Grimmia caespiticia may also be confused with G. sessitana. These species are both found above timberline and both have bulging laminal cells and capsules with stomata. However, the incurved leaf margins, cucullate apex, and quadrate to short-rectangular basal areolation of G. caespiticia are quite different from the plane to recurved leaf margins with long-rectangular basal areolation typical of G. sessitana. Although the type specimen of G. alpestris var. holzingeri lacks capsules, gametophytically it is indistinguishable from muticous specimens of G. caespiticia. Specimens of var. holzingeri with capsules have been collected near the type locality and these specimens have stomata. Rather than accepting that G. alpestris may have stomata (in the sense of E. Lawton 1971), Hastings places var. holzingeri within the concept of G. caespiticia. In 1890, Kindberg described G. nivalis based on a specimen collected by J. Macoun at a high elevation site in southern British Columbia. This taxon is similar to G. caespiticia, differing mainly by having papillae on the leaf lamina. Having examined the type and other material of G. nivalis, Hastings interprets these features to be merely the remnants of laminal cell walls; the exterior surface of the strongly bulging cell wall has been worn away by the elements. H. C. Greven (2003) believed that the somewhat longer awns and weak plications of G. nivalis fit well with European specimens of G. pyrenaica, a taxon that has also been put in synonymy with G. caespiticia. Therefore, we place G. nivalis in synonymy with G. caespiticia.