The Scottish Naturalist. 77 



NOTE ON SOME KECENTLY DESOKIBED SCOTTISH FUNGI. 



FOR the last fifty years or longer Scotland seems to have always had at 

 least one good student of mycology. Pre-eminent among these 

 were Johnstone, Carmichael, Jerdon, and, the greatest of all, Greville. 

 Each of these has made known to us the Fungi of a more or less wide dis- 

 trict, and left behind them indelible records of their industry and research. 

 Still there remains a great deal to be yet discovered among the Fungi of 

 Scotland, and that searchers are not wanting is very apparent from an 

 analysis of a paper on British Fungi, published by Messrs. Berkeley & 

 Broome, in the January number of the Annals and Magazine of Natural 

 History. In this paper somewhere about 100 new British Fungi are 

 noticed, and of these more than half the number were found in Scotland, 

 besides a few others found almost simultaneously in England and Scotland. 

 In addition to these some other new Scottish Fungi have been recorded in the 

 columns of our own {vide the interesting "List of the Fungi of Morayshire" 

 and other notes, by the Rev. J. Keith and others) and other Magazines. 

 Altogether, this may be considered as a very encouraging state of matters, and 

 none the less so when we find that it is chiefly to the energy of four botanists 

 that these discoveries are due, and that the district in which they have been 

 made is comparatively a small one, and included in five counties — Forfar, 

 Kincardine, Aberdeen, Banff, and Moray. The chief discoverers are the Rev. 

 J. Stevenson (Glamis), Rev. M. Anderson (Menmuir), Rev. J. Fergusson 

 (Fern, late of New Pitsligo), and the Rev. J. Keith (Forres). Though in 

 the paper referred to the localities of the new species are given (by a not 

 unnatural mistake) as the districts where the respective discoverers reside, 

 yet we understand that while in some cases these are the correct localities, 

 in others the plants were found in quite another part (even 50 or 60 miles 

 distant) of the district we have indicated. This, however, is a matter of 

 little importance at present, and will, no doubt, be rectified when the 

 Floras of the various parts of the district are published. One thing is 

 evident and that is, that we in other parts of Scotland must begin to show 

 a little more activity, unless we wish our friends in the north-east to carry 

 off all the honours of mycological research. 



The following are the species mentioned (and their finders) : those with 

 * were new to science. By the Rev. T. Stevenson : — Agaricus (Omphalia) 

 philonotis Lasch. ; A. ( Entoloma) resutus Fr. ; A. ( Hytholoma) silaceus 

 P. ; * A. (Collybia) Stevensoni B. and Br. ; * Cantharellus Stevensoni B. 

 and Br. ; * Lentinus scoticus B. and Br. ; Polyporus floccopus Rostk. ; P. 

 trabeus Fr. ; P. callosus Fr. ; * P. coll abef actus B. and Br. ; * P. blepharis- 

 tovia B. and Br. ; * Hydnum Stevensoni B. and Br. ; * Radulum 

 epileucum B. and Br. ; Grandima crustosa P. ; * Kneiffia subgelatinosa B. 

 and Br. ; * Leptothyruim pictum B. and Br. ; * Peronospora interstitialis B. 

 and Br. ; * P. rufibasis B. and Br. ; * Cylindrosporium rhabdospora B. and 

 ~Bv. ; Septoria hyper ici Desm. ; S. stachydis Desm. ; * Helotium sublateritium 

 B. and Br. ; Eustegia arundinacea Fr. (Mr. Stevenson has also found 

 the following, which however had previously occurred elsewhere in 

 Britain : — Polyporus Rennyi B. and Br. ; Protomyces menyanthes De By. ; 

 and Peziza ciborium Fr. ) By the Rev. M. Anderson : — Raduhim tomento- 

 . sum Fr. ; * Penicillium megalosporom B. and Br. ; * Puccinia AudersoniB. 



