THE GENUS PTYCHOGASTER. 



This is not a genus, or rather it is a spurious genus. It is well 

 known now to be the conidial condition of various polyporoids. The 

 genus was first set forth by Corda in his Icones, 1838, but as a species 

 supposed to belong to the same genus was named Ceriomyces Fischeri, 

 also by Corda in the previous year, the latter name has been taken up 

 in Saccardo. 33 In mycology generally, however, the name for the 

 genus is Ptychogaster. 



Corda thought that the genus was allied to the Myxomycetes, and 

 I think Fries was the first to publish that it was a monstrosity of a 

 Polyporus. 34 Tulasne gave a good account and figure of its struc- 



Fig. 265. 

 Ptychogaster albus and section of 



ture and considered it not a fungus "perfect and complete," but did 

 not account for its origin. Since Tulasne's day a number of species 

 have been found and the direct connection with species of Polyporous 

 has in several instances been established. 33 The genus Ptychogaster 

 usually does not have a porous structure. It consists simply of fila- 

 ments bearing in abundance conidial spores. While it sometimes 



33 By this method he added his name to all but one of the European species in his work. 

 It is very much the same cheap method of changing that Saccardo (wisely) ignores when 

 indulged in by American mycologists. The name Ceriomyces, drawn from a honey-comb, has 

 little application to the usual species. 



14 In 1846 he announced that Ptychogaster was "monstrosa progenies" of Polyporus 

 borealis. 



31 There exists in Fries's herbarium a specimen which is part Polyporus borealis and part 

 Ptychogaster. It was sent by Rev. Stevenson, of Scotland. 



