No. 7] REMARKS ON MELOBESIA IN HERBARIUM CROUAN. 7 



Fosl. mscr.-^) The latter appears, however, to be a separate spe- 

 des, according to a fevv very small and in part fragmentary crusts 

 that I have seen, distributed in G. B. De Toni e David Levi, 

 Phj^cotheca Italica, no. 15. They are according to the label from 

 „Venezia, al Lido su una Chætomorpha reietta dalle onde sulla 

 spiaggia; dicembre". This species stands very near to Melohesia 

 caspica Fosl.^}, as far as the very scanty material allows a careful 

 examination, or perhaps it is but a young form of another species. 

 The crust is about 50 jj. thick, and, as in the last quoted species, 

 the one crust sometimes stretches itself over the other. The basaj 

 cells appear to be higher and more narrow than in the latter, ap- 

 parently with small cortical cells. However, I do not exactly know 

 the latter on a section. Seen from above they are very small, 

 square or a little rounded, or sometimes a little longer than broad. 

 The said minute crusts bear a couple of conceptacles, but I do 

 not know whether they are those of sporangia, nor do they seem 

 to be fully developed. The}'' are comparativety large, subconical 

 and 250 — 300 ,a in diameter seen from above, with a rather deli- 

 cate apical pore. The species needs a closer examination of hetter 

 materials than that I at present possess, and also forms referred 

 to it by other authors. So it seems to be very uncertain whether 

 the plant recorded from Guadeloupe^) under the name of Hapali- 

 diiim confervicola really is identic with Kutzing's species, and 

 also as regards British specimens referred to the same species. Cp. 

 below under Hapalidiwn roseum. 



Hapalidium callithamnioides Crn. 



Ann. SC. natur. p. 287, pl. 21, f. D. 21—24; Fl. Finist. p. 149. 



= Rhodochorton sp.? 



1) Phyllactidium confervicola Kiitz. Phyc. gener. p. 295; HcqKilidiam Phyl- 

 lacticlium. Kiitz. Spee. Alg. p. 695, and Tab. Vhyc. 19, p. 33, t. 92. 



2) M. Foslie, Melohesia caspica, a new Alga. Ofvers. af Kgl. Vet, Ak. 

 Handl. Stockholm 1900. 



I considered 1. c. this species to be in some respects related to Melo- 

 hesia myriocarpa Cm., but I had not then the opportunitj^ to compare it 

 with the latter, nor with Melohesia confervicola. 

 ^) Cp. G. Murray. Catalogue of the Marine Algæ of the West Indian Region. 

 London 1889. P. 21. Reprinted from Journal of Botany 1888—89. 



