— 10 — 



Climacium Kindbergii (R. & C.) Grout. 



The three species of Climacium are quite common in northern Massa- 

 chusetts, at least in that section of the state that is watered by the Merrimac 

 River, as there is an abundance of swamps and wet meadows just fitted for 

 the growth of this genus. There is a very marked difference between the 

 superficial appearance of the two species C. Americaimm and C. Kindbergii 

 from the fact that the branch leaves of the former are subimbricate, while 

 those of the latter are widely open. In their compact method of growth and 

 patent leaves they remind one strongly of Mniuin ho7'7iuvi, as the dendroid 

 character of the genus is not apparent. I think the blackened appearance 

 to be due to submersion, as greener plants are found in less wet situations. 



J, W. Huntington. 



NOTES ON NOMENCLATURE. 



By Elizabeth G. Britton. 



Platygyrium repens (Brid.) Br. & Sch. 



Hypnum palatinum Neck. Act. Acad. Theod. palat. 2:454. t.l. f. 1. 1770 

 pp. Neck. Meth. Muse. 182. 1771. — Dill. Hist. Muse. 2:320. t. 41, fig. 

 55. B. C. 1741. 



Entodon palatinus Lindb. Muse. Scand. 39:1879. 



Entodon repens (Brid.) Grout. Bull. T.B.G. 23:227. 1896. 



Recent European authors have followed Schimper in the name of this 

 moss. Dr. Grout in his Revision of the Isotheciacese, has followed Lindberg 

 generically but not specifically. In a genus so marked in its natural char- 

 acter as Entodon, I fail to see how this species belongs there. As to the speci- 

 fic name, Lindberg seated in his Musci Scandinavici that there are numerous 

 and perfect specimens of Hypjiuin palati7itim collected by Necker, preserved 

 at St. Petersberg, which are identical with Platygrium repens. Le Jolis, in 

 his remarks on Nomenclature, fails to appreciate the points that Lindberg 

 made and attempts to elucidate the species by reference to subsequent 

 authors, instead of consulting the original place of publication of H. pala- 

 tinnni. The original citation is given correctly above, and the volume is to be 

 seen in the Astor Library. We have Necker's Methodus and Dillenius' His- 

 toria, and the three references show very conclusively what Necker meant. 

 He refered to plate 41, fig. 55, of Dillenius, and in the Methodus says figures 

 B and C absolutely illustrate his plant. Figures A and D are undoubtedly 

 Pterogonium gracile, and it is unquestionably true that Necker included 

 both species under H. palatinum, in his description as well as his synon5^my ; 

 but in t. 1., fig. I, of the Acta, he figured P latygyrinni^scsi^ in the Methodus 

 he excluded the Dillenian figures of Pterogonium gracile. At first he evi- 

 dently thought that Platygyrium was the young "germinating plant" of 

 Pterogoniufn, and described the gemmae on the apex of the branches. He 



