96 
ON THELEPHORA LYCII. 
genus may be numerically reduced, and their study facilitated. I 
have now to direct attention to a single species which has been 
long overlooked. 
Persoon, in his “Mycologia Europsea,” described (p. 248) a 
species of Thelepliora, following cinerea^ which he called Thelephora 
Lycii, found on the dry branches of Lycium barharum. Sub- 
sequently Desmazieres published in his “ Exsiccati ” what he con- 
sidered the same species, on branches of the Lilac, adding that he 
had found it also on the Ash. Many years ago I found the same 
species on the Ash, but not having seen the specimens issued by 
Desmazieres, these always remained without a name, as I could not 
refer them to any species with which I was acquainted. This year 
I have met with them again, but this time on the Lilac, in Kew 
Gardens. 
By comparison I am satisfied that my specimens are identical 
with those published by Desmazieres. I have no direct evidence 
of the species being that of Persoon, but the presumptive evidence 
is strong in its favour. 
Fries appears to have known the Thel. Lycii P. only by repute, 
for he had not seen specimens. In his Elenchus, under “ Thele- 
phora limitata,^’ he says Th. 'Lycii is possibly referable to this 
species. On the next page he includes it amongst his uncertain 
forms, which he considered as imperfect states of the species he 
had previously described. 
That Fries was wrong I think manifest from the fact that what 
is I believe an authentic specimen of Corticium limitatum in the 
Berkeley herbarum is a species of Peniophora with the character- 
istic bodies on the hymenium, and there are none of these on 
Thel. Lycii, although the hymenium is perfectly mature. From 
this I conclude that the species are not identical. It is true that 
the description of Cort. violaceo-liviclum is very like Cort. Lycii, 
but specimens of that plant have a very dilfferent appearance. I 
am, therefore, strongly of opinion that this which I consider to be 
the Thelephora Lycii, Pers., cannot be referred to any European 
species, and is in itself distinct. 
Persoon says of it briefly, “ sub-orbicularis, crassiuscula, con- 
fluens, glabra ; papillis minutis subcongestis.” He afterwards adds 
in a note that the single individuals are half an inch broad, sub- 
rugose, with the margin sub-repand, whitish, becoming cinereous, 
subpulverulent. 
It is characterised by growing in small discoid patches in. 
in diameter, with at first a whitish byssoid circumference, of a pale 
rosy grey tint, papillate in the centre, and cracking when old. 
There is a tendency to grow around the old pustules of a Sphceria 
after the manner of C. polygonium. But it is thinner and more 
delicate, and of a difi'erent colour to C. polygonium, to which it 
has really the nearest external resemblance. 
To C. cinereum it could not be referred, as that is also a Penio- 
phora. I have carefully compared it with all the forms of allied 
