— 44 ~ 
on closely related mosses, particularly in the Hypnaceae. To sum up, I vote 
for irriguum because your plant has the habit, the leaf form and structure, and 
paraphyllia of irriguum rather than of filicinum. I believe these outweigh the 
contiguity of the forms and the inflorescence.” 
I have sent what I have of the variety to Dr. Grout for his Series of N. A. 
Musci Pleurocarpi, and shall accept his diagnosis; still the interesting question 
remains to be answered ; how does it happen that everyone of a number of mats of 
Amb. filicinum , growing at the water’s edge, is continued below the water by 
Amb. irriguum var. spinifolium, while a mat of Entodon seductrix growing in like 
situation on the wall of the same spring is not thus accompanied by the variety* 
nor could I find the variety growing independently of filicinum? 
Dayton, Ohio, 17 Jan., 1914. 
HYPOPTERYGIUM JAPONICUM IN NORTH AMERICA 
John M. Holzinger 
Professor A. S. Foster recently sent me a Hypopterygium collected by him 
"on rocks among boulders, at Egg Harbor, Coronation Island, southeastern 
Alaska, July 24, 1913”. This moss was collected at the same place also by Dr. 
Frye. On examination, I found it to agree perfectly with Hypopterygium jap - 
onicum Mitt., sent me by Prof. H. Nakanashiki from two stations, and by Prof. 
Shutai Okamura from two other stations, all in Japan. Both these moss stu- 
dents had their plants determined by Dr. V. F. Brotherus, and both sent fruit- 
ing plants. The Egg Harbor plants are not fruiting, but show quite a few arche- 
gonial buds. On careful comparison of branch leaves, of ventral bracts, and of 
perichaetial leaves there is left no doubt about the identity of the Alaskan with 
the Japanese species. Several of the Japanese specimens are more luxuriant, 
and part of them show rather scant brown felt, which is quite pronounced on the 
Alaskan plants. 
On submitting my findings to Mrs. Britton, she very kindly sent me a bit 
of the type of Hypopterygium japonicum Mitt., informing me at the same time 
that Prof. Foster had sent some of his plant to the New York Botanical Garden,, 
and that both she and Mr. R. S. Williams had referred this to H. canadense. A 
comparison with Mitten’s type still further strengthened my conviction that the 
Alaska plant is indeed H. japonicum. 
Then the question arose: Is Dr. Kindberg’s type really different, and a. 
distinct species? Mrs. Britton here also kindly came to my assistance, and 
loaned me her material of H. canadense Kindb., comm. J. Macoun, as “type,” 
and therefore, by inference (the label does not state locality) the very plant 
collected by Newcombe on Queen Charlotte Island off the coast of British Colum- 
bia in 1898, and communicated to Dr. Kindberg by Mr. John Macoun, the 
Botanist of the Dominion of Canada. The few plants in this pocket are some- 
what smaller, and rather battered, but enable perfectly comparison of the several 
