REPORT OF THE STATE BOTANIST I917 I05 



in the original description. There are mounted on the type sheet at 

 Albany six small bits of wood, four of which have only a few 

 rhizomorphic strands of white or cream-colored mycelium. On the 

 other two bits of wood there is perhaps a square centimeter of 

 fruiting surface which apparently represents the marginal growth 

 of the fructification, though on one of these bits the hymenium is 

 well formed (plate i6, figure i). The chief characteristics of the 

 species appear to be the color, the rhizomorphic strands, and the 

 oblong-ellipsoidal spores (plate t6, figure 6). The spores measure 

 5 to 7.5 fi in length and 2.5 to 3 /x in breadth. No cystidia are pres- 

 ent (plate 16, figure 3). The hyphae of the subiculum and trama 

 are rather characteristic. Many of them are quite irregular in out- 

 line and have the appearance of being much collapsed. In the 

 subiculum they are often slightly encrusted and made up of rather 

 short cells with a diameter of 4 to 7 fx. They are very transparent 

 and thin-walled. Clamp connections are present but their walls are 

 so thin and transparent that they easily escape detection. In the 

 trama the hyphae are somewhat smaller, averaging 2 to 4 |U, in 

 diameter. Some are with cross walls and clamp connections but in 

 others these are lacking. The hyphae are more or less branched in 

 both the trama and the subiculum (plate 16, figure 4, 5). 



In the same folder with the type collection there is another sheet 

 en which is mounted an excellent representation of a species of 

 Poria referred by Peck to P. r a d i c u 1 o s a . Microscopic exam- 

 ination shows, however, that it is not the same plant, though some- 

 what similar as far as one is able to judge. There are two important 

 differences. The spores in that collection are very short-ellipsoid or 

 subglobose with much smaller dimensions than those in the type 

 collection. They measure only 3 to 5 jw in length and 2 to 3.5 /j. in 

 breadth. Another difference is in the hyphae. In this collection they 

 are exceptionally clear-cut in teased preparations as contrasted with 

 the often irregular, ill-defined hyphae in the types. Their dimen- 

 sions are 2.5 to 4.5 jm. Clamji connections and cross walls are abund- 

 ant and extremely well defined as contrasted with the often indis- 

 tinct walls and clamps of the t}pes. These hyphae are frequently 

 branched and hyphal anastomoses are common — both characteris- 

 tics rare in the t\pe collection. 



If the type collection well represented the species, and if in gen- 

 eral appearance this second collection were much like the types, the 

 writer would nevertheless hesitate to refer it to this species on the 

 basis of these micrDscopic differences alone. .Since the type collec- 



