Wilson : The identity of Mucor Mucedo 559 



western Europe, and frequently described and figured.* The 

 descriptions all agree in a most satisfactory manner, the figures are 

 all referable to the same species, the habitat agrees with that given 

 by Linnaeus and Micheli, the synonymy is in the main correct. No 

 new name was proposed either for this or for a closely related 

 species until Bulliardf published his Mucor sphaerocephalus, which 

 he himself admits is but a second rechristening of M. vulgaris. 

 The first real step toward complicating the synonymy of the 

 species was taken by Tode % when he redescribed it as Ascophora 

 Mucedo. Some years later Ehrenberg redescribed the stoloniferous 

 habit of the species, renamed it Mucor stolonifer § and later made it 

 the type of the new genus Rhizopus.\\ A few years later Link^f 

 recognized as valid species a number of forms of Mucor Mucedo 

 which differed from each other in substratum and in characters 

 for which the substratum and the stage of development would 

 account. 



The confusion became so great that Fresenius ** attempted to 

 bring order out of the chaos. After examining the figures of 

 Mucor Mucedo L., Ascophora Mucedo Tode and Rhizopus 7iigricans 

 Ehrenb. from the time of Malpighi down, and contrasting the de- 

 scriptions of these species he decided that there were no characters 

 upon which to separate the genera and that therefore "we had 

 best return to the old genus Mucor, and with Link recognize a 

 Mucor stolonifer {Rhizopus nigricans Ehrenb.) and Mucor Mucedo, 

 of which last Mucor ascophorus Link and Ascophorus Mucedo Tode 

 are merely synonyms.'* So far the results of this work appear 

 to unravel the nomenclatural tangle of the species in question. 

 Permanent results would have rewarded his labor had he not fallen 

 into a still graver error than that which he strove to counteract, 



* Monti, Bononiensi Acad. Comment. 3: 141-159. pi. f. Bologna. 1755- — 

 Hudson, Flora Anglica 504. 1762. — Scopoli, Flora Carniolica 6j. 1760.- — Wulflf, 

 Flora Borussica I. 1765. — Haller, Hist. Stirp. Helv. 3: 113. 1768.— Oeder, Flora 

 Danica//. 467. f. 4. 1769. — Bolton, Fung. Halifax 3 : 132. pi. rj2. f. 1. 1789, 

 Lightfoot, Flora Scotica 1072. 1789. — Bulliard, Herb. France//. 480. f. 2. 1789. 



f L. c, and Champ. France 112. 1791. 



J Fungi Meckl. Sel. 1 : 13. //. j>. /. 22. 



gSylvae Myc. Berol. 13, 25. 1818. 



|| Nova Acta Acad. Leop. io l : 198. //. //. /. /-6. 1820. 



•fWflid- Sp. PI. 6* : 85ff. 1824. 

 **Beitr. Myk. 4-13. 1850. 



