57 
REHM’S ASCOMYCETEN. 
The publication of another fasciculus of this collection was 
announced in our last number. We have since had occasion to 
examine some of the specimens, on which a few observations are 
necessary. 
No. 451. Plicaria tracheia , Rehm, is identical with Boudiera 
alveolata , C. & Phil., and is intermediate between Ascobolus and 
Ombrophila ; in some respects allied also to Sphcerosoma. 
No. 454. This is certainly not the typical form of Peziza hirta , 
but intermediate between P. hirta and P. scutellata. 
No. 456. Humaria umbrata, is a large pallid form, but the 
fructification is the same as in the type. 
No. 457. Dr. Rehm is certainly wrong in his assumption that 
Peziza fuscescens, P., and Peziza fuscidula, C. & E., are the same 
species. This will be manifest when we publish figures of both in 
an early part of “ Mycographia.” 
Meliola quinqueseptata, Rehm, No. 492, is stated to be the same 
as Meliola quinquespora , Thum. There seems to be a curious 
fatality about this species ; fortunately the specimens can be con- 
sulted in both instances. The description by Thuemen, which is 
quite different from his specimens, would be a novelty in Meliola. 
It says that the asci are ellipsoid, -035--038 X *01-*012 mm., con- 
taining 5 ovate sporidia, which are simple, hyaline, *01 X *005 mm. 
The specimens clearly show that he has mistaken the sporidia for 
asci, and the five cells for five sporidia — a most extraordinary 
error, but nevertheless true, for he calls the asci brown and the 
sporidia hyaline. We have examined the specimens ; the sporidia 
are precisely as in Meliola amphitricha, brown, with four septa, and 
consequently five cells, the dimensions of the mature sporidia are 
rather more than those given above. There are two of these 
sporidia in each ascus, but when fully mature the asci are dissolved. 
Dr. Rehm, evidently finding the name an error, changes it to M. 
quinqueseptata , which is again erroneous, for neither in his speci- 
mens nor in those issued by Thuemen are the sporidia more than 
four septate, either name conveys a wrong impression. It is curious 
that neither Thuemen nor Rehm has indicated the main point of 
distinction, in fact the only difference between this species and M. 
amphitricha , with which evidently neither of them are much ac- 
quainted, or they would have recognized the distinction at once. 
In passing, it may be stated that Helminthosporium orbiculare, 
Thum., according to specimens received from him, is Meliola am- 
phitricha, Fr., and that Meliola Mac-Oweniana , Thum., is most 
decidedly not a Meliola at all, but a very good species of Asterina, 
and will therefore stand as Asterina Mac-Oweniana, and Meliola 
Psilostomce, Thum., No. 775, is also an Asterina, although the 
specimens are scarcely mature. On the other hand, Meliola micro- 
theca, Thum., No. 851, cannot be distinguished from M. amphitricha, 
