64 Rhodora [APRIL 
p. 6%, from which I quote the following: “This is a very beautiful 
and attractive species. . . .the fresh tufts of clear white trumpet shaped 
pilei are suggestive of a cluster of giant calla lilies.” It is probably 
rare, as Mr. C. G. Lloyd writes me that he has never received it but 
from two correspondents. I quote the following from Mr. Lloyd’s 
letter as it may interest those who are students of the Polyporaceae: 
“With regard to Polyporus admirabilis . . . .it is related to P. squamosus 
and belongs to the same section, for when well developed it has in- 
dications of a black base aad rudimentary stipe. As a matter of 
relationship the plant is more closely related to P. varius of Europe 
than to any other species, having the very minute pores and hard 
context which are the characters of P. varius, and both of them op- 
posed to the leading characters of squamosus. They all belong 
however to the section Melanopus, characterized by a black stipe." 
Flammula betulina Pk. and Naucoria firma Pk. were both found in 
limited quantity and smaller in size than usual, in their regular habitats. 
Both grew in a grove of chestnut, the former upon decayed white 
birch logs, the latter upon both white birch and decayed chestnut 
limbs. ‘ 
Hygrophorus coloratus Pk. was quite as abundant as usual and more 
highly colored; young plants were found with pilei entirely egg- 
yellow, and some entirely orange. It is certainly a very attractive 
plant in situ. I have found it for successive seasons in a swamp 
under pines, tamaracks and maples. It is an excellent mushroom to 
eat. 
Clavaria pallescens Pk. was more abundant and larger in size than 
at any time since its discovery in 1908, when I first sent it to Dr. Peck. 
While it bears a strong resemblance to C. ligula Schaeff., Dr. Peck 
certainly advances good reasons for believing it a new and distinct 
species and has had abundant material upon which to base his opinion. 
During October and November I found many plants of Hygro- 
phorus hypothejus Fr., and I was particularly pleased to find the 
alleged variety “mendax” of Kalchbrenner. An illustration of this 
plant is given on Plate XXVII of Kalchbrenner's Icones. I firmly 
believe it is our duty to notice every departure from the type, but I 
fail to see any:good result to be obtained from an attempt to lend 
undue importance to such a very slight variation from the type as 
“mendax” exhibits, and judging from the author's own words his 
conscience smote him before he concluded his work above named. 
