DESCRIPTIONS OF THE SPECIES 
285 
Synopsis of the species : 
167. E. conforme. Frond coriaceous, without scales, four to six 
inches long, one inch broad, rounded at the apex. 
Var. latifolium. Frond one-half to two feet long, two to four 
inches broad, bluntly pointed. 
168. E. petiolatum. Frond six to fifteen inches long, widest at the 
middle, firmly herbaceous, bearing at first scattered deciduous scales 
but not fringed. Fertile frond as long. 
Var. rupestre. Frond one to three inches long. 
169. E. hybriduvi. Frond herbaceous, lanceolate, fringed with scales. 
Fertile frond three inches long, including stipe, club-shaped. 
170. E. Aubertii. Frond one to two feet long, thinly herbaceous, 
linear-lanceolate, fringed with scales. Fertile frond oblong, on a 
stipe eight to twelve inches long. 
1 7 1. E. linear e. Frond six to eight inches long, two inches wide. 
Fertile frond much smaller. 
172. E. spathulatum. Frond set with hair-like scales on both 
surfaces. Plant much smaller than the other species. 
167. Elaphoglossum CONFORME (Sw.) Schott. 
Plate 147. Nat. size. Plate 148. Var. latifolium. 
Rhizome creeping, woody, clothed with lanceolate, pointed, 
large, loose, wavy scales. Fronds ligulate, rounded at the 
apex, rounded or tapering to the stipe, four to six inches 
long, one inch broad, thickly coriaceous, quite glabrous on 
both surfaces, very light green ; mid-rib almost white ; the 
margin entire but undulated ; the stipe three to six inches 
long, quite glabrous, nearly white. Fertile frond about equal 
to the barren and similar in shape. Sori filling the whole 
of the under surface except the mid-rib and the cartilaginous 
margin. Veins obscure, once forked. 
Very much confusion has existed between this and the 
next species. E. petiolatum has been repeatedly named 
Acrostichum conforme Sw.; and the two forms of E. petiolatum 
have been named A. viscosum and A. conforme. We find E. 
petiolatum a quite distinct species, and easily distinguished 
from this ; but it was with great hesitation that we made 
A. conforme and A. latifolium distinct species in our first 
edition, and we have now placed the latter as a variety of 
the former. Kuhn makes an evident mistake somewhere 
