A historical Review of the proposed Genera of the Hydnaceae 
By Howarp J. BANKER 
The family of the Hydnaceae is distinguished from all other 
families of the Basidiomycetes by the fact of the hymenial surface 
being developed in the form of subulate or awl-shaped spines OF 
teeth. This characteristic renders it comparatively easy to dis- 
tinguish most members of the group. Yet there are species that 
grade insensibly into related families, so that it is impossible to 
draw hard and fast lines here as much as in any part of the plant 
world; thus through the genera Szs¢otrema and /rpex we may Pass 
by a natural transition to the family Polyporaceae, or, choosing 
a different route, we may make the transition just as naturally 
through the genera Phlebia and Merulius ; on the other hand we 
may pass with equal ease to the Thelephoraceae through Grandima 
and Thelephora, while the transition to the Clavariaceae is not likely 
to prove any more difficult. 
The earliest reference we have to a plant of the hydnaceous | 
type appears to have been by Bauhin, in 1651, in his Historiae 
Plantarum Universalis, 3: 828. As the reference is brief I quake 
it in full as a matter of curiosity, and as giving the historical ogi 
of this group of plants : 
“‘ FUNGUS PAENE CANDIDUS prona parte erinaceus. Raro naturae 
miraculo parte prona pro membranulis innumeris veluti aculels 
muricatus, erinaceum in memoriam revocat, unde ex argumento 
nomen imposuimus.” It is entirely probable that the plant oO 
referred to was Hydnum repandum. ‘ 
For the next century the group received little attention from 
botanists, and at the publication of the Species Plantarum in 17 53 
but four plants had become distinguished in botanical ee 
During the past century and a half the group has grown to 44! 
ample proportions, constituting the distinct family Hydnaceae A 
embracing more than 450 species as recognized in — x ge 
Sylloge Fungorum. From this material numerous gene - 
been proposed with more or less substantial claims to validity. ~ 
436 ; 
