4 THE JOURNAL OF BOTANY 
possessed perichetia, ‘‘B. mnioidet proxima, foliis patenti cris- 
patis, limbo apice folii evanescente, perichetialibus immarginatis 
diversa.” The habitat given of the plant was “in monte Macedon 
ad ramos, pauca frustula.’’ 
Now, this Australian moss is the same plant as that referred by 
Australian, New Zealand, and Tasmanian plant does not differ in 
any way from B. mnioides. 
First, as to the alleged points of difference mentioned above 
by Hampe. As pointed out above, the leaves of B. mnioides are 
i ibed Se i 8 
that the word occurs here as a misprint for immarginata. 
The following description of the perichetial leaves of B. mnivides 
is based on examination of the type-specimens. The true peri- 
erect, not becoming ‘“crisped” like the cauline leaves. These 
perichetial leaves are usually wholly immarginate, with all the 
leaf-cells—except those of the contracted base, which are wide and 
rect —narrow and prosenchymatous, pellucid, smooth, and 
with rather thick walls (fig. 14). Occasionally, however, one of 
the 
perichetium, while retaining the distinct ‘limb” and the normal 
dense papillose areolation, become somewhat elongated, narrower, 
and more gradually acuminate at the apex,—so forming a transition 
