NEW OR ORITICAL BRITISH MARINE ALGE 875 
figure (Phyc. Brit. pl. 822), though the colouring should have been 
purple, is, so far as it goes, a correct r repre resentation of the erect 
many apparently site mature dises which bore no erect filaments, 
and which in every way —— Berthold’s Gow of the dises of 
his picket F fio only other British specimens that 
I have seen that I can piericl een to the same species are some 
gathered by Mr. E. M. Holmes on Corallina officinalis at Arbroath 
in September, 1890, and some others on Zostera sent to me last 
year from the Scilly Islands by Mr. E. George. 
The specimens from Appin and Scilly are similar in all respects ; 
those from Arbroath are longer and broader than the others. is 
lichen dieeacecnaging of ees and Prantl the ane Prof. F. 
Schmitz has 
pa pains eam eh tally expanded frond we! jie 
growth. In the oe of t the gen s he makes no mention of erect 
filaments, and states that cell- division is confined to the marginal 
cells, and does not take place in any other cells of the thallus. 
Berthold, on “ae other hand, jiesiethos his F. discigera as very like 
B i ciliaris, but the filaments slightly more slender, not half as long, 
and arising in groups from a monostromatic disc, which is some- 
times alone present. If Schmitz did not intend to exclude from 
his genus Hrythropeltis plants which bore erect filaments, although 
ag: occasionally, it is cult to see why he has excluded LF. obseura, 
sari the disc is often all that is present. (‘‘ Aufrechte Thallom, 
hochet s 3 mm. lan ng, gewonlich kiirzer, oder auch fehlend (in 
jie "vielfach),” Berthold, Bang. p. 26.) I am pictased to think 
that Schmitz peaiaokal the fact that erect filaments are present in 
E.. discigera Berth., and was consequently mistaken in supposing 
the specimens on which Ke founded the genus Hrythropeltis belonged 
to the same species as Berthold’s plant, though resembling it in 
a discigera Berth. or FE. obscura Berth. (which is‘said to differ from 
by the darker colour, relatively larger cells, and occasional 
branching) rather than F. ciliaris Berth. is the plant described by 
Carmichael fifty years Sha under the name Bangia ciliaris. 
3 Bertnotpn Batt. = E. craris Berth. Bangiacea, p. 25 
(non Bangia ciliaris Carm On Zos ete Belly ait June, 1899 ; 
very slender below, gradually t 2 iiong from 10-12 p at the base to 
