- 8 9 - 
his Hepaticae Boreali-Americanae (No. 5). If Stephani’s supposition could be 
proved correct the range of N. Geoscyphus to the southward would, of course, be 
much farther extended. Unfortunately, N. Lescurii is still very incompletely 
known. In the specimens examined by the writer, which include both Austin’s 
exsiccatae and a part of Seymour’s collection, the plants resemble N. Geoscyphus 
very closely, although the underleaves are somewhat better developed. They 
show, however, antheridia and archegonia on distinct individuals and not on the 
same shoot. The inflorescence, therefore, is dioicous and not paroicous, as it 
ought to be in N. Geoscyphus. The attempt was made repeatedly to demon- 
strate young archegonia at the tip of an antheridial shoot, but absolutely in 
vain. At the same time the leaves below the terminal clusters of archegonia 
were found to show no signs of the basal sacs characteristic of perigonial bracts. 
The absence of perianths and of capsules in all the material studied makes it 
impossible to establish the generic position of the plant beyond all doubt, but 
it seems advisable to consider it a valid species until more is known about it. 
The locality in New Jersey therefore must be regarded as the southernmost 
known station for .Nardia Geoscyphus along the Atlantic seaboard. 
4. Cephalozia affinis Lindb. Meddel. Soc. F. et FI. Fenn. 17 : 158* 
1883 (nomen nudum). Stephani, Bull. Herb. Boissier II. 8: 277. 1908. K. 
Muller, Rabenhorst’s Kryptogamen-Flora 6 2 : 54. f. 16. 1912. 
Collected at Sisson, California, on a wet bank, growing on soil, humus, and 
rotten wood, by G. M. Pendleton. In his announcement of C. affinis as a new 
species Lihdberg quoted specimens from two stations in Finland, from one sta- 
tion in Sweden, and from Austin’s Hepaticae Boreali-Americanae, No. 57, in 
part. He published no description of the plant, and apparently it attracted no 
attention until formally described by Stephani twenty-five years later. K. 
Muller, in the place quoted above, again records the various stations originally 
given by Lindberg, but makes no additions. At the same time he intimates that 
the species ought probably to be found in central Europe. He points out its ex- 
tremely close relationship to C. media Lindb., so close that sterile plants are prac- 
tically indistinguishable. The only important differences, in fact, are that C. 
affinis is autoicous, while C. media is dioicous, and that the dentation at the 
mouth of the perianth is a little deeper in C. affinis than in the other species. 
The specimens from California are clearly autoicous, a fact which was first dem- 
onstrated by Miss Haynes. The writer, however, has failed to find any autoicous 
material in the number of Austin’s exsiccatae which Lindberg quotes. The 
number is composed of a mixture of various distinct plants, without any indica- 
tion of the stations where they were collected, and it is probable that there are 
different mixtures in different sets. For the present, therefore, the Californian 
specimens may be regarded as the only ones from a definite North American sta- 
tion, which can be safely cited. 
5. Lejeunea spiniloba Lindenb. & Gottsche: G. L. & N. Syn. Hep. 770. 
1847. Potamolejeunea spiniloba Steph. Sp. Hepat. 5 : 639. 1914. 
Collected in December, 1913, at Sanford, Florida, on trunk of cypress, by 
S. Rapp (No. 71). New to the United States. This species, originally described 
