MYCOLOGICAL NOTES 
C. G. LLOYD 
Page 1036 
There is a collection of Polystictus zelanicus at Paris determined 
as Polystictus cristatus "Cooke in litt.". If Cooke did not know 
his own species we can hardly expect our Parisian friends to know it. 
POLYSTICTUS ZELANICUS (Fig. 1893 ),- This is somewhat similar 
to the preceding but is a thinner plant with much larger pores and is 
much more common and widespread. The type in the British Museum 
came from Ceylon where it is evidently rare. I have specimens from 
Ceylon, India, Africa, China and several collections from the Phil¬ 
ippines, These had been determined and recorded as Polystictus 
acutus, pargamenus and Munsae, all synonyms, and as cristatus, gib- 
berulosus, floccosus and funalis, all misdeterminations. The plant 
is very characteristic and should not from our figure ever be con¬ 
fused again, 
TRAMSTES WILDEMANI (Fig. 1894).- Some years ago we received 
from Rev. Hyac * Vanderyst, Congo Beige, a specimen that we misre- 
ferred to Polystictus cristatus on comparison at Paris with the mis¬ 
named specimens of "Cooke in litt". In our opinion now it is the 
same plant as Polystictus zelanicus but a thick, Trametes form. We 
found afterwards at Brussels a co-type specimen of Hexagona Wilde- 
mani as this plant has been named by Bressdola. For me it is a 
Trametes closely related to this section of Polystictus, although we 
would class it in Sect. 132 of Trametes. The plant is only known 
from this one collection from Rev, Vanderyst ( sent to me ) and only 
found by me in the museum at Brussels. 
POLYSTICTUS FLOCCOSUS (Fig. 1895 & 1896).- This is somewhat 
similar to Polystictus zelanicus with which it has been confused but 
it has smaller pores than zelanicus and finer, softer hairs than 
cristatus. It was named from Java, and beautifully illustrated by 
Junghuhn and his types are at Leiden. It is rare and I know of but 
one certain, recent collection (Williams 74, Philippines), 
POLYSTICTUS DYBOWSKI: (bis.) (Fig. 1898).- The three preced¬ 
ing species are closely related but this departs in its very thin 
context, large, long, glaucous pores and more hirsute surface hairs. 
It is only known from Africa and we have a fine collection from 
Hyac, Vanderyst and co-types given us by P. Hariot. It was published 
as Hexagona Lybowskii and so illustrated in our Hexagona pamphlet 
but for me now it is a much better Polystictus in this section. 
However, it is a duplicate name in Polystictus and will have to be 
c hang e d s ome day. 
POLYSTICTUS ELLISIANUS (Fig. 1897 ).- Published as Trametes. 
We put it in Polystictus as a convenience and because of its close 
relationship to Polystictus Dybowskii, It is not a good Polystictus 
neither a Trametes, as published. It might be called Irpex. The 
surface is covered with the same fibrils as Polystictus Dybowskii 
but the pores are large, irpicoid and to the eye the plants have no 
resemblance, as a comparison of our figure with Fig. 1898, will show. 
The teeth are strongly glaucous but I find no spores or basidia. The 
projecting hyaline hyphae are not specialized. 
