94 
COOKE HERBARIUM. 
The large herbarium of Fungi transferred by M. C. Cooke to 
the Royal Herbarium at Kew, is now for the most part incor- 
porated with the National collection. The total number of 
specimens reach to 46,000, being nearly double that of the 
Berkeley Herbarium, and these, approximately, represent : — 
Hymenomycetes ... 
... 11,000 
Gasteromycetes and Myxogastres 
... 2,000 
Ustilagines and Uredines 
... 6,000 
Discomycetes 
... 6,000 
Pyrenomycetes 
... 12,000 
Incompletae 
... 9,000 
The number of species has not been calculated, a large number 
of which are types, and others as important as types ; such, for 
instance, are the individual specimens used in the illustration of 
“ Mycographia.” The entire collection is a most valuable one, 
and has fitly become national property, containing as it does 
contributions from most of the mycologists of the past forty 
years, Berkeley, Broome, Bloxam, Cesati, Currey, Curtis, De 
Notaris, Duby, Ellis, Fries, Kalchbrenner, Leveille, Montagne, 
Peck, Ravenal, Rabenhorst, Westendorp, Winter, &c., &c. 
WHAT IS LICHENOPSIS ? 
By M. C. Cooke. 
Schweinitz described and figured in his “ Fungi Americani 
Boreali” a fungus which he there named Lichenopsis sphcero- 
boloides , and, upon the faith of this description and its 
illustrative figures, Prof. Saccardo has, in his “ Sylloge ” (Yol. 
iii., p. 442), included it in Sphceropsidece. This is the first 
interpretation of the genus. 
In the Berkeley Herbarium there is a very good specimen of 
this fungus, contributed by Schweinitz himself, which accords 
very well with the description externally, and also internally 
to a certain extent, but not entirely, since this is a J Discomycete, 
differing very little, if at all, from Schmitzomia ; and this is 
the second interpretation accepted by Berkeley, and Curtis, 
and also, we fancy, by most of the American botanists. 
The third interpretation appears to be an accidental one. It 
is based on specimens from S. Carolina in the Berkeley 
Herbarium, and included under Lichenopsis sphceroboloides , with 
which it agrees in external appearance and habit, but differs 
in fructification. Which of these is the true Lichenopsis ? 
There certainly seems to be a strong presumption in favour 
of the authentic specimen derived from Schweinitz. It is 
erumpent, with the appearance of a Stictis , the hymenium 
