146 REVISION OF THE NORTH AMERICAN HYDNACEAE 
agree in the large size, stout stems, coarse teeth, broad pilei, and 
distinct imbricate scales of the pileus. If it were not for the latter 
character many of the plants could not be separated from forms of 
5. laevigatus and the group presents much the same difficulties 
as were met with in that species. Ав the presence or absence of 
scales on the pileus appears to be an artificial distinction, it is pos- 
sible that a more thorough study of the forms of these related 
species will show that the true line of specific cleavage must ignore 
this character. In the collections quoted not a single field note 
has been made and the description has been prepared entirely from 
the dried specimens. It is undoubtedly too broad. Many of the 
plants appear to be sufficiently marked as to warrant their being 
regarded as distinct species. But with such meager material and 
no field notes it does not seem best to attempt a specific descrip- 
tion. Some of the conspicuous distinctions may be noted as fol- 
lows: “Ala. U. & E.," teeth not at all decurrent ; “ Nelson, 4197,” 
stem hollow and scaly within ; “ Tweedy, 6," remarkably thick 
prominent scales. I regard the Connecticut and New York 
teeth and stem and Fries shows a hollow or perforate stem. 
Fries' figure differs from Nelson's plant in its much longer stem. 
Atkinson's figures are not Very satisfactory; they appear to 
represent a deformed rather than а typical plant. 
Of the Exsiccati the most sa 
and Linhart. Ellis, N. Am. Fun 
of different things some of Which 
tisfactory are Krieger, Herpell, , 
g. 926, appears to be made up 
may constitute a distinct species. 
8. SARCODON FENNICUS Karsten, Rev. Myc. 9: 10. 1887. 
Sarcodon scabrosus fennicus Karsten, Ryssl. Finl. och den Skand. 
Half. Нанву. 2: 104. 1882. 
