March 7. 1881 [?]
Am. [?] Sci. 3d [?] [?] XIX [?] 109. Jan'y. 1880. 1.75.
classification & description of [N?]. American species of characeae?; by B. D. H[a?]lstead.
The [?] paper directly relating to the American charae appeared
in this journal in 1843, [?]; the "[?] [?] of the charae of North [?]
Prof. [?] [Braun?], communicated by Dr. Engelmann." Two years later a
notice of American charae appeared in a note to [Plantae?] [?],
published in the Boston Journal of Natural History. Since that date he has
only scattered references to charae in local lists & reports of
different expeditions, [?] within the last few years when the attention of our
botanists has been more frequently turned to the species of the small but
interesting order. The task of determining native species will be much
facilitated by two books which have recently appeared, one by
Dr. J. F. Allen entitled Characeae Americanae, an illustrated work
of which two parts have appeared, has already been noticed in
this journal. The other, originaly presented as a graduating thesis at
Harvard University in May 1878, by B. D. H[a?]lstead, is now published in
part in the Proceedings of the Boston Society of Drafted Botany. There is a
short introduction, giving a general account of the structure of the
order, followed by detailed descriptions of the 18 species known to the
writer from an examination of the Herbaria at Cambridge and a
number of P[?] collections. Of the species 8 belong to [Netulla?],
[10?] to [Tolypella?], and 9 to Chara. One new species C. [?]
is described. Among the more interesting species, we may mention
[N?]. [gelatinaea?] found by R[?] in the Santee Canal, & the
beautified G. gymnopus, var. [elyans?], which was first found by [?] in
[Essay?] County, Massachusetts, where it has recently been rediscovered
by Mr. Robinson; & it is now known in other localities. As a whole
the paper shows indications of careful study, & there is only one
portion which we would criticise.
The group of the Gynopodae including C. gymnopus to
C. r[?] should be compared with C. [polyphylla?] var. [?] [?]
which as it seems to us, may have been confounded with what
Mr. Halstead considers to be the typical C. gymnopus.
It should also be compared with C. [sejuneta?] [Brown?],
a species certainly approaching C. r[?].
The literature of the old C. m[?] & C. [sejuneta?]
is very obscure, & these two species figure unpleasantly in the
footnotes of inaccessible articles, but we hope to have
eventually from Mr. Halstead a further elucidation of the Gymnopodae.
W. G. F.
