299 T. Nakai, Filices Adansonianae. | 
X. Osmunda (p.20) is the miscellany of 44 different plants; they are 
Ficus scandens? (young creeper) — determined by Mr. DANGUY 
of Paris’ Museum. 
Aerostichum aureum. 
Asplenium septentrionale. 
Blechnum spicant. 
Cryptogramma crispa. 
Diplaxium parallelogramme. 
Pellaea sp. ? 
Polypodium sp. ? 
Osmunda regalıs. 
Botrychium Lunaria. 
| 
| 
XI. Angiopterts (p. 20) is represented by a single species Onoclea 
senstibilis. 
XII. Opluoglossum (p. 20) is represented by a single species Ophio- 
glossum vulgatum. 
XII. Palma-Filix (p. 24). 
This genus does not present in the collections, but his descriptions 
accord with Bathmium. If Palma-filix is Bathmium, it is Pleo-filix of his 
specimens. The species is Bathmium martinicense (B. macrophyllum Link). 
XIV. Piularia (p. 21) is represented by Pilularia globulifera. 
XV. Lemma {p. 21) comprises 2 species Marsilea minuta and Marsilea 
quadrifolia. | 
Besides these, there is one more unpublished genus Pleopteris. This is 
the miscellany of Schixaea, Acrostichum, Matteuccia, Vittaria, Cyclophorus 
etc. I will leave it out, for it has no relation to the systematic botany. 
ADANSON’s specimens are historically interesting, yet his genera of Fi- 
ices are «mélanges des genres», and hardly applicable to the modern 
systematic botany. Scolopendrium has lesser value than Phyllitis of Hill, 
and Dryopteris is ratified when backed by CarisTENsEn’s “Index Filicum’, 
In Filices, too many genera and species were hitherto confounded, 
and very few of generic names are precise in the present meanings. This 
is, however, an unavoidable result brought fourth from the former studies 
when no good microscope existed. Young generations might be shocked 
if they would read the descriptions of male flowers of Salvinia by great 
Linnaeus. But human efforts as such made the foundations of modern 
sciences. We must pay respects to the investigations of ancient botanists, 
yet excessive trusts on them make the science out of realities. The dis- 
cussion without studying the type-specimens is often worse than nothing. 
