Bovista velutina (Jour. Linn. Soc. 14-78) Lycoperdon golun- 
gense and Lycoperdon tomentosum (Trans. Linn. Soc. 26-287) (the 
latter compiled in Saccardo as Bovista tomentosa) Lycoperdon 
tephrospermum (Jour. Linn. Soc. 10-718.) I should refer all to un¬ 
opened geasters. 
OTHER GENERA. 
Stella Americana (Jour. Myc. 5-185) as I have already sup¬ 
posed (Myc. Notes, p. 82) is a specimen of Scleroderma Geasterwith an 
accidental cleavage of the peridium. 
The genus Sclerangium (Ann. Sci. Nat. 3 9-119) I am satisfied, 
notwithstanding very eminent authority to the contrary, is a false 
genus and should be referred to Scleroderma. I have received fresh 
specimens from Florida and the “endoperidium” of this specimen was 
represented by a few fragments of the exoperidium that had adhered to 
the gleba and slivered off from exoperidium. The young specimens 
show no sign of two layers of the peridium and I am satisfied there is 
no such genus as Sclerangium with two distinct peridia. 
Scleroderma pyramidatum (Grev. 10-109). A specimen that 
answers the description (though numbered A 374 not A 375 as cited) 
is at Berlin and is no doubt Kalchbrenner’s type of this species. It is 
a curious plant from South Africa with large rough cortex warts but is 
so immature that little can be told about its genus excepting it is not 
a Scleroderma. 
Sphaericeps lignipes (Trans. Linn. Soc. 26-290). The type of 
this genus is a little gleba at the British Museum. Prof. Massee ex¬ 
amined it years ago and stated that it is a Battarrea, which it .surely is, 
and still we find the genus considered as valid in the most recent com¬ 
pilation (Engler & Prantl) which shows how much easier it is to 
introduce error than to get rid of it. The genus Battarrea is character¬ 
ised by the possession of a kind of false capillitium “ annulated cells’’ 
as they are known and which no other genus has. The genus can 
therefore be recognized from the merest fragment of the gleba. What 
the source was of the wonderful figure that represents this genus we 
do not know. The original is not at the British Museum. As it is 
well known, the Welwitsch fungi lay around for a number of years 
before Curry “described” them, and as there is no specimen in exist¬ 
ence from which the figure was drawn* I surmise it was reconstructed 
by Welwitsch from memory. It impresses me, as being about what a 
collector would reconstruct from memory after a lapse of years, of the 
genus Battarrea, especially if he was not a mycologist and did not 
observe very closely the plant. The genus Battarrea is well known 
from Africa, being in several collections, and there is no doubt that it is 
the origin of the genus Sphaericeps. 
We have found in the museums of Europe a great many plants 
that impress us as being wrongly classified, synonyms etc. but the pre¬ 
ceding are all that we recall that we think are based entirely on errors. 
* Monsieur Hariot tells me he learned from inquiry that the specimen is not at Lisbon 
Portugal, where there is a possibility it might be. 
182 
