156 BRYOLOGY OF NEW ZEALAND. 
1. Grimmia apocarpa (lL.) Hedw., Deser. i, p. 104 (1787). 
Syn. G. hedwigiacea C. M. in Hedwig. aig p. 164 Seats 
G. Searellii R. Br. ter in Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. 27, 
(1895). G. revisa R. Br. ter., op. et loc. me G. susiefeveds 
R. Br. ter., op cit., p. 411. G. Alfred R. Br. ter., op. cit. 
J bos. ete... G. La 
=. 
oe) 
p. 412. G. turbinata R. Br. ter., op. et cit Laing 
R. Br. ter., op. cit., p. 413. G. gracilis : as ter., op. cit., 
Pp anime - perichaetialis R. , op. et. loc. cit 
: sO ¥ 
G. oamaruensis R. Br. ter., op. cit., vol. 35, fs 336 (1902). 
Forma mutica. 
lel sags Hampe in Linn., 1859-60, p. 631. G. Mitchellir 
r. ter. in Trans. N:Z. Inst.. vol. 27, p. 411. 
Var. rivularis (Brid.) Web. & Mohr. 
Syn. G. Creve Hampe in Linn., 1859-60, p. 632. G. subfleaifolia 
C. Hedwig, xxxvii, p. 164. G. Beckettiana C. M., op. cit., 
p- 168. G. aquatica*R. Br. ter. in Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. 27, 
S. 2080 eS: aquatilis R. Br.,” Broth. Musci, p. 448, is an 
error ; no such species exists.) 
Var. pumila Schimp., Syn. Ed., ii, p. 243. 
Syn. G. sazatilis R. Br. ter. in Trans. N.Z. Inst., vol. 27, 411. 
G. maorica Par. Ind. Suppl., p. 174. G. Wrightii R. Br. ter., 
op cit., p. 413. 
Of the above reductions I have examined specimens of the larger number, 
and of the rest the descriptions leave practically no doubt of the identity 
of the respective plants with one or other of the many forms of G. apocarpa. 
The forma mutica appears to me a slight form merely; the leaves may 
be quite hairless or with very short and inconspicuous hyaline points; the 
other distinguishing hues enumerated by Hampe do not appear to 
have any importance. 
One of Brown’s specimens, an ordinary form of i apocarpa, was collected 
a very unusual habitat for this species—viz., on poplar-trees near the 
River Avon. The bark of the tree still remains attached to the plants, so 
that there is no doubt as to the correctness of the r 
The var. rwularis is a very marked and distinct ee and it is gomsibli 
should be considered a distinct species, as it is treated by some authors. 
Limpricht has pointed out structural characters of some importance. On 
the other hand, the fact that the form, otherwise not widely distributed 
in the Southern Hemisphere, is associated in this region with G. apocarpa 
type is certainly an additional argument in ss of its being a derivative 
of G. apocarpa rather than an independent species. I know of no area, 
in fact, where the var. poms occurs from ae G. apocarpa is absent. 
Specimens of G. flexifolia, collected by Beckett, and determined by 
Brotherus, as well as G. aquatica R. Br. ter., and other Sees in Brown’s 
herbarium, exhibit no differences from our northern 1 
The var. pumila is a fairly well marked form, ate idk Tow, 
in dense, small tufts, with small, narrow leaves and a smaller capsule. 
