Page:Journal of botany, British and foreign, Volume 34 (1896).djvu/364

 336 NOTES ON KECENTLY PUBLISHED DESMIDIE^. By W. West, F.L.S., and G. S. West, A.R.C.S. Sph/Erozosma Goebelii Racib. {Flora, 1895, 1, p. 32, t. iii.u.iv. fig. 5). This is certainly only Sioharozosma rectangular e WoUe. Wolle's figures and description {Desm. U. S. 31, pi. xlix. fig. 9) are very bad, but specimens obtained in material received from him prove the two to be identical. Raciborski's figure is also not very good. An accurate description and figures are given in our paper on N. American DesmidiecB, which has been in the press for some time. MicRASTERiAs PAPiLLiFERA Breb. A Variety has been described by Schmidle {Oesterr. Hot. Zeitsch. 1896, 23) as var. verrucosa^ n. var. (cum fig. zylogr.). We have met with many of these verru- cose forms of Micrasterias papillifera from many localities, and the curious character of the membrane is due to the age of the cells, as in the case of M. Jenneri Ralfs. Very often one semicell is typical and the other verrucose. EuASTRUM suBcuNEATUM Schmidlc. This is described and figured in the same paper (p. 21) ; it is not an Euastrum, and certainly does not resemble E. cuneatum Jenner; it is probably a form of Cosmarium plicatum Reinsch, with two tubercles within the apex of each semicell. E. BoLDTii Schmidle (/. c. p. 21). This is only a frequent form of E. denticulatum (Kirchn.) Gay, as first mentioned by Boldt [Desm. Gronl. p. 8, t. 1, fig. 9). Cosmarium Quasillus Lund. var. alpinum Schmidle [Oesterr. Bot. Zeitschr. 1895, 459, t. xvi. fig. 1). This seems to us much nearer a form of G. tetraophthalmum Breb. var. Limdellii Wittr. than to any form of C. Quasillus Lund., which latter it does not appear to resemble. C. OsTERi Schmidle (I. c. p. 458, t. xv. fig. 32). This is certainly a form of C. vogesiacum Lemaire [Desm. Vosges, 1883, p. 20, pi. 1, fig. 2), with rather more granules and a broader isthmus, and we therefore refer it to C. vogesiacum Lemaire as var. Osteri (Schmidle) nob. If the vertical view and the front view of the figures given by Lemaire (I. c.) be compared, it is evident that if the figure of the former is correct, that of the latter should have the papillae at the apex much less pronounced. C. ornatissimum Schmidle {Hedwigia, 1894, p. 90, t. vi. fig. 12). This seems to be but a form of C. nasutum Nordst. (Desm. SjJetsberg. 1872, p. 33, t. vii. fig. 17). C. PsEUDOREGNESii W. & G. S. Wcst in Trans. Linn. Sac, 1895, 2nd Ser. v. p. 59, pi. vi. figs. 42, 43. C. Novce-SemlicB Wille var. 2)olonicum Eichler & Gutw. De Nonn. Spec. Algar. Nov., Krakow, 1894, p. 170, t. V. fig. 27. C. Eegnesii Reinsch var. montanum Schmidle (Hedivigia, 1895, p. 74, t. i. fig. 9 ; Oesterr. Bot. Zeitschr. 1895, 389. The variety montanum of C. Regnesii described by Schmidle is stated by him {in litt.) to be precisely the same as