interested observer to this effect. "On a preparation preserved in a moist chamber, on the third day a white speck was seen on the surface, consisting of innumerable 'yeast' cells, with some filaments, branching in all directions. On the fourth day tufts of Penicillium had developed two varieties-P. glaucum and P. viride. This continued until the ninth day, when a few of the filaments springing up in the midst of the Penicillium were tipped with a dewdrop-like dilatation, excessively delicate-a mere distended pellicle. In some cases they seemed to be derived from the same filament as others bearing the ordinary branching spores of Penicillium, but of this I could not be positive. This kind of fructification increased rapidly, and on the fourteenth day spores had undoubtedly developed within the pellicle, just as had been observed in a previous cultivation, precisely similar revolving movements being also manifested."* Although we have here another instance of Mucor and Penicillium growing in contact, the evidence is insufficient to warrant more than a suspicion of their identity, inasmuch as the equally minute spores of Mucor and Penicillium might have mingled, and each producing its kind, no relationship whatever have existed between them, except their development from the same matrix.

Another case of association-for the evidence does not proceed further-was recorded by us, in which a dark-coloured species of Penicillium was closely associated with what we now believe to be a species of Macrosporium-but then designated a Speridesmium-and a minute Sphæria growing in succession on damp wall-paper. Association is all that the facts warrant us in calling it.

We cannot forbear alluding to one of the species of Sphæria to which Tulasne † attributes a variety of forms of fruit, and we do so here because we think that a circumstance so extraordinary should be confirmed before it is accepted as absolutely true. This refers to the common Sphæria found on herbaceous plants,

* Lewis's "Report on Microscopic Objects found in Cholera Evacuations," Calcutta, 1870.

Tulasne, "Selecta Fungorum Carpologia," ii. p. 261.

known as Sphæria (Pleospora) herbarum. First of all the very common mould called Cladosporium herbarum is constituted as conidia, and of this again Macrosporium sarcinula, Berk., is considered to be another condition. In the next place, Cytispora orbicularis, Berk., and Phoma herbarum, West, are regarded as pycnidia, enclosing stylospores. Then Alternaria tenuis, Pr.,* which is said to be parasitic on Cladosporium herbarum, is held to be only a form of that species, so that here we have (including the perithecia) no less than six forms or phases for the same fungus. As Macrosporium Cheiranthi, Pr., often is found in company with Cladosporium herbarum, that is also open to suspicion.

We have adduced in the foregoing pages a few instances which will serve to illustrate the polymorphism of fungi. Some of these it will be observed are accepted as beyond doubt, occurring as they do in intimate relationship with each other. Others are considered as scarcely so well established, but probable, although developed sometimes on different species of plants. Finally, some are regarded as hitherto not satisfactorily proved, or, it may be, only suspicious. In this latter group, however much probability may be in their favour, it can hardly be deemed philosophical to accept them on such slender evidence as in some cases alone is afforded. It would not have been difficult to have extended the latter group considerably by the addition of instances enumerated by various mycologists in their works without any explanation of the data upon which their conclusions have been founded. In fact, altogether this chapter must be accepted as illustrative and suggestive, but by no means as exhaustive.

* Corda, “Prachtflora,” plate vii.

X.

INFLUENCES AND EFFECTS.

Ir is no longer doubted that fungi exercise a large and very important influence in the economy of nature. It may be that in some directions these influences are exaggerated; but it is certain that on the whole their influence is far more important for evil and for good than that of any other of the Cryptogamia. In our endeavour to estimate the character and extent of these influences it will prove advantageous to examine them under three sections. 1. Their influence on man. 2. Their influence on lower animals. 3. Their influence on vegetation. Under these sections the chief facts may be grouped, and some approximate idea obtained of the very great importance of this family of inferior plants, and consequently the advisability of pursuing their study more thoroughly and nationally than has hitherto

been done.

I. In estimating the influence of fungi upon man, we naturally enough seek in the first instance to know what baneful effects they are capable of producing on food. Although in the case of "poisonous fungi," popularly understood, fungi may be the passive agents, yet they cannot be ignored in an inquiry of this nature. Writing of the Uses of Fungi, we have already shown that a large number are available for food, and some of these real delicacies; so, on the other hand, it becomes imperative, even with stronger emphasis, to declare that many are poisonous, and some of them virulently so. It is not sufficient to say that they are perfectly harmless until voluntarily introduced into the human system, whilst it is well known that accidents are always

possible, and probably would be if every baneful fungus had the word POISON inscribed in capitals on its pileus.

The inquiry is constantly being made as to what plain rules can be given for distinguishing poisonous from edible fungi, and we can answer only that there are none other than those which apply to flowering plants. How can aconite, henbane, oenanthe, stramonium, and such plants, be distinguished from parsley, sorrel, watercress, or spinach? Manifestly not by any general characters, but by specific differences. And so it is with the fungi. We must learn to discriminate Agaricus muscarius from Agaricus rubescens, in the same manner as we would discriminate parsley from Ethusa cynapium. Indeed, fungi have an advantage in this respect, since one or two general cautions can be given, when none such are applicable for higher plants. For instance, it may be said truly that all fungi that exhibit a rapid change to blue when bruised or broken should be avoided; that all Agarics are open to suspicion which possess an acrid taste; that fungi found growing on wood should not be caten unless the species is well known; that no species of edible fungus has a strong, unpleasant odour, and similar cautions, which, after all, are insufficient. The only safe guide lies in mastering, one by one, the specific distinctions, and increasing the number of one's own esculents gradually, by dint of knowledge and experience, even as a child learns to distinguish a filbert from an acorn, or with wider experience will thrust in his mouth a leaf of Oxalis and reject that of the white clover.

One of the most deleterious of fungi that we possess is at the same time one of the most beautiful. This is the Agaricus muscarius, or Fly Agaric, which is sometimes used as a fly poison.* It has a bright crimson pileus studded with pale whitish (sometimes yellowish) warts, and a stem and gills of ivory whiteness. Many instances have been recorded of poisoning by this fungus, and amongst them some British soldiers abroad, and yet it cannot be doubted that this fungus is eaten in

* A detailed account of the peculiar properties of this fungus and its employment as a narcotic will be found in Cooke's "Seven Sisters of Sleep,” p. 337. It is figured in Greville's "Scottish Cryptogamic Flora," plate 54.

Russia. Two instances have come under our notice of persons with some botanical knowledge, and one a gardener, who had resided in Russia and eaten of this fungus. In one case the Fly Agaric was collected and shown to us, and in the other the figure was indicated, so that we might be under no doubt as to the species. Only one hypothesis can be advanced in explanation. It is known that a large number of fungi are eaten in Russia, and that they enter much into the domestic cookery of the peasantry, but it is also known that they pay considerable attention to the mode of cooking, and add a large amount of salt and vinegar, both of which, with long boiling, must be powerful agents in counteracting the poison (probably somewhat volatile) of such fungi as the Fly Agaric. In this place we may give a recipe published by a French author of a process for rendering poisonous fungi edible. It must be taken on his authority, and not our own, as we have never made the experiment, notwithstanding it seems somewhat feasible: -For each pound of mushrooms, cut into moderately small pieces, take a quart of water acidulated with two or three spoonfuls of vinegar, or two spoonfuls of bay salt. Leave the mushrooms to macerate in the liquid for two hours, then wash them with plenty of water; this done, put them in cold water and make them boil. After a quarter or half hour's boiling take them off and wash them, then drain, and prepare them either as a special dish, or use them for seasoning in the same manner as other species.*

This method is said to have been tried successfully with some of the most dangerous kinds. Of these may be mentioned the emetic mushroom, Russula emetica, with a bright red pileus and

* Pour chaque 500 grammes de champignons coupes en morceaux d'assez mediocre grandeur, il faut un litre d'eau acidulée par deux ou trois cuillerées de vinaigre, ou deux cuillerées de sel gris. Dans le cas ou l'on n'aurait que de l'eau à sa disposition, il faut la renouveler une ou deux fois. On laisse les champignons macérer dans le liquide pendant deux heures entières, puis on les lave à grande eau. Ils sont alors mis dans de l'eau froide qu'on porte à l'ébullition, et après un quart d'heure ou une demi-heure, on les retire, on les lave, on les essuie, et ou les apprête soit comme un mets spécial, et ils comportent les mêmes assaisonnements que les autres, soit comme condiment.-Morel Traité des Champignons, p. lix. Paris, 1865.