46 



viz. that Fries: S. M. should be the starting point for the nomen== 

 clature of the fungi, except for the Uredinales, Ustilaginales and 

 Gasteromycetes which date from Persoon's Synopsis. It has been no 

 small work to carry through those rules for so many names as are 

 stated here, these rules not having been used before in mycological 

 literature. It has necessitated a closer study of Fries's S. M. and Per* 

 soon's Syn. which I have, therefore, quoted with every separate spes 

 cies. It is to be desired that all mycologists should submit to those 

 rather practical rules so that the question of nomenclature might once 

 be so far settled that it in future should play no greater part than it 

 deserves. 



With each species I have also quoted the synonyms used by Ro* 

 STRUP or earlier Danish authors in order to facilitate the understanding 

 of their works; as also the names used in Rabenhorst's Kryptogamen* 

 flora and in Sylloge Fungorum. Especially in the latter work the 

 same species will often be found under different names. 



I have also adopted, what is now common, the spelling of all names 

 of species with small initial letters when they are not derived from 

 names of persons. 



THE DANISH NAMES OF THE FUNGI. Although it is not 

 common in systematic works to use or quote the domestic names of 

 fungi I have considered it necessary to state them in the present 

 work which, in several ways, has a historical character. In several of 

 his works Rostrup deals with the ancient popular names of the fungi- 

 (R. 1875), and he has very often denominated them himself (e. g. R. 

 69, 83 d, 93 d, 02 a and 04 a); after Rostrup F. K0lpin Ravn and 

 M. L. MoRTENSEN have followed in his foot«steps giving Danish 

 names to the parasitic fungi when they were mentioned in popular 

 papers. Prior to Rostrup, Shumacher (26), Hornemann (37) and 

 ViBORG (1793) have given Danish names to the fungi; Ihave, there* 

 fore, thought it necessary to quote them here in order that those who 

 may want to use Danish names in the future should not increase the 

 number of them but use the same as have formerly been used for the 

 same species. It must be noticed that Jenssen^Tusch who has so 

 enthusiastically (1867) collected the Danish names of plants only 

 mentions very few Danish names of fungi. 



PHAENOLOGICAL OBSERVATIONS have, as far as concerns 

 the fungi, been very much neglected by earlier authors (Schroeter, 

 Bubak and Liro excepted), I have, therefore, stated as many facts in 

 that respect as possible, believing it to be of great importance in diffe* 

 rent respects. 



