United States National Museum United States. Division of Botany.

Contributions from the United States National Herbarium, Volume 10 online

. (page 45 of 65)
Online LibraryUnited States National Museum United States. Division of BotanyContributions from the United States National Herbarium, Volume 10 → online text (page 45 of 65)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


as C. detipiens Cleve and C. arctica Cleve.
Most of the above are found in the following dredgiugs; that corresponding to



a Quart. Journ. Micr. Sci. 8; 13. pi. l.f 12. 1860.
6 Miss. Sci. Cap. Horn 116. pL 10. f 5. 1889.
c Bih. Sv. Vet. Akad. Handl. 27^: 182. 1895.
rfSyll. Alg. 2: 450. 1891.



Digitized by



Google



330 CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE NATIONAL HERBARIUM.

C.arctica at station 3607, itself an arctic dredging, is another illustration of the value of
the diatoms for fixing the source of the material comiX)sing sea bottoms.

Found at Ftations 3607, 4516H, Bering Sea and off Ix)wer California.
Cocconeis dirupta Greg. Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb. 21: 491. -pi. l.f. 25. 1857. Jan.
Abh. Schles. Ges. Vaterls. Cult. 1862-: 3. pi. 2B.f. 14. 1862. Grun. in Feuzl,
Reise Novara Bol. 1: 14. 1870. Cleve in Nordensk. Vega Exped. 3: 460. 1SS3.
H. L. Smith, Sp. Diat. Typ. no. 633. 1874. Van Heur. Synop. pi i9.f. U-Io.
1881. Schmidt, Atlas pi. 196. f. 7, 17, 18. 1894. DeToni, Syll. Alg. 2: 453. 1801.

Cocconeis diaphana W. Smith, Synop. Brit. Diat. 1: 22. pi. 30. f. 264B. 1853.

Cocconds beltm^eri Jan.; Schmidt, Atlas pi. 196. f. 22-2S. 1894.

Cocconeis dclicata Schmidt, Atlas pi. 196. f. 24. 1894.

Cleve a unites under the above name, in addition to those here given, all cases of his
own C.decipiens & which are similar to the above in the broadly oval character of the
valves, in the fineness and curvature of the beading, in the presence of a trans\-en?e
stauras at the middle of the lower valve, and in a general tendency toward a sigmoid
outline in the median line of one or both valves. There is much in favor of this, for
C. dirupta does show these characters, even the sigmoid curvature in some inptanc-es.
But such unification is here attended with confusion. The forms thus grouped are
too diverse, e. g., C. hcltmeyeri Jan., a very evident variety of C. dirupta and C, sparm-
punctata Temp. & Brun., a very evident variety of C. decipiens. To call these two one
species is carrying condensation too far for practical use. I have accordingly united
only the three above names with C. dirupta and have grouped all the other forms under
C. decipiens. This arrangement, though no less artificial than that of Cleve, is no more
so, and it affords an easy means of grouping these confusing forms. The salient char-
acteristic of C. dirupta is, as its name indicates, a hyaline median area on one or both
valves, broad at the center and tapering to a point at each end, slightly or not at all
sigmoid. This line in C. decipiens is slightly or extremely sigmoid, the ends of the
raphe curved like an *' S"' in opposite directions, the median area generally narrow or
sometimes wanting, and the transverse stauros plain. It may be added that the
members of the C. dirupta group are generally much smaller than those belonging to
C. decipiens.

Found at stations 2690H, 4516H, off central and Lower California.
Cocconeis distans Greg. Quart. Journ. Micr. Sci. 3: 39. pi. 4. / 9. 1855; 5: 67. pi. 1.
/. 25. 1857. Moeb. Diat.-taf. pi. 5.f. 9, pi. 12. f. 25. 1890. Schmidt, Atlas pi. 19S.
f. 29-37, 40. 1894; Jahresb. Komm. Deut. Meere 2: pi. 3. f. 22-23. 1874. Pritch,
Hist. Infus. ed. 4. 870. pi. 7./. 38. H. L. Smith, Sp. Diat. Typ. no. 70. 1874.

Grunow c makes this a variety of C. scutellum Ehrenb., for which there is some war-
rant. As there is, however, quite a di fference between what I conceive to be Gregor>''s
type and that of Ehrenberg, I have retained the above name. The two figures of
Gregory's in the above citations are not at all alike. The first was e\ndently incor-
rectly drawn by Tuffen West, so far as the beading is concerned. It is represented in
very regular rows evenly graded from the large marginal beads to the smaller medium
ones. But Gregory says,** "This beautiful form is at once characterized by the equal
size of the dots or granules and their great distance from each other, so that it almost
loses the aspect of striation." The faulty representation of this is corrected, in fact
over-corrected, in Gregory's second figure. When the type idea of Gregory's spjeciesis
thus made out and is compared with Ehrenberg's original figure and description,* it
seems to mo the two are sufficiently widip apart to admit of the retention of both names.

Found at station 4505H, Santa Cruz light-house, Monterey Bay, Oal.

« Sv. Vet. Akad. Handl. 27': 175. 1895.

f> Bih. Sv. Vet. Akad. Handl. 1'^: 14. pJ. l.f. 6. 1873.

'•Fenzl, Reise Novara Bot. 1: 9. 1870.

^'Op. cit. 39.

« Ehrenb. Infus. 194. pi. 14. f. 8. 1838.

Digitized by LjOOQIC



MANN DIATOMS OF THE ALBATROSS VOYAGES. 331

Cocconels grevlllei \V. Smith, Synop. Brit. Diat. 1: 22. pi. .i./. .yj. 1853. Rabh. Fl.

Eur. Alg. 1: 102. 18G4. Jan. Abh. Sohl. Ges. Vatorl. Cult. 1862 ^i 18. pi J A.

f. 10. 1862. H. L. Smith, Sp. Diat. Typ. no. 72. 1874. Pritch. Hist. Infus. ed. 4.

870. 1861.
Campyhneis greiillei Grun. orr. del. in Fonzl, Reise Novara Bot. 1: 10, 98. 1870.

Joum. Roy. Micr. Soc. 1: 245. pi. 14. f. 5. 1878. Petit, Fonds de la Mer3:

171. pi. 4. /. S. 1877. Van Hear. Synop. 134. pi 28. f. 8-12. 1881. De Toni,

Syll. Alg. 2: 439. 1891. Grun. Verb. Zool. Bot. Ges. Wien 12: 430. 1862.
Campyhneis argus Grun. Verb. Zool. Bot. Ges. Wien 12: 429. pi 10. f. 9. 1862.

Fenzl, Reise Novara Bot. 1: 10. 1870. Van Heur. Synop. 134. pi 28. f. lo-lii.

1881. De Toni, SyU. Alg. 2: 441. 1891. Truan, Anal. Soc. Espan. Hint. Nat.

13: 363. pi 10. f. 22-23. 1884.
• DeToni« gives separate rank to C. grevillci W. Smith, C. regalis Grew and C. argns
Grun. under the generic head Campyloneir?. Cleve, in above citation, unites the three
under Campyloneis grenllei (W. Smith) Grun., thus following Grunow's analy.sis.6
I do not think C. grenllei and C. argus can be held separate. Differences exist, but
they are slight and variable, having chiefly to do with the thickenings on the internal
craticular plates. But the union of Greville's C. regalis with these is ten) radical.
A comparison of the published figures does not' show the strong contrast that is to be
seen in specimens of these two species. The craticular plates and the inferior valvt»s
are never closely alike; but the widest difference is to be seen in the superior plates,
which in C. grevillei have beading actually or approximately alike in the middle and
outer portions, while C. regalis has an oval central area marked with bars of fine punctii ,
while the outer area, separated from this central pK^rticm, is marked by very large beads.
Two specimens afforded by H. L. Smith, types no. 72 and no. 635, show this contrast
finely, the former of C. grevillei from Granville, France, and the latter of C. regalis from
Cape of Good Hope. I therefore take the jK)silion of Van Heurck, De Toni, and others
in classifying these species separately.

Found at stations 2807, 3698, Galapagos Islands and Honshu Island, Japan.
Oocconeis peUudda Grun. in Rabh. Beitr. 1: 21. pi 6. f. 11. 1862; in Fenzl,

Reise Novara Bot. 1: 12. 1870, not C. pellucida Grun. Verb. Zool. Bot. Ges. Wien

13: 145. pi 14. f. 6. 1863, which is (\ pseudomargtnata Greg. Schmidt, Atlas

pi 191. /. 48, pi 193. f. 0-8, pi 194. f. 2, 15, pi VJo.f. 1-6. 1894. Grun. in

Fenzl, Reise Xovara Bot. 1: 98. pi l.f. 7-8. 1870. De Toni, Syll. Alg. 2: 455.

1891. Cleve, Sv. Vet. Akad. Handl. 26-: 178. 1894. Pant. Beitr. Bacill. Tng. 3:

pi 32./. 465. 1893.
Cocconeis curvi-roUinda Temp. & Brun, Mem. Soc. Phys. et Hist. Nat. Geneva 30':

32. pi S.f. 6. 1889. Schmidt, Atlas pi 195. J. 10-19. 1894.
Coccoruns lunyacsekii, Pant. Beitr. Bacill. Ung. 3: pi 41- f. 564- 1893.
Coceonei^ notahilis Pant. Beitr. Bacill. Ung. 3: pi 35. f. 492. 1893.
Cocconeis drcumcincta Schmidt, Atlas pi 195. f. 7-9. 1894.

The doubt of Tempere and Brun of their C. cuni-rotumia being anything more than
a variety of this species, indicated by their bracketing the latter name with their own,
is. I think, well founded. Indeed, I have met with all ix)ssible varieties of the.se
extremely close forms, and I am convinced they should be united. So also regarding
C. cirrumeincla Schmidt. Its radially arranged markings and its generally straight
raphe are not sufficient to separate it from the alK)ve. It occurs at stations 3.346 and
3604. I exclude C. heteroidea Hantzsch<* and the variety of it rc»gard(Hl by Jani.seli
as a species C. flejiMa,^ though both Grunow and De Toni are impressed with their



«i De Toni, Syll. Alg. 2: 4,39-441. 1891.
«> Fenzl, Reise Novara Bot. 1: 10. 1870.
cRabh. Beitr. 1: 21. pi 6./. 10. 1862.
''Rabh. Beitr. 1: 7. pi 1. pi 11. 1862.



Digitized by



Google



332 CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE NATIONAL HERBARIUM.

close affinity. They belong, with C, cmmerid Jan. and C. aliena Schmidt, to a very
di fferent group. Grunow explains o that he gave the name pelliicida ^ to a specimen of
C. pseudoviarginata Greg. , being misled by a f>oor figure of Ralfs. c He refers to the form
cited by Hantzsch^* as the true type.

Found at stations 2844, 2848, 3346, 3604, 3604H, Aleutian Islands and Bering Sea.

Cocconeis senegalensls Breb.; H. L. Smith, Sp. Diat. Typ. no. 79. 1874. De
Toni, Syll. Alg. 2: 464. 1891. Hab. Cat. 84. 1877.

Though both De Toni and Habirshaw rea)gnize this as an authentic spocies, I sus-
pect it is a synonym of some other form. I have been, however, unable to find such,
and as my specimen agrees with Smith's type I am compelled to assign this name
provisionally.

Found at stations 2680H, 2694H, 4516H, off central and Lower California.

Cocconeis splendida Greg. Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb. 21: 493. pi. 9. f. ^9. 1S57.
Pritch. Hist. Infus. ed. 4. 870. 1861. Rabh. Fl. Eur. Alg. 1: 102. 1864.
Orthoneis splendida Grun. in Fenzl, Reise Novara Bot. 1: 15. 1870. Van Heur.
Synop. pi. 28./. 1-2. 1881. Cleve, Sv. Vet. Akad. Handl. 27^: 148. 1895. Pant.
Beitr. Bacill. Ung. 2: pi. 24-/ 352. 1889. Truan & Witt, Diat. Hayti 18. pi 4.
/. IS. 1888. Truan, Anal. Soc. Espan. Hist. Nat. 13: 363. pi. 10. f. 20. 1884.
Cocconeis punctatissima Grev. Quart. Journ. Micr. Sci. 6: 8. pi. S.f. 1. 1857. Moeh.

Diat.-taf. pi. 11. f. 1, 1*. 1890.
Orthoneis punctatissiina Lagerst. Bih.-Sv. Vet. Akad. Handl. 3'*: 57. 1876. De Toni,

Syll. Alg. 2: 466. 1891.
Melosira cribrosa Grun. Verb. Zool. Bot. Ges. Wien 12: 577. pi. S.f. lOa-d. 1860.
It is not perfectly clear that Greville's and Gregory's species are the same. That
of Greville would appear from the figures to be much more finely beaded, particularly
as ho says its beading is "very minute," especially toward the median line. The fact
is also against their identity that Greville made the drawings for Gregor>'*s paper.
including this very form, yet does not Wk upon his own publication as a renaming
of the same diatom. But they are united by Cleve, Grunow, De Toni, and otheRs,
while Ralfs holds them separate. If admitted to be the same, which seems on the
whole to be best, the question what name should be assigned presents somediflBcultie?=.
Both names were published in 1857. ^ There is no record in the Proceedings of the
London Microscopical Society as to when Greville's paper was presented, in theretxjrda
either of 1856 or of 1857. Gregory's paper was read January 19, 1857, and appeared
tliat year. The preference would, therefore, be in favor of Gregory; and as his name
is the better established of the two, I have for all these reasons adopted it.

Grunow's Melosira cribrosa must be included here. It appears to me more nearly
to r<»semble the Greville type than that of Gregory, though Grunow and Cleve take
an opposite view. It is also rather difficult to see the reasons for assigning only figuni?
10 a, b of Grunow's figures to this species and placing the other two, figures 10 c and d,
in different species, as Grunow does./



o Fenzl, Reise Novara Bot. 1: 12. 1870.

b Verb. Zool. Bot. Ges. Wien 13: 145. 1863.

<- Pritch. Hist. Infus. ed. 4. pi. 7.f. 39. 1861.

d Hantzsch in Rabh. Beitr. 1: 21. pi. 6./. 11. 1862.

<■ Greville's paper was published on pages 7-12 of the Quart. Journ. Micr. Sci. for
1857, which probably appeared before July, if not as early as April or May, 1857. While
Gregory's paper was read on January 19, 1857, it was not published until an appendix
dated Mi\y 28, 1857, and a corrigenda dated August 1, 1857. It constituted pages
473-542 of Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb. 21: 1857, which came at the end of the volume
which un(|ue.Mtionably was not published until after Aujeiist 1, 1857.

/Fenzl, Reise Novara B(»t. 1: 16. 1870 .



Digitized by



Google



MANN — DIATOMS OF THE ALBATROSS VOYAGES. 333

Small specimens of the present species approach closely to n)biist specimens of
('. adriadca Kiitz., a variety of C. sciitellnm Ehrenb., the best mark of distincticm
being the round and widely set beads of C. splmdida and the more compact and
rectangular beads of C. sniteUttm.

Found at station 3696, off Honshu Island, Japan.

NAVICXJI-A Bory.

Naiicula Bory, Encycl. Meth. d'Hist. Nat. 2: 562. 1824. Ehrenb. Infus. 173. 1838.
Ktitz. Bacill. 88. 1844. De Toni, Syll. Alg. 2: 6. 1891. W. Smith, Synop. Brit.
Diat. 1: 46. 1853. Donk. Brit. Diat. 2. 1871-1873. Van Heur. Synop. 71. 1881;
Treat. Diat. 162. 1896. Castr. Rep. Voy. Chall. Bot. 2: 22. 1886. Pritch. Hist.
Infus. ed. 4. 892. 1861. Rabh. Fl. Eur. Alg. 1: 168. 1864. Cleve, Sv. Vet. Akad.
Handl. 2Qh 4, 136. 1894; 27^: 10. 1895. Cleve & Grun. Bih. Sv. Vet. Akad.
Handl. 17^: 27. 1880. Grun. Verb. Zwl. Bot. Ges. Wien 10: 513. 1860. Brun,
Diat. Alp. 63. 1880.
Pinnularia Ehrenb. Ber. Akad. Wiss. Berl. 1840: 213. 1841. W. Smith, Synop.

Brit. Diat. 1:54. 1853.
Diploneis Ehrenb. Ber. Akad. Wiss. Berl. 1844: 84. 1845. deve, Sv. V(»t. Akad.

Handl. 26^: 76. 1894.
Stanroptera Ehrenb. Phys. Abh. Akad. Wiss. Berl. 1841: 134. 1843.
Stanroneis Ehrenb. Phys. Abh. Akad. Wiss. Berl. 1841: 134. 1843. Kiitz. Bacill.
194. 1844. De Toni, Syll. Alg. 2: 204. 1891. Van Heur. Tn»at. Diat. 158. 1896.
Pleurostauron Rabh. in part; Grun. in Fenzl, Reise Novara Bot. 1: 101. 1870.
/>ifh>ia Berk, in part; Van Heur. Synop. pZ. 76./. 70. 1881; Treat. Diat. 233. 1896.
Anomoeoneis Pfitz.; Cleve, Sv. Vet. Akad. Handl. 27=*: 6. 1895.
Xeidiuvi Pfitz. in Hanst. Bot. Abhandl. 2: 39. 1871. Cleve, Sv. Vet. Akad. Handl.

26^: 68. 1894.
Caloneis Cleve, Sv. Vet. Akad. Handl. 26^: 46. 1894.
StenoneU Cleve. Sv. Vet. Akad. Handl. 27^: 123. 1895.
Frustulia 0. Ag. in part; Ktitz. Linnaea 8: pi 13. f. 16. 1833.
Cymbella C. Ag. i^^Cocconema Ehrenb.) in part; Consp. Diat. 8. 1832.
Synedra Ehrenb. in part; Ktitz. Bacill. 63. pl.S.f.29. 1844.
Amphiprora Ehrenb. in part; Mikrog. pl,S. I. f. 10-11, III. f. Sa-c. 1854.
Schizonema C. Ag. in part; W. Smith, Synop. Brit. Diat. 2: 71. 1856.
Colletonema Breb. in part: W. Smith, Synop. Brit. Diat. 2: 70. pi. 56. f. .S.yJ-.l5.S. 1856.
Achnanthidinm Ktitz. in part; W. Smith, Synop. Brit. Diat. 2: 31. pi. 61. f. SSO. 1856.
Pleurosigma W. Smith in part; Ehrenb. Infus. 180. pi IS.f. 10. Ktitz. Bacill. 102
(no. 127, 128, etc.) pi 4 J. 25, 26, etc.

The enormous size of this genus has incited many authors to attempt its division
upon more or less tenable grounds. Thus Ehrenberg divided it into Naviciila (Bory)
Ehrenb. and Pinnularia Ehrenb., the chief distinction being that the former had
smooth, the latter ribbed, valves. But the distinction was seen to be fictitious, and
Kulzing and Brebi8S(m refused to accept it. William Smith revived the names,
making the distinguishing feature the character of the striation, that in Pinnularia
being composed of sm(x>th costae, while Navicula had the striae broken more or less
into moniliform or beaded lines. This would serve admirably to distinguish such
species as Pinnularia nobilis Ehrenb. from Xainaila aspera Ehrenb. But two difficul-
ties have stood in the way of making application of this distinction in general; first,
very few of the multitude of species in the genus can be positively classified by this
criterion, every conceivable gradation between plain (or apparently plain) co.**tae and
rows of independent beads being presented : and, second, in even the extreme Pinnula-
ria type the apparent presence or absence of perfectly smooth bars or costae is largely
a matter of illumination. It is true that scientific cla.vsifications are chiefly valuable



Digitized by



Google



334 CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE NATIONAL HERBARIUM.

for so assorting ol)joct8 of nature into small groups as to render easy their availability
and identification. Nor can at the present time that other purpose of cIassifK-ali<»n,
the indication of relationships, ))e pressed very strongly. But unh^ss all the usual
conceptions of the word "genus' are to be ignored, the distinctions drawn by William
Smith must be considered as too unimportant and especially t<K) unstable to admit of
adoption.

By far the most painstaking and thorough analysis of Navicula is that of ('lev*' in
his Naviculoid Diatoms.« I regret I can not follow his divisions of this genus. It
would be aside from the purpose of this report to discuss in ample detail the merits of
this extensive work. It must, therefore, suffice to say that a careful reading of the
chapter*" On the value of the characteristics." on page 4 of that work, will, in connec-
tion with the divisions of Navicula subsequently made in the work, revt»al the fact
that nearly all the characteristics there looked upon as inadequate are subsequently
employed as ba.ses for the new genera created. I therefore follow in general the
majority of authors writing since elevens work appeared, in considering these* distinc-
tions of value for sul)generic gnmping, though not of generic worth. Especially has
Van Heurck f> grouped the genus Navicula in a way satisfactory to the writer. Excep-
ti()n must, however, be taken to his recognition of the genus Stauroneis Ehrenb.
as a genus. As Van Heurck there says, the true Stauroneis forms differ in
no respect from Navicula, except "by the central nodule being transversely dilatwl
into a .**tauros." ' This has always appear^d to me to be a very trivial ground. The
staun)s is a most common accident of many species in several other genera, as Ach-
nanthes Bory, in A. coarctata (Breb.) Grun.;<^ Pleurosigma W. Smith, in P. CLsiaiicum
Temp. & Brun and P. staurophorum Grun.;** and Cocconeis Ehrenb., in C. forvxosa
Brun.'' Nor is this any more or less the "dilation of the central nodule- in the one
case than in the other. In short, the sepmration of stauroe-bearing forms into a geniL«
is an impossiiiility, either inside the genus Navicula or outside of it.

I look upon the following genera as having fairly good claim to separate standing:
Masiogloia Thwailes, for reasons stated under that genus; Dictyoneis Cleve. on
account of its peculiar internal plates and especially its loculate border. / though it
may po.-^sibly be necessary to unite it with Mastogloia; Rouxia Brun & Herib. ; g alsii
the following six genera, which, although separate from Navicula, should be uniti-d
under the same generic name: FrustuliaC. Ag., in part, Berkeleya (Grev.) Van Heur..
Reicheltia Van Heur., Amphipleura Kiitz., Brebissonia Grun., Vanheurckia Breb.,
for all which see under Frustulia in this report; also their figures and descriptions
by Van Heurck. *

To the foregoing may be added Cleve's genus Vistula;* for although it at pr^'sent
includes only the single species C. lorenziana (Grun.) Cleve. this is perfectly constant
and strikingly unlike other naviculoid diatoms. On the whole the best conception of
Navicula and its allies is that of Van Heurck.;

Navicula aestiva Donk. Trans. Micr. Soc. Lond. n. s. 6: 32. pL ,S.f. 18. 1858; Brit.
Diat.6. pL /./. .i. 1871-73. Schmidt, Atlas />/. 7./. <s'. 70 // (unnamed), /)/.^\/. ,>6
(type),/. SI (unnamed). 1875. Rabh. Fl. Eur. Alg. 1: 184. 1864. DeToni. Syli.



« Sv. Vet. Akad. Handl. 26^: 1894; 27^: ISl).').

b Van Heur. Treat. Diat. 18%.

t- Van Heur. Synop. pi. 26. f. 18. 1881.

d Pcrag. I^* Diatomiste 1^-^: pl8.f..',i V*. 181)1.

f Schmidt, Atlas pi. Uhi.f. id. 1894.

/('f. Sv. Vet. Akad. Handl. 26^: 124. 1894; and Van Heur. Treat. Diat. 157. 1896.

<y Herib. Diat. Auverg. 150. 1893.

ft Van Heur. Treat. Diat. 239, 242 245. 1896.

1 Sv. V<'t. Akad. Handl. 26': 124. 1894.

;• Van Heur. Treat. Diat. 162-237. 1896.



Digitized by LjOOQIC



MAXN — DIATOMS OF THE ALBATROSS VOYAGES. 335

AI?. 2: 93. 1891. O'Meara, PrtK-. Roy. Irish Acad. II. 2: 384 (pi. J/. /". JO. worth-
less). 1875. rieve, Sv. Vet. Akad. Ilaiull. 26-: 94. 1S94. Pritch. Hist. Iiifiii^.
ed. 4. 899. 1H(J1.
Xavicula fusca (\refi. variety; Schmidt. Alias/)/. 7./. / ;. 1875: Jahresb.

Komm. Deut. Meere2: pi. »./. :^6. 1874.
Xancula smilhii Breh. variety; Van Hear. Treat. Dial. 198. 1896.
This beautiful form is, as Van Heurck claims, near to X. smithii Hreb., but is vai^tly
finer and, so far as 1 have seen, it never shows the double-beaded striae of that species,
ilM striae being delicate and obscurely moniliform. Its re-^emblance to X.fiisca ((ireir. )
Ralfs is also superficial. Schmidt's figures of that species quoted al)ove are quite dis-
tinct from ( Gregory's type, originally published as A', smithii Breb, variety /j/^ra (ireg.,
its true name, for as Ralfs, who makes it a separate species. says.« it "differs from X.
smithii Breb. in its much larger size and more distinct striae.'' It is, therefore, even
more strongly in contrast with the present species, and I agree with (ieve and De
Ton i in recognizing its distinctness. The peculiar termination of the two halves of the
raphe at the center of the valve ^ is well displayed in a specimen accompanying this
rei)ort .

Found at station 2920H, Hawaiian Islands.

Kavicula anceps (Ehrenb.) Mann.

Stauroncis aneeps Ehrenb. Phys. Abh. Akad. Wi.^n. Berl. 1841: 306, 422. pi. )i. I.f.

i<*?. 1843. Kiitz. Bacill. \0b. pi :iU.f. J,. \^\A. W. Smith. Synop. Brit. Dial.

1: 60. pi 19. f. 190. 1853. Brun, Dial. Alp. 89. pi 9.f. 1-J. 1880. Van Heur.

Synop. 68. pi 4./. 4-S. 1881; Treat. Dial. 160. pi I.f. o.> o7. 1896. Schum.

S<hrift. Phys. Okon. Ges. Konigsb. 6: 22. pi i. /. 2:. 1864. Wolle, Dial.

N. A. pi s'f, 4 (not/. S9). 1890. De Toni, Syll. Alg. 2: 211. (Meve, Sv. Vet.

Akad. Handl. 26-: 147. 1894. Cleve & Grun. Sv. Vet. Akad. Handl. 17^: 48.

pi S.f. 65. 1880.
Stauroneis amphicfphala Kiitz. Bacill. 105. pi 30. f. Jo. 18^11. Pritch. Tli.'^t. Infus.

ed. 4. 912. 1861. Schum. Schrift. Phys. Okon. (ies. Konigsb. 22. pi >.J. *9. 1864.
SiauToneis linearis Y}\x^\\h. Phys. Abh. Akad. Wt <s. Berl. 1841: 300. pi /. //./. 11.

1843 ?; Mikrog. pi .39. ILf. 106. 1854.
In adopting the above name to represent this widely known and variable diatom
I am led by considerations of policy only. If a strict observance of priority w(»re fol-
lowed Ehrenberg*8 linearis would probably have lo sujK^rsede his anceps, as the former
appears earlier in both the text and plates of his article. CMevc questions the union
of linearis with this species. To me it seems impossible to diagnose either of them with
any accuracy. Certainly the numerous figures of both given by Ehrenberg represent
a considerable number of species. And it is because 1 can not see the boundaries of
these two names by means of the original citations that I am unwilling to overturn the
above accepted and widely-known specific name for a theoretically earlier one. Diatoms
di ffer from most other organ isms in that their minuteness and delicacy of structure are so
extreme that only by the finest lenses and the most exact drawings can their specific
characteristics be seen and recorded. As a consequence, most of the earlier observa-
tions of the more minute diatoms are untrustworthy, and t(K) much weight is attached to
the names assigned in these writings. A large part are veritable nomina nuda.and
.should be given consideration only when subi^efpient repetitions establish their char-
acter. For this reason anceps is to be preferred to liiuaris. The union of the Stau-
n)neis diatoms with Xavicula has been discussed under the genus.
Found at station 3669H, along Kurile Chain.



o Pritch. Hist. Infus. ed. 4. 898. 1S6I.
6Cf. Schmidt, Atlas pi 7./. .i. IN75.
cSv. Vet. Akad. Ilandl. 26': 147. ISIM.



Digitized by



Google



336 CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE NATIONAL HERBARIUM.

Navicula eintillaruzn (Cleve & (Irun. ) Mann.
Alloneis (Navimda ?) antillarum Cleve k Grun. in Cleve, Bih. Sv. Vet. Akad. Handl.
5^:8. p/. 2. f. 11. 1878. Ca?tr. Rep. Voy. Chall. Hot. 2: 35. pi. 15. f. 5, pL eo. f.
14, pi 28. f. 14. 1886.
Scoliopleura antillarum Pellet. Diat. 288./. ,A:?/. 1888-89. De Toni, Syll. Alg. 2:



Online LibraryUnited States National Museum United States. Division of BotanyContributions from the United States National Herbarium, Volume 10 → online text (page 45 of 65)