Gibsmithia hawaiiensis — Doty 
465 
branches are deciduous at maturity, as is the 
disklike peltate blade of Constantinea simplex. 
However, the many quite different features of 
Constantinea, especially as revealed by Masaki 
(1952), indicate that Constantinea could be, 
at best, but remotely related to Gibsmithia. 
Some of the anatomical features, the seiro- 
spores, and tetrasporangia are reminiscent of 
the Ceramiaceae. Yet I believe Gibsmithia 
should be placed among the primitive Crypto- 
nemiales for several reasons, most notable of 
which is the occurrence of the carpogonia and 
the auxiliary cells in separate but similar spe- 
cial branch systems. In their general morphology 
and in having a small differentiated cell among 
the enlarged hypogynous cells, the carpogonial 
branches of Gibsmithia (if, indeed, we have 
seen normal carpogonial branches) recall both 
the carpogonial and auxiliary-cell branches of 
Dudresnaya crassa , as I have seen them in ma- 
terial collected by Dr. A. J. Bernatowicz in 
Bermuda (his number 51-580), and as they 
are illustrated by Taylor (1950: figs. 5-7, 38) 
in his splendid account of the reproduction of 
that species. 
The terminal row of sterile cells distinguishes 
an auxiliary-cell filament from a carpogonial 
branch with its terminal trichogyne. While the 
terminal row of sterile cells is distinct from 
the terminal part of a normal vegetative branch, 
it is less specialized than the "hair” to be seen 
in Dudresnaya crassa and which Taylor ( 1950: 
figs. 36, 37 ) refers to as a "piliform extension.” 
In other features Gibsmithia also recalls such 
a genus as Dudresnaya rather than any of the 
polycarpogonial forms discussed by Norris 
(1957), which are far more complex. It is like 
Thuretellopsis (Kylin, 1925: 14) in that the 
carpogonial and auxiliary-cell branches are 
alike; but in Gibsmithia they are less compact 
and less specialized. In having a terminal row 
of sterile cells and in having a larger number 
of cells, the auxiliary-cell filaments of Gib- 
smithia would seem to be more primitive than 
those of Thuretellopsis. 
A point of some systematic interest is the 
development of low, wartlike sori containing 
the cystocarps. The tetrasporangia are borne 
quite differently, being exposed as in the Cera- 
miaceae. These two features seem to set this 
genus apart from most of the other genera now 
placed in the Dumontiaceae. The possession of 
cruciately divided tetrasporangia further distin- 
guishes Gibsmithia from the type genus of the 
Dumontiaceae and likens it to families such as 
the Squamariaceae of the Cryptonemiales which 
have cruciate tetrasporangia and the reproduc- 
tive structures in nemathecia. Until the simpler 
cryptonemiaceous families are better known, it 
seems best to place Gibsmithia tentatively 
among the Dumontiaceae. 
REFERENCES 
Feldmann-Mazoyer, G. 1940. Recherches sur 
les Ceram iacees de la Mediterranee Occiden- 
tale. Imprimerie Minerva, Alger. 540 pp. 
Gmelin, S. M. 1768. Historia fucorum. Typo- 
graphy Academiae Scientiarum, Petropoli. 
12 + 239 + 6 pp. + illus. 
Hollenberg, G. J. 1959. Smith ora, an inter- 
esting new algal genus in the Erythropelti- 
daceae. Pacif. Natural. 1(8): 3-11. 
Kylin, H. 1925. The marine red algae in the 
vicinity of the biological station at Friday 
Harbor, Washington. Lunds Universitets 
Arsskrift, n. f. Avd. 2, Bd 21., Nr 9., 87 pp. 
1956. Die Gattungen der Rhodophy- 
ceen. Gleerup, Lund. Xv + 673 pp. 
Masaki, T. 1952. Studies on the reproductive 
organs of the red algae. I. Constantinea rosa- 
marina (Gmel.) Post, et Rupr. and C. subu- 
lifera Setchell. Bull. Jap. Soc. Sci. Fish. 18: 
30-38. 
Norris, R. E. 1957. Morphological studies on 
the Kallymeniaceae. Univ. Calif. Publ. Bot. 
28:251-333. 
Okamura, K. 1912. leones of Japanese algae. 
Privately published by the author, Tokyo. 
Vol. II, 191 pp. + illus. + index. 
R IDG WAY, R. 1913. Color standards and color 
nomenclature. Private publication by the au- 
thor, Washington, D. C. 43 pp. and 53 color 
pi. of 115 different colors. (Though the 
book is dated 1912, according to D. H. Hamly 
[Science 109:605], it appeared in early 
1913.) 
Taylor, W. R. 1950. Reproduction of Dudres- 
naya crassa Howe. Biol. Bull. 99:272-284. 
