MYCOLOGICAI MOTES 
0. ,G. LLOYD 
only very sne.ll species known devoid of both cristoted cells end 
color glands. The color of the dried specimen is Isabelline but it 
soaks up pale, almost white, Hr. Chipp found it on dead palm stems. 
Collection No.4693. 
LENZITES ABIETIS PROM I. «. JOHK^OS, OCLORAEO (Pig,1607).- 
I presume I should heroic! this as a u ncw species 11 , but with the same 
surface, color, thickness, texture and microscopic features as the 
common Polystictus abiot liras and the same general appearance except- 
in;: it has lonzitoid bynoniuia, I think it best to consider it an 
hymonial variant, Polystictus abiotinus is with us a fairly depend¬ 
able species, although we net some puzzling forms from Japan. This 
is the first American' collection I have seen that strongly departs 
from the usual plant, as there is nor- a Lonsltos abiotina wo 
slightly change the name for this lenzitoid form of Polystictus 
abietinus. 
POLYSTICTUS , HIUOH, FROM J. £. LAWOE, DENMARK 
fPip* 1608).- One who can discover a. nor species of Polyporus in 
Denmark now deserves a medal and when we first saw this collection we 
thought one would have to be awarded to Mr. Lance. But when wo came 
to observe it closely wc found the same color, surface, context, 
pores and spores rn the common Polystictus perennis, and notwith¬ 
standing the areat difference shown in our photograph wo are fox cod 
to the conclusion that Hr. L anael a collection is a depauperate form 
$r condition of Polystictus perennis. Our figure shows Hr. Lange’s 
plant (1608 and 1S09] the usual Polystictus perennis, 
POLYSTICTUS DILATATU3 FROM DR» Cl I, BERNARD, JAMA (Pi£. 
1610).- This appears to correspond to our photograph of the types 
at Leiden, and it was named from Java. T7c referred it in Letter 36 
to Polystictus Blumoi but the pores of Blumei are large and shallow 
and these arc smaller and more irpicoid. The reference is doubtful 
of course but it is better to utilize an old name than to invent 
a new one. X!o would enter it in section 105 on account of its 
nearly smooth pileus but it should be cross indexed in 109 from 
its irpicoid pores. 
IRPEX CRASSXTATUS PROM 0. U, OEESOH, I0V.7. ( Fi>1011) .- 
Adnotc to the host with a thiefc, white, hard context, 1-1 1/2 era. 
thick* Piloi imbricate, white, with strigoso, hirsute surface. 
Tooth thin, white, foliaceous. gperes 4-5 nic, globose, hyaline , 
smooth. Vlo base a now name on this specimen for we know no old 
name for it. It might be held as a thick form of the common Irpe 
lacteus (Fig. 1612) but our photographs in contrast will demonstrate 
the improbability of this view. Besides Irpex lacteus has- different 
spores. The proper nemo for the plant would be Irpex crassus, but 
this was applied to a species common with us which occurs also m 
Europe, and was called by Persoon Sistostrona pachyodon. The name 
Irpex crassus is still applied, to it, however, by those who arc not 
fmiliar with the European plants. Fig. 1611 represents Irpex 
erassitatus. Fig. 1012 the common Irpex lacteus. 
