Lloyd Mycological Writings V4.pdf - MykoWeb

SPORES HYALINE.
Mr. Weir finds this plant on Larix in Idaho. It is most excellently
named, for such abundant setae are found on no other species. Several
collections that Mr. Weir sent us are entirely resupinate. In context,
color, and setae the plant is close to Polyporus gilvus.
TRAMETES FARCTA. Pileus thin, cinnamon brown (4x6x1 cm.), with
sulcate, soft surface. Context concolorous, thin, but represented by the old stuffed
pores very light weight. Pores large, sinuate, >-! mm., almost reaching the crust;
but the old pores are filled with brown hyphae, so that they appear as context. Setae
slender, sharp, very numerous. Spores not found, no doubt hyaline.
Rick distributed this (No. 108) as "Fomes cereus Berk.", which is some error,
apparently, for no such species was published as far as we can find. Surely it is not
Poria cerea from India, and there is nothing "waxy" about it, but just the contrary,
or we would retain the misname. Technically it is a Fomes, but on account of its
light weight, nonligneous tissue, and general nature we should class it as Trametes.
Its affinities are with Polyporus gilvus, and it is very close to Polyporus setosus.
POLYPORUS BAM BUSINUS. Pileus general size, shape, and color as Polyporus
gilvus. As to texture and surface, closer to Polyporus licnoides. Setae same.
Spores hyaline, subglobose, 4-5 mic. The plant bears also conidial spores of a different
type, colored, smooth, and measuring 6-8x8-12 mic. Abundant specimens are
known in Patouillard's herbarium from China, where it occurs on the bamboo.
Fig. 688.
Polyporus radiatus.
POLYPORUS RADIATUS (Fig. 688). Pileus dimidiate, sessile,
triquetrous, with thin margin. Surface minutely velutinate, at length
strongly rugulose, radiate. Flesh hard, dry, yellowish brown. Pores
concolorous, small, about ^ cm. long, with mouths that glisten
silvery when turned to the light. Setae rare, short, thick. Spores
hyaline, 4-5 x 5-6.
This is a frequent plant in the United States and Europe, usually on alder. It
is easily confused with Polyporus cuticularis, having about the same general shape
and color, but easily distinguished by the spores. There is an erroneous tradition
extant in regard to the color of its spores. Patouillard and Murnll each put it in a
"new genus" based on "colored" spores. We never had a spore print, but abundant
351