176 
Persoon and Link, and is to blame for an extensive waste of 
arundinacea gave negative results. The description of the 
Melanconium stage shows that it is practically identical with M 
saccharinum, Penz. e , mentioned above, but if so Turconi, 
+ Sace. 
like many other mycologist in similar cases, failed to notice that 
the spores were compresse 
EXCLUDED SPECIES. 
Melanconium Rusci, Cooke et Mass. in Grevill. xvii. 3. Sace. 
Syll. x. 473. 
= Pustules scattered, orbicular, erumpent, covered by the 
lacerated ee cuticle. Conidia elliptical, continuous, sooty- 
olive, 12 x 
= On aay [sic] ‘‘of Ruscus aculeatus, Kew. This 
cannot be a form of Sphaeropsis Rusci, for there is no peri- 
thecium and the saitiies are scattered and solitary ’’? (C. & M.) 
An indubitable error: whatever the specimens may have been, 
they are not a Melanconium, and apparently not a fangs at all. 
EXPLANATION oF. Figures. 
- Melanconium bicolor, on Birch; a, two spores of D. pro- 
Het (Grev.). 
2. M. betulinum, on Birch. 
3. M. zonatum; a, from J. B. Ellis’s specimen on — 
b, from Berkeley’s specimen, no. 157 
4. M. stromaticum, on Hornbeam. 
5. M. apiocarpum, on Alder. 
5a. 
a9 , var. didymoideum, meg J. W. Ellis’s 
Stes Bridgnorth specim: 
