156 



BOTANICAL MAGAZINE. 



[Vol. XVII, 



It is the bullation of the short pedicels. The pedicels are sometimes nearly 

 wanting but mostly measure 1-2 mm., and often as long as 3 mm. They 

 are sharply constricted at the point of insertion to the stolon and again at 

 the base of the frond so as to retain an orange or club shaped pedicel 

 (fig. 1, 2 & 4). The proliferations when they occur on the surface of the 

 fronds have also the characteristic bullated pedicels and the segments pro- 

 nounced from the margins of the fronds have mostly none of them. 



This character is constantly found in our plant through the year, 

 although the proliferation, dentation and the external appearance of the 

 fronds might undergo any modification. It is clearly visible in the fresh 

 material or those preserved in an aqueous reagent. In the dried specimens 

 the character is liable to be overlooked if not noticed beforehand. Especially 

 in the dried specimens of summer form it is very often hardly visible be- 

 fore dipping in water. This is owing to its extreme delicacy of the cell wall. 

 I wrote to Weber v. Bosse for a bit of C. Stalilii in order to compare 

 it with our plants. She was so kind as to send me the original specimen 

 of PI. XXII. fig. 4. of her excellent work, Monographic des Caulerpes, for 

 examination. It is alcoholic specimen preserved in a very good state. In 

 it, the shape of the fronds show quite similar charac- 

 ter with ours but the bullated pedicel was not to be 

 detected. The teeth of the serrature are arranged at 

 nearly similar intervals with C. hrachypiis but they 

 are more blunt at the apices (fig. 6). Xo special 

 thickening of the cellwall could be found at the 

 teeth. 



I am sorry to say that Harvey's authentic speci- 

 mens of both C. hrachypiis and C. anceps are not 

 accessible to me. And we are not sure whether C« 

 anceps from Japan and Friendly Islands are the same 

 species or not. Though C. hracJiypus has been de- 

 fined " a bord une retrecie par endroits,^^ I have no 

 doubt that the plant collected at Misaki belongs to it. 

 Fig. 2a. PI. XXII. fn the Monograph, which was re- 

 produced from the original specimen shows one of the 

 fronds with much swollen pedicel. Would it be rather 

 speculative to suppose if the other fronds in the figure 

 might have been provided with similar character ? 

 C. Stalilii might be easily separated from C. hrachypiis by wanting 

 the bullated pedicel. If C. anceps of Friendly Islands had not been 



