112 Mycologia 



fuscescens subcompressus ramosus erectus (altit. circiter 2 centi- 

 metr.) ; apothecia badio-nigricantia (latit. 2-3 millim.), termi- 

 nalia; spores 8 nae ellipsoideae minutae, longit. 0.005-8 millim., 

 crassit. 0.0025-35 millim. Iodo gelatina hymenialis fulvescens. 

 Super Pinus contortam in Oregon, Tellanock (misit Dr. Eck- 

 feldt). Comparanda cum A. diver gene ente, quae thallum habet 

 te'retiusculum, sporas majores. Thallus lamina tenuit rubescens. 

 Spermatia bifusiformia, longit. 0.0045 millim., crassit. 0.0005 

 millim. ; sterigmata breviuscula." 



In 1891 (Bull. Torr. Bot. Club 18: 257. 1891), Dr. Eckfeldt 

 writes under Botanical Notes: " Alectoria cetrariza (Nyl.) Eck- 

 feldt. Thallus erect, tufted, caespitose and spreading, slender, 

 softish, at first compressed ; lacunose and channeled beneath, the 

 branches becoming terete ; terminating in subulate extremities, 

 olivaceous to lead color and darkening, canescent. 



" Apothecia of middling size terminal and subterminal, lead- 

 colored, margin uneven, dentate or disappearing, becoming de- 

 flexed with a thin bloom. Spores ovoid-ellipsoid, hyaline con- 

 tinuous, quite constantly ~~ mic. 



" This lichen was first discovered by Mr. Thomas Howell, in 

 October [30], 1882, on the branches of small shrubs, bordering 

 the sea, at Tillamook, Oregon. From its resemblance and rela- 

 tionship to the well-known Cetraria calif omica, Tuck., no doubt 

 this interesting plant has been collected before, and distributed 

 under an erroneous name. It is evident that this lichen is pecu- 

 liar only to the northwestern coast." 



During the years covered from 1894 to 1903, three sets of 

 exsiccati were issued including specimens of Cetraria calif omica 

 Tuck., i. e., Hasse, No. 192, San Gabriel mts., Cal., Aug., 1896; 

 Cummings, Lich. Bor. Amer. No. 142 ; Decades No. Amer. Lich. 

 No. 212, Wawona, Cal., May 16, 1896, 3,950 ft.; Zahlbruckner, 

 Kryptogamae Exsiccati, San Jacinto mts., Cal.* 



In 1910, Mr. Merrill (Bryologist, 1. c.) reviews the history of 

 the plant somewhat vaguely, and makes these important state- 

 ments : ( 1 ) that he had noticed a' " discrepancy between the ori- 

 ginal description" . . . "and the published examples"; (2) that 



* See also Herre : Proc. Wash. Acad, of Sciences 7: 337. 1906 and 12: 

 206. 1910. 



