188 
Simmons, Remarks about the Relations of tbe Floras etc. 
follow Set ch eil as to tlie specific clistinction. There are two 
areas, wliere the Mariae are especially numerous, viz., the 
northern Pacific and the border-regions between the Polar Sea 
and the Atlantic. The type of the genus, A. esculenta , is widely 
spread in the northern Atlantic, wliere it reaches down to the 
coast of France, it is hardly arctic anywhere (Spitzbergen?) but 
appears again in the northern Pacific (?). 
A. Pylaii comes in within the northern parts of the ränge 
of the former species (Norway, Faeroes, Maine, Bering Sea) but 
is as far as known at present not distribnted very far into the 
arctic regions. Tliree species, A. membranacea, A. grandifolia , and 
A. fagellaris are northatlantic- arctic. One, A. dolichorhachis , is 
pacific witli an arctic ränge in the neighbourhood of Bering Straft. 
As previously mentioned the two species that stand as arctic- 
endemic probably are to be found also ontside that sound. This 
gives us 8 species, the ninth, A. linearis , is only found in Ice- 
land (Jönsson (2ü) has it under A. esculenta ), all the other 9 spe- 
cies are northpacific. It is apparent that such a distribution 
must doubtless point to a centre of dispersion in the tertiary 
Polar Sea, and to a cleaving into new forms in very late 
periods. 
The name „Sea of the Laminariaceae “ for the Polar Sea, 
must have been still more appropriate in tertiary times than 
now (cf. Setchell 48, p. 373), as the family has probably been 
restricted to that area, with a few exceptions only. 
It must jiow be examined how far the views here stated 
are in accord with the ideas of Reinke (41) about the phylo- 
genesis of the Laminariaceae. The simplest form of all is after 
liis opinion (p. 51) Laminaria solidungula (Setchell has L. Phyl- 
litis) and that species is not only the primitive type („die ide- 
elle und embryologische Grundform“) of the family, but he also 
accepts the hypothesis, that it is the original form („die Urform 
des Laminariaceentypns 11 ) from which all the different Lamina- 
riaceae have sprung. This again he thinks derived from the 
Flagellatae , and as far as is indicated in the treatise he seems to 
assume a direct descendance from the Flagellatae , so*far as none 
of the phylembryons of Laminaria solidungula should live now, 
all the intermediate members of the chain should be exstirpated 
without leaving any trace, as they, likewise as the Lamina- 
riaceae now living, have been unfit for preservation in a fossil 
state. He further has a discussion of the probabilities for and 
against a monopliyletic origin of the family, but as already in- 
timated, not the least that points to an assumption that more 
Phaeosphoreae also could have the same ancestor among the 
Flagellatae , i. e. that the Laminariaceae could descend from an- 
other now existing family of brown algae, or at least have the 
same origin as some or other of these. I cannot see why not 
the theory of Kjellman (Engler & Pran tl, 1. 2, p. 253) should 
be at least quite as acceptable, that the Laminariaceae have 
branclied off from the Encoeliaceae. Indeed this is a question 
