■ pv •( i I
i
' I
rii
k i l
In the Transactions of the Wernerian Society, I have
shown that there are only two species of Grimmia with which
the subject of the present description can be confounded, namely,
G. campestris of B u r c h e l l and H o o k e r , and Campy-
lopus (Grimmia) Icevigatus of B r i d e l . From the former of
these, G. leucophcea is distinguished, by its more simple stem,
its narrower leaves and much shorter acumination ; hy the
shorter fruitstalk, and hy the teeth of the peristome being perforated
and not cleft.
With Campylopus Icevigatus, it has more points in common
; but the description of that moss does not warrant my referring
to it the species in question. The two characters,
“ pedunculis subarcuatisj and “ folia erecta” ascribed by
B r i d e l to his plant, are directly opposed to mine. Should
they, however, indeed be the same, it cannot be wondered that,
with so imperfect a description before me, I prefer rather to establish
a species, accompanied with a figure, than to run the
chance of adding to confusion.
Grimmia leucophcea, in spreading over the rocks, not un-
frequently extends itself in a circular manner, and, like Orthotrichum
Drummondii, and many Lichens, dies and disappears
in the centre, while the circumference is enlarging, and in full
vigour. When growing, I am not acquainted with any moss
which possesses so peculiar and striking an appearance.
Specimens from the Vosges have recently been communicated
to me by Dr M o u g e o t .
Ill I
Figs. 1, 2 . G. leucophiea, natural size. Fig. S. A single plant. Fig. 4 . A
leaf. Fig. 5. Capsule with calyptra. Fig. 6. Capsule with operculum.
Fig. 7. Opcmdum o f a different form. Fig. 8. Teeth from the peristome-
Fig. g. Sporules; magnified.