Part 33

The imperfect condition of our information concerning very many countries, even of those partially explored, must render any estimate or comparison of the floras of those countries most fragmentary and imperfect. Recently, the mycology of our own islands has been more closely investigated, and the result of many years' application on the part of a few individuals has appeared in a record of some 2,809 species, to which subsequent additions have been made, to an extent of probably not much less than 200 species, which would bring the total to about 3,000 species. The result is that no material difference exists between our flora and that of Northern France, Belgium, and Scandinavia, except that in the latter there are a larger number of Hymenomycetal forms. The latest estimates of the flora of Scandinavia are contained in the works of the illustrious Fries, but these are not sufficiently recent, except so far as regards the Hymenomycetes, for comparison of numbers with British species.

The flora of Belgium has its most recent exponent in the posthumous work of Jean Kickx; but the 1,370 species enumerated by him can hardly be supposed to represent the whole of the fungi of Belgium, for in such case it would be less than half the number found in the British Islands, although the majority of genera and species are the same.

For the North of France no one could have furnished a more complete list, especially of the microscopic forms, than M. Desmazières, but we are left to rely solely upon his papers in "Annales des Sc. Nat." and his published specimens, which, though by no means representative of the fleshy fungi, are doubtless tolerably exhaustive of the minute species. From what we know of French Hymenomycetes, their number and variety appear to be much below those of Great Britain.

The mycologic flora of Switzerland has been very well investigated, although requiring revision. Less attention having been given to the minute forms, and more to the Hymenomycetes than in France and Belgium, may in part account for the larger proportion of the latter in the Swiss flora.

In Spain and Portugal scarce anything has been done; the small collection made by Welwitsch can in no way be supposed to represent the Peninsula.

The fungi of Italy include some species peculiar to the Peninsula. The Tuberacei are well represented, and although the Hymenomycetes do not equal in number those of Britain or Scandinavia, a good proportion is maintained.

Bavaria and Austria (including Hungary, and the Tyrol) are being more thoroughly investigated than hitherto, but the works of Schæffer, Tratinnick, Corda, and Krombholz have made us acquainted with the general features of their mycology, to which more recent lists and catalogues have contributed. The publication of dried specimens has of late years greatly facilitated acquaintance with the fungi of different countries in Europe, and those issued by Baron Thümen from Austria do not differ materially from those of Northern Germany, although Dr. Rehm has made us acquainted with some new and interesting forms from Bavaria.

Russia is to a large extent unknown, except in its northern borders. Karsten has investigated the fungi of Finland, and added considerably to the number of Discomycetes, for which the climate seems to be favourable; but, as a whole, it may be concluded that Western and Northern Europe are much better explored than the Eastern and South-Eastern, to which we might add the South, if Italy be excepted.

We have only to add, for Europe, that different portions of the German empire have been well worked, from the period of Wallroth to the present. Recently, the valley of the Rhine has been exhaustively examined by Fuckel; but both Germany and France suffered checks during the late war which made their mark on the records of science not so speedily to be effaced. Denmark, with its splendid Flora Danica still in progress, more than a century after its commencement, has a mycologic flora very like to that of Scandinavia, which is as well known.

If we pass from Europe to North America, we find there a mycologic flora greatly resembling that of Europe, and although Canada and the extreme North is little known, some parts of the United States have been investigated. Schweinitz first made known to any extent the riches of this country, especially Carolina, and in this state the late Dr. Curtis and H. W. Ravenel continued their labours. With the exception of Lea's collections in Cincinnati, Wright's in Texas, and some contributions from Ohio, Alabama, Massachusetts, and New York, a great portion of this vast country is mycologically unknown. It is remarkably rich in fleshy fungi, not only in Agaricini, but also in Discomycetes, containing a large number of European forms, mostly European genera, with many species at present peculiar to itself. Tropical forms extend upwards into the Southern States.

The islands of the West Indies have been more or less examined, but none so thoroughly as Cuba, at first by Ramon de la Sagra, and afterwards by Wright. The three principal genera of Hymenomycetes represented are Agaricus, Marasmius, and Polyporus, represented severally by 82, 51, and 120 species, amounting to more than half the entire number. Of the 490 species, about 57 per cent. are peculiar to the island; 13 per cent. are widely dispersed species; 12 per cent. are common to the island and Central America, together with the warmer parts of South America and Mexico; 3 per cent. are common to it with the United States, especially the Southern; while 13 per cent. are European species, including, however, 13 which may be considered as cosmopolitan. Some common tropical species do not occur, and, on the whole, the general character seems sub-tropical rather than tropical. Many of the species are decidedly those of temperate regions, or at least nearly allied. Perhaps the most interesting species are those which occur in the genera Craterellus and Laschia, the latter genus, especially, yielding several new forms. The fact that the climate is, on the whole, more temperate than that of some other islands in the same latitudes, would lead us to expect the presence of a comparatively large number of European species, or those which are found in the more northern United States, or British North America, and may account for the fact that so small a proportion of species should be identical with those from neighbouring islands.

In Central America only a few small collections have been made, which indicate a sub-tropical region.

From the northern parts of South America, M. Leprieur collected in French Guiana. Southwards of this, Spruce collected in the countries bordering on the River Amazon, and Gardner in Brazil, Gaudichaud in Chili and Peru, Gay in Chili, Blanchet in Bahia, Weddell in Brazil, and Auguste de Saint Hiliare in the same country. Small collections have also been made in the extreme south. All these collections contain coriaceous species of Polyporus, Favolus, and allied genera, with Auricularini, together with such Ascomycetes as Xylaria, and such forms of Peziza as P. tricholoma, P. Hindsii, and P. macrotis. As yet we cannot form an estimate of the extent or variety of the South American flora, which has furnished the interesting genus Cyttaria, and may yet supply forms unrecognized elsewhere.

The island of Juan Fernandez furnished to M. Bertero a good representative collection, which is remarkable as containing more than one-half its number of European species, and the rest possessing rather the character of those of a temperate than a sub-tropical region.

Australasia has been partly explored, and the results embodied in the Floras of Dr. Hooker and subsequent communications. In a note to an enumeration of 235 species in 1872, the writer observes that "many of them are either identical with European species, or so nearly allied that with dried specimens only, unaccompanied by notes or drawings, it is impossible to separate them; others are species which are almost universally found in tropical or sub-tropical countries, while a few only are peculiar to Australia, or are undescribed species, mostly of a tropical type. The collections on the whole can scarcely be said to be of any great interest, except so far as geographical distribution is concerned, as the aberrant forms are few."

The fungi collected by the Antarctic Expedition in Auckland and Campbell's Islands, and in Fuegia and the Falklands, were few and of but little interest, including such cosmopolitan forms as Sphæria herbarum and Cladosporium herbarum, Hirneola auricula-judæ, Polyporus versicolor, Eurotium herbariorum, etc.

In New Zealand a large proportion have been found, and these may be taken to represent the general character of the fungi of the islands, which is of the type usually found in temperate regions.

The fungi of Asia are so little known that no satisfactory conclusions can be drawn from our present incomplete knowledge. In India, the collections made by Dr. Hooker in his progress to the Sikkim Himalayas, a few species obtained by M. Perottet in Pondicherry, and small collections from the Neilgherries, are almost all that have been recorded. From these it may be concluded that elevations such as approximate a temperate climate are the most productive, and here European and North American genera, with closely allied species, have the preponderance. The number of Agaricini, for instance, is large, and amongst the twenty-eight subgenera into which the genus Agaricus is divided, eight only are unrepresented. Casual specimens received from other parts of India afford evidence that here is a vast field unexplored, the forests and mountain slopes of which would doubtless afford an immense number of new and interesting forms.

Of the Indian Archipelago, Java has been most explored, both by Junghuhn and Zollinger. The former records 117 species in 40 genera, Nees von Esenbeck and Blume 11 species in 3 genera, and Zollinger and Moritzi 31 species in 20 genera, making a total of 159 species, of which 47 belong to Polyporus. Léveillé added 87 species, making a total of 246 species. The fungi of Sumatra, Borneo, and other islands are partly the same and partly allied, but of a similar tropical character.

The fungi of the island of Ceylon, collected by Gardner, Thwaites, and König, were numerous. The Agarics comprise 302 species, closely resembling those of our own country. It is singular that every one of the subgenera of Fries is represented, though the number of species in one or two is greatly predominant. Lepiota and Psalliota alone comprise one-third of the species, while Pholiota offers only a single obscure species. The enumeration recently published of the succeeding families contains many species of interest.

In Africa, the best explored country is Algeria, although unfortunately the flora was never completed. The correspondence between the fungi of Algeria and European countries is very striking, and the impression is not removed by the presence of a few sub-tropical forms. It is probable that were the fungi of Spain known the resemblance would be more complete.

From the Cape of Good Hope and Natal collections have been made by Zeyher, Drége, and others, and from these we are enabled to form a tolerable estimate of the mycologic flora. Of the Hymenomycetes, the greater part belong to Agaricus: there are but four or five Polypori in Zeyher's collection, one of which is protean. The Gasteromycetes are interesting, belonging to many genera, and presenting two, Scoleciocarpus and Phellorinia, which were founded upon specimens in this collection. Batarrea, Tulostoma, and Mycenastrum are represented by European species. There are also two species of Lycoperdon, and one of Podaxon. Besides these, there is the curious Secotium Gueinzii. The genus Geaster does not appear in the collection, nor Scleroderma. Altogether the Cape flora is a peculiar one, and can scarcely be compared with any other.

At the most, only scattered and isolated specimens have been recorded from Senegal, from Egypt, or from other parts of Africa, so that, with the above exceptions, the continent may be regarded as unknown.

From this imperfect summary it will be seen that no general scheme of geographical distribution of fungi can as yet be attempted, and the most we can hope to do is to compare collection with collection, and what we know of one country with what we know of another, and note differences and agreements, so as to estimate the probable character of the fungi of other countries of which we are still in ignorance. It is well sometimes that we should attempt a task like the present, since we then learn how much there is to be known, and how much good work lies waiting to be done by the capable and willing hands that may hereafter undertake it.

Mr. E. P. Fries, in "Ann. des Sci. Nat." 1861, xv. p. 10.

Berkeley and Broome, "Enumeration of the Fungi of Ceylon," in "Journ. Linn. Soc." xiv. Nos. 73, 74, 1873.

Fries, "On the Geographical Distribution of Fungi," in "Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist." ser. iii. vol. ix. p. 279.

The Hypogæi are evidently intended here by Fries.