454 



erroneous. I cannot therefore accept either KuNZE or Fries as the 

 authority for Cephaleuros. It is possible that some later author, 

 stili before 1880 when Mycoidea was set up by Cunningham, may 

 bave pubblished a better description of Cephaleuros than either 

 KuNZE or Fries, cfr. fig. 80 et 81 in Introduct. to Cryptog. Bot. by 

 the Rev. M. J. Berkeley, 1857. I therefore thiak that it is yet un- 

 decided whether Cephaleuros or Mycoidea bas the right to priority. 

 In Botaniska Notiser 1890, p. 117, K. Starbaeck says that it is 

 impossible to decide what Sphceria sepincola of Fries 's works is and 

 that up to and includi ng Winter's «die Filze» thes question had 

 not been cleared up, Starbàk has exainined the type specimen and 

 found it identical with Sphcerulina inlermixta (B. et Br.) and on 

 this ground alone he revives the name of sepincola. If no other 

 reason exist it seems to me that Brooms and Berkeley 's name is 

 entitled to priority and that Fries 's name should be regarded as a 

 synonym. 



