CEYl.ON LRNTINI. 
147 
connatus, the remaining two being probably L. sajor-cajii. 
It may be noted that L. multiformis was described from the 
painting which accompanied the specimens. The painting is 
marked by Thwaites, “ No. 609, small, poor specimen.” It 
is certainly not L. connatus, but probably L. sajor-caju ; it 
was drawn from one of the doubtful specimens at Peradeniya. 
Of the unnumbered Ceylon specimens in Herb. Kew, one, 
ex Herb. Hooker and probably of Gardner’s collection, 
sub L. exilis, is L. sajor-caju ; another “ Ceylon G. H. K. T.” 
sub L. subnudus, marked by Berkeley, '' L. subnudus B., 
inconspicuus,” is L. subnudus. 
We have therefore three species under the following 
names 
A. 
E. 
C. 
L. connatus B. 
L. revelatus B. 
L. velatus B, & Br. 
L. infundibuliformis 
B. & Br. 
L. subnudus B. 
L. pergameneus Lév. 
L. inconspicuus B. 
L. anthocephalus Lév. 
L. cretaceus B. & Br. 
L. manipularis B. & 
Br. 
L. lobatus B. & Br. 
L. exilis Ed. 
L. multiformis 
B. & Br. 
According to Bresadola (Ann. Myc., IX., p. 549), L. infundi- 
buliformis is identical with L. javanicus Lév. 
I have not inquired into the question of nomenclature 
beyond ascertaining the synonymy of the Ceylon records. 
For the present, A is included in Ceylon lists as L. connatus 
Berk., with the other three names as synonyms. L. subnudus 
Berk, is adopted for the second species, with four Ceylon 
sjmonyms ; whether this species is identical with L. pergame- 
neus or L. anthocephalus must be decided elsewhere. C is 
Lentinus sajor-caju, of which, judging from the figure from 
which the description was drawn up, L. multiformis is a 
synonym. I have not seen the type of Lentinus exilis 
Klotzsch. 
Of the other specimens collected by Gardner, L. giganteus 
B., L. stenophyllus B., L. obnubilus B., and L. maculatus B., 
are the same species (see Ann. Perad., IV., p. 406). This 
