W. C. Sturgis — Type- Specimens of My xomycetes. 4Y7 



tion contains nothing which militates against this statement and the 

 latter may be accepted as correct, 



DiDYMiuM coNNATUM, Pk., Rcp. XXVI, p. 74, 1873, and Rep. 

 XXXI, p. 55, 1 878. This species is represented in the N. Y. St. Mus. 

 Herb, by two sjsecimens. One is marked, ^' JPhysaruni 2H>lymorphiim , 

 Mont. (^Dklymium polycepjhalura^ Rav., Didymium connatum, Pk.), 

 Catskill Mts., leg. C. H. Peck." The label upon the other reads 

 '■'■Didymium connaixini^ Pk., Portville, leg. C. H. Peck." Both of 

 these specimens belong to the same species, the only difference 

 between them being that in the first the sporangia are separate and 

 in the second they are connate in clusters of two to five. Peck's 

 reference of them to Physarum polyniorplnim, Mont., is evidently 

 an error since the sporangia do not exhibit the compressed or con- 

 volute form characteristic of that species. The connate form is 

 immature, but both specimens are distinctly referable to Physarum. 

 nephroideum, Rost. {P. comj^ressum, A. & S. var. 8, List.), one of 

 the commonest species in northern New England. The robust 

 habit; the absence of lime in the stalk except as an external crust ; 

 the large, rounded, white lime knots of the capillitium ; the absence 

 of a columella ; the large, dark, violet-brown, minutely spinulose 

 spoi'es, are all features which distinguish this species from such 

 related forms as P. globidi/erum^ Pers., P. leucophceum, Rost., and 

 P. leucopus, Lk. Neither specimen shows the "ovoid or reniform, 

 laterally com|>ressed " sporangia characteristic of typical P. nephroi- 

 deum, Rost. (Cf, Lister, Mon. p. 54), so that whether we call them a 

 globose form of that species or refer them to Lister's globose variety 

 of P. compressxm, A. & S., is a matter of little importance. Mac- 

 bride discards the latter name on the ground that no degree of cer- 

 tainty can be derived from the original description. I am inclined 

 to share this opinion and to accept Rostafinski's name for the species 

 under consideration. This globose form, so typically American and 

 so constant in shape, is possibly deserving of something more than 

 varietal rank, but inasmuch as other writers, more competent than 

 I to judge, have not seen fit to establish it as a separate species, it 

 seems inadvisable for me to attempt it. 



Mr. Morgan has described it in his " Myxoniycetes of the Miami 

 Valley" and considei's it a distinct species (Journ. Cinn. Soc. Nat. 

 Hist., August, 1896, p. 92), but unfortunately he has referred it to 

 Physarum connexum, Lk., a species suppressed by Rostafinski as 

 being merely a clustered form of P. leucophceum., Fr. (Rost. Mon., 

 pp. 113 & 114.) In the absence of the original type and of any 



Trans. Conn. Acad., Vol. X. March, 1900. 



32 



