OF ARTS AND SCIENCES. 81 



scattered, soon becoming naked. Uredo spores yellowish brown, oval, 

 echiniilate, 20-2G.5/X in diameter, average 22-23/x,. Teleutospores 

 brown, densely packed and germinating in the sorus, short-stalked, 

 clavate, contracted somewhat at the septum, apex rather acute, with 

 thickened cell wall, 38-o3/x X 17-21//. 



Differs from P. Epilohii DC. in its distinctly longer, clavate teleu- 

 tospores. 



No. 1029. This common Puccinia on Panicum capillare and 

 apparently other species of grasses, both in the Eastern and Western 

 States, is certainly the P. emaculata of Schweinitz, Syn. Fung. Am. 

 Bor,, no. 2912, of which I have examined an original specimen. It 

 has been called P. Graminis var. brevicarpa by Peck in his Twenty- 

 fiftli Report, where, however, it is stated that it is possibly P. emaculata. 

 It seems to me to differ from P. Graminis both in the uredo and 

 teleutospores, and I add a descrii^tion to furnish details not given by 

 Schweinitz. Whether it cannot be referred to some older name than 

 that of Schweinitz is a question I am unable to answer. It is found 

 in some herbaria under the name of P. Caricis, a species to which it 

 has. superficially, a greater resemblance than to P. Graminis. 



Puccinia emaculata Schw. Sori at first small and oblong, soon 

 becoming confluent and linear, naked, uredo spores brownish, nearly 

 globose, echinulate, 18-21^ in diameter. Teleutospores dark brown, 

 on stout stalks, mixed with subclavate paraphyses, oval or elliptical, 

 obtuse or somewhat contracted at the base, apex obtuse and thickened. 



In this connection it may be remarked that Puccinia Ellisiana 

 Thm., in Torr. Bull., Vol. VI. p. 215, and Myc. Univ., no. 1336, does 

 not differ f\ )m P. Andropogi Schw. Syn. Fung. Am. Bor., no. 2911, 

 published in 1831. I have examined an original Schweinitzian speci- 

 men and compared it with Myc. Univ., no. 1336. 



No. 1031. Puccinia Veratri Tinhj . Although the identity of this 

 species offers no special difficulty, writers differ with regard to the 

 authority. Niessl, who mentioned the species in 1859 in the Verb. 

 Zool. Bot. Ges., is usually quoted as the author, but Duby in Bot. 

 Gall., Vol. II. p. 890, published in 1830, described a P. Veratri, under 

 which he quoted Uredo Veratri DC. I have French specimens 

 bearing the date 1843, labelled P. Veratri Duby, which corresponds 

 in all respects to the No. 1031 of Ellis's Fungi, and, as I have no 

 reason whatever to doubt the authenticity of the specimens, I have 

 adopted the name of Duby. Uredo Veratri DC. is considered by 

 writers to be a Uromyces, and it may be that it was erroneously con- 

 nected by Duby with his P. Veratri; but it seems to me that the 



VOL. XVIII. (n. s. X.) 6 



