488 MINNESOTA BOTANICAL STUDIES. 



future collectors the regions where field work is sadly needed 

 in contrast with those states that are fairly well explored. In 

 this way New York stands at the head of the list with thirty- 

 four species because of the untiring work of her veteran 

 botanist, Charles H. Peck. Massachusetts and North Carolina 

 follow, the former with 18 species a 3 and the latter with 16. In 

 the first named state there have been numerous collectors; the 

 latter was the early collecting ground of Schweinitz and later 

 that of Curtis. California stands fourth with 13 species 

 representing the earlier work of Harkness and the later of 

 McClatchie. Then follow Rhode Island with 11 and Pennsyl- 

 vania with 10, the latter representing the later work of 

 Schweinitz. South Carolina and New Jersey each have 9, the 

 work of Ravenel in the South and Ellis in the North. Wis- 

 consin has 8, Nebraska has 7. Then come Indiana and 

 Greenland with 5 each. Ohio and Connecticut and New 

 Hampshire, with 4, Minnesota, Illinois, Alabama and Cuba 

 with 3, Maine, Kansas, Iowa, Louisiana and Florida 

 with 2, and Vermont, Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky, Missis- 

 sippi, Michigan, Ontario. British Columbia and Alaska, each 

 with a single species. It will thus be seen that of the 49 states 

 and territories of the United States, not a single species of the 

 order Helvellales, one of the conspicuous groups of fungi, have 

 been collected in 21 states, and only eleven states have furnished 

 as many as five species. In the face of facts like these, there 

 are those who persistently maintain that the work of the sys- 

 tematic botanist in America is nearly exhausted! Over vast 

 portions of our domain the collector of even our most conspic- 

 uous fungi has never yet roamed, and the example of New 

 York shows clearly that in well known regions additional 

 species and even genera are continually coming to light. ] 4 The 

 species are mostly transitory, some of them are apparently 

 local in their range, many are erratic in their appearance — 

 occurring one year and missing three or four, turning up in 



(13) There are some four species reported simply from " New England " without 

 closer reference. It is therefore fair to state that from all New England 27 species 

 have been reported. 



(14) As an illustration of this we give the dates at which the species of New York 

 were first collected as announced in Peck's annual reports. 



1868 (22nd Report.) 4 species 1876 (30th Report.) 4 species. 



