
426 Mr. Woopwann’s Account of a 
This plant agrees with the genus Phailus in its volva, which 
has a double coat replete with mucilage ; ; and its ftipes crowned _ 
with a reflexed pileus. But it more nearly approaches the — 
genus Lycoperdon, by its head covered with a thick duft, con—_ 
tained in a fubflance of a fpongy appearance, and by the form 
of the duft, which agrees perfectly with that of moft of the true: 
lycoperdons, when examined in the microfcope. To this genus 
it muft at prefent probably be referred, though the total want 
of an exterior coat prevents its agreeing with it fo perfe@tly as. _ 
it ought. 
The Mucor * fepticus of Hupson and Licurroot (Mucor 
ovatus of ScH#FFER); the Mucor * butyraceus of SCHEFFER 
(194.), not taken notice of by either Hupson or Licurroorm,, 
but which I have often found here; and the Lycoperdon * epi- 
dendrum of Licutroor, which I fuppofe to be what Hupsow 
calls Lycoperdon epiphyilum, as he has referred to the fame 
plate of Scua@rrer (193. Mucor fragiformis); have all fome 
affinity with the frudtification of this plant; and the more fo, 
if we {uppofe the head to be at firft covered with a mucilage, 
which afterwards turns to a duft; but this will hardly be ad- 
mitted, as the plant fent to Mr. Dickson had the duft per- 
te&ly formed, though the volva and ftem were both. replete- 
with mucilage. But we cannot admit it to agree with any of 
thefe laft mentioned plants, as they have all an exterior coat, 
though very fugitive, of which this feems entirely deftitute, 
We may add, that they are all very fugitive productions ; 
* T cannot help obferving that, in my opinion, Harier has done more rightly 
20 making thefe into a new genus (Filago), than our botanifts, who have jumbled 
them with the genera Lycoperdonand Mucor, to which they have no great affinity 
any more than the Spheria of Hauzer, likewife very improperly ranked with the 
Lycoperdons and Clavariz. 
7 whereas 
