REVISION OF TECTARIA. 
417 
b. Var. macrodon. 
Frond bi pinnate; sori less nnmerons and forming irregular (usually, 
very irregular) rows parallel to the coste and main veins. 
Luzon, Owning 9 ; Mt. Maquiting, Matthew s. n., Topping 657, 697 ; 
Mt. Mariveles, Topping 447 ; Tayabas, Whitford 668. Gregory 144; Min- 
doro, Merrill 5873; Samar, Merrill 5198. 
Intermediate forms between this and the next variety are : M earns, ' 
B. S. 2986, Casiguran, Luzon; Topping 335, Benguet; Merrill 1806 
Mindoro. 
c. Var. Brogniartii. 
Bipinnate, the sori restricted to a single, more or less regular, closely 
marginal row. 
Luzon, Cuming 171 ; Negros, Whitford 1665, Copeland 2076, typical; 
Copeland s. n. Negros, has the sori of this var., but the form of » var. 
cuirregularis. 
Aspidium Whitfordi is probably a form, rather than a good variety; 
characterized by having the veins conspicuous on the upper surface; in 
other respects the plants are mostly referable to var. macrodon. Luzon, 
Mt. Mariveles, Whitford 201 ; Bizal, Foxworthy B. S. 76, Ramos B. S. 
957; Cavite, Copeland s. n., Mangubat, B. S. 1285. 
This species as a whole is a very natural one, distinguished from the 
preceding by the color, texture, margins, naked and often irregular sori, 
absence of free included veinlets, and coarse, chocolate-colored scales 
crowning the rhizome and burying the bases of the stipes. It is the type 
of Arcypteris, but is not isolated enough to be given generic rank by itself, 
and is no near relative of our other exindusiate species, T. Bryanti and 
T. ambigua. On the other hand is nearly related to Pleocnemia, as is 
shown by the venation, the shape of the sori, the texture and the pubes- 
cence. But for these many points of resemblance I should not include 
Pleocnemia in Tectaria. 
17. Tectaria leuzeana (Gaud.) Copel. nom. nov. 
Polypodium Gaud. Freyc. Yoy. Bot. 361, 1827. 
As distinct as Aspidium angilogense Christ, Bull. Herb. Boiss, II 6 
(1906) 1003, appears in its description, and as different as its huge typical 
form is from the more common small forms, I am unable to find any 
constant character distinguishing them in the field. Even the few 
specimens collected by Cuming seen to me to have been more safely treated 
as a single species. At any rate, our specimens of No. 33 (P. Cumin- 
giana) and No. 289 (P. leuceana) , of Epimeliae Bot. p. 50, are alike. 
However, I am not ready to pass positive judgment on the question. 
T. leuzeana remains a very variable species even if the arborescent form 
is removed from it. We have T. leuzeana, s. s., as follows : 
Luzon, Cuming 34; Bizal, Ramos, B. S. 1046, 1091; Cavite, Copeland 
