LTNNEAN SOCIKTT OF LONDON. I03 



illustrate by means of these photographs a relationship between 

 Pachyma Cocos and a fructification — in this instance, that of a 

 Poli/porus. 



Throiigli the kindness of Professor Cramer of Ziirich, I received 

 for investigation a beautiful Polj/porus with a central stalk, col- 

 lected by Dr. Keller in Madagascar. It is certainly closely allied 

 to Polj/jiorns sneer, if not identical with it But what is par- 

 ticularly interesting is the circumstance that it springs from a 

 large well-formed sclerotinin, which shows on microscopical ex- 

 amination the same structure as Pachtjmn Cocos. Sections of it 

 exhibit those peculiar highly refractive starch-grain-like bodies 

 so characteristic o^Pnehyma Cocos *, but the nature of which has 

 not yet been certainly ascertained. These bodies are inclosed in 

 a loose web of hyph.e. On coming to London I made a point of 

 going further into the matter. In the herbarium of the late 

 Mr. Berkeley and in the British Museum there are specimens of 

 Polijporus sneer attached to sclerotia ; and on close examination 

 there were found in the sclerotia the peculiar starch-grain-like 

 bodies mentioned. On the other hand, the specimen of Pohjporus 

 sneer, described by Mr. Berkeley in the 'Annals and Magazine of 

 Natural History,' vol. x. t, preserved in the British Museum, has 

 110 distinct sclerotium and only a root-like process, in which I 

 have not found any of these starch-like bodies. However, the 

 base of this root-like formation is not present, and it is possible 

 that the specimen may have originally sprung from a sclerotium. 

 However, this much may safely be said : tJiere are species of 

 Polyporus (e.f/. P. sacer) tchich nrise from a selerotium jjossessing 

 tJie striic/ lire of Fachjma Cocos. I would willingly here draw the 

 conclusion that PaeJri/ ma Cocos is to be regarded as the sclerotium 

 of certain species of Pohjporus ; but the appearances admit of two 

 interpretations. The Pohjporus may actually represent the 

 fructification of the Pacliyma, or it may be merely parasitic on it. 

 Mr. Muri'ay decided in favour of the latter alternative in his 

 paper on Lentinus sclerotina on Tuber-regium J. In the case of 

 Polliporus I do not now venture any opinion, since I have not 

 yet been able to prove a direct conneciion between the hyphse 

 of the Poljjporus and the refractive starch-like bodies. Beyond 

 this there is no certainty that the starch-like bodies are of fungal 

 nature. I have undertaken to follow the matter up, and to 

 submit Pacliyma Coeos itself to a more searching examination. If 

 I may here express a request, it would be for aid in the form of 

 material, such as specimens of Pachyma, esj^ecially those in a 

 young state and such as are in situ on the roots on which it 

 commonly grows. I must also request you to excuse this partial 

 communication, which I have made only at the suggestion by 

 Mr. Murray that the matter would be of interest §. 



* Cf. Currey and Hanbury, in Trans. Linn. Soc. vol. xxiii. p. 04. 



t Page 371, plate ix. | L. c. 



§ I am also indebted to Mr. Murray for the translation of this paper. 



