220 
gathered will be lighter as the applications are less perfectly made. In 
conclusion the writer adds: 
I am liappy to be able to say that the black-rot, which American viticulturists 
have considered with reason as the worst of diseases, is to-day a malady less difficult 
to £,uard against than the odium, the anthracnose, or the mildew.— David G. Fair- 
child. 
Peck, Charles H. Boleti of the United States. Bulletin of the New 
York State Museum, Vol. II, No. 8, September, 1889. 
In this bulletin Professor Peck brings together descriptions of all 
Boleti known to occur in the United States. Convenient synoptical 
tables have been arranged for the use of students, and the author seems 
to have done everything to make this a complete synopsis of the United 
States species of this important family. Western readers will at once no¬ 
tice that the Rocky Mountain regions are not cited in the geographical dis¬ 
tribution of the species, and eveu California is only credited with a very 
few, the vast majority seeming to occur in the Eastern and Southern 
States. We would naturally inquire whether the Boleti have been care¬ 
fully searched for by botanists in the Rockies, or whether there is a 
natural but deplorable dearth of such fungi in these regions. It is al¬ 
most certain that from the western slopes of the Rocky Mountains many 
new and otherwise interesting Boleti will yet be reported, because on 
the western slopes the best natural conditions obtain for their develop¬ 
ment. It is possible, however, that the comparative lack of damp for¬ 
ests and copses on the eastern slopes, of the northern Rockies at least, 
may preclude the possibility of very many Boleti ever being found there, 
as the forests, though extensive, are neither very dense nor very humid. 
In the paper before us 110 species are recorded, as against 100 species 
described in Hymenomycetes Europcei. Of the whole number 36 are na¬ 
tives of Europe as well as America. The author has found it necessary 
to establish two tribes not represented in European Boleti , as he re¬ 
marks, “ for the reception of species for which no place is found among 
the Friesian tribes.” He has adopted Fries’s classification in the main. 
He tells us that a few species have been left unclassified in consequence 
of the imperfect character of their descriptions, and that a few unpub¬ 
lished species have been omitted because they areas yet represented by 
too scanty material. The genera included in the paper are as follows: 
Boletinus — 5 species. This genus is distinguished from Boletus by 
the tubes not being easily separated from the hymenophore and by the 
hymenium having a perceptibly radiating structure. Boletus —103 
species; the six following being described as new: B. ( Viseipellis ) loir- 
tellus ; B. ( Subpruinosi ) dictyocephalus ; B. ( Calopodes) rimosellus; B. 
( Calopodes) flexuosipes; B. ( Edules) leprosus; B. (Luridi) subvelutipes. 
Strobilomyces—2 species. This genus is distinguished from Boletus 
by the tubes being not easily separable from the hymenophore and by 
the hymenium being without a perceptibly radiating structure. The 
author remarks that by the former character and by the tough snb- 
