74 
SOCIETY ISLANDS. 
[PolypodiaceoB. 
1. Antrophyum plantagineum. Kaulf. /3. Lessoni. — A. Lessoni. Bory in Duperrey Voy. 
p. 255. t. 2S.f. 2. — A. plantagineum. Blmne FI. Jav. t. 30. 
Our plant is exactly the A. plantagineum figiu-ed by Blume, and equally the A. Lessoni of Duperrey’s 
Voyag’e. Nor does the A. Durvillei appear to us to be really distinct from it, according to Bory’s description. 
1. Notochlffina pilosa ; frondibus ovato-lanceolatis bi-tripinnatis, pinnulis oblongis remo- 
tiusculis subtus margineque recurvo prsecipue cum rachibus stipiteque nitidissimo glanduloso- 
pilosis. 
This is allied to the N. distans of hfr. Brown, but has a broader frond, more lax pinnules, which are quite 
destitute of the paleaceous setse so copious in the former, and sparingly clothed instead- udth somewhat glan- 
dular hairs. 
1. Niphobolus w^fl!cromrjOMs; frondibus lineari-lanceolatis obtusis inferne in stipitem longi- 
usculum attenuatis subtus incanis, soris serialibus ellipticis magnis prominentibus. (Tab. 
XVIII.) 
Caudex longus, repens, magnitudine pennse corvinae, adpressim squamosus, hie iUic fibrosus; squamis lan- 
ceolato-subulatis fuscis, margine fimbriatis. Stipites bi-tripoUicares, glabri, versus basin articulati, infra arti- 
culum dense imbricatim squamosi. Frondes pahnares, lineari-lanceolatae, obtusae, coriaceae, supra areolis (soris 
oppositis) oblongis depressis, ubique squamulis minutis stellatim pilosis obsitae, demum superne nudae, inferne 
semper incanae, margine leviter reemwae. Costa subtus prominens. Sori magni, eUiptici, fusci, valde prominentes, 
in unam seriem infra costam et marginem dispositi, totam dimidiam et superiorem pai’tem frondis occupantes. 
Tab. XVIII. Niphobolus macrocarpus. Fig. 1, Capsules; fig. 2, Scales from the frond: — magnified. 
1. Polypodium phymatodes. Linn. 
2. Polypodium alternifoliwn. Willd. Sp. PI. v. 5. p. 168? Bory in Duperrey Voy. v. 1. 
p. 261. 
3. Polypodium latifolium. “ Forst. Prodr. n. 457.” Schkuhr, Fil. t. 24. 
1. Nephrodium exaltatuni. Br. — Aspidium exaltatum. Willd. 
2. Nephrodium propinquum. Br. Prodr. FI. Nov. Holl. p. 148. Bory in Duperrey Voy. 
V . 1. p. 269. — Aspidium unitum. Sw.? Schkuhr, Fil. t. 33. b. 
3. Nephrodium nymphale. — Polypodium nymphale. “ Forst. Prodr. n. 442.” Schkuhr, 
Fil. t. 34. — Aspidium patens. Sw. — A. molle. Sw. .? 
1. Asplenium Nidus. Linn. 
2. Asplenium ohtusatuni. “ Forst. Prodr. n. 430.” — Labill. Nov. Holl. v. 2. p. 93, t. 242. 
f. 2. var. minor, (et A. obliquum. Labill. Nov. Holl. v. 2. p. 93. t. 242. f. 1.) fide Br. in 
Prodr. FI. Nov. Holl. p. 150. 
3. Asplenium tenerum. “ Forst. Prodr. n. 431.” Sw. Syn. Fil. p. 78. et 266. Schkuhr, 
Fil. t. 69. 
1. Diplazium arborescens. Swartz, Syn. Fil. p. 92. Willd. Sp. PI. p. 354. Bory in Du- 
perrey Voy. V . \. p.21\. 
We have seen no authentic specimen of D. arbor eum: but oiu- plant accords sufficiently with the 
description. We have received what Ave consider the same species from St. Vincent in the West Indies and 
have doubted if it might not be a more than usually branched state of Asplenium ambiguum. 
1. Doodia Kunthiana. Gaud, in Freyc. Voy. Bot. p. 401. t. 14. 
Although this entirely agrees with the plant above quoted, we are yet unable to decide if it be really 
distinct from the Doodia caudata of Mr. Brown. The terminal pinnae can indeed scarcely be said to be 
