BRITTON: FLORA OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS 105 
The first species, Radula pallens (Sw.) Dumort., is said to have 
been found “in St. Crucis insula,” the record being based on a speci- 
men in the Weber herbarium. This specimen was originally referred 
to Jungermannia complanata L. (Radula complanata Dumort.) by 
Weber,’ but the later determination is probably correct. 
The second species, Lejeunea Montagnei Gottsche, was based on 
material from the Mascarene Islands and is now regarded as a species 
of Euosmolejeunea. A specimen from St. Croix is listed in the Synopsis 
but is very problematical and would probably now be referred to 
some other species. Since the specimen in question has not been 
available for study, and since no later references to it are to be found 
in the literature, its status must be left in doubt. 
The third species, Lejeunea bethanica Gottsche, is based on material 
collected by Breutel and is said to have come from ‘prope Bethaniam 
in Insula St. Christopheri.’’ Many years later Stephani,’ on the basis 
of a specimen in the Lindenberg herbarium at Vienna, quoted the 
species from St. Jan, referring it to the subgenus Cheilo-Lejeunea. 
Still later he apparently changed his ideas regarding the habitat of 
the plant, citing it from St. Kitts and redescribing it under the name 
Chetlolejeunea bethanica Steph. In studying the Lejeuneae in the 
Lindenberg herbarium, the writer found two specimens labeled 
Lejeunea bethanica, both of which were collected by Breutel at Be- 
thania, St. Jan. One of these is very fragmentary but is apparently 
referable to Rectolejeunea phyllobola (Nees & Mont.) Evans; the other, 
which is the specimen studied by Stephani, is (in the writer’s opinion) 
referable to Lejeunea rather than to Cheilolejeunea. The species was 
originally described from a specimen in the Gottsche herbarium at 
Berlin, not available at the present time, and there is therefore a 
possibility that the actual type may have come from St. Kitts. The 
evidence, however, is against this view, and it seems permissible to 
assume that the specimen in the Lindenberg herbarium is identical 
with the type and that it formed a part of the same collection. Un- 
fortunately L. bethanica has not again been collected on either St. 
Jan or St. Kitts. 
The fourth species, Lejeunea epiphyta Gottsche, was described as 
“parasitans in Lej. bethanica in Insula St. Johannis prope Bethaniam 
(Breutel, Hb. G.).’”’ This statement affords further proof that L. 
bethanica came from St. Jan. According to Stephani® the specimen 
of L. epiphyta in the Lindenberg herbarium should be referred to 
§ Prodr. Hist. Musc. Hepat. 59. 1815. 
7 Hedwigia 29: 86. 1890. 
8Sp. Hepat. 5: 652. 1914. 
° Hedwigia 29: 90. 1890. 
