﻿Report 
  of 
  the 
  Botanist. 
  71 
  

  

  another 
  point 
  of 
  affinity 
  with 
  Pholiota. 
  Still, 
  the 
  absence 
  of 
  an 
  

   annulus 
  and 
  the 
  arachnoid 
  character 
  of 
  the 
  veil 
  seem 
  to 
  forbid 
  

   its- 
  reference 
  to 
  this 
  subgenus. 
  

  

  Panus 
  dorsalis 
  Bosc. 
  

  

  The 
  form 
  that 
  occurs 
  here 
  does 
  not 
  well 
  agree 
  with 
  the 
  

   description 
  of 
  the 
  species. 
  It 
  has 
  no 
  stem 
  and 
  is 
  of 
  a 
  buff 
  or 
  

   pale-yellow 
  color. 
  The 
  cuticle 
  does 
  not 
  break 
  up 
  into 
  " 
  floccose 
  

   scales," 
  but 
  the 
  pileus 
  is 
  strigose-hairy, 
  especially 
  toward 
  the 
  

   margin. 
  The 
  spores 
  are 
  of 
  a 
  beautiful 
  fleshy-pink 
  color 
  like 
  

   the 
  lamellae 
  of 
  young 
  Agaricus 
  campestris. 
  It 
  grows 
  on 
  beech 
  

   and 
  birch. 
  I 
  have 
  not 
  found 
  it 
  on 
  pine. 
  If 
  the 
  type 
  is 
  accu- 
  

   rately 
  described, 
  our 
  plant 
  ought 
  at 
  least 
  to 
  be 
  considered 
  a 
  

   distinct 
  variety. 
  

  

  Panits 
  operctjlattjs 
  B. 
  & 
  C. 
  

  

  It 
  is 
  not 
  rare 
  on 
  alder 
  trunks 
  and 
  branches, 
  but 
  the 
  veil 
  or 
  

   operculum 
  is 
  generally 
  very 
  fugacious, 
  so 
  that 
  it 
  is 
  rarely 
  seen 
  

   except 
  in 
  very 
  young 
  plants. 
  

  

  Lenzites 
  sepiaria 
  var. 
  porosa. 
  

  

  This 
  remarkable 
  variety 
  was 
  detected 
  at 
  Long 
  Lake, 
  in 
  Ham- 
  

   ilton 
  county. 
  The 
  whole 
  hymenium 
  is 
  porous 
  so 
  that 
  the 
  plant 
  

   might 
  easily 
  be 
  taken 
  for 
  a 
  species 
  of 
  Polyporus. 
  All 
  the 
  spe- 
  

   cimens 
  found 
  on 
  a 
  single 
  pine 
  trunk 
  were 
  of 
  this 
  character. 
  

  

  Lenzites 
  Cookei 
  Berk. 
  

  

  The 
  opinion 
  has 
  somewhere 
  been 
  expressed 
  that 
  Dcedalea 
  

   confragosa 
  and 
  Trametes 
  ruhescens 
  are 
  one 
  species. 
  I 
  am 
  dis- 
  

   posed 
  not 
  only 
  to 
  adopt 
  this 
  opinion, 
  but 
  also 
  to 
  add 
  to 
  these 
  

   synonyms 
  Lenzites 
  Cookei, 
  L. 
  Cratcegi, 
  L. 
  proxima 
  and 
  pos- 
  

   sibly 
  L. 
  KlotzscML 
  Excepting 
  the 
  last 
  one, 
  of 
  which 
  I 
  have 
  

   seen 
  no 
  diagnosis, 
  the 
  descriptions 
  of 
  these 
  so-called 
  species 
  

   are 
  all 
  applicable 
  to 
  a 
  single 
  fungus 
  common 
  with 
  us. 
  Neither 
  

   description 
  covers 
  all 
  the 
  forms 
  of 
  the 
  fungus, 
  each 
  is 
  applica- 
  

   ble 
  to 
  one 
  or 
  another 
  of 
  its 
  forms. 
  Indeed, 
  so 
  wonderfully 
  

   variable 
  and 
  comprehensive 
  is 
  this 
  L. 
  Cookei, 
  of 
  which 
  scarcely 
  

   more 
  than 
  a 
  two-line 
  description 
  was 
  given, 
  that 
  not 
  only 
  does 
  

   it 
  exhibit 
  all 
  the 
  essential 
  characters 
  of 
  the 
  five 
  species 
  named, 
  

   but 
  its 
  hymenium, 
  utterly 
  regardless 
  of 
  the 
  generic 
  limitations 
  

   of 
  the 
  books, 
  assumes 
  the 
  hymenial 
  characters 
  of 
  four 
  genera 
  

   even, 
  viz. 
  : 
  Lenzites, 
  Dsedalea, 
  Trametes 
  and 
  Polyporus. 
  A 
  

   species 
  so 
  comprehensive 
  in 
  its 
  characters 
  certainly 
  deserves 
  a 
  

   more 
  extended 
  notice 
  than 
  any 
  yet 
  given 
  to 
  it. 
  

  

  It 
  generally 
  grows 
  singly 
  and 
  stemless, 
  but 
  in 
  rare 
  instances 
  

   I 
  have 
  seen 
  it 
  clustered 
  and 
  with 
  a 
  stem-like 
  base. 
  When 
  

   growing 
  upon 
  large 
  trunks, 
  the 
  pileus 
  is 
  nearly 
  semiorbicular 
  ; 
  

  

  