SECTION LIGNOSUS 10. 



DEALBATUS. Few plants have been worse confused than dealbatus. It 

 was originally collected by Ravenel and Curtis and named by Berkeley in 1853. 

 These types are all I have seen. (There are cotypes also in Ravennel's collection 

 in British Museum). They are found in a "Fomes" cover at Kew, but should be 

 classed as a Polyporus. 



At the same time Berkeley named mutabilis also from Ravenel's collection. 

 It has little resemblance to dealbatus (cfr. figs. 422 and 446), and is a thin, zonate 

 plant, a Polystictus as classed. Ravenel distributed (Fasc. 3, No. 10), Polystictus 

 mutabilis as dealbatus, and Berkeley, when he made his resume in Grevillea, cites 

 this distribution as being correct. Berkeley made so many "new species" he could 

 not remember them himself. 



Dealbatus is found in Saccardo, vol. 6, p. 159, as a "Fomes," and also page 218 

 as a "Polystictus," both with exactly the same description, word for word, and 

 "Polystictus" has as much resemblance to "Fomes" as a piece of paper has to a 

 lump of coal. It is a good example of the value of our "literature." 



Murrill, in his half-hour studies in the principal museums, probably never saw 

 the type specimen, for he gives mutabilis as a synonym for dealbatus. He uses the 

 word dealbatus in keeping with the sacred principle of priority, it having been pub- 

 lished in a "prior" position (the previous page) in the same article. Of course, 

 that is much more important for the purpose of a juggle than the fact that the plants 

 have little resemblance or relation to each other, and should not be classified in the 

 same section. Then to make the matter more binding he discovers that mutabilis 

 and unguicularius (which no one knows anything about) and a few others form a 

 "new genus" and takes Polyporus dealbatus as his "type species." 



SECTION LIGNOSUS 10. 



PAULENSIS. In a letter just received from Bresadola, he writes me that 

 paulensis is a young specimen of angustus. I should never suspect it and the spores, 

 according to my observations, were not the same. 



SECTION LIGNOSUS 11 C. 

 Context colored. Setae present. 

 (See Musashiensis, page 135, Fig. 436. Also remarks on page 191). 



SECTION LIGNOSUS 11B. 



SCOPULOSUS. This is a marked species with its black stem and smooth 

 pale pileus crust. It was named by Berkeley from Australia fifty years ago, and 

 the type is in good condition although "effete." Then Reichardt published a good 

 figure of it under the name Trametes Rhizophorae. It grows in Australia and in 

 the East abundantly, and has been known to European mycologists from abundant 

 collections for years. It was sent to Murrill from the Philippines in quantities, and 

 he referred it to a "new genus" that he had discovered under the specific name 

 anebus, to which species it has no resemblance whatever. On his second visit to 

 Kew he probably noted that the specimens that Cooke had referred to "anebus" 

 were badly named and he "corrected" it, this time discovering it was another "new 

 genus" and referred it to "Warburgianus," to which species it has less resemblance 

 than to "anebus." It is curious how much easier it is to discover a "new genus" 

 than it is to learn an old, common and well-known species, which is abundantly 

 represented in the museums. We have specimens from A. D. Machardo, Perak; S. 

 Hutchings, Bengal; and Bresadola, Philippines. 



When in its prime the surface is smooth, but weathered specimens become 

 scrobiculate. Such a specimen was the "type," and was named evidently from this 

 "character." This is one of the misfortunes that plants often suffer from being 

 named by those who have very scanty knowledge of them. 



IQO 



