468 
do I consider him justified in dividing lus Fucus evanescens into 
the main groups arcticus , norvegicus, edentatns and dendroides. 
According to my opinion the alga distributed by Kj ell man 
in Areschoug’s Exsicc. No. 401, 
Fig. 91. Fucus inflatus L. f. edentata de la Pyl. 
From Nolso. 3 / 5 : 1. (H. Westergaard del.) 
corresponds exactly to the plant 
named by Collins Fucus eden- 
tatus de la Pyl. and distributed 
by him in Hauck et Richter, 
Phykotlieka universalis No. 119. 
It likewise bears a fair resem¬ 
blance to specimens of Fucus 
edentatus from Miquelon preserved 
in our museum in Copenhagen. 
The specimens of my Faeroese ma¬ 
terial which I have referred to for¬ 
ma edentata agree well with these 
specimens in Phykotlieka and 
Areschoug’s Exsicc., as also with 
others referred by Kj ell man, 
Rosenvinge, Foslie and Col¬ 
lins to Fucus inflatus var. eden¬ 
tate (, so that I do not doubt 
their identity with this form. 
Lastly, I may mention that when 
Professor W. G. Farlow was on 
a visit to Copenhagen I showed 
him the specimens which I had 
referred to this form and he pro¬ 
nounced them to be good Fucus 
edentatus. 
Fucus inflatus f. disticha has 
hitherto been regarded as a 
distinct species. 1 This is, however, 
an error, as from observations 
which I have several times had 
an opportunity of making in the Faeroes, I have arrived at the con¬ 
clusion that it is only a plant whose small size is due to its habitat. 
As shown in fig. 92, very gradual, almost imperceptibly transitional 
1 I may mention here that in »Handbok«, p. 15, Kjellman writes: »This spe¬ 
cies is slightly differentiated from the more slender forms of Fucus inflatus p nord- 
landicus«. (»Arten ar svagt begransad mot finare former of Fucus inflatus {3 nord- 
landicus«). 
