34 Dansk Botanisk Arkiv, Bd. 2, Nr. 3. 



tergiversans Fr.) I have never met. [Most spores have however 

 only been examined by moderate power (Seibert Obj. IV, focal 

 distance 6,4 mm.)]. 



In some cases the spores are provided with a double mem- 

 brane, an almost hyaline e pi spore enclosing the spore itself. 

 This was noted by Emil Chr. Hansen (Bot. Zeitung 1897, VII) 

 for C. stercorarius, and is still more easily perceptible in C. 

 norcoticus. In this latter species I have even met with twin- 

 spores o: two spores enclosed in one episporal membrane 

 (fig. III). This singular monstrosity seems however to be rather 

 exceptional (1914: less than one pr. mille, 1915: about 2 pr. C. 

 of the spores of my specimens). 



The cy s tid i a of the Coprini are generally vesicular, either 

 subglobate, ovate or somehwat flask-shaped. A particular form 

 of cystidia are found in some few species (f. inst. C. ephemerus, 

 tardus and disseminatus) on the surface of the cap, in the shape 

 of minute, erect setulæ, just discernible under an ordinary lens. 



For purposes of classification the nature of the surface of 

 the cap seems to me of supreme importance. Already Fries 

 laid great stress upon this feature and made it the leading 

 character of his subdivisions of the genus. Unfortunately his 

 two main tribes (»Pelliculosi« and »Veliformes«) were based on 

 another, far less valuable character: the fleshy or membrana- 

 ceous nature of the cap. (Especially for the coprobious species 

 fleshiness is a particularly unreliable character, as they vary 

 exceedingly in size according to circumstances). And being 

 restricted to macroscopic investigations, Fries occasionally would 

 be apt to misplace a species by not properly discerning the 

 nature of the surface-coating. For such reasons we find in 

 »Hymenomycetes Eur.« the mealy- floccose C. stercorarius and 

 C. narcoticus (which are absolutely next in kind) separated, and 

 grouped respectively with the glabrous C. plicatilis and the 

 pilose C. lagopus, with which they have nothing to do. And 

 C. lagopus again is widely separated from C. tomeniosus, 

 althougt they are almost identical. Unfortunately most later 

 authors have repeated or even aggravated such errors. 



By discarding the fleshiness of the cap as leading character 

 and basing the main divisions on the absence or presence of a 

 universal veil, and the microscopic structure of the same, a 

 more natural classification can be attained, without deviating 

 fundamentally from the systematic arrangement of Fries. 



