I 02 
Dichoiontiiun pellucidum var. strictum Braith. M.E.C. Report, 1900 
p. 48, “ Dr. Braithwaite has seen the plant and says it is not the 
var.”--H N. D. “ I sent it out in good faith, having as I thought 
the assurance from Mr. Binstead it was the var. and that Dr. B. 
had seen spns. The var. does grow among grass on Craig Cille a 
few miles from the Abergavenny locality. I fear I was mistaken.”— 
E. Armitage. 
Dicranella heteromella var. stricta Schp. M.E.C. Report, 1900, p. 48, 
“This is not the name I sent to the Club but var. sericea Schimp.” 
—W. Ingham. 
Weisia calcarea C. M.. M.E.C. Report 1899, 33. Mr. Nicholson 
has again examined this plant and is satisfied it is calcarea. He 
thought at first it was tenuis from confusing this rather slender form 
of calcarea with a robust form of W. tenuis from Sussex. “In 
papillosity, length of branch areolation I find considerable variation 
in both species, the cells, however, in calcarea are always more 
opaque. Schimper says of it ‘ species valde variabiles difficillime 
extricanda’.”—W. E. Nicholson. “ I also gathered this species at 
Knaresborough and recorded it in The Naturalist, June, 1897. It 
forms dense velvety tufts in the crevices of the Magnesian 
limestone. I also found it at Boston Spa The plants shew the 
interrupted tufts referred to in the Derbyshire spns. Owing to its 
small size and obtuse leaves perhaps Mr. Ingham’s plant is var. 
intermedia Schimp. The height of my plants is 5m. Schimper 
gives its range as from 4m. to 7, while for W. te?iuis he gives im. 
This plant fcalcareaJ seems to prefer rock crevices whereas tenuis 
always forms spreading patches on the surface.”—LI. J. Cocks. 
Bryum Warneum Bland. Southport, M.E.C. 1900, 54. “ In my 
spn. there was some B. calophyllum mixed.”—W. P. Hamilton. 
Amhlystegium serpens v ar. depauperatum Boul. Between St. Ann’s 
and South Shore v.c. 60, 5.99. J. A. Wheldon. Clay banks, 
Lybster Burn, Caithness, 6.6 99. D. Lillie, (Vide also Report, 
1900, 56.) “ Boulay assigns this var.— depauperatum —to the ‘ series 
of forms with short cells’ which does not seem applicable to the 
St. Ann’s plant, as it has the leaf cells distinctly longer than usual. 
The fruiting characters fairly correspond. The Caithness plant 
seems distinct. It is much mixed with the var. trichodes of 
A. JilicinumB —W. E. Nicholson “The St. Ann’s plant struck 
me at first sight as differing considerably from that from Caithness. 
I gather from Braithwaite’s description and list of localities that 
he considers the two forms both belong to Boulay’s var., i.e., 
assuming that the plant from Reiss Links, Wick, is the same, which 
is only conjecture. I should not be surprised to find that the two 
forms intergrade. The suspicion (suggested by Mr. Nicholson) as 
to the Caithness form being possibly A. filicinu?n var. trichodes 
is not, I think to be disregarded ; I believe however, that in the 
finest forms of the var. trichodes, (i.e. the most delicate) the nerve 
has a tendency to be predominant as compared with A. serpensT 
—IT. N. Dixon. “This slender maritime form of serpens is 
