KiEK. — On Neplirodium decompositum and N. glabellum. 399 



springing from tlie apex of the rhizome, usually from 12-24 inches 

 in height. Stipes from half to two-thirds the length of the entire 

 frond, clothed with scattered chaffy scales and fine pubescence, angular, 

 channelled ; the frond is from 7-10 inches wide with the apex elongated 

 and the lowest pair of secondary pinnae much developed, so that its 

 general outline is pentangular acuminate ; hi- or tri-pinnate, membranous, 

 villous or pubescent ; rachis slender ; lowest pair of pinnae much the largest, 

 5-7 inches long, 3-4 inches wide, obliquely deltoid ; upper pinnules lanceo- 

 late, pinnate, or deeply pinnatifid, ultimate segments ovate or rhomboid 

 ovate with acutely toothed lobes. Sori attached nearer the margin of the 

 segment than the midrib. 



In iV. glaheUum. the rhizome is short, stout, densely clothed with the 

 wiry bases of old fronds, unbranched. Fronds from 4-6 in number, tufted, 

 springing from the apex of the rhizome and usually of less size than those 

 of N. decompositum. Stipes always more than half the length of the entu'e 

 frond, scaly at the base, naked above, reddish, channelled, from 7-10 inches 

 long, 6-9 inches wide, deltoid, acuminate, twice or thrice pinnate, slightly 

 coriaceous, glossy ; lowest pair of pinnae 4-5 inches long, 2-3 inches wide, 

 less obliquely deltoid than in N. decompositum, with the basal pinnules much 

 less developed, and rachis more prominently winged ; segments pinnate or 

 deeply pinnatifid, with the basal lobes overlapping so as to form a con- 

 nected line on each side of the rachis of the lowest pinnge ; lobes obtusely 

 toothed, veins prominent. Sori equi-distant between the margin of the 

 segment and the midrib. 



While freely admitting the close resemblance in the cutting and in the 

 general outline of these plants, the essential differences indicated appear to 

 me sufficient to warrant these plants being considered specifically distinct, 

 but it is necessary to offer a few remarks on their nomenclature, which is 

 somewhat confused, the specific name ^'glaheUum'' having been applied to 

 both. 



The earliest description of either is that of N. decompositum, by E. 

 Brown, in his "Prodromus Flor^ Novae Hollandiae," p. 149 (1810). The 

 next is that of N. glabellum, by Allan Cunningham, in Hooker's " Com- 

 panion to the Botanical Magazine," II., p. 367, and which is clearly the 

 plant to which the name is now applied. 



In the "Flora Novae -Zelandiae," IL, p. 39, under N. decompositum, 

 Brown's plant is described and figured as var. a. glabellum., N. glabellum, 

 Cunn. Although corrected by Sir W. J. Hooker, in " Species Filicum," 

 IV., p. 146, owing to the wide ch-culation of " Flora Novae-Zelandiae " the 

 error has become generally circulated, and caused much confusion, 

 especially in this colony. 



