in diameter with thin foliaceous lobes. Color yellow, whitish below. 

 Spores subglobose, apiculate, 8-10 mic. in diameter, hyaline, smooth. 



HISTORY. It is a rare plant and I have seen it but once. It grew 

 erumpent from the limb of an oak tree and was collected the latter part of No- 

 vember. It is much thinner, firmer and more foliaceous than the common 

 species Tremella mesenterica. I refer it to Schweinitz's name, as it seems to fit 

 exactly his short description and habits. 14 I am not certain, however, that it is 

 not Tremella frondosa of Europe, 13 but Fries (and other European inycologists 

 to whom I have sent it) saw the American species and considered it distinct. 

 Besides it does not appear to me to be Bulliard's figure. I have seen in the mu- 

 seum at Paris quite a different American plant (a species of Dacryomyces) deter- 

 mined as " Tremella aurantia, Schw." but I think it is an error. 



POLYPORUS VIRGINII-CUBONI, N. C. 



BY N. J. McGiNTY. 



It is held by our leading authorities that whenever one discovers a dupli- 

 cation of an old name, it is his first duty (to himself) to immediately propose 

 a new name for one of the plants, notwithstanding he may not know anything 

 about either of them. In 1836, Berkeley in Vol. 5 of Hooker's English Flora 

 described a resupinate Polyporus on the bark of fir trees which he named 

 Polyporus armeniacus. This species was compiled in Saccardo (Vol. 6, p. 127) 

 as Polyporus armeniacus, Berk. It belongs to the genus Poria, and certainly 

 not to the genus Polyporus, and I therefore name it Poria armeniaca (Berk- 

 eley) McGinty. In 1856 Berkeley described in Hooker's Journal, vol. 8, 

 page 197, a new species collected by Spruce in Brazil under the name Polyporus 

 armeniacus, n. s., identically the same name he has applied to a British species. 

 Saccardo has compiled it without change in vol. 6, p. 109, although any date 

 dictionary would have demonstrated that 1856 is twenty years later than 1836. 

 I have carefully studied the works of the learned nomenclatorial authority, 

 Otto Kuntze, and also read the Rochester code (which seems to have been 

 taken from them), and I" can find in neither any rule justifying an author to 

 call two entirely different "new species" by identically the same name. I there- 

 fore change the name of the second Polyporus armeniacus to Polyporus Virginii- 

 Cuboni, McGinty, in honor of Madame Cuboni, who has rendered mycology 

 such marked service in translating some English diagnoses into Latin (cfr. 

 Saccardo Sylloge, vol. 6, p. 199). I regret that I must still include it in the 

 old genus Polyporus, as my distinguished co-workers have not yet indicated 

 what new genus is comprised in the section Anodermei Carnosi of Fries' classi- 

 fication. The synonymy may be indicated as follows : 



Poria Armeniaca (Berkeley) McGinty: synonym, Polyporus armeniacus, 

 Berkeley, Hooker's English Flora, vol. 5, part 2, 1836, p. 147. 



Polyporus Virginii-Cuboni, McGinty : synonym, Polyporus armeniacus, 

 Berkeley, Hooker's Journal, vol. 8, 1856, p. 197. 



(NOTE. Our apologies are due to Professor McGinty for delay in printing 

 the above communication, the copy having been in our hands nearly two years. 

 In the meantime his " co-workers " have indicated that Fries' section forms the 

 " new genus " Tyromyces. C. G. L.) 



H The specimen in Schweinitz's herbarium has mostly disappeared, only some very small 

 fragments left. There still remains the Stereum with which it grew. 



15 I do not know Tremella frondosa of Europe, though I know well a plant in this country 

 that passes for it. Our plant, however, can not be called "pale yellow," and I have always 

 doubted the reference. 



