422. Poria Juglandina. The type is not very ample and I do not recog- 

 nize it, and it may never be recognized. Evidently it has no resemblance 

 to Poria spissa however (which Fries states). I judge it is related to 

 ferruginosa, viticola, etc. Schweinitz observes it as "durissima, immersa, 

 compressa, difformis," if that described anything. 



423. Poria viticola. This is a species named by Fries from specimens 

 sent by Schweinitz. The type is hence at Upsala, but it is same as speci- 

 men so preserved in Schweinitz' herbarium. It is a species very close to 

 Poria contigua. 



426. Poria pulchclla. This is the yellow (trametes) Poria that passes 

 as Poria vulgaris in American traditions. It is only yellow when protected 

 from light, but fades out to white when the light reaches it. Hence the 

 white condition which is most commonly met was not recognized by 

 Schweinitz as the same thing and was by him called Poria vulgaris. I do 

 not know the plant as a European species. 



432. Poria vitellinus. The specimen is very unsatisfactory, but I do 

 not question from the description that Morgan has correctly interpreted it. 

 It is a rare yellow species with large pores and loose subiculum. I have 

 only collected it once. 



435. Poria xantholoma. Specimen does not tell much. It is described 

 as thin, with large pores and fimbriate margin. It appears closely adherent. 

 The plant that Morgan referred (incorrectly) to Poria xantholoma, 

 Schweinitz evidently referred (incorrectly) to Poria obducens of Europe. 



436. Poria rhododendri. The specimen so labeled now is probably re- 

 supinate Trametes sepium, but surely not what Schweinitz described. I 

 believe I know the species as Schweinitz has described it in detail and I 

 think characteristically, but it is not the specimen now in his herbarium 

 nor has it any "affinity to Poria contigua." 



437. Poria Sassafras. The description and the scanty specimen do not 

 accord, as noted by Berkeley, and I question if it will ever be known. It 

 seems to be a white species with large pores. 



438. Poria supcrficialis. Fries claims it is same as Poria viticola, which 

 I believe is also true as to the specimen at Upsala. Berkeley says it is 

 the same \ as Poria nigro-purpureus, and while I do not know what the 

 latter really is I do not believe they are the same on comparison. For 

 me the most satisfactory conclusion is to consider Poria superficialis as a 

 synonym for Poria viticola on the basis of specimen sent Fries. 



439. Poria nigropurpiirea. I do not recognize either the description or 

 the little piece of type in Schweinitz' herbarium as anything that I know. 



440. Poria cinerea. No type preserved now. 



441. Poria Coryae. This is one of those nondescript growths which 

 vary. I think it is what is known now as Poria subacida. 



442. Poria papyracea. Very thin, white, with large, round pores, about 

 what Peck calls "Trametes serpens." Berkeley compares it to Polyporus 

 Stephensii, which Fries refers to "Trametes serpens." Notwithstanding, I 

 think Poria papyracea will prove in time a good species. 



456. Poria tenuis. This is a thin, white species with medium, firm, 

 round pores, otherwise not recognized by me. 



467. Poria decolorant. Specimen very scanty, but is probably Poria 

 sanguinolenta from its color change and color now. 



10 



