285 



DEADALIA Para." 



Daedal ia elegans Spreng. Vet. Akad. Handl. (1820) 51. Dacdalia dcplanata 

 Fr. Linnaea 5 (1830) 513. Leneites apphuiuta Fr. Epicr. (1838) 404. 

 Luzon, Manila {holier) fide Massee in Kew Bull. (1899) 17G. Negros (Usteri) 

 fide Henn. in Usteri Beitr. (1905) 130. 



Daedalea inconcinna Berk. Load. Journ. Bot. 1 (1847) 151. 

 Philippines (2021 Cuming) fide Berk. 1. c. 



Daedalia repanda (Fr.) Pers.; Sagra Hist. Pol. Nat. Cuba 9 (1845) 232; 

 IVrs. opp. cit. 12 (1855) pi. llj. f. 5. Jjcn.ziles repanda Fr. Epicr. (1838) 404. 



Culion (3574 Merrill) December, 1902, on fallen logs. Nhxjkos (Usteri) fide 

 Henn. in Usteri Beitr. (1905) 130. Luzon, Province of Tayabas (Warburg) 

 fide Henn. Hedw. 32: 221. 



This species is closely related to Dacdalia elegans Spreng., and may be the same. 

 Specimens from tropical and subtropical regions of both hemispheres indicate 

 that both are extremely variable and with many intergrading forms. 

 Daedalea tenuis Berk. Lond. Journ. Bot. 1 (1842) 151. 



Philippines (2137 Cuming) fide Berk. 1. c. 



ELFVINGIA Karat. 



Elfvingia tornata (Pers.) Murr. Bull. Torr. Bot. Club. 30 (1903) 301. Poly- 

 porus tornatus Pers.; Gaud.-Beaupr. Voy. Freyc. (1827) 173. Polyporus 

 australis Fr. Elench. i (1828) 108. 

 Culion (3572 Merrill) December 1902, on fallen logs. Philippines (2041 



Cuming) fide Berk. Lond. Journ. Bot. 3: 188. Negkos (Usteri) fide Henn. in 



Usteri Beitr. (1905) 130. 



2 The replacing of the genus Dcadalia by Agarieus by Dr. W. A. Murrill in 

 Bull. Torr. Bot. Club. 32 (1905) 83, will hardly meet the approval of many 

 mycologists. Neither is it in accord with the rules promulgated by the Botanical 

 Club of the A. A. A. S., in Bull. Torr. Bot. Club. 31 (1904) 249, 201. Canon 15c 

 requires a citation of nonbinomial literature, but there is no such citation in 

 Linn. Gen. PL ed. 5 (1754), 492 under Agarieus Dill. The crediting of the genus 

 Agarieus to Dillenius does not constitute a citation as it is not definite enough. 

 It should refer to some work in particular. Besides this Canon 15/ provides 

 for the selection of the types of Linnean genera from the most common or officinal 

 or European species as suggested by Linnaeus, Phil. Bot. (1751), 197. There 

 are but few mycologists who will not agree to accept Agarieus campestris L., as 

 the type of the genus Agarieus. 



The next name used for this group of species was, according to Murrill. 

 Slriglia Adans. Fam. PI. 2 (1703), 10, based on "Battar. /. 88." This consists 

 of figures AG and d. The only one of these figures with its accompanying 

 description that can be connected with a binomial contemporaneous with or 

 earlier than Adanson is fig. d, Agarieus pectunculi forma elegans Batt., under 

 which is given as a synonym Agarieus parvus lamcllatus pectunculi forma elegans 

 Raii. This name is given under A garico- fungus lamellis bifidis pulverulent is 

 Hall. Enum. Helv. 1 (1742) 58, which is in turn cited under Agarieus alnvus 

 Linn. Sp. PL 2 (1753) 1170. Therefore, the name Striglia Adans., under the 

 above-cited rules, must replace the generic name Bokiatophyllum Fr., unless there 

 is still an older valid name, in which case it would become a synonym. 



Under the same rules Dacdalia qucrcina (L. ) Pers., would become the type of 

 the genus Dadalia Prs. Syn. (1801) 499. 



