Marine Algae.] SUBANTARCTIC ISLANDS OF NEW ZEALAND. 515 



The following is Agardh's description of the species : " P. flabellifera foliis ad 

 geniculum quodque secundum alterne egredientibus, ambitu flabelliformibus, margine 

 inferiore et superiore rectis integerrimis, petiolum versus cuneatim adproximatis, 

 antico margine arcuato saepius argute dentato cellulis paginalibus rectangularibus, 

 primariis a petiolo radiantibus, radiis novis superne formatis bifurcationem folii 

 properantibus." 



The genus Euzoniella was established by Falkenberg(') for the insertion of 

 various species previously included under the genus Polyzonia. He seems to have 

 overlooked the species Polyzonia flahellifera, J. Ag.,(-) which, belonging to the same 

 section as P. cuneifolia, should also have been transferred to Euzoniella. Further, 

 E. flahellifera is probably to be identified with Polyzonia cuneifolia, var. bifida, 

 from Port Preservation, of Hooker and Harvey('^), but, as no type specimens of 

 this variety are available in New Zealand, a certain opinion on this point cannot 

 be given. I have, however. New Zealand specimens of E. flabellifera, identified by 

 Agardh, and the plants from the Snares and Monument Harbour agree with these in 

 all details. The leaflets are double throughout ; the divisions vary much in relative 

 size— sometimes they are equal or nearly so, sometimes the inner leaflet is the 

 smaller, though it is occasionally the outer one which is the less. The upper 

 margin of the outer leaflet is usually much more erose than the upper margin 

 of the inner leaflet, which is dentate, the teeth running out into short hyaline 

 points. But there seems to be a good deal of variation in the matter. I ha,ve 

 a form from Dunedin, also collected by Mr. Crosby Smith, in which most of the 

 leaflets are trifid. The plant is, on the whole, rather smaller than E. cuneifolia, 

 and usually the adjacent leaflets are more widely apart in E. flabellifera than 

 in E. cuneifolia. However, the large non-epiphytic forms of E. cuneifolia from 

 Perseverance Harbour have in parts the upper margin of one leaflet separated 

 from the lower margin of the one above by a space equal to the breadth of the 

 leaflet. 



Falkenberg considers the plant E. cuneifolia, var. bifida, as not even a variety 

 of E. cuneifolia. He states that bifid leaflets are chiefly characteristic of the fertile 

 and certain other portions of the shoots of E. cuneifolia, whereas the leaflets on the 

 creeping stems are unsplit. He further points out that, as bifid leaflets and un- 

 divided ones are sometimes to be found on the same shoot, they cannot be considered 

 to mark even a variety. He thus identifies E. cuneifolia, var. bifida, with the normal 

 form of E. cuneifolia. It is, to my mind, much more likely that the variety bifida 

 is really E. flabellifera, which is not unlike E. cuneifolia in many of its characteristics, 

 and has its leaflets normally bifid. It is true that an occasionally bifid leaf may be 

 found on E. cuneifolia ; on the other hand, an occasionally entire leaflet may 

 be found on E. flabellifera ; but the two forms — (a) with single leaflets, (6) with 

 double leaflets — are typically quite distinct. It will, however, be seen from the 

 figures given that forms of E. flabellifera from Campbell Island, the Snares, and the 

 Bluff differ somewhat. {Jide Plate XXII, figs. 3, 4, 5 ; and Plate XXIII, figs. 4, 

 5, 6, 7, 8.) 



(^) " Die Rhodomelaceen," p. 360. 



(2) Till. Alg. Syst., vi, p. 74. 



(3) Fl. Nov. Zel, ii, p. 226. 



