ili il ;
i; 't '
It was witli much pleasure that I received, in the summer of
1846, from my friend Mr. Rohloff, a specimen of this interesting
and beautiful species, which he was so fortunate as to discover
in that year; and I have to thank him, as well as my friends
Mr. Hore and Dr. Cocks, for a liberal supply of specimens
gathered in several localities near Plymouth, in the summer and
autumn of 1847. It appears to be an abundant species in that
neighbourhood, where it grows in the greatest luxuriance. As
yet no other locality in Britain has been recorded, but it
will probably hereafter be found in similar situations on the
south coast of England, and south and west of Ireland. The
favourite locality of this plant seems to be mud-banks, or mud-
covered rocks. It requires some algological zeal to hunt over
such ground,—which, to many collectors, would appear little
likely to yield anything so beautiful; yet such ground is very
favourable to the growth of many of this genus, and of the
finest Callithamnia.
No species need be more distinct than this is. Its habit is
very like that of P. elongella, it is true, but the purple colour
aflbrds an obvious character; while the six tubes of the stem
furnish an important distinction from that, and all other British
species yet known.
P. variegata is widely dispersed through the warmer latitudes
of the Atlantic, and abounds on certain parts of the Mediterranean
and Adriatic shores. Indeed, where it establishes itself,
it generally occurs in quantity. At Venice it is the commonest
of the genus; but Venetian specimens are greatly inferior in size
and beauty to some of their Plymouth brethren. Those which
I have received from Dr. Bailey of New York are nearest to tlie
luxuriance of the latter.
My friend Dr. Montagne contends that the specific name
peucedanoides, under which this plant was described by Bonnemaison,
in tbe same year that Agardh published it under the
name here adopted, should be preferred. It has only this inconvenience,
the changing a name now universally known, for one
which is little known, and of which the priority, its only recommendation,
is disputable. We have no proof that Agardh was
acquainted with Bonnemaison’s synonyme at the time he published
the ‘ Sy sterna.’
Fig. 1. P o ly s ip h o n i a v a m e g .i t a -.— of. the natural size. 2. Apex of a branch
with lateral ramuli. 3. A ramulus. 4. Portion of a branch. 5. Portion
of the stem. 7, 8. Sections of branch. 9. Section of old stem ■.— all more
or less highly Tìingnified.