CoLENSO. — DescrijMon of neiv Plants. 341 



pinnate, sessile, free, alternate, patent, 1 line or a little more long, sub- 

 quadrate with a single deep notch at apex and nearer to the inferior side, 

 sHghtly arcuated on the superior side, and very finely and closely toothed" 

 on its outer corner and round it a little /way on the apex: sac, or torus, 

 sub-terminal on both main and lateral branchlets, sub-globose or broadly 

 oval, 1^2 lines long, densely hirsute-hispid, colour light brown. 



Hab. — On shaded clay banks and on rotten logs near watercourses in 

 thick wood near head of the Eiver Manawatu, North Island ; 1879-1881. 



A species possessing close affinity with G-yvmanthe tenella, Taylor, and 

 Marsupidium knightii, Mitten. 



This species I have long known in its barren state ; and although it 

 appeared to be very nearly allied to Gymnanthe tenella, Taylor, of New Zea- 

 land and Tasmania [vide " Fl. Tasmania "), yet I could never quite believe 

 it to be the same ; and now that I have found it pretty copiously in fruit, I 

 am certain of its specific distinction. G. tenella is fully described by Taylor 

 (who established the genus on that species), in " Lond. Jom-nal of Botany," 

 vol. iii., p. 377 (and in " Syn. Hepatic," p. 192), and a drawing of it is also 

 given in the " Fl. Tasmanise." In foliage and in size and in manner of 

 growth the two plants are very much alike ; still, the leaves of this species 

 are not so closely set, and have many more and finer serratures at the apex 

 (9-10) than there are in that one, which usually bears but three. But the 

 chief distinction is in its sac or torus, which in G. tenella is described as 

 " elongato obconico striato "; while in this species the same part is densely 

 shaggy, almost echinate when fresh. 



In the "Handbook of the New Zealand Flora," p. 520, G. tenella, G. 

 saccata, and G. urvilleana, with other Hepatica, were all lumped together 

 under the one species — G. saccata. (This, to me, who had formerly collected 

 them all in New Zealand, seemed surprising, as I could not discern much 

 of a close resemblance between them.) Subsequently, however. Mitten 

 broke up the genus (though but a small one) into several new genera,* and 

 in so doing not only restored the three above-mentioned species of Gymnanthe 

 (which I was pleased to see) but even separated them into distinct genera. 



It is not, however, stated in which of those new genera G. tenella is now 

 placed ; possibly in Tylimanthus ; but this plant of mine will, I think, be 

 found to rank naturally with Marsupidium, and seems pretty closely allied 

 (judging from the short description) to Mitten's new species, M. knightii 

 (p. 753, I.e.), which is also a New Zealand species. 



* See "Handbook N.Z. Flora," pp. 751-754. 



