MURRILL : POLYPORACEAE OF NORTH AMERICA G01 



ii. Inonotus fruticum (B. & C.) 

 Poly poms fruticum B. & C. Jour. Linn. Soc. Bot. 10: 310. 



1868. 



This species was named from its habit of growing upon shrubs. 

 In shape it varies from thin and dimidiate to nearly spherical, ac- 

 cording to its position on the branch and the size of the branch. 

 If on a small twig it frequently encircles it. The pileus is very 

 soft and spongy and the pores become almost black. Orange and 

 oleander are mentioned as hosts. Several well-preserved speci- 

 mens are among Wright's Cuban collections at Kew. 



Species inquirendae 



Polyporus aureonitens Pat. & Peck, Rept. N. Y. State Mus. Nat. 



Hist. 42 : 25. 1889. 



This species is based on material collected in New York by 

 Peck and described by Patouillard. It occurs on birch, alder and 

 maple. There are several specimens of it in the herbarium here 

 collected in Massachusetts, Connecticut and New York. In his 

 original publication, Peck says it is related to P. radiatus, but is 

 distinguished by its paler color, often lineate-zoned pileus and paler 

 spores. In a recent letter to me, Dr. Peck distinguishes P. glom- 

 eratus from P. aureonitens as follows : " P. glomeratus differs from 

 P. aureonitens in its darker colors, more uneven surface of the 

 pileus, entire absence of concentric lines or narrow zones on the 

 surface of the pileus, which is more irregular and wavy on the 

 margin, and never shining. Its spores in mass are of a brighter, 

 richer, yellow color. The two are readily distinguished at sight 

 by any one who has seen them growing." 



By referring to Sowerby's description of the young stages of 

 P. radiatus, it will be seen that the zonate pileus and yellow mar- 

 gin are present in that species. Also excellent European speci- 

 mens from Bresadola and others, called by them young P. radiatus, 

 seem to differ in no particular from New York specimens of 

 P. aureonitens. It can hardly be imagined that two such eminent 

 mycologists as Peck and Patouillard could have confused Ameri- 

 can and European species in this way, but they may not have had 

 at hand good material of the young stages for comparison. In 

 view of the above facts, I have thought it best to defer the settle- 



