101 



Aegerita Cordse, Sacc. ? 



Ricker, Univ. of Maine Studies 3 : 24. 30 April 1902. 

 Aegerita deeolorans, (S.) Sacc. 



Sacc. Syll. 4 : 664. d. 10 April 1886. 



Lindau in Engler & Prantl, Pflanzenfam. I 1 ** : 500. Feb. 1900. 

 Dermosporium deeolorans, S. 



S. Syn. Am. Bor. 302 no. 3033. d. 1834. 



Cke. Bull. Buf. Soc. 3: 194. July 1877. 

 Aegepita luteseens, S. 



NOTE. Aegerita luteseens of Herb. Schweinitz has not the structure of the 

 genus if Aegerita Candida, P. is to be regarded as the type. The A. 

 luteseens of Herb. Schweinitz is a fungus certainly near Penicillium or 

 Corenrium, but the material we have examined does not warrant assigning the 

 species a definite place, although it is certainly not an Aegerita. 

 S. Syn. Am. Bor. 303 no. 3042. d. 1834. 

 Cke. Bull. Buf. Soc. 3 : 195. July 1877. 

 Sacc. Syll. 4: 663. d. 10 April 1886. 

 Aegerita Ovulum, S. 

 S. Syn. Am. Bor. 303 no. 3043. d. 1834. 

 M. A. Curtis, Bot. N. Car. 153. 1867. 

 Cke. Bull. Buf. Soc. 3 : 195. July 1877. 

 Sacc. Syll. 4 : 663. d. 10 April 1886. 

 Aegepita posea, (S.) Sacc. 

 Sacc. Syll. 4 : 664. d. 10 April 1886. 



Dermosporium roseum, S. 

 S. Syn. Am. Bor. 302 no. 3034. 1834. 

 Cke. Bull. Buf. Soc. 3 : 194. July 1877. 

 Aethalium eandidum, Schl. in Spreng. 



See Fuligo septica, Gmel. 

 Aethalium feppineola, S. 



See Fuligo septica, Gmel. 

 Aethalium flavum, Lk. 



See Fuligo septica, Gmel. 



Aethalium geophilum, Pk. 



See Hyphelia terrestris, Fr. 

 Aethalium museopum, S. 



See Fuligo septica, Gmel. 



See Fuligo muscorum, A. & S. 

 Aethalium septieum, (L.) Fr. 



See Fuligo septica, Gmel. 

 Aethalium vaporarium, (P.) S. 



See Fuligo septica, Gmel. 



Aethalium violaeeum, Spreng. 

 See Fuligo violacea, P. 



Agarieus, L. 



NOTE. In assigning the authority to the specific combinations of species 

 here cross-referred from Agarieus to other genera we have in general cited the 

 author by whom the species were placed under the names given, regardless of 

 the question whether he considered the names to represent genera or sub- 

 genera, the plan followed in Saccardo's Sylloge and by a large number of 

 writers. This we have found to be the only practical method, for since we 

 believe that the present classification of Agaricacece is of necessity only pro- 

 visional and temporary, it would be a waste of time to attempt to search through 

 the innumerable scattered lists, monographs and other small papers of Euro- 



