476 



GRITIGISMS ON RENAULD AND CARDOT 

 MUSCI AMERICyE SEPTENTRIONALIS EXSICCATI 



{Bull. Herb. Boiss., IV, 1-19, 1896.) 



BY 



Elizabeth-G. BEtITTOIV 



In their notes on the species distributed in this collection MM. Re- 

 nauld and Cardot take exception to several conclusions which we hâve 

 published in the Bulletin of the Torrey Botanical Club. We may State 

 that thèse conclusions hâve been arrived at after much study and 

 careful cpmparison of North American spécimens with types and ori- 

 ginal descriptions of species, most of which are preserved in continental 

 herbaria, from which we hâve been favored by authentic spécimens, 

 and original notes. We shall reply to thèse criticisms by number as cited 

 in the Bulletin of the Boissier Herbarium for this year. 



N" 18. Leucobryum minus Hpe. — We hâve shown in the 

 Bulletin ofthe Torrey Botanical Club for 1892, that this species is the 

 same as L. minus, Sull. only in part, and that it has been confused both 

 in America and Europe with L. aïbidum (Brid.) Lindb. We hâve also 

 statcd that L. sediforme, Müller, according to Müller does not exist in 

 the United States, and that L. sediforme of Lesquereux and James 

 Manual is referable to L. minus, Hpe. We hâve also shown that L. pu- 

 milum (Michx.) 1803, antedates L. mitius, Hpe. 1839, and hâve claimed 

 that thercfore this name ought to be adopted as it would obviate ail 

 further confusion. Wo also claim that the name sediforme should be 

 limited to the species to which it belongs, and not apphed, as MM. Re- 

 nauld and Cardot havc done, to a slightly denser form, not even 



