—23 — 
THE GENUS ANACOLIA IN NORTH AMERICA. 
John M. Holzinger. 
Among some plants recently sent me by Mr. E. P. Sheldon I found a 
moss which was evidently a Bartramia but which from its gross appearance 
I refused to refer to Bartramia Menziezii Turn. It has a comparatively 
scant supply of red radicles clothing the stems below the shoots; its leaves 
appear more rigid and darker green; and the capsules are markedly longer 
cylindrical. After repeated study, looking up all the available literature on 
Bartramia and related genera, I concluded that I must have Glyphocarpa 
Baueri Hampe. which is cited as a synonym of Bartramia Menziezii in L* 
& J. Manual, p. 204. The note in the Manual in fine print under the species 
but strengthens me in my supposition that I have rightly diagnosed this 
plant. (E. P. Sheldon’s No. I0050). 
The following characters are clearly established in the course of my 
examinations: the stem sections show the epidermis beset with papillae, and 
are octagonal, showing an eight-ranked leaf arrangement: the leaves are 
almost devoid of papillae, only a few occurring along the costa on the upper, 
inner surface, so that an ordinary observation would lead to the conclusion 
that there are none at all: lastly the plants are evidently dioicous. Now 
Limpricht in his diagnosis of the genera of Bartramiaceae assigns to Bar- 
tramia only plants with synoicous or autoicous inflorescence, with striped 
and furrowed capsules and with leaf base mostly sheathing. In none of 
these characters did the plant before me agree with Bartramia, but on care- 
ful comparison with Californian B. Menziezii I found to my^surprise that it 
agreed in all these points and that furthermore its peristome is as figured in 
Sullivant's leones, Suppl. t. 26. Indeed in dissecting one capsule I found one 
solitary ghost-like translucent real tooth, the mates of which must have been 
left behind in the lid, and which must be the “ pellucid membrane” referred 
to in L. & J.’s footnote, only here the full set of so-called teeth as figured by 
Sullivant were also present. Therefore, I am led to express the opinion, 
which needs verification by other observers, that Sullivant’s figure really’ 
shows segments, not teeth. This view is the more plausible since they look 
more like “ segments ” of certain other genera than like bryaceous “ teeth.” 
A still closer comparison of the California and Oregon plants led to the 
■discovery of at least two specific differences : the capsule in the California 
plant has about 1/4 of the entire length, namely that part which is below the 
loosely hung spore sac contracted into a distinct collum ; and the spores 
measures 28-30 ju\ while the capsule of the Oregon plant shows no collum at 
all, the spore sac descending lower down and the remnant does not con- 
tract into a collum; and the spores measure only 18-22 ju. For these reasons 
I hold that the Oregon plant must after all be distinct from B. Menziezii 
and can not well be produced simply by differences in exposure, as is sug- 
gested by Lesquereux and James. 
Now I felt these plants could not stand under Bartramia, in Limpricht's 
sense, neither could I bring them under the next genus, Anacolia, unless I 
restricted myself to the characters predicated in the Key to Genera (Laub- 
