62 
REPORT ON THE MOSSES 
0. Rliizogonium Brid. 
12. Riiizogoiiiuiii spinifornie (Linn.) Bruch. 
Spur above. upper Rengging camp, on fallen rotten branch, alt. 
4,200 ft., c. fr. fn. 36285). Tree trunk, Lalik Valley, alt. 2,700 ft,, 
c. fr. (n. 37335a.) 
10. Milium Dill. 
13. Milium rostratusu Schrad. 
• Evidently a common moss here as throughout the Himalaya range 
(nos. 36115, 36174, 36541). 
14. Mnium sueculentum Mitt. Muse. Ind. or. p. 143. 
Janakmukh; with Hepatic on rocks, st. (n. 37177). (Plates I, II, 
fig. 5.) 
Fleischer (Musci von Buitenzorg, II, 581) describes M. sncculen- 
tum> referring to it M. integrum Bry. jav.j and has issued Javanese 
specimens as M. sueculentum and M. sueculentum . n. var. densum Fleiseh. 
in the M. Frond. Arch. Ind., nos. 367 and 467. He has however unfor- 
tunately been misled, no doubt by an examination of the specimens purport- 
ing to be Mitten's types. The type specimen should be No. 680, Hb. Ind. 
or. of Hooker, Nepal orient, reg. temp. Unhappily both at Kew and 
at the British Museum the specimen under this number contains only 
M. rost Tatum , with which no doubt the true plant was ass 9 ciated. 
Mitten however describes his plant as “ M. rostrato habitu'omnino 
simile, sed foliis paululum majoribus, cellulis sexies majoribus succu- 
lentis," and Assam specimens, leg, Griffith, at Kew, determined by 
Mitten, agree precisely in these respects with his description, having 
a quite different texture, a narrow, not cartilaginous border to the leaves, 
and the cells between two and three times the diameter of those of 
M. rosiratum (Mitten's “sexies " would apply quite well to the super- 
ficial measurement) . 
It will be seen from a comparison of Fleischer's description that it 
applies to a moss in no way markedly distinct from M. rost rat urn 
except in the dioicous inflorescence (the cell measurements would apply 
very well to that, but by no means to the true M. sueculentum), I have 
not seen No. 367 M. Fr. Arch. Ind. ; but No. 467 — which has the leaves 
by no means entire — I should refer unhesitatingly to M, rostratum , 
judging from the vegetative characters ; I have not been able to examine 
the inflorescence. 
The margin in M. sueculentum varies greatly even as between the leaves 
of a single stem. Mitten describes the cells as “ marginalibus con- 
