MYCETES ARGENTINENSES. 



Carolo Spegazzini has kindly forwarded me a copy of his latest publication 

 under the above title. It is entirely devoted to Gastromycetes, and therefore 

 comes in the scope of my work and comment. I am most glad to see that it 

 is well illustrated, and that some estimate can therefore be placed on the value 

 of the species. Heretofore Spegazzini's work has been mostly vague, verbose 

 descriptions from which no idea whatever can be gained as to the nature of 

 the plants. 



CYPELLOMYCES ARGENTINENSIS The first is a new genus which 

 appears to me very good. Fig. 155 is a section of the plant, and fit; 156 

 represents a cluster of basidia. Spegazzini compares it to Xylopodium and 

 Dyctiomycetibus. We do not know the latter (unless he means Dictyocephalus), 

 but Xylopodium is obsolete. It has been proven to be co-generic if not co- 

 specific with Phellorina. Spegazzini's new genus is very close to Phelloraifl 

 indeed it seems to be Phellorina wi//i a volra. The basidial structure is also 

 similar, for while it is hard for me to believe that any Gastromycetes lias 

 "chain-spores," it has been demonstrated by Patouillard that Phellorina has 

 clustered basidia, very similar in general effect to the clusters shown in the 

 figure. We have seen in Professor Underwood's collection a specimen col- 

 lected in Texas by W. H. Long that seems to be exactly the same as Spega/xini's 

 figure, except as to volva which may be absent by accident from this specimen. 



PODAXON MACROSPORUS. We do not pass judgment on descrip- 

 tions of new species of Podaxon, except to state that we think there are about 

 four times as many species now described as exist. 



SCLERODERMA TUBEROIDEUM. We are suspicious of SclerodernJ 

 described as "subhypogeal," for all Sclerodermas are hypogeal when young, 

 and if hypogeal when mature they are not Sclerodermas. The habits and de- 

 scription point strongly to unopened Geastcr hygrometricus. 



ARACHNION? FOETENS. The doubtful mark is well placed. AraJ 

 nions are not subterranean, and their spore characters and gleba structure are 

 quite different from Spegazzini's plant. It is probably a genus of the Hymeno- 

 gasters. 



DICTYOPHORA LILLOI. The figure and description are exactly that 

 of Phallus indusiatus, better known now as Dictyophora phalloidea. Excepting 

 the size, which is slightly smaller than usual, the figure does not differ from 

 the usual form in the slightest detail. 



PHALLUS CAMPANULATUS. Spegazzini's figure agrees fairly with 

 Berkeley's, which was originally from South America. 



MUT1NUS ARGENTINA'S (Fig. 157). Spegaz/ini states that it differs; 

 in no manner from Miittnus Muclleri named by Professor Fischer, and 

 produces a diagram to show that iK8; is an earlier date than 1888. ( >n referring i 

 to our calendar we find he is correct. 



SIMBLUM SPHAEROCEPHALUM.-Spegazzini reports it "most com- 

 mon, which is in keeping with usual reports from South America. He 

 states that "Simblum australe. Speg." and also "Simblum Lorentzii, Speg." ami 

 most distinct.'' (Prof. Fischer has been unkind enough to refer them as- 

 synonyms to Simblum sphaerocephalum.) If they are distinct, we lee! that,' 

 bpegazzim should publish a photograph and show 'it. Neither have been illus- 

 trated, and an umllustrated phalloid is reallv undc-crihed If Spi-a//ini will 

 send us photographs we shall be glad to publish them 





