378 Fritsch, Observations on the young plants of Stigeoclonium Kütz, 
racterized by the stout filamentous setae, which very much resemble 
the branches of a Chaelophora or a Stigeorlonium. The setae are 
also narrower at their point of attachment to the cells than for 
some distance away from the base‘ (cp. my fig. 11). It seems to 
me very probable, that this species in reality belongs to Stigeo- 
clonium, representing a stage in the development of an epiphytic species. 
This may also very probably be the case with the Zerposteiron 
polychaete of Hansgirg (see Hansgirg 88c, Pl. XII, figs. 1—5). 
The plants’shown in Hansgirg’s fiss. 1—3’show considerable resem- 
blance to a young plant of Stigeoclonium‘) of the type, figured on 
Pl. XII, fig. 27; his fig. 5 (cp. also Hansgirg 93, p. 218), however, 
does not exactly recall anything I have seen in Stigeoclonium, al- 
though coinciding to some extent with the description of Huber 
cited above. But Huber’s remarks scarcely indicate the formation 
of an upright branch (entirely transformed into a hair) on each 
cell of the base, as in Hansgirg’s figure 5. It should be men- 
tioned, that Hansgirg (88®, p. 215, foot-nete) himself considers the 
species of Herposteiron Näg. as stages in the development of cer- 
tain species of Chaetophora and Stigeoclonium, whilst Aphanochaete 
(with unseptate, sheathed hairs) is regarded by him as a form in 
the life-history of species of Coleochaete. Although very possibly 
this view is correct for the species with septate hairs (HZerposteiron 
Näg.). I think that the genus A»hanochaete (including the species 
with unseptäte hairs) is well-established and not a stage in the 
life-history of any other form. 
There is thus considerable reason for regarding Hansgirg’s 
Herposteiron polychaete as a young form of some member of the 
Chaetophoraceae.e On the other hand there are some analogies to 
Aphanochaete, which become more striking, if we disregard the dis- 
tinet septation of the hairs. It seems extremely doubtful to me 
whether the septation in the hairs was really as distinet as Hans- 
sirg figures it, since when he first described the species in question 
(Hansgirg S6, p. 25%; also 884, p. 398), he regarded the hairs as 
unseptate. But for this point Hansgirg’s Fig. 5 (loc. cit.) agrees 
with a species of Aphanochaete, occurring commonly in England; 
and possibly Figs. 1—-3, resembling young Stigeoclonia, have no 
real connection with the form in Fig. 5 at all. 
In the early part of this year the species of Aphanochaete, 
just referred to as occurring commonly in England, formed the sub- 
ject of one of my algological notes (Fritsch 024, p. 403). At the 
time I identified it with Hansgirg’s species, describing it as 
Aphanochaete polychaete (Hansg.) Fritsch, since I consider that 
Aphanochaete has priority over Herposteiron (cp. also Klebahn 93, 
p- 294). For the reasons stated above I have somewhat modified 
my views on this subject aud have now come to the conclusion that 
it will be best to give this species a new name, and not to confound 
it with Hansgirg’s form. It may very possibly correspond to the 
A. repens Braun, described by Huber (92%, 327), which has al- 
most spherical cells and which can moreovyer develop several hairs 
!) cp. also Fritsch 02A, p. 404 et seq., where a full discussion of the 
genera Aphancchaete and Herposteiron will be found. 
