Report of the Botanist. 57 



Present Names. Former Names. 



Arcyria punicea Pers. Arcyria punicea Pers. 



A. incarnata Pers. A. incarnata Pers. 



A x, „ (A. cinerea Fl. Dan. 



A. cinerea BuU. j A _ digitata Mw ,. 



A. nutans Bull. A. nutans Fr. 



A. pomiformis Roth. 



Lachnobolus globosus Schw. A. globosa Schw. 



Oligonema flavida Pk. Perichsena flavida Ph. 



0. brevifila Pk. 



Perichsena csespitosa Pk. Physarum csespitosum Pk. 



P. corticalis Batsch. 



P. irregularis B. & C. 



Lycogala epidendrum Bux. Lycogala epidendrum L. 



L. flavo-fuscum Ehr. 



Bidymium oxalinum Pk. is probably only a form of Physarum cinereum, 

 and is therefore omitted. Bictydium microcarpum received from Dr. Howe, 

 is Lamproderma physaroides A. & S., and Bidymium simulans Howe, is 

 Badhamia hyalina Pers. 



Of Physarum sinuosum, two varieties have occurred ; one with the outer 

 walls of the sporangium ochraceous, the other, with them nearly black. 



Physarum citrinellum appears to be quite distinct from Biderma citrfnum, 

 to which it was referred. The following is a description of it : 



Sporangia subglobose, double-walled, the outer wall crustaceous, yellow, 

 the inner very delicate, whitish ; stem very short, reddish ; capillitium whit- 

 ish or slightly tinged with yellow, its knots numerous, large ; spores blackish 

 in the mass, globose, minutely rough, .0004-.0Q05 in diameter. 



Mosses. Catskill Mountains. 



The stem is so short that the sporangia appear sessile. The doublewall 

 of the sporangium prevents the reference of the species to Physarum Schu- 

 maeheri. 



Fuligo varians Sommf. 



The widely variant forms that are brought together under this name by 

 Dr. Rostafinski, present to the eye such diverse appearances, that it is difficult 

 to believe that they should all be united. The forms with a floccose setha- 

 lium like the old 2E. septioum, IE. vaporarium and 2E. ferrincola are 

 readily united, but those with a crustaceous gethalium would appear rather to 

 constitute another species, while the form with a naked gyrose surface seems 

 still more worthy of specific distinction. Aside from its external peculiari- 

 ties, its internal structure strengthens the idea of its specific validity. 

 Nevertheless, it must be admitted that the spores are so nearly alike in all the 

 forms, that they do not confirm the differences exhibited externally. I am 

 of the opinion, however, that the last-mentioned form will yet be separated 

 from the others, and also that Fuligo ochracea does, and will equally merit 

 specific distinction, and for this reason I have not united it with the others. 

 JEthalium geophilum Pk. is not an iEthalium, nor even a Myxogaster. It 

 is probably Hyphelia terrestris Fr. 



Badhamia magna Pk. (Bictydium magnum Pk.). 



Perhaps some may regard this as a form of the very variable Badhamia 

 utricularis. It approaches B. utricularis v. Schimperiana, but differs clearly 

 in its larger size and globose sporangia, with reticulately corrugated walls. 



