications in nomenclature would the adoption of my 

 opinion bring about? 



Weber has settled the question for his Rhipsalis madagas- 

 cariensis which he refers as a synonym to Rhipsalis fasciculata 

 Haw. 



Rhipsalis suareziana and R. tetragona Web. were published at 

 the same time. I should prefer to keep the name of the American 

 species which seems to be the stock or source of the plants of 

 Diego-Suarez. 



For the same reason the name R. Lindbergiana K. Sch. 

 should be adopted and R. erythrocarpa of the same author be- 

 comes a synonym, unless in the future we are peremptorily 

 obliged to consider these plants as varieties with red fruits of 



