NOTES ON FRESHWATER ALGH 295 
nalenye but ome endless trouble and synonymy. Had Lem 
ann know the existence of such well-marked ince os 
C. tenue ah as —— Arch., C. pygmeum Arch., an 
C. pygmeum Arch. r. Schliephackianum (Grun.) West & a. 8. 
West, he could <a tae intended his three and a half lin 
imperfect description to slg the idea of yet another distinct 
species of minute Cosmariu 
SravrastRum susrrirurcatom Schmidle in on, s Botan. 
Jahrbiich. Bd. 26, Heft 1, 1898, p. 56, &. ili. f. 17 plant 
deecetiod by Schmidle “5 merely a large aie ae major) of 
. subtrifurcatum West . 8. West, ‘N. Amer. Desm.,’ Trans. 
oc. Bot. ser. 2, ois 1896, p . 258, t. xvi. vt 24. It seems 
rather strange that Schmidle should ‘hie se the same name as 
we “ two years previously to the same plan 
. Sravrastrum Brasiuiense Nordst Lunpettn West & 
G. S We st, /. c. 1896, p. 259. [Syn. S. Brasilionse var. Lundellianum 
Schmidle in Bib. til K Sy. Vet.-Akad. Handl. 1898, Bd. 24, Afd. iii. 
no. 8, p. 58.] e = remind Schmidle that the name “ var. 
Lundellii’”’ was giv S. Brasiliense forma Lundell (in aie 
R. Soe. Scient. peek ser. 8, viii. 1871, p. 78, . iv. £. 39) 8 
two years previous to his name of * var. Lundellian 
Note.—Xanthidium Stuhlmannii Hieronymus (in “Midian Die 
Pflanzenwelt Ost-Afrikas und der Nachbargebiete, Theil C, Berlin, 
1895; Schmidle in Engler’s Bot. Jahrbiich. Bd. 26, Heft 1, 1898, 
t. iii. £, 7) is certainly a ‘form of 3. brasiliense. 
24. SraurastRuM acuteatum (Ehrenb.) Menegh. var. Brripu 
Schmidle, /.c. p. 55, t. ii. £44. This is undoubtedly a form of 
p. 894- 
e same paper a records ‘‘ 8. Enger Lund. var. 
longicornis | Schmidle” in his text (J. c. p. 55), and * i longicorne 
Schmidle ” in his description of plates (/.c. p. 70)! Although the 
plant he thus records is certainly a variety of S. te lonlcens 
approaching var. enoplon West, yet it does not resemble S. forficu 
latum arte so much as his so-called S. aculeatum var. bifidum! 
AURASTRUM COSMOSPINOSUM (Borges.) nob. [Syn. S..acule- 
atum (Ehren, Menegh. subsp. cosmospinosum Borges. in Botanisk 
by Mess: oy and Bissett as ~ rostellum is unquestionably iden- 
tical with Borgesen’s 5. aculeatum subsp. cosmospinosum t 
érgesen’s name ‘cosmos inbediae must take precedence, ye 
pba the more correct in placing it as a species qui 
S. aculeatum. 
The complete characters of S. aculeat poten * found discussed 
in Journ, Linn. Soe. Bot, vol. xxxiv. pp. "39 
