1 99 
“If any members find autoicous inflorescence, will they please 
notice if the leaf characters are those of cordifolium or giganteum .”— 
J. A. Wheldon. 
Amblystegium Kochii (?), near Perth, R.H.M. “The rather 
obscure chlorophyllose cells are in favour of A. riparium, but the 
short cells are very different from most forms of that species.”— 
H. N. Dixon. 
“ My specimen is a mixture of two different things, which are 
scarcely to be distinguished by a lens only. One has the areolation, 
shape, size, &c., of leaf of A. varium ,—nerve sometimes rather 
short, perhaps, but in spite of that and the habit must belong, I 
think, to that species. The other I am inclined to call a slender 
form of H. riparium , but not A. trichopodium as defined by 
Limpricht—still less A. Kochii —T. Barker. 
This plant was sent for criticism. See p. 143 in 1903 Annual 
Report. 
Cynodontium virens forma , page 114 in 1902 Report. “I think 
these will be found to be Weisia curvirostris var. insignis, Dixon.”— 
R. H. Meldrum. 
Lejeunea /lava (Sw.), p. 146 in 1903 Report. “ In my opinion 
the plant is a form of serpvllifolia. The Irish distribution of 
‘ flava' was given quite wrongly a few years ago. Lett has it 
correct in his book.”—S. M. Macvicar. 
The last remark is queried in the Note Book. 
Weisia sterilis Nicholson. “ The W. mullicapsularis on p. 32 
in 1899 Report is this plant.”—W. Ingham. 
Anthoceros dichotomus Raddi. “This new Scale Moss, described 
in ‘ Journal of Botany,’ Oct.. 1903, from Devonshire, must be 
added to our List.”—C. H. Waddell. 
Grimmia conferta v. pruinosa, p. 135 in 1903 Report. “I think 
it is clear from the highly papillose leaves of this plant, it cannot 
belong to ‘ conferta' as described by Limpricht, nor have I 
been able to distinguish the orange-red colour of the peristome to 
which Mr. Meldrum alludes. I have found the peristome teeth 
distinctly orange in typical conferta , which, conjoined with the 
smooth areolation of the leaves, make the plant fairly easy to 
recognise. In any event, if Mr. Waddell’s plant be the var. 
pruinosa , I should certainly agree with Mr. Wheldon in following 
Husnot by placing it as a variety under G. apocarpa rather than 
under G. confertaf —W. E. Nicholson. 
“ I am doubtful whether the presence or absence of papillae 
on the leaf cells is a character of much practical value, since in 
the var. pumila (and kindred alpine forms) of G. apocarpa (the 
only ones as a rule likely 10 be a cause of difficulty) the cells 
are often at least quite smooth. I have such a plant from the 
summit of Ben Lawers, with peristome teeth scarcely at all 
