Puate 57. . 
ACROSTICHUM (§ Lomaniopsts)* Yarurrnss, art. 
Strong-veined Acrostichum. 
Acrosticuum (§ Lomariopsis) Vapurense; caudex long, stout, scandent (“climb- 
ing up young trees,” Spruce), in general especially the new shoots very 
scaly ; stipites a span to a foot long, more or less scaly, especially below ; 
rachis subsquamose, winged towards the apex ; fronds one to two feet long, 
oblong, ovate, pinnate ; pine six or seven to thirty and more; sterile ones 
four to seven inches long, jointed upon the rachis, terminal one generally 
the longest, one to two inches broad, elliptical-oblong, obliquely subcuneate 
and sessile at the base, very firm, subcoriaceo-membranaceous often cuspi- 
dato-acuminate, the margin entire or obscurely crenato-dentate; veins ap- 
proximate, very conspicuous, parallel, simple or forked, prominent, especially 
beneath ; ferdile pinne much smaller, oblong-lanceolate, capsuliferous to the 
very entire margin, the base rounded. 
AcrosticuuM Yapurense. Mart. Ic. Plant. Crypt. Bras. p. 86. t. 24 (excellent). 
AcrosticHum phlebodes. Ave. ix Linnea. v. 9. p. 33. 
Lomariopsis phlebodes. Fée, Acrostich. p. 66. 
Lomaniopsis Prieuriana. Ee, Acrostich. p. 66. t. 26. f. 1. 
Lomanrropsis erythrodes? and L. elongata? Fée, derost. p. 67. 
Has. Tropical America; Brazil; on old trees in the forests of the rivers Japura 
and Madeira, Martins ; Paré, Spruce, n. 27 and 569; Organ Mountains, 
Gardner, n. 101, Sellow; Guiana, Le Prieur, Hostmann, n. 188 and 179, 
Appun, n. 128, Sagot, n. 112; Trinidad, Purdie, Cruger ; Jamaica, Vilson ; 
Peru, Peppig ; Varapota, Spruce; Magdalena, N. Granada, Holton, n. 21. 
—Cultivated at Kew, from roots sent by Dr. Cruger from Trinidad. : 
Dr. Martius’ name of Yapurense (Japurense would perhaps 
be more correct) has the claim of priority over that of the more 
* Lomariopsis of Fée, which I here preserve as a section of Acrostichum, has 
no character to distinguish it from Acrostichum of Fée (Elaphoglossum of Schott 
and other authors), except that the individuals that compose it are pinnated 
(not simple) ; and now that the original Acrostichum is so much split into genera, 
the very name has been wellnigh abolished ; and it does seem to me strange 
that Pres] and others should fix upon Acrostichum aureum, Linn., as the fit 
representative—a genus of one species, too, as I believe, for this once extensive 
genus. Moore asserts that it is the “ Linnean type,” and quotes ‘ Linneus 
Gen. Fil.’ (Plant. 2) p. 785. Now I have consulted Linneeus’s works. In the 
first edition of his ‘Syst. Nat.’ (1735) his only reference under dcrostichum, is 
“ Muraria.? In his ‘Genera Plantarum,’ 1737, n. 785 (and therefore I presume 
the one referred to by Moore), the first synonym is “ Ruda muraria, Town. t. 
317,” and in his edition of the same work, 1754, it is the only one given: and 
this is Asplenium Ruta-muraria, Linn. ! 
MARCH lst, 1862. 
