465 
Sundene it grows in shallow water, but does not occur so abun¬ 
dantly as in the former place, doubtless because it prefers being 
left dry at ebb-tide. 
I found it bearing ripe receptacles as early as the end of 
April, and it keeps on fructifying throughout the summer, evidently 
ceasing towards the end, as specimens gathered late in July bad 
only a few receptacles left on them. Lastly, specimens from the 
beginning of December bore young receptacles, so the latter doubt¬ 
less develop during the winter. This agrees well with what Kjell- 
man (1. c. p.244 [195]) says is the case in Arctic Norway. 
This is an extremely common species of the Fcieroese coasts as 
already pointed out by Lyngbye: — »Ad littora Fee rose copiose«. 
FUCUS L. 
152. F. inflatus L., M. Vahl, Flora Danica, tab. 1127; Foslie, 
Krit. fort., (Tromso Mus. Aarsliefter, IX, 1886, p. 109); Rosenv., Gronl. 
Havalg., p. 834; Fucus vesiculosus y inflatus Lyngb., Hydrophyt., 
p. 3. (Specimens are lacking in his herbarium in Copenhagen). 
Fucus furcatus Kleen, Nordl. Alg., p. 29. 
f. edentata (De la Pyl.) Rosenv. 1 1. c. Fucus edentatus de la Pyl., 
Flore de Terre Neuve, p. 84, Paris 1829; Fucus furcatus and Fucus 
edentatus J. Ag., Spetsbergens Alger, Tillag p. 40 2 ; Fucus edentatus 
de la Pyl., f. typica Kjellm., N. I., p. 256 (204). 
f. disticha (L.), Fucus distichus L. partim 3 ; Lyngb., Hydrophyt., 
1 C. Agardh’s Fucus furcatus (Spec. Alg., p. 97, 1821, leones alg. ineditte, 
tab. XIV) is certainly older than DelaPylaie’s Fucus edentatus , and, consequently, 
on the ground of priority the former name ought to be preferred, but as the spe¬ 
cimen of this species which C. Agardh described was — judging especially from 
his figure — a small, poorly developed one (apparently a transitional form to 
f. disticha ) I think it most proper not to use his name. 
2 Cfr. Ruprecht, F. J, Tange des ochotskischen Meeres (Middendorff, Reise 
in Sibir., 1. Rand, p.346). Ruprecht’s objection, quite unjustifiable as it appears 
to me, to J. Agardh’s definition of Fucus furcatus in Spec. Alg. was the reason 
why Agardh in »Spetsbergens Alger« described the two species Fucus edentatus 
and Fucus furcatus as distinct, which again has created much uncertainty with 
regard to Fucus in flatus. 
3 Linne’s short description (Syst. Nat. Edit. 12, Vol. 2, p. 716) of Fucus distichus 
suits all dwarf forms of Fucus inflatus , consequently, both f. linearis and f. disticha r 
but I apply the latter name to the small, more robust forms which grow on exposed 
coasts in contradistinction to the slenderer f. linearis which grows in rock-pools. 
Judging from Kj ell man’s description of his f. nana (Spetsbergens mar. klorof. 
Thallophyter, II. p. 4) the latter appears to be some poorly developed specimens, 
belonging to f. disticha (cfr. his note 1. c. p. 7). 
