80 PROCEEDINGS OP THE AMERICAN ACADEMY 



region on V. Vitis-IJcea, and also less frequently on V. Canadense 

 and V. Pennsylvanica. It has recently been found to be common on 

 V. corymhosum at Hanover, N. H,, on the Connecticut River, where 

 it has been collected by Professor Jessup. 



No. 253. Through an error in my manuscript, the label was origi- 

 nally printed Puccinia microspora B. & C, instead of P. microsperma 

 B. & C, which was the name given by Berkeley in Grevillea, De- 

 cember, 1874. The name P. Lohellce. Gerard, in Bull. Buffalo Soc. 

 Nat. Sci., June, 1873, has, however, priority. 



No. 257: The name which this Pwccira 2a, common on Podophyllum, 

 should bear, is P. Podophylli Schw. In the Syn. Fung. Car. Sup., 

 1822, Schweinitz described an ^cidium Podopl/ylli and a Puccitiia 

 Podophylli. In 1825, in the Species Plantarum, Vol. VI. Part 2, 

 Link described a Puccinia aculeata and a P. Podophylli. To the 

 former he refers Schweinitz's P. Podophylli, and to the latter the 

 ^cidium Podophylli Schw. In 1831, in the Syn. Fung. Am. Bor., 

 Schweinitz changed the name of P. Podophylli to P. aculeata, giving 

 his own name, and not that of Link, as the authority. Original speci- 

 mens of Schweinitz's ^cidium Podophylli show that it is really an 

 ^cidlum, and not a Puccinia, and the reference in Link is incorrect. 

 There is no reason why the original name of Schweinitz, P. Podo- 

 phylli, should not be retained, instead of the later name P. aculeata. 



No. 2 GO. Puccinia Epilohii DC. var. Proserpinacce Farlow. I 

 have found this fungus twice, once at Wood's Iloli in August, and 

 once in Cambridge in October. The teleutospores germinate at once 

 in the sorus, even those found as early as August, and the species on 

 that account would be referred to the subgenus Leptopuccinia, to 

 which the pulvinate sori and closely packed spores also point. But 

 the presence of a uredo is not supposed to occur in Leptopuccinia, and 

 in the j^resent species there is a well-mai'ked uredo. Evidently, the 

 reference of the species to P. Epilohii as a variety is incorrect, as a 

 carefid examination of the teleutospores shows that they are larger 

 and of a different shape from those of P. Epilohii. It should be com- 

 pared with no. lOGO, P. (Enotherm Vize, from California, to which it 

 is very closely related, and with which it may be identical, although I 

 should not wish to speak with certainty on the latter point without 

 examining a larger set of specimens than I have seen. I give a 

 description of the Massachusetts plant for comparison with the Cali- 

 fornian plant, without meaning to imply that I consider the two clearly 

 distinct. 



Puccinia Proserpinac^ (forma P. Epilohii Vize ?). Sori round, 



