seventy-seven) that are recognized today as follows: Alectoria, 
Beomyces, Buellia, Cetraria, Cladonia, Cellema, Hndocarpon, 
Ephebe, Evernia, Graphis, Heterothecium, Lecanora, Lecidea, Lep- 
togium, Nephroma, Parmelia, Peltigera, Physcia, Ramalina, Ro- 
cella, Sagedia, Soiorina, Sphaerophorus, Stereocaulon, Sticta, Telos- 
chistes, Umbilicaria and Usnea. (In later editions of Linneus, 
eleven species are today recognized, adding the genera Biatora, 
Coniocybe, Pertusaria, and Urceolaria.) ‘These, it will at once be 
seen, cover the most widely known, conspicuous and important 
lichen genera, and include species of the three types: foliose, 
fruiticose and crustose. . 
These genera also include Linnean species, representing as 
wide a geographical range as could be expected for the time—in 
fact, a rather remarkable. territory—including Alpium, Americ, 
Anglie, Arvonie, Cambria, Canariis, Caipini, Europe, Gallia, 
Gronlandie, Helvetia, India, Insulis Archipelagi, Insula Balthici 
Blakulla, Italiz, Lapponize, Pensylvanie, Scaniz and Suecie. To 
tell the truth, I see no vital reason why asmaller area would not 
be as well, certainly a larger area could have no advantages from 
a basic nomenclatural standpoint. Even if the Lineean species 
represented only a ‘limited European flora’’ as a starting point, 
I see no objections. The nomenclature, as the knowledge of the 
world, has resulted from a natural growth of discovery, to the 
future much is left. 
As to the ‘‘character of the descriptions,’’ it is true that they 
are in many cases vague; yet the appended list of Linnean species 
will show that, throngh tradition and the ehiatical advance of lich- 
enological study from 1753 to today, out of eighty Linnean species 
we still recognize all but thirteen, or 84%, with the probability 
that most of these thirteen would stand, if a proper recognition of 
priority should be granted. This points conclusively, I think, to 
the fact that the majority of Linnean diagnoses (coupled with the 
actual and traditional knowledge of types) have been understood. 
Linneus also, we find, was unerring in his recognition of lichen 
species, all eighty still remaining today with the group. This is 
not only remarkable, but, I believe, unique in his classification of 
cryptogamic plants.* 
Dr. Farlow claims that: ‘The specialists who study Bryo- 
phytes, Lichens, Algee and Fungi are entirely justified in adopting 
*Refers to the 1753 edition; he placed a lichen species under JZucor in the 
1764 edition according to Krempelhuber. 
2 
