Nitophyllum fimbriatum Harvey 1855: 549

Nitophyllum fimbriatum Harvey 1855: 549 , nom. illeg. non N. fimbriatum Greville (in Saint-Hilaire 1833) ( Wynne 2014, Guiry and Guiry 2016).

Type locality

Garden Island, Western Australia ( Millar and Huisman 1996: 64, Wynne 2014, Guiry and Guiry 2016).

Distribution

Southern and Western Australia ( Wynne 2014, Guiry and Guiry 2016).

The new genus Neoharaldiophyllum is clearly a member of the tribe Myriogrammeae based on the vegetative morphology, conformation of procarp and molecular evidence ( Hommersand and Fredericq 1997a, this study). Neoharaldiophyllum is separated from other genera in the tribe Myriogrammeae ( Myriogramme , Hideophyllum and Platyclinia ) by the arrangement of carposporangia (singly terminal vs. in chains) and from Gonimocolax by their substratum (epilithic vs. parasitic on other genera). Neoharaldiophyllum and Haraldiophyllum have many morphological features in common, except for the final development of the primary gonimoblast filaments (secondarily fused with floor cells of cystocarp vs. remaining free without secondary incorporation), size of fusion cell (comparatively small vs. large), fusion cell formation (not incorporated with any floor cells vs. incorporated with a few floor cells) and arrangement of tetrasporangia (clearly separated into two layers vs. irregularly arranged; Table 2). In this study, only three species of Haraldiophyllum (i.e. Haraldiophyllum bonnemaisonii , Haraldiophyllum crispatum and H. infossum ) with a Haraldiophyllum - type carposporophyte ( Millar 1994: figs. 6 and 15; Lin et al. 2007: figs. 27 and 60) remain in the genus Haraldiophyllum .

On the Korean coast, four species assigned to the tribe Myriogrammeae , including Myriogramme livida , H. bonnemaisonii , Haraldiophyllum udoense and Hideophyllum yezoense , have been recorded ( Nam and Kang 2012). Although Nam and Kang (2012) commented that Korean H. bonnemaisonii is a different species from H. udoense , their figure of a cross-sectioned cystocarp (see Nam and Kim 1996: 104, fig. 15) is in agreement with that of Neoharaldiophyllum . Moreover, Nam and Kim (1996) clearly described that “extreme elaboration of fusion cell forming numerous connections with content-rich cells is observed in the floor of the cystocarps”. That character does not belong to Haraldiophyllum ( Maggs and Hommersand 1993, Lin et al. 2007) but to Neoharaldiophyllum . This suggests that the so-called H. bonnemaisonii from Korea should be the same species as Neoharaldiophyllum udoense . With regard to the two other species, M. livida and H. yezoense reported from the Korean coast, their identity is still in doubt because the arrangement of carposporangia and molecular data for Korean material remain unknown for these species. We confirmed that specimens of M. livida from Korea deposited in NIBR are all conspecific with N. udoense . So we suggest that many of the specimens identified as M. livida in Korea might be N. udoense .

In late 2015, we had the opportunity to collect some specimens of H. notii (identified according to Womersley 2003) from Tasmania and then compared their rbc L sequences ( Table 1). All of the sequences were identical with sequence-data of H. crispatum from New Zealand ( Figure 55 View Figure 55 ). The Haraldiophyllum species known as H. notii in Australia does not have the Neoharaldiophyllum - type carposporophyte but the Haraldiophyllum - type (see Womersley 2003: fig. 60). Moreover, the cross-section of the tetrasporangial sorus (see Womersley 2003: fig. 59E) agrees with that of Haraldiophyllum . Consequently, the so-called H. notii reported by Womersley (2003) in Australia should be identified as H. crispatum .

Acknowledgments: We thank Dr. Wendy A. Nelson, Dr. Roberta D’Archino and Dr. Gerald T. Kraft for helpful counsel and for collecting the specimens from New Zealand and Tasmania, and Dr. Michael J. Wynne for kind advice and many corrections on our manuscript. This research was supported by the 2016 scientific promotion program funded by Jeju National University.