FUSCUS. CONTEXT BROWN. 



phae deeply colored. Subhymenial layer hyaline, cellular. Setae 

 rare, with swollen bases, projecting 12-16 mic. Spores globose, hyaline, 

 5-6 mic., smooth. 



Fomes igniarius in its type form grows common on the willow 

 in Sweden, but is found on various frondose w r oods. In the United 

 States it occurs often on ash. On the willow it often takes a resupi- 

 nate form. It is more common in northern localities. There has 

 always been confusion in Europe in regard to the identity of Fomes 

 igniarius. Fries and Persoon were in accord, as shown by their 

 specimens. Berkeley, however, never had clear ideas in regard to it. 

 In early American work he referred Fomes rimosus to Fomes igniarius, 

 and in England his Fomes igniarius was always Fomes pomaceus, a 

 tradition that persists in England to the present day. As to the 

 French, they have never had it right apparently, and of the four 

 specimens I found so labeled at Paris all were Fomes robustus, and 

 all specimens labeled Fomes igniarius w r ere the form Fomes nigricans. 

 Boudier's figure of Fomes nigricans is typically Fomes igniarius for me. 



ILLUSTRATIONS. Boudier, t. 155 (as Fomes nigricans); Sowerby t. 132 (rather light color); 

 Bolton's and Bulliard's figures are both too doubtful to quote). 



SPECIMENS. Many from Europe and United States. From foreign countries, I have only 

 one doubtful collection, from Australia. 



Compare Haematoxyli, hyperboreus, inaequalis, Novae- Angliae, Pandani. 



FOMES NIGRICANS. With the same context color, spores, setae, it is in 

 reality the same plant as Fomes igniarius, differing only in its host (usually birch), 

 its smoother black crust, and the setae, which usually are more abundant. At the 

 best, it is only a form with a smoother crust. It is frequent in Europe and in America 

 is far more common than the type form. 



Much confusion exists as to the plant meant under this name, whether a black 

 form of Fomes igniarius or a black form of Fomes fomentarius. It seems that Fries 

 confused them. His original description and citation seem to apply to Fomes 

 fomentarius (black form), and in this sense is taken by Bresadola. His specimens, 

 however, both at Upsala and Kew, are the black forms of Fomes igniarius, as above. 



SPECIMENS. I have a number so labeled, but it is difficult to draw a line between the type 

 forms and the variety. I have one from S. Kawamura, Japan. 



FOMES ROBURNEUS. For me, this also is a form of Fomes igniarius, or 

 rather of Fomes nigricans. It is exactly the same, excepting there is a slight resinous 

 exudation on the crust and the setae are quite abundant. The pore mouths are 

 strongly silvery, glancing. Until I unearthed the type at Kew, the identity of 

 Fomes roburneus was entirely unknown to recent European authors. Little can be 

 decided from Fries' writings. His Icones 184 has no resemblance whatever to his 

 specimens, and I believe it represents Fomes roseus. 



Fomes roburneus, in the sense of Fries' specimen, is a slightly laccate form of 

 Fomes nigricans, and is very rare in Europe, and, to my knowledge, does not occur 

 in America. The name must not be confused with Fomes robustus, a frequent 

 plant in Europe. 



ILLUSTRATIONS. None published. Those cited in Saccardo are both errors. Fries Icones 

 184, notwithstanding it is from Fries, does not represent his specimen at all, and Brefeld 8, t. 9-11, is 

 an excellent illustration of Fomes annosus, with not even the slightest suggestion of Fomes roburneus. 

 Others cited are copies of these errors. 



SPECIMENS. I have only one typical, viz., from Ant. Weidmann, Bohemia. 

 246 



