—55 — 
M. Theriot’s Note on Hypnum uncinatum and its Forms in North 
Minnesota. 
It is rather difficult to find one’s way among the numerous varieties of 
this polymorphous species, especially since absolutely authentic type speci- 
mens are not available. It is also probable that several of the described 
varieties are synonyms. 
Thus in studying closely the var. attenuattis Bry. Eur., it seems very 
little different from the var. phmiosum; also the var. pola^'e seems not far 
removed from var. gracilescens (if descriptions are compared) etc. 
I have had over two hundred specimens of Hypnum uncmattim to name 
from northeastern Minnesota. If I had been obliged to try to place each of 
these specimens under the eight or ten varieties actually described I would 
have had to spend a year of time and surely this species is not worth that 
much trouble. A reasonable amount of time must suffice. 
In order that my labor may be appreciated and critically verified, it has 
seemed to me necessary that my critics endeaver to occupy the view point 
which I have taken. I have taken as basis for my study the descriptions of 
M. Renauld in “ Muscologia Gallica,” which has permitted me to make a 
preliminary classification as follows; fifty belonged to the type, thirty to 
iormsiplumosa, thirty to var. plumulosum, forty to var. subjulaceum, hold- 
ing in mind the following characters: 
Typical plants erect, robust, leaves large, strongly plicate, falciform 
but not circinate; forma plumosa plants smaller, more or less pinnate, leaves 
folded, more straight, contracted from above the base into a long subula, 
circinate; Ndc:. plumulosum plants slender, leaves small, little or not striated, 
of variable form ; seta short, capsule small; var. subjulaceum plants robust, 
stems erect, leaves erect or secund, plicate, costa large, tissue loose, cells 
more short. I then took up again my task of seeking to form a personal 
opinion and I have arrived at the following conclusions: 
1. — The well-characterized type is rather rare in the region explored. 
2. — Forma plu7nosa, understood as it is in the above definition, is very 
abundant, it is distinguished as easily at. least as is the var. plumulosum, 
and it deserves more than the place of a simple “forma.” My view would 
be to make of it a variety as did Schimper. 
3 . — Yax. plu77iulosu?fi is more difficult to define; one is obliged to bring 
to it forms quite different; its stems are more or less pinnate, its leaves are 
more or less circinate, more or less long, more or less folded. For my part 
I do not understand it very well, at least not as M. Renauld has defined it, 
