FUNGI OF ICELAND 453 
(17) E. Rostrup: Islands Svampe, Botanisk Tidsskrift, 25. Bind, 
pp. 281—335. København 1903. 
(18) E. Rostrup: Liste over Svampe samlede paa Island 1903—05 
af Helgi Jonsson, 0. Davidsson og C.V. Prytz — in manu- 
script in the Library of the Botanical Garden. Copen- 
hagen 1905. 
The figures in brackets are quoted in the following in refe- 
rences to this literature. 
The first botanical investigation of Iceland which included the 
fungi was made by J.G. Kénig in 1765—66 with the object of 
collecting plants for the Flora Danica His collection of fungi forms 
the basis of the lists contained in C. F. Müller’s Enumeratio (1) 
and in Zoéga’s Flora Islandica (2). These lists comprise respec- 
tively 11 and 12 species which, however, are identical except for 2. 
In 1783 Bjorn Halldörsson’s Grasnytiar (3) appeared. In this 7 
species of fungi are mentioned by their Icelandic names, of which 
2, at any rate, are not to be found in the above-mentioned lists. 
This brings up the number of species to 15. These 15 species 
reappear without additions in (4), (6), (7), and (8). Thienemann’s 
and Günther’s investigations (9) of the Icelandic vegetation in 1820 
and 1821, and Hjaltalin’s Islenzk Grasafrædi (10) add each one species 
to the number. Roberts and Vahl’s lists (11) and (12) bring up 
the number to 19. L. Lindsay’s Flora of Iceland 1861 (13) only 
gives 13 species, adding no new ones, and 5 of the earlier 6 species 
are declared by Berkeley (p. 70) to be impossible to determine. 
Rostrup, however, regards this reduction as partly unfounded (15). — 
The 19 species of fungi given in these earlier lists are the fol- 
lowing: — 
Humaria granulata (Bull.), Geopyxis Ciborium (Vahl), G. cupu- 
laris (L.), Chlorosplenium aeruginosum (Fl. D.), Lachnea scutellata (L.), 
Helvella atra König, Clavaria muscoides (L.), Psalliota campestris (L.), 
Psilocybe ericaea (Pers.), Russula fragilis (Pers.), Boletus scaber Bull., 
B. laevis Fr., B. bovinus L., B. luteus L., Globaria Bovista (L.), 
Bovista clavata Fr., Crucibulum vulgare Tul. 
The lists further contain a couple of Agaricaceae which must 
be considered doubtful. The same applies to Boletus laevis, B. bovi- 
See Carl Christensen, Den Danske Botaniks Historie, p. 118. 
