143 
entirely with R. maritima , even by this fact proving that 
it cannot be reckoned as a separate species. 
Through these researches we have shown that the 
anatomy of stem and leaf is of the same great importance 
in this genus, when the question is to decide the rank of a 
form, as in the genus Potamogeton. This also was to be 
supposed, the two genera being so near allied with each 
other. 
Distribution of Ruppia obtusa Hagstr.: S. America. 
S. Patagonia: Canal Fitzroy, ia l* 08, C. Skottsberg, Skyring 
water, 08, C. Skottsberg. Var. repens Hagstr.: S. Pata- 
gonia: Punta Arenas, 2l / 2 96, P Dusén, earlier (14,235) by me 
determined as R. maritima L. Argentina, Inchachuli in 
Puna de Atacama in aqua 2—4 dm alta, calida (35—37,5°) ca. 
4800 m. s. m. 31 1 10 01, Rob. E. Fries. — Ar. Bennett, in The 
Journal of Bot. 1890 (15,299) writes: — P. filifolius R. A. Phi- 
lippi, Florula Atacamensis n:o 357, 1860. — A specimen of 
this, kindly sent me by Prof. Ph. proves the plant to be a 
Ruppia, which I hope he will name R. atacamensis. — Though 
we have not seen this Potamogeton filifolius* we, indeed, 
suspect it to be our R. obtusa, since the station (Atacama) 
is placed within the distribution-area of the same. Any de- 
scription by Prof. Philippi has not been made, as far we 
know. 
Type specimen of this Ruppia in lib. Upps., var. repens 
I also in lib. Lund. 
Cited literature. 
1. C. Raunkiær, De danske Blomsterplanters Naturhis- 
torie, I, 1, 1896. 
2. L. Schlegel, Ruppia, in Hartmans Handbok i Skand. 
flora, Xlled., utg. af Th. O. B. N. Krok, 1889. 
3. L. Schlegel, Ruppia, in L. M. Neuman, Sveriges flo- 
ra, 1901. 
4. A. Blytt, Haandbog i Norges flora 1, 1902. 
« 
