EDITORIAL. 



Among the interesting facts brought out by Mr. Reverchon's 

 "Fern Flora of Texas," in this number, is the meeting of two 

 distinct floras in the State. The Aspleniums, Nephr odiums, Ly- 

 copodiums and other species of moist shades are but poorly rep- 

 resented, while there is a remarkable increase of dry rock ferns 

 such as Cheilanthes, Notholacna and Pellaea. One familiar with 

 the habitats of ferns need only run through the names of the 

 species to get a fair idea of the Texas climate. As Mr. Rever- 

 chon intimates, the State is too large for a single student to map 

 out its fern flora accurately, and it is hoped that our readers will 

 contribute further notes on the subject. We now have ready 

 or in course of preparation the fern-flora of California, by S. 

 B. Parish; of Florida, by A. H. Curtiss; Georgia, by R. M. Har- 

 per ; Mississippi, by S. M. Tracy ; Connecticut, by C. H. Bissell ; 

 New York, by B. D. Gilbert ; Vermont, by W. W. Eggleston ; Ken- 

 tucky, by Miss Sadie F. Price ; Iowa, by T. J. Fitzpatrick, and 

 Washington, by J. B. Flett. The fern floras of other States 

 will be announced later. It is hoped that most of those named 

 above will be published this year. 



* * 

 * 



In the February number of Torrcya, Prof. L. M. Underwood 

 states that after a study of specimens of the royal fern from both 

 Europe and America, growing side by side in the New York 

 Botanical Garden, he has concluded that the American plant 

 is different from the European one, and accordingly he would 

 now call our plant Osmunda spcctabilis Willd., instead of O. rc- 

 galis L. It happens that the very plants Professor Underwood 

 is writing of, were set out by the editor of the Fern Bulletin. 

 and the latter having had not a little chance to see them growing 

 side by side from the first unrolling frond of spring to the last 

 naked rachis of autumn, does not believe that they are different 

 species. This does not imply that Professor Underwood is 

 wrong, but it does intimate that there is a possibility of a differ- 

 ence of opinion on the subject. The European plant, it must be 

 admitted, presents some slight superficial differences, but these 

 are no greater than one would expect to find in two plants from 



