Lloyd Mycological Writings V4.pdf - MykoWeb

PROFESSOR CHARLES H. PECK.
At various times portraits of mycologists have been presented
in "Mycological Notes," but never one that has given me greater
satisfaction than does the portrait of Professor Charles Peck, whom I
consider the father of systematic American mycology. When he
began his study years ago, very little had been accomplished with
American fungi, and it will therefore not be out of place to give a
short preliminary resume. Indeed, it is necessary that this should be
done in order to show the exceptional difficulties under which Professor
Peck labored.
Schweinitz, who got his introductory knowledge from his own work in Europe,
published a list of his own determinations from North Carolina and then from
Pennsylvania. At this time, about the beginning of the century, the subject was
practically unknown in America and he was absolutely alone. Consequently little
attention was paid to his efforts until yearg after his death.
Then came Curtis and Ravenel in North Carolina, who, however, were collectors
rather than mycologists. Curtis sent all of his specimens to Berkeley for
naming, and Berkeley advised him of the names by numbers, on which uncertain
basis Curtis published the little he accomplished. None of his work showed much
personal knowledge of the subject; for not one out of ten of the specimens that he
sent to Berkeley to be named was Curtis able to suggest even a generic name. Notwithstanding
this, Berkeley published them under the advertisement of "Berkeley
and Curtis," and this deception is still carried on in nomenclature, although Curtis
had about as much to do with the naming of the plants as did our Professor Mc-
Ginty. This is one of the frauds that is winked at in our current usage.
Frost began his studies in Vermont and published a list of specimens in Tuckerman's
Catalogue. He seems to have determined his species largely from
European literature, and did very remarkable work considering the difficulties under
which he labored.
When Professor Peck began his work with fungi forty odd years
ago, the foregoing American mycologists only had preceded him.
He got his first ideas from Curtis, from whom he purchased a set of
specimens. At that date it was extremely difficult to get the names
of even the most common plants, but Professor Peck persevered, and
has now been working on this subject for so many years that he has
acquired an exceptional field knowledge of fungi, especially agarics,
no other American mycologist being his equal. In his capacity of
State Botanist of New York, he has issued 45 Annual Reports, the
first of which is called the 21st Annual Report, 1868, and the last,
which is known as the 65th Report, 1911. These Reports have been
devoted largely to a description of "new species," and I think all
records have been lost of the number even, of "new species" tha't he
has proposed. In-fact, Professor Peck has given names to almost all
our American species of agarics. Of the validity of many of these
"new species," I venture to express serious doubts; for, while I know
very little about agarics, it develops in the Gasteromycetes and Polyporaceae,
which have been my special studies, that the fungus flora
of the temperate world is practically the same and that most "new
species" that have been named, not only in America but in Europe,
are really old species not recognized. This, however, is natural in
510.