PHALLUS DUPLICATUS OF MAURITIUS. Those who 

 have compared our figures 222 and 223, originally printed on page 

 371 of Mycological Notes, may reasonably question if they represent 



Fio 223. 



Fij. 222. 



the same species. One of the problems constantly confronting the 

 systematist is, what amount of variation may be allowed the same 

 species. We should be better able to judge of this matter if \ve had 

 abundant collections of phalloids from the tropics, and could com- 

 pare the reticulations of the pilei. However, w r e would rather err on 

 the side of liberality than of narrowness in the consideration of 

 species. There is no more difference in the reticulations of the 

 Mauritius form and the American form that we have called Phallus 

 duplicates than there is in the illustrations of Phallus indusiatus, 

 as shown in Moeller's photographs from Brazil, and Mr. Moeller states 

 he finds there all connecting forms. The pileus of Mr. O'Conner's 

 species, Fig. 222, is very similar to that represented by Penzig as a 

 phalloid from Java, which he called Phallus favosus, but that species 

 has no veil. The Mauritius form does not have as strong an apical 

 collar as the American, and it perhaps would have been better to 

 have given it a separate name to indicate this form. 



JANSIA RUGOSA (Fig. 218 and Fig. 217 enlarged six diame- 

 ters). In a fine lot of alcoholic phalloids that Dr. Bernard sent us 

 from Java is a specimen of Jansia rugosa which was so beautifully 



387 



