198 Mycological Biillcfiii Xo. •>() [Vol. IV 



parasitic fimgus is so common that it can not be neglected by the wide- 

 awake amateur or the beginner. It is the first of the three stages in the 

 ]ife-c\xle of a Black Rust. The second and third stages of this species 

 are found (associated) on a Sedge, or Slough Grass (Carex). See ex- 

 planation under figures. 



■"QUOTATION PAGE." 

 {Quotation continued from page 104). 



"These specimens resembled the herbarium specimens of those para- 

 sitic on C. atramentarius (as identilied by McKenna), but with some vari- 

 ations. They are considerably larger, but the greater size is only propor- 

 tior.al to the greater size of C. comatus as compared with C. atramentarius. 

 The pileus in one specimen is 3. .5' broad. Here and there portions of the 

 veil adhere to the pileus, forming a fringe on the young cap. The surface 

 of the cap is roughened by reticulate umber colored areas, especially at the 

 margin, which latter become elevated and flaky, breaking up into recurved 

 umber patches. The stipe is cylindrical ]..")' long by .)" in diameter in the 

 largest specimen. The spores vary in size from .0003'-. 0004' by .0002'- 

 .00028'. . ' 



"The hypertrophied host resembles that described by McKenna, but is 

 larger, becoming from 2 to 3 inches in diameter by 2 inches high. It forms 

 a cup-shaped or cushion-like mass with swollen edges and a deep indenta- 

 tion at the top. Sometimes a single large carpophore arises from the cen- 

 ter of this indentation. In other cases two or more are present in various 

 stages of development. The mass of the host is scarcely distinguishable 

 as stipe and pileus. It is merely narrowed below and is connected di- 

 rectly with thick mycelial strands ramifying in the substratum. The 

 outside is striate and covered with brownish tilires, especially that portion 

 which corresponds to the pileus. 'i'he thickened edges of the hypertrophied 

 host were examined, and although the gills, basidia and sterigmata could 

 be distinctly made out. the fungus was apparently not sufficiently matured 

 to produce spores. 



"The reasons for believing the host in this case to be Coprinus coma- 

 tus are as follows: The fungi in question are accompanied by growths 

 of C. comatiis only, and the host rcscm1)lcs closely the form identified 

 from its spores as C. atramentarius by McKenna, but is as much larger 

 than that form as Coprinus comatus is larger than Coprinus atramen- 

 tarius. 



"So called abortive forms very similar to these parasitized Coprini 

 have been described for Clitopilus prunulus Scop. Clitopilus abortivus B. 

 & C. and Armillaria mellea Vahl, but the cause of these formations is 

 still unexplained. Clitopilus prunulus produces aliortcd forms singly or in 

 tufts. They aie very variable in shape and are white tinged with l>nnvu 

 on ruptured surfaces. 



"Peck in describirg the aborted forms of Clitopilus abortivus B. & 

 C. says they are irregular or sub-glol)ose lleshy white masses occurring in 

 company with normal forms and apparently tuider the same conditions of 

 sou, moisture and temperature. These forms are common here and are 

 found in various stages of development. Some show marked cliaracter- 

 istics of the normal form of C. abortivus, while others arc hypertrophied 

 and contorted into mr.sses reseml)!ing closely the forms described above 

 for the Coprini. They are smaller, liowever, the lari^est not l)eing over 

 l-l'/S in diameter The gills show plainly on sectioning. 



"The abortive forms of Armillaria mellea Vahl arc also conunon in 

 this region are very similar to those of the two Clito])iIi just men- 

 tioned. Peck states in his description of this from that the masses arc 

 of celhdar matter without any distinction of stem, pileus or lamellae. 

 'Without positive proof,' Mcllvaine says, 'no one would susjiect either of 

 these odd formations to be abortive of either Clitopilus abortivus or Ar- 

 millaria mellea or any other fungus.' In view of other resemblances to the 

 parasitized Coprini described ai)ove, it is cpiite possible that these mon- 

 strosities are (\uq also to the presence of .some parasitic agaric which for 

 some reason is unable to produce c;iri)ophores." [Helen .Sherman. Journal 

 of Mycology ] 



