TAB. CLXVIJ, l i l i
H Y M E N O P H Y L L U M M U L T I F I D UM .
FILIC ES .— G y e a t æ . B r . P o l y p o d i a c e æ . K a u l f . F i l i c e s v e ræ . B r .
G en . C h a e . H Y M E N O P H Y L L U M , Sm. S a r i m a rg in a le s . Capsulai sessiles, rc copta e iüti
com m u n i cyliiulra c eo in s e rtæ , in tr a Involucrum bivalve, te x tu r a fro n d is, valvis p lanis e x te riu s
I I y m e n o p h y i l o m m u ltifidu v i, froudc deltoideo-ovata acuta pinnata, pinnis bi-tripiniiatifidis, laciniis
auguste lincaribns dcntlculato-scrratia, involucro snbscssili obovato compresso apice bilabiato
integro, rachi submarginata.
Hymenophyllum multifidum. “ F o rst. P ro d r. n. 7 4 3 .” S tv a rtz, S ijn. FU. p . 149. ^ 3 /8 . W ilid .
S p . P I . V. 5. p . 5 2 4 . Schkuhr, Fil. t. 135 b. ? (absque friict.) Spren g. S y s t. V eget. v . 4.
p . 133.
Trichomanes macilentum. He rb . B a n k s , (fide D. Menzies).
H a j ì. Insiilis maris Pacifici. F orster. In N o v a Zeelandia. Menzies.
Caudex longe repens, filiformis, ramosus, hic illic tomentosus atque radiculosus.
Stipes digitalis, erectus, teres, nudus, nigro-fuscus.
F vn s circumscriptione ovato-deltoidea, subrigida, siccitate rufi^fusca, pinnata, pinnis plerisque elongatis, bi-tri-
pinnatifidis, segmentis primariis subflabellatis, laciniis angusto-lmearibus, glabris, reticulatis, denticulato-
serratis, apicibus obtusis, subintegerrimis. Rachis superne marginata, denticulata, inferno teres, nud.n,
nigro-fusca.
Sori pauci, plerumque solitarii in singula pinna, versus basin laciniæ inferioris, subsessiles.
Invohici-um obovatum, inferne cylindracco-attenuatum, superne compressum in labiis duobus brevibus semiorbicularibus,
integerrimis fi.ssum.
Receptaculum inclusum.
Capsìdx peltatæ, annulo lato, integro cinctæ.
E g . 1. Portio pinnæ cum soro. f. 2. Apex Incinte, f. 3. Receptaculi pars inferior, cum capsula ava.
Onr specimens were gatbercd by M r .M en z ie s in Now Zealand; and th ey seem In every essential
particular to correspond with Forster’s I I . m ullifidum, as described by Swartz, who observes, that it
comes near to H .fu c o id e s , but differs in the form o f the frond, in the much narrower laciniæ, and
in the entire valves o f the involncrc ; and that it is distingnishcd from / / . bivalve Forster, by the
different situation o f the fructification, &c.
Schknhr has figured the barren fronds o f two Hynuinophylla under the name o f H . bivalve and
I I . muUifidum: but wc must observe, that the structure o f the former approaches nearer to our
plant than the latter.
To judge from the involucre, this species seems to be intermediate between tlie gene ra Hymeno-
p h jlh tm and T r i c h o m a n e s and wc fear there arc many in the same predicament.