fucatus, Europe, Quelet = Polyporus gilvus. There is a little cotype at Upsala. 

 It is a remarkably rare plant in Europe (cfr. Letter 38, Note 22). It has no relation 

 to lucidus as classed by Quelet, does not have "colored spores", has little resemblance 

 to his figure and may not be his plant excepting as to the specimen he sent Fries. I 

 am told by Bresadola, however, that he has Polyporus gilvus from Quelet. 



fumidiceps, United States, Atkinson. Unknown to me. (Cfr. page 389.) 



fusco-badia, Philippines, Bresadola (mss.) as Trametes = Polyporus Patouil- 

 lardii of Brazil. I have exactly same plant from Japan, G. Yamada. I do not 

 know that Trametes fusco-badia was ever published, though specimen sent to me 

 was marked "cotype". 



fusco-cinereus, South America, Patouillard. Unknown to me. Compared 

 to Polyporus adustus. 



fuscolutescens, Europe, Fuckel = nodulosus it is stated. 



fusco-pellis, Europe, Quelet = Polyporus quercinus teste Bresadola. 



fusco-velutinus, United States, Patouillard = Polyporus cuticularis. 



Garckeanus, India, Hennings = Polyporus nilgherriensis which is not much of an 

 improvement as far as the name goes. 



gogolensis, New Guinea, Hennings = Polyporus immaculatus, Henning's 

 barbarous name, which he borrowed apparently from the native dialect, fortunately 

 does not have to be used. 



Gordoni, England, Berkeley, nomen nudum and type a remmant. Probably 

 Polyporus brumalis. 



gossypinus, Europe, Leveille. The type a little frustule from Mougeat, too 

 poor for comment, is at Paris. Except the discoverer I believe no one had ever 

 found it, but Berkeley found something that he called it on gorse, hence it is carried 

 in the English text books. I know no species in Europe with "white cottony pileus" 

 and believe it to be principally imagination. 



gratus, India, Berkeley. Based on one collection which is white, thin, with 

 allantoid spores and seems same as Polyporus floriformis of this pamphlet. 



griseus, Java, Bresadola. Seems to me on comparison to be same as Polyporus 

 ostreiformis. Griseus would be a better name for it, if it were not preoccupied. 



guadalupensis, West Indies, Leveille. Only known from the type at Paris and 

 I think will prove in time a good species. It is quite close to Polyporus anebus 

 which I believe does not occur in the American tropics. It has same shape, general 

 appearance, etc., but the context is more brown, surface smoother, pore mouths 

 darker. It must be rare for I did not note it in the abundant West Indian material 

 at New York. Murrill refers it to Polyporus supinus, an obvious mistake. Com- 

 pare micromegas. 



guaitecasensis, Chile, Hennings. It has been recently referred to Berkeley! 

 I believe, and when I examined the type some years ago I noted that it had same 

 flesh, pores and spores as Berkeley!. As it was described as "dimidiate" and grew 

 "in truncis putridis" I could not see how it could be Berkeley!, however, unless the 

 name is a mistake or unless the South American plant has a different habit from the 

 North American plant, for it never grows on "trunks" in the United States. The 

 type I saw was only fragments and nothing could be told as to how it grew, but 

 "eine gross exampler" was stated to be in the museum which I did not find. 



guttulatus, United States, Peck, change of maculatus and = alutaceus of Europe. 



haematinus, India, Berk, nomen nudum and name even not found at Kew. 



Halesiae, United States, Berkeley = Polyporus adustus. 



Hausmanni, Europe, Fries. It is supposed to be same as hispidus. No type 

 exists in Fries' herbarium, (it came from Tyrol). It seems from description to be 

 hispidus excepting that Polyporus hispidus is not "pale within". 



havannensis, Cuba, Berkeley. Pileus (2 x 4 x % cm.) with smooth reddish 

 brown surface (Hazel). Context thin. Pores small dark, isabelline color. Known 

 only from type at Kew, a single partial specimen. Determinations at New York 

 are thick specimens of Polyporus subfulvus belonging to the section Petaloides, 

 and no connection with this. The plant could be recognized I believe, on com- 

 parison with type. It will probably go in Section 95. I believe that Polyporus 

 valenzuelianus of Montagne's determinations from Waddell, Brazil, (not type) 

 to be this plant. 



Helix, United States, Hennings as var. of volvatus. It is the usual thing. 



hemileucus, Cuba, Berkeley. When described six specimens are cited which 

 are referable to three different sp'ecies, viz., Trametes cubensis, Polyporus modestus, 



379 



