THE PENICILLIUM LUTEUM-PURPURO- 
GENUM GROUPS 
Charles Thom 
Welimer^ in a recent paper pointed out what he believes to be 
natural cleavage lines among the species commonly lumped 
together under the generic name of Pcnicillmm. In that paper 
he reasserts the validity of his separation of Citromyces as a 
separate genus, transfers the coremiform species P. claviformc 
and P. silvaticiini to the genus Coremium Link, incorrectly at- 
tributed to Corda, and revived for the purpose, and indicates the 
desirability of separating P. brevicaiile and its allies without rec- 
ognizing that this was done by Bainier® in 1907 under the name 
of Scopiilariopsis. 
The validity of the latter group has been amply confirmed by 
the work of Miss Dale,^ whose cultures have been seen by the 
writer of this paper. 
The application of the name Coremium to P. claviformc Bainier 
and C. silvaticum Wehmer is appropriate. Whether the botanical 
rules of nomenclature will permit such use is, however, very 
doubtful from the history of the name Coremium as given else- 
where.® 
If the Coremium group were limited to the two species named, 
separation would be easy. However, P. duclauxi Delacroix 
* Published by permission of the Secretary of Agriculture. This paper is 
a revision and extension of a paper read before the Botanical Society of 
America in Philadelphia, in December, 1914, under the title “The Penicillium 
Group Verticillatae of Wehmer.’’ 
*Wehmer, C. Ber. deut. Botan. Ges. 32 (1914). Heft. 5, pp. 373-384- 
Coremium silvaticum n. sp. nebst. Bemerkungen zur Systematik der Gattung 
Penicillium. 
“Brainier, G. Bui. Soc. Myc. France, 23 (1907), p. 98. 
‘Dale, E. On the fungi of the soil. Ann. Mycol. 12 (1914), No. i, pp. 
33-62. 
“Thom, C. Cultural Studies of Species of Penicillium, U. S. Dept. Agr. 
Bur. Anim. Ind. Bui. ii8, Washington, 1910. 
134 
