MYOOLOGICAL NOTES 
0. G. LLOYD 
Page 912 
Kew and which was figured in Hooker's Journal. It differs apparently 
very much from the plant nor; known as Cordycops Taylori and has 15 to 
20 branches in a Medusa-like head* I have already published my doubts 
that Cordycops Taylori as now known is the same as the original 
species, and the publication of the original as Cordycops trictenae 
tends to confirm them. Mr. Olliff's figure is"from an unpublished 
drawing, once the property of G. R. Gray 11 . I think it is the original 
of Cordycops Taylori. 
Mr. Cheel sendfe me a specimen of Cordycops Robertsii from 
New South Pales. I had only received it from New Zealand and all the 
specimens I saw in London were from New Zealand. From Australia it 
had been named and figured as Cordycops Selkirkii, small specimen but 
surely the same. Also I see no difference in Olliff's account and 
figure of Cordycops Coxii excepting it grow on a different host. 
In addition to the new names that Oiliff gives to old species 
he records a species, Cordycops Meioionthae from Australia, which I 
think is recorded from very uncertain material. 
CORDYCEPS HZNLEYAE.- Mr. Cheel suggests in a letter that 
our Fig. 622 suggests a branched specimen of Cordycops Robertsii, and 
as we come to think about it that is possibly the case although it 
had not occurred to us. 
In Mr. Olliff's paper is a local synonym of Cordycops that we 
did not know at the time we wrote our pamphlet, vis: Cordycops crassa 
Mandsley (as Clavaria) = Cordycops Gunnii. 
THE CORDYCEPS AT HEW YORK BOTANICAL GARDEN 
• Y/e recently looked over the Cordycops material at the New 
York Botanical Garden, where are preserved the specimens on which 
Ellis and Seaver, for the most part, based their work. 
CORDYCEPS CRINALIS.- The specimen (Fig. 1619) on which Ellis 
based his record of Cordyceps Sphingum, is interesting, Ellis found 
at Newfield a single specimen (cocoon) from which slender Cordyceps 
clubs were growing from the larva. He cut it in half as shown in 
our photograph (Fig. 1619) and named it in manuscript Cordyceps 
crinalis but afterward concluded it was Cordyceps Sphingum. Its 
habits of growth and the clubs are not the same as those of Cordyceps 
Sphingum, and to my view Ellis' manuscript name should stand. This 
is the only specimen of this species known. 
CORDYCEPS 
de- 
d GRACILIS (Fig. 1620).- There arc only two col¬ 
lections of this known to me from the States* Cue is in Pock's 
collection and he found only a single specimen and the other was 
veloped from culture at New York from material sent from Indiana, 
Our figure (1620) is a photograph made of a drawing at New York. 
Both collections were referred to Cordyceps entomorrhiaa, as the 
species so common in England is generally mis-known (Cfr. Letter 
Note 94). It is somewhat misleading that the plant is only illustra¬ 
ted in the States by copying Dickson's old figure from England, which 
is an entirely different species and has never been collected in the 
47, 
United 
States. 
