— 45 — 



The Catdlogo, however, is much more than merely an annotated list. There 

 are analytic keys to families, genera, and species, and a four or five line de- 

 scription summarizes the salient features of each form. The keys seem, also, 

 to be based upon obvious characters wherever possible. Sufficient synonyms 

 are given to facilitate reference to standard works of bryology, and in the case 

 of all species not mentioned in such works a footnote quotes the original descrip- 

 tion in full. No new species or varieties are proposed in the present list, Dr. 

 Machado having followed the commendable course of describing novelties in 

 more easily accessible journals. He has seen fit, however, to make some twenty 

 new combinations (all listed below), and we confess that it seems to us unwise 

 to make such changes in a publication which must by its nature be of limited 

 circulation. These combinations are due in part to questions of priority, in 

 part to generic changes, and in part to the reduction of species or subspecies to 

 varieties. Concerning some of these matters opinions will ever differ, especially 

 as regards the relative rank of forms, but we cannot see the advantage of replac- 

 ing Hedwig's Bartramia with Plagiopus, without a careful discussion of the ques- 

 tions involved and an attempt to cover the nomenclatural changes needed for 

 all species. The author's course compels future workers to canvass the ground 

 afresh and means the citation of one additional title in literature for a matter of 

 but three names. Nor do we see the advantage of subordinating Raddi's Fab- 

 ronia pusilla, the type of the genus, to Schwaegrichen's F. octoUepharis. 



There are an annoying number of changes of spelling and of typographic 

 errors of other sorts, not all of which are covered by the list of errata. Such 

 errors are responsible doubtless for indicating the following combinations as new: 

 *'PoUia intermedia var. litoralis (Mitt.), " which should be (Mitt.) Dixon; Br yum 

 caespiticium h. var. commense (Husn.), " which should be var. comense (Sch'imp.) 

 Husn.; " Eurhynchium confertum Milde var. brevifolium (Milde)," which should 

 have the parentheses omitted; rusciforme Milde var. afa^aniicum (Brid.),'* 

 which should be var. atlanticum (Brid.) Milde; and " Raphidostegium substrano- 

 mulosum (Dixon)," which should be Rh. substrumulosum Dixon (the spelling 

 is corrected in the "errata"). We are keenly aware, however, of the difficulties 

 that printing anything whatsoever, wrong or right, involves at the present time 

 and do not wish to be understood as being critical of what a stupid compositor 

 has made our confrere say. On the contrary, we extent to Senhor Machado 

 our heartiest congratulations upon the Catdlogo, and wish him all success in his 

 further studies upon the Portuguese mosses. 



The following lists includes all cases where the combinations in Dr. Mach- 

 ado's list have not, to our knowledge, been used previously. The authority r 

 the new combination will in all cases be Machado. Ceratodon purpureus Brid. 

 var. corsicus (Schimp.) ; Fissidens polyphyllus Wils. var. Welwitschii (Schimp.) ; 

 Grimmia trichophylla Grev. var. Sardoa (De Not.); Tortula meridionalis (Luis- 

 ier) (= Desmatodon, Luisier); Trichostomum humile (Hedw.) (= Barbulacaes- 

 pitosa Schwaegr.); Cinclidotus mucronaius (Brid.) (= Dialytrichia Brebissonii 

 Limpr.); Funaria mediterranea Lindb. varr. dentata (Crome), et convexa (Spruce) ;. 



