Lloyd Mycological Writings V4.pdf - MykoWeb

The following names in American traditions are applied to plants which
grow in Europe and have established European names. In time the European
names will prevail.
guttulatus = alutaceus of Europe.
pennsylvanicus^rpallidus. (not sure.)
flavovireris = cristatus.
Pilotae croceus.
dryophilus=rheades, or corruscans,
obesus=Montagnei.
fulvus = pomaceus.
Peckii hispida.
vialis=trabea, although
European.
the American name is more sure than the
Polystictus Lloydii is not a valid name. It is too close to Polystictus
Grayii, usually referred as a variety of pubescens, but for me a distinct
if the oak form is held distinct.
species.
semipileatus is a synonym for semisupinus.
zonalis is the unzoned form, called Polyporus rigidus by Leveille.
nidulans is a synonym for rutilans, and as Persoon gave such a good
illustration of it there was no excuse whatever for Fries to rename it. According
to "Law," however, Fries is the only man who can make blunders
and then have them legitimatized.
lobatus is only a juggle for reniformis, and doubtfully correct even for
juggling purposes.
conchoides is not same as dichrous, but a tropical form that does not
occur in Ohio. The hymenium is pale flesh color, never the dark reddish
purple of our northern plant.
rubellus is a synonym for Merulius incarnatus, and no excuse for it,
as Schweinitz left good specimens in several museums.
Three plants known in American traditions, viz., carneus, picipes, and
resinosus, are surely wrong, but there being no correct names for them, the
name? will probably prevail. They should be cited, however, as "American
traditions," not Nees, Fries, etc. I shall use carneus and picipes, but resinosus
is not only wrong and missapplied, but so absurd to employ it for a
plant that has no suggestion ever of being resinous, that I will use a Persoonian
name, Polyporus fuscus, which may have been the same plant in
part, at any rate not a bad name for it.
The white species have always been the difficult part of Polyporus
study, and it is impossible to reconcile ail conflicting evidence. As two
different schools, Romell and Bresadola, are positive that two different plants
are chioneus, I shall compromise the dispute by accepting neither, and use
Peck's name albellus, about which there is no question.
Polyporus lacteus, in sense of Overholts, I have decided is Polyporus
trabeus, ore of Fries' "lost" species. It is another species about which no
two investigators will agree on the evidence.
With these few exceptions, I believe Overholts' paper is strictly correct,
and, as the truth, will finally prevail. It is the only paper that has yet appeared
on American Polypores that is reasonably accurate, and the only
paper of much value.