MycoLens is a section in IMA Fungus introduced for historical or topical commentaries and observations of potential interest to a wide range of mycologists, but which fall outside the scope of other sections of the journal.

Notable historical databases of fungal names

MYCOLENS Ronald H. Petersen1 and David L. Hawksworth2, 3, 4

1Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996-1100, USA; corresponding author e-mail: [email protected] 2Department of Life Sciences, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, SW7 5BD London, UK 3Departamento de Biología Vegetal II, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Plaza Ramón y Cajal, Madrid 28040, Spain 4Comparative Plant and Fungal Biology, Jodrell Laboratory, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Surrey, TW9 3DS, UK

Abstract: Present-day electronic databases of fungal names are 21st century versions of previous compilations for the same purpose. The comprehensive indices attached to books by Persoon and Fries summarized names known at those times. Later compilations appeared piecemeal in journals or free-standing, always improving but hardly available for “rapid retrieval.” Twentieth century Index of Fungi required tedious data entry from thousands of journals over many years, but the result could later be inserted into electronically retrievable computer programs. Index Fungorum includes data harvested from Index of Fungi, but perhaps its major source has been Saccardo’s Sylloge Fungorum, probably the most prodigious compilation of the 19th–20th century. Names for lichen-forming fungi were gleaned from the catalogues of Zahlbruckner and Lamb. The role of the Commonwealth Mycological Institute, its predecessors and its successors, has been significant.

Key words: compilations, nomenclators, name registration, Index Fungorum.

INTRODUCTION PRE-1900 fungorum species in D.C.H. Persoonii Synopsi Methodica Fungorum … dated 1808 (but Among the several definitions of the term Even the “founding fathers” of mycological bound in with the reprint edition of the “database,” two parameters seem almost taxonomy had access to and studied Synopsis; Johnson Reprint Corporation, universal: data must be arranged for rapid previous floristic studies which included 1952), acted as an early database to retrieval and the instrument for retrieval is names for fungi. To be sure, written fungal names treated by Persoon. Taken the computer. While “computer” is open descriptions in several prior works on together, they constituted the first such to only limited interpretation, “rapid” is fungi were less than fastidious (by modern comprehensive offering dealing with fungal certainly a relative term. “Rapid retrieval” standards), but some of the more influential names since the time of Linnaeus (1753) two centuries ago might be currently works were well-illustrated. Petersen (1976a, (Jarvis 2007). judged intolerably slow. Nonetheless, 1977a, b, c, 1983a, b, c) dissected some The proliferation of plant names, using nothing more than mental acuity, of these works, drawing attention to how including cryptogams (which included penmanship and type-setting prowess, such authors as Schaeffer, Bolton, Bulliard, fungi), was growing apace. In Germany, cumbersome mycological data has been Sowerby and Fries simply substituted their Christian Gottfried Daniel Nees von presented for “rapid retrieval” for nearly own preferred species epithets for prior Esenbeck (1776–1858) gained respect as two centuries. The intent of this paper is names. The result was a body of names a philosophical and academic botanist. As to outline some of the important sources with checkered histories available to the he used Persoon’s Synopsis, he ventured his of organized mycological data on fungal “founding fathers,” who, together with own system of arrangement and logic on names over the years leading to our current attempting to submit fungi to philosophical the fungi, and in 1816–1817 published state. systems, sorted the taxa for acceptable Das System der Pilze und Schwämme (Nees For the purposes of this paper, such names. It was the first peristalsis of names von Esenbeck 1816–1817). It appeared compilations (including databases) are since the introduction of Linnaean binomial concurrently with Fries’s Observationes attempts to synthesize or distill previous nomenclature. It would not be the last. Mycologici part I, but was far more data (i.e. monographs, checklists, etc.) Pfister et al. (1990) and Petersen comprehensive. Deeply steeped in Romantic in order to bring together concise data (1975a, b, 1976b, c, 1977c) summarized philosophy, Nees von Esenbeck’s volume (whether fungal names, protologues, host the name-giving, pre-1821 mycological was soon a cornerstone, with significant records or literature citations), but only literature which contributed to the library influence on Fries and others over many the first constitutes a “database” of fungal available to the “founding fathers” years. names. In this way, for example, Fries’s The Synopsis Methodica Fungorum by When still rather young, Elias Magnus Systema Mycologicum is not a database of Christian Hendrik Persoon (1801) was a Fries began writing summaries of the fungal names, but the Index Alphabeticus summary of a taxonomic scheme used to fungi he found in Småland in southern following volume III is such. In the same gather descriptions (and a few illustrations) Sweden (Petersen 1996, Petersen & way, Index Fungorum is a database, but with of all fungi known to Persoon. As such, it Knudsen 2015). First came two editions links to Species Fungorum, which includes did not constitute a “database” but in reality of Observationes Mycologicae (1815, 1818) heterotypic synonymy and suggestion of a was a philosophical treatise with fungi as and during the in-press time for the second “current name.” examples. The Index Botanicus sistens omnes part, the first draft of Systema Mycologicum

(28) IMA FUNGUS MYCOLENS (29) , mostly , mostly 3 of names of names ), ), ). Certainly ). Certainly by Wenceslao Wenceslao by (commenced (commenced Colletotrichum Crataegus Nomenclator Botanicus Nomenclator ), his coverage was thorough. Around ), his coverage thorough. was Around 2 Given the emphasis on “Hymeomycetes” on “Hymeomycetes” emphasis the Given above the rank of speciesabove the of all “botanical” of 1858 end publishedgroups to the up is not often thiswork 1873–74); (Pfeiffer amongst includes, cited mycologists but by things, usages and other names of generic of typeindications species. While useful, difficult indices are and these to search in literature the especially out to ferret cryptic. often are original as form, citations mycological clubs amateur Meanwhile, on local data generating fungiwere the same time, Louis (Ludwig) time, same the K.G. massive his (1805–1877) prepared Pfeiffer 1698-page discounted by the professional mycological professional the by discounted community. that it is interesting and Fries, Persoon by came from fungalan early “database” (Harvard), dealt with States United the arranged fungi,parasitic and was derivative, fungal by names than rather hosts plant by & Seymour 1888, 1890, 1891; Fig. (Farlow (1844–1919; 1). William Gilson Farlow Fig. 2) recognized several (1) problems: fungal taxa than on more could be found of sophistication the (considering one host (2) day); fungalthat of fungal identification based named hosts being taxa on their were organs particular plant on and even by the found;which they was known were (3) little taxonomic or geographic the about breadth of pathogenic fungi; number and (4) the too rapidly. of fungus increasing was names & Seymour 1891) wrote: “… (Farlow Farlow complete believing an approximately that hosts species parasitic and their list of our toward advance the would in aid materially mycological of our study accurate a more (1829) list from Amherst, MA; Amherst, from (1829) list Somers’ Scotia 1890, 1891) “Nova (1882, 1887, contribution growing Peck’s fungi,” especially 1980–1988), (Vogelenzang all accumulating were fungi, of fleshy years. Rogers the over (1981) mentions of numbers of most end the At more. of Mycology Journal the of appeared an “Index there 1885) in combining mycology,” American North fungus (i.e. names (i.e. Cobb, N.A.),authors geography and hosts (i.e. Colorado myxomycetes) (i.e. Cranberry, compilation comprehensive most the years was these of fungus during names Fungorum Nomenclator (1792–1876; Streinz Streinz Materno imposed have may 1862). While Streinz some taxonomic judgements (Ainsworth 1976 century, century, th The lists of fungus names, even of names, The lists funguseven Shortly after the turn of the 20 of the turn after Shortly several mycological journals from Europe several Europe mycological from journals significant providing were States and United on describing: intent pagination for authors 1950) not adopted(1) taxa until (a term new to science; (2) descriptions putatively of fungalof life-histories largely pathogens, agriculturalof plants, and/or horticultural; of mycobiota of the and (3) descriptions and regions, including Central “exotic” landmasses America, Africa,South Pacific Asia. As it had extent, and, a lesser to of evolved botanists (botany, for prior included mycology), traditionally course, was day mycological of the the literature becoming and linguistically nationally too many names, too many with burdened of thousands organisms, by exacerbated famous botanical at specimens arriving European western in usually institutions, far corners the from capitals, national as pride well as National world. of the biogeographical rendered ignorance surely same organisms. for the names redundant could come Africa all, from specimens After Lisbon, Brussels, London, Paris to Berlin, regions contiguousor Vienna, from often of continent. the CONSOLIDATION AND CONSOLIDATION COMPILATION which with a handle to create How easily could more mycological workers such as data for simple literature the plumb preoccupied sizes of genera and for names, them made had whose experience authors some selectedexpert in fungal group? becoming were States, United the in not but already extant, inconvenient; (1822, Schweinitz’s available. readily and published Leipzig, in of 1834); lists 1856); & Curtis fungi (Berkeley American (Berkeley 1847), Curtis’ (Berkeley Lea’s 1849a, b, c, d,& Curtis 1853, 1859, specimens 1980), and Ravenel’s Petersen 1872a, b, c, (Berkeley to Berkeley sent 1873a-k, 1874a-d, 1875a-d, 1876a, and b) (1856); Hitchcock’s a few to Montagne as a very early compendium of fungus as a very names compendium early point AFTER starting nomenclatural the took on added importance. and it therefore changes have nomenclatural recent More of Steudel’s diminished implications the (1840– Steudel’s Parenthetically, “database”. 1841) second edition of Nomenclator did cryptogams. not include Botanicus

”. Again, ”. and and (Steudel (Steudel (of which which (of I. Systema Systema was intended to to was intended Systema . Steudel’s volume volume . Steudel’s as Systema part of the 1

volumes were were volumes Elenchus and (vol. 3, 1832), a dense, five- 3, 1832), a dense, (vol. included so many names that that names included so many A friend of Nees von Esenbeck, Ernst Esenbeck, von Ernst Nees of A friend In the culmination of culmination the In appearing as it did during the years in which the asappearing it did during Systema Fries’ being published,being recognized was eventually ” and to ” and to “Methodicus Persoon’s overhaul “Systema (Fries’) his own substitute part 1 was begun. As with Persoon, Fries’ part Fries’ begun. 1 was Persoon, As with summarize to wasObservationes intended wrote Fries taxa. his in autobiography, But Persoon’s that experience by learnt “Having I beganto in 1816 is not sufficient, system and to subject all species another, produce & (Fries new investigation” to an entirely 1955). The SystemaFries it was a taxonomic treatise embedded in treatise a taxonomic it was 1 of the Vol. a philosophical But scheme. Systema a offering an index, appended thus Fries names. of hymenomycete “database” (1783–1856), a physician Gottlieb Steudel plethora the by struck was and botanist, by influenced Perhaps names. of plant Esenbeck, a gathered von Steudel Nees published names, in of plant compendium Botanicus 1824 as Nomenclator Mycologicum part summary of fungipart as summary Elias Magnus to felt constrained Fries them, knew Fries fungal of the index an inclusive append volumes. the included throughout names versus took Roman even to use pains He he names type-faces to represent Italic he included either accepted and names did not but discussion or in synonymy in (other adopt. While hisdirectly motives no longer are clear, completeness) than mycological the by community “legislation” of inclusion mandated later a century nearly Alphabeticus Index the 1821, 1824). Accepted names and and names 1821, 1824). Accepted included (distinguished were synonyms typeby included: and fungi point), were 1821) didpart not include (Steudel I cryptogams, part 1824) did II but (Steudel all fungi, lichen- including so (covering his in mentioned Prominently formers). Fries’ were introduction Europeae Mycologia Persoon’s only volume I had then been published; then I had only volume were Fries from 1822). Names Persoon, genus, appropriate the citedunder arcanely and the number tribe the followed by Systema in species number elevated Fries’s and thus and Elenchus of as index a compilation comprehensive “devalidated” validly published versus names used dealing for some years when (a term of non-lichen point” “starting the with fungal nomenclature) VOLUME 7 · NO. 1 (30) MYCOLENS

by J.B. Ellis Kellerman 3),assisted (1850–1908;Fig. Ashbrook by William (1885) was edited threewas already yearsold.Volume 1 the published, publication.” prepared for over years,has been several present the result index, ofwork extending aserious the has become already evil, of indiscriminate making species which tendflora and would tolessen the amount Kellerman (1908,Journal ofMycology Fig. 1.Cover ofPart I.Farlow andSeymour’s exactly the hub ofscience in 19 emanated from Manhattan, not Kansas, changed, andKellermanchanged, invited them back. to the journal its direction had because professionals subscriptions had dropped from the US.fungi Many amateurs and “anbecome of species new index” forall to sought the journalstill solicited, again mycology”. practical papers While were the interest ofsystematic ortaxonomic was at most exclusively first published in journal 4).Kellerman(Fig. “The wrote: the journal backstarting with volume 8 then(by at State Ohio University) took andKellerman agricultural, unabashedly of Agriculture. Volumes 5–7were shifting publication to Departmentthe formally by wasthis recognized tendency etc.Starting withby fungi, volume 4, caused diseases plant fungi, pathogenic – cast journal onanagricultural took United States. Almost immediately, the 1 By Index the time the “Host The Journal ofMycology 4 andB.M.Everhart, and Journal ofMycology , though, was , though, 14(1),facing p.51). th ” was was ” century

Provisional host-index ofthe ofthe fungi United States 2 with cursory experiencewith cursory in the “universal tomakewas these data available toanyone Latin (Saccardo 1875).The hehoped, result, descriptions rendered language, in asingle most important, and, origins their geographic from Italy, their literature sources, their of pyrenomycete generic names reported 5)ofPadua,Fig. Italy, acompilation began breadth, Pier Andrea Saccardo (1845–1920; unfamiliar to workers with limited linguistic often literature inadozen languages reverse inEurope. nobetter was Thesituation in challenged. linguistically German but most other Americans were PhDhis in Zürich, with sowas familiar somewhat later. Kellerman had received Mycological Society from 1885)and (with the exception of aminor stepchild only with mycology (at cryptogams), least subjects botanical and authors andmost were inclusive ofwide narrow audiences catered tolinguistically France Hedwigia, Bulletin Societé Botanique dela de Societé RoyaledeBotaniquela Belgique (from 1885), Bulletin SocietéMycologique dela deFrance exclusively French, in 1879). andstarted outlets (i.e. Europeanswhile had somepublication the audience so), totally wasand almost were American andeditors and organizers uniquelyalmost American the all, (after In 1876,confronted with pyrenomycete , Engler’s Botanisches Jahrbuch Flora Journal ofMycology Transactions ofthe British , Grevillea (from 1895) joined (from 1895)joined Revue MycologiqueRevue , Bulletin de (also (also ), most . 1888; , ,

Fig. 2. Fig. finally posthumouslyending in 1931 monumental volumes ofSylloge Fungorum, years with 25 other produced collaborators) unanticipated, Saccardo’s (andover effort the titlenew intended was the but tobe last, volumesecond (Saccardo 1883)under the Fungorum literature, this time under the title tosummarizeneed pyrenomycete names and saw a By 1882,Saccardo again or regions. fromlists various offungi European countries aseries to grow andSaccardo of published literature taxonomic Mycological continued of Latin to ayearortwo school. in grade even American workers were usually exposed of America’s cannot known, be insularity but language”. Whether Saccardo cognizant was the 19 preface toVolume 1andby the end of Kellerman 1907)were out laid in the The principles of systemthe (see toadoptasystem ofclassification. obliged stupendous compendium? Saccardo was (assumedly apyrenomycete) in such a Butfungus how tofind aparticular HAYSTACKIN A SEARCHING FOR A NEEDLE course workers –all were provided with a with fortified – in Latin,keys Especially of &Farrgroups (Anon. 1898, Reed 1993). system known was in placeforall fungal Fig. 3. Fig. GilsonFarlow; William 3 th century, Saccardo’s classification (Saccardo 1882).Saccardo’s Willam Ashbrook Ashbrook Willam IMA FUNGUS Sylloge 5, 6 . MYCOLENS (31) , with figure , with from . 12 (2). Frontispiece). . North American Pyrenomycetes American of North Cover Laboulbeniales Fig. 7. Journal of Mycology Ellis Journal (1906, Bicknell 6. Job Fig. , upon return of W.A. of W.A. , upon return Journal of Mycology Journal

Volume 8, page 1, Volume Pier Andrea Saccardo (Wikipedia) Saccardo of Mycology. Andrea 5. Pier Fig. Journal Fig. 4. as Editor. Kellerman VOLUME 7 · NO. 1 (32) MYCOLENS

Frontispiece). 9. Fig. (1905, Journal ofMycology 8. Fig. Paul Sydow, founder of andEditor Hans Sydow (1906,Journal ofMycology . 11(6).Frontispiece). Annales Mycologici

12(6). , Fig. 11.Frederic Edward images). Clements (Google Literaturae Fig. 10.Gustav compiler, Lindau, with Hans Sydow, ofthe . (1907,Journal ofMycology . 13(2).Frontispiece). IMA FUNGUS Thesaurus MYCOLENS (33)

(Pritzel (Pritzel 11 (Royal Society brought the Bibliotheca Bibliotheca 10 and two volumes and two volumes . In all cases, his . In (Richter 1840); Just’s 1840); Just’s (Richter (Miltitz 1829) or 1829) (Miltitz 9 ’s abbreviated literature ’s Codex . (Just, 1873–1922)]. The 12 (Dryander 1798–1800); v. (Dryander 1798–1800); v. Handbuch Two chief justifications were furnished were chief justifications Two We hope to give, through these these give, hope to through “We as one just designed advances, find a hardly could previously general the in discipline scientific are nevertheless we ourselves totality, empty are still and spaces that aware attainable readily nominally the that inaccessible periodicals or wholly from other lands must literature strive, be provided.furthermore We too, these spaces out fill to if possible, from not succeed but if we should we be granted may direction, any least a fair at and receive good will, assessment” by listed citations volumes firsttwo The 1872); Richter’s 1872); Richter’s Jahresbericht 1869–1921); Pritzel’s Thesaurus 1869–1921); Pritzel’s because they too in content: broad were Papers of Scientific Catalog die niederendie Kryptogamen Deutchlands of Die Pilze taxon-based. was research need the new for this to demonstrate on mycological, focusing Thesaurus and including lichenological First, literature. collected of the of various works citations given Examples unavailable. were authors McAlpine, Farlow, Traverso, Saccardo, were etc. Pissarschewsky, Krempelhuber, v. Second, bibliographic previous compendia because they either inadequate, were obsolete:were Dryander’s Banksiana Miltitz’ authors set out their aims aims their out set new authors Thesaurus (transl.): listed three literature to 1906. Volume author volumes final two 1907–1910, and the from previous of the recapitulated literature the subject divided areas. time into this volumes, Literaturae Thesaurus Thus, mycological bibliography to up literature was published five in1910, although volume its at I was War World time, that at 1917. Just newly enlisted States United the height, with Although and France. side of Britain on the fungus with names, concerned not directly bridged Thesaurus betweenthe hiatus the Sylloge Saccardo’s itself. primary and the literature citations mycological the useful was throughout It original edition and the sold community, Reprint Johnson the Subsequently, out. published a facsimile, whichCompany helped circulation. , Die (rust fungi) (rust (several , and in 1903,, and in ), none were ), none were 8 . Immediately, . Immediately, Bulletin de la Bulletin century, Moses Ashley Moses century, th Uredinales (smut fungi). In the 1880s, the fungi). In (smut Kryptogamenflora der Mark derMark Kryptogamenflora , had written three editions of three written , had Annales Mycologici Annales By 1908, Paul Sydow established a Sydow 1908, Paul By Paul Sydow was a professional biologist. a professional was Sydow Paul Hilfsbuch für das Sammeln und Präparieren Präparieren und das für Sammeln Hilfsbuch and Ustilaginales a huge exsiccati he amassed and distributed fungi, be found of these of which copies may world. western the all over Lindau (Fig. Gustav with relationship 10) which resulted compilation, in their Mycologicae et Litteraturae Thesaurus 1908– (Lindau & Sydow Lichenologicae Lindau already was an 1917). Gustav and widely published German influential he time lichenologist/ the by botanist contributed had He Sydow. with partnered Prantl’s Englersignificantly to & Pflanzenfamilien Natürlichen and deuteromycetes), of ascomycetes groups coordinated organizationhe had and of publication Brandenburg launched launched it served for a few authors, as an outlet of whom alsomost list appeared on the itself journal While the of “cooperators”. (but could a compilation not be considered indices), it persisted extensive with always of days concluding the until continually Mycologici Annales time the II. By War World appeared,first was data Saccardo gathering . Once Fungorum 17 of Sylloge for Volume Mycologici Annales founded Sydow Hans co- became Sydow” dominant “H. and P. 1921, Paul’s in for several years, but authors to continuing disappeared,name Hans with his father. publish without but on mosses, were publications early His middleby age, shifted he had attentions his to fungi, especially Curtis (1808–1872) and Miles Joseph Joseph Miles (1808–1872) and Curtis dead. Mordecai (1803–1889) were Berkeley emerged (1825–1914) Cooke as Cubitt mycologist. B.M. British prolific most the years, his in final was (1818–1904) Everhart Ellis (1829–1905). J.B. as his was partner, (1843–1917) and Peck (1844–1919), Farlow prime. their in (1845–1920) were Saccardo and a new father however, Germany, From 1851–1925; Fig. 8) (father, son team, Paul (son, 1879–1946; Fig. 9) Sydow, and Hans a new start to mycologicalendeavored some mycological Although, now, by journal. already existed (i.e.journals de France Societé Mycologique was Sydow Hans or Germanic. German of reputable names the careful to invoke “cooperators” as mycologists POST-1900 20 of the turn the By . 7 . - th Sylloge was not not was North American American North North American American North

is added “Analytic key to to key is added “Analytic (Ellis & Everhart 1892; Fig. 1892; Fig. (Ellis & Everhart century. Ellis, while receiving Ellis, while receiving century. th In the greater scheme of things, Curtis of things, Curtis scheme greater the In Pyrenomycetes families genera and of the suborders, the and Pyrenomycetes American North author. an anonymous by Hysteriaceae” and 39 composite fullWith descriptions to onlyattempt the is still work this plates, non-lichenized American all North cover fungi today. available pyrenomycete Lloyd not a major (1859–1926) was Gates to be a did not intend and surely character fact, In paper. of this sense the in compiler the were compilations his only first-hand of his of most writings, ends the indices at 1925. 1898 through which from extended based on compilations Comprehensive came some years later his publications 1933, 1936, Stevenson & Cash (Stevenson Anon. undated), an and so do not form integral “turn-of-the-20 part of the specimens from widely scattered locations, locations, specimens widely scattered from Newfield, around his research centered who his home, and Everhart, Jersey, New mined prodigious eastern collections from the outside did not travel Pennsylvania, included to genera While were US. keys of copy my in text, the in century” chronology. Nonetheless, Lloyd Lloyd Nonetheless, chronology. century” and wealthy man not onlywas an eccentric widely and to publish enough to travel and caustic including research, his own work on the musings injurious sometimes correspondence through but of others, the he was often and personal interactions first- known “mycologist” only American and, professionals by international hand taxonomic on influence had therefore, mycology. Nonetheless, they were able to amass their their able to amass they were Nonetheless, monographicearly tome, Pyrenomycetes was 7), which all not only transmitted that fungus of the north about group known be regarded must retrospect in but Mexico, as typical fungal of the groups which were being most carefully examined turn the at 20 of the taxonomic scaffold upon which to match uponmatch taxonomic scaffold which to in those fungus to an unidentified so, availability of Sylloge Even universal (down-loaded on-line scans were were scans on-line (down-loaded universal workers so many away), a century well over to struggle. (1884–1890) Cooke continued as he knew pyrenomycetes the summarized Ellis (1829–1905; Bicknell Job them. Everhart Matlack Fig. 6) and Benjamin and picked self-taught (1818–1904) were preceding three systems through way their VOLUME 7 · NO. 1 (34) MYCOLENS

Fig. 13.Franz Petrak (WikiPedia). Sylloge Fungorum. includesBold face reference in Saccardo’s tovolume andpage Fig. ofkeys 12.Page from Clements (1909) The Genera of Fungi . Mycological Institute.Mycological Fig. 14.Cover of Commonwealth Institute. Mycological Fig. toPetrak’s 15.Cover ofASupplement Lists Petrak’s Lists in in Index ofFungi in Index in ofFungi from Commonwealth IMA FUNGUS from MYCOLENS (35) after after Index , Sydowia but he was he was but aimed to Index, Sylloge , which appeared Annales Mycologici Mycologici Annales Lichenum Nominum Index from 1952–78, planned a 1952–78, planned from ”, 1920, the Imperial Bureau Bureau Imperial 1920, the ”, was to provide himself with with himself was to provide Sydowia An unfortunate consequence of the of the consequence unfortunate An began Petrak same year that the In Influenced by Saccardo, Austrian Austrian by Saccardo, Influenced During World War II afterward and War World During of compilation with Concurrent in 1972. in of Fungi catalogues for different lichenized fungi, as opposed biologies, to fungi other was with fungi, lichenicolous and some many that biologies, overlooked; uncertain were with these missed often Saccardo fungi in when and Zahlbruckner works, lichen primarily not as they were and Lamb did not list them lichen-formers. Lists “Petrak’s unable to complete this and passed this his to complete data unable to CMI and editing; for completion this to the publishedwas as a supplement of Mycology (IBM) on established was from separate to but adjacent Green, Kew for as a centre Royalthe Gardens, Botanic for the mycological information gathering & Hawksworth (Aitchison Empire British 1930, it became part of the 1993). In cite all The published names. of the uses fungi of lichen published of names indexing Ivan by continued 1932–60, was from Elke Lamb (1911–1990; later Mackenzie not arranged alphabetically, Mackenzie), as taxonomically, (Lamb 1963). William Louis Culberson (1929–2003), who produced a 100-part in on Lichens” “Recent Literature series, The Bryologist of Lamb’s continuation WW II. It is said that one of the reasons for reasons one of the is said that WW II. It editing especially for publications, since an outlet last with to persist was one of the Petrak manuscripts. hand-written lichenologist Zahbruckner Alexander on a Catalogus (1860–1938) embarked Universalis Lichenum years 1921–1940 the over 10 volumes in (Zahlbrucknerwas 1921–1940). This accepted under names taxonomic, listing the species, and unlike (1938–1951), Petrak served as Petrak (1938–1951), a the his at alma mater, worker” “contract a in Wien, Museum Naturhistorische his intelligence and than far lower position of the removal the oversaw He experience. library to safe places during and herbarium (completed return II, and their War World a fellowship 1950–1951, under In 1958). in Philosophical Society, American the from Beltsville, USA, year at the spent Petrak specimens. identifying many also edited Petrak Lists”, “Petrak’s of continuation the

15 Just’s Annales , both of, both ) in which compiling all compiling new at the Bureau of Plant of Plant Bureau the at 16 Kryptogamenflora Annales Mycologici Annales in 1914. In the Austrian army army Austrian the 1914. In in . The series came to be called “Petrak’s came to be called. The series “Petrak’s 17 Years later, once retired, Clements Clements once retired, later, Years His close and protracted relationship relationship close and protracted His partnered with Cornelius Lott Cornelius Shear with partnered (1865–1956) families and orders. The latter provided families The latter and orders. of generic a “database” with reader the was not What names. and suprageneric listing was the later much appreciated until of a type species for every whether genus, or a previous himself Clements supplied by taxon). of the (including author the author which introduced Petrak to fungi. Soon, Petrak hewhich introduced mycological in totallywas research, involved in and published paper his first Mycologici collected fungi I, Petrak War World during Galicia,in Bosnia, Albania Macedonia and home after his return Balkans). Upon (the and soon his research, resumed he War, the to began of contributions a series Botanischer Jahresbericht PETRAK’S LISTS stepped to carry in man on improbable An (1886–1973; Petrak Franz tradition. the his and during Fig. man an ascetic was 13) subsisted years often on early andpotatoes he years later In vegetables which he grew. described as painfully or variously was thin to later contributed have diet may His gaunt. was born in ruralgastric symptoms. Petrak preliminary after schooling, but Austria, and earned a doctoralmoved to Vienna 1910, In Wettstein. von Richard degree under mycological obtained the herbarium Petrak of a few plus volumes of C.A. Eichler, Rabenhorst’s of fungi. sources The and literature names for names information this summarized series published 1920–1939, and was from through 1944 to publish his research results, often in often to publish results, his research this Through number. per papers multiple received numerous Petrak relationship his named only son, have and may exsiccati, friend. his professional after Hans, Lists” (Samuels 1981, 1982, 1983, 1986). (Samuels Lists” with provided Petrak Sydow Hans with an organ ( Industry (US Department of Agriculture, of Agriculture, (US Department Industry Beltsville, MD) to produce a revised volume than it, more 1931). In & Shear (Clements reviewed, were keys names 5000 generic revised significantly were and were genera not only typified well.as illustrated The but a 1954) presented in (reprinted volume of fungal generic “database” comprehensive names.

in Sylloge was was Thesaurus ,” and were and were ,” Sylloge wasSylloge taxon- 13 then a teacher at at a teacher then 14

” and Fungorum Sylloge were entitled Fungorum Sylloge The translation, understandably, was understandably, translation, The The relative opacity of Saccardo’s opacity of Saccardo’s relative The Rafaele Ciferri (1897–1964), of Pavia, of Pavia, (1897–1964), Rafaele Ciferri Lindau and Sydow’s If through vol. 18 (1906), but used only the (1906), but 18 vol. through volumes. earlier the from keys dominated largely by keys, translated and there here but Latin Saccardo’s from based he on what revised Clements, by was other It better literature. considered which qualify however, the chapters, of familiesbook as Index a compilation: “ in Saccardo’s Rehm’s “Discomycetes”; list of new genera “Discomycetes”; Rehm’s and types; to genera, index subfamilies, the University of Minnesota, translated the the translated of Minnesota, University the (1882– eightvolumes first Saccardo’s in keys English 1889) into them and reproduced immediately “It mycology. for classes in the that and usable so convenient proved guide of a complete fungipreparation to the The product of was begun same year”. the 1909) was effort published the (Clements (Fig.Fungi 12). of Genera 1909, asin The was able to cite Saccardo’s Clements classification system due to its presentation presentation due to its system classification the impeded in adoption its Latin in Clements Edward Frederic States. United (1871–1945; Fig. 11) Thesaurus Literaturae Thesaurus revived the Italy, appending 1957–1960), even 1957 (Ciferri page, title to the names Lindau and Sydow’s to be supplements purporting volumes in was 1911–1930. Ciferri from of literature pathologyin plant author with a prolific continuing 1920s, but the in papers early the 1957, By to publish for a half-century. improved had economic in Italy situation II. A new War of World depths the from and was available, of reproduction form a duplication was revived Thesaurus the paper. of typescript inferior on somewhat mycological the (including cover To lichenological) 1911–1930, from literature filled, were the last volumes thick four published 1960. in author-based, Saccardo’s author-based, Saccardo’s mycological 1920, the community based. In passing. Subsequent Saccardo’s mourned of volumes “Supplementum Universale edited of collaborators group a small by ceased 1931. in Publication of Saccardo. edited 26” was in Cash by A “Volume biblioghraphy) 1972 (see in Saccardo Reed by indexed & were and all volumes volumes (1993). The posthumous Farr Abraham Jan Antonie compiled Cornelis by (1825-1906) arranged fungi the Oudemans associates plant their by VOLUME 7 · NO. 1 (36) MYCOLENS

(CMI) the Commonwealth Institute Mycological to in 1948,the was changed name ofIMI the Empire in the wake ofWorld War II, the in change character of Recognizing Ciferri’s forward carrying Mycology TheBibliography20 parts. ofSystematic cumulative volume of index forevery and including both ahost index anda at andbelow theofgenus, species ranks those from 1970),initially oflichen fungi year, covering names (also fungal new index-of-fungi/) per parts , issued in two products/online-information-resources/ Fungi its name15 (1948)changed to and to the Institute supplements as reproduced, also Bibliography ofSystematic Mycology. to produceboth or Director. however, CABI, continues had nolonger aseparatethe IMI identity into aslimmer CABIBioscie four Institutes of CABI were reorganized Institute,Mycological In IMI. 1998,the 1990, resurrected the simpler International International, toCAB body andin CABI), to international status ofthe legal parent InstituteMycological (following the change in 1940by IMI Review ofApplied Mycology Fungorum maintainedwhich the thread ofthe literature.mycological It “Petrak’s was lists” names, butmycological alisting ofpertinent was notacompilation RAM of (RAM). literature inthe publishingabstracts1922 started ofresearch from 1921onward, fungi pathogenic andin anidentification provided for IMI service the Imperial Institute Mycological (IMI). in established 1927)andwas renamedbeen Imperial Bureaux Agricultural had (which particularly typification (the category of of particularly typification (the category nomenclaturalwith details, the required excessiverequired topin effort them down etc.) was unwieldy groups, and fungus in all identification was available, nomina herbaria, names, names noaccurate forwhich number of“obsolete” moribund names (i.e. (1)the as anticipated: difficultiesemerged data-entry work ofthe times, at two least the above oforder. rank of fungi ofnames catalogue apreliminary prepared David names ranks, at (2002) of fungal all As astep toward acomplete nomenclator The series called The series called Encumbered by the inefficient, laborious A Supplement toPetrak’sA Supplement Lists (http://www.cabi.org/publishing- Index ofFungi 19 , and in 1986, to CAB International, andin1986,toCAB commenced in 1947,essentially from 1920–1939. 18 Review ofApplied Mycology Index ofFungi , but after Supplement Supplement , Petrak’s Lists Thesaurus. , commenced nces, and and Index of to (Fig. 15) (Fig. (Fig. 14) (Fig. The Sylloge 20 . concept notfind did sufficient traction in correct. The “names in current usage” oftenwhile obscure, historically was ofwhich, namesof historical the “validity” namesuitable lists fungal and the dismissal invited tobe the tocompile lists of people by “purists”, taxonomic issue whotook with plant) names. Theidea met by was resistance “startingan injected (and point” forfungal nomenclature bureaucracy, become would the ideathat these lists, by oncevetted the moribund names mentioned above),with (thus removing from consideration the asked tocompile lists ofactively names used various wouldbe plant groups (andfungi) names. Through experts effort, in this over potentiallyusage” competing earlier concept ofprotecting “names in current introduced (IUBS), Sciences the Biological the auspices ofthe International Union of David Hawksworth under andcolleagues, ofnomenclature,code some30yearsago covered byof organisms the botanical To the alleviate former problem groups in all PROTECTION OFNAMES REGISTRATION AND 1979). e il etab volumesas Veg ofRegnum 63,500 generic names issued andtheir types, Nominum Genericorum Index over andproduced toiled adecade by Dr. andateam,led obtained, Ellen Farr, funding forafull-blown was project 35,000 cards were Eventually, amassed. effort was undertakenconcerted andover aseriesas ofindex cards, but now amore Such anindex species. hadunderway been andtheir type fungi) plants (including compile asummary ofgeneric names for a fieldof research,was made to aproposal taxonomy ofbotanical as reorganization MuseumHistory in central London. scanned inthe ofthe libraries Natural journals were notat Kew regularly orIMI the attention staff.Some additional ofIMI anddrawn to names were flagged fungal its abstracting journals andany with new were being regularly scanned by CABI for the support Around effort). journals 12,000 (andfunds to manpower harvest andtedious agrowingwas already problem requiring andpress runs, coverage lists, geographical wide journals, subscription often withlimited names in published search world- fornew “epitype” was still in the future); and(2)The As part oftheAs part post-World War-II (“ING”), with over (“ING”), (Farr et al . 9 Following forthe support scheme at the International Association. Mycological The Netherlands, but now owned by the Fungal Diversity Centre in Utrecht, (CBS) MycoBank into what andisstill known was, today, as nomenclature hierarchy andincorporated but eventually approved was through the with opinions, mixed the greeted idea was submission ofnames world-wide. Again, registration had envisioned ben toease from the plants, andthe provisions were deleted and fungi foralgae, proposed had been the scheme, which against 1999, voted However, that Congress, in in St Louis after the next Congress. obligatory become into theincorporated Tokyo to Code, at the Yokohama Congress of1993,and coveredorganisms by thecode botanical 1955). Theconcept all was approved for ayearlater (Ainsworthproposed &Ciferri Vegetabile 5:47–48)andformally ConferenceGeneva in 1954(Regnum havingmycology, at discussed the been of thein idea notnew This taxon. was from the journal subscriber tothe author combinations, new wellas as ranks etc.) compiling taxonomic names lists ofnew (all themoved fordetecting responsibility and “nameincluded registration”, which renovation ofname compilation also the Melbourne Congress in 2011. names,at accepted was which of protected into has evolved the conceptusage” oflists mannerall ofnames, and“names in current Fungorum et al having (Greuter published been already names, lists forsample andspecies families names,an overall listoffamily generic Congress in Yokohama,Botanical despite bythe 1993International rejected and was community the andmycological botanical Names Names MycoBank CongressMycological in Bangkok in 2014; to ratification at the next International one ormore registration centres, subject with approvingfor Fungi charged was 2013. The Nomenclature Committee following year, from with 1 effect January Congress in MelbourneBotanical the approved bythe subsequent International names was publicationvalid fungal ofnew oftheregistration requirement part forthe tomake in 2010,proposals in Edinburgh ratified at Congress. the Bangkok th International Congress Mycological Hawksworth proposed andcolleagues’ Index b,c). The . 1993a, unveiling ofIndex were approved andthe decision Code (more below) abruptly revealed (more abruptly below) revealed , headquartered at CBS-KNAW Index Fungorum , Index . Several centres. Several forname , and IMA FUNGUS Fungal Fungal MYCOLENS (37) Saccardo A.N. P. and with Saccardo Berlese P.A. Oglin. Mancini. and V. Cuboni J. by Cuboni. collaboration J. by De A.N. by J.B. collaboration with Berlese, Ed. Fischer. Toni, A.N. Berlese, Paoletti, J. by collaboration Trevasin. V. De Toni, J.B. Saccardo. I. P.A. fungi fossil A. by with Saccardo, II. P.A. Meschinelli. Saccardo. III. P.A. Sydow. P. by Sydow. and P. Saccardo P.A. part IV. Mussat E. Sydow. and P. Saccardo P.A. part V. (son), Saccardo D. Saccardo, part VI. P.A. to memorial [with Traverso. and J.B. Berlese]. Napoleon August Saccardo and D. Saccardo part VII. P.A. (son). Traverso. and J.B. Saccardo P.A. Traverso. and J.B. Saccardo P.A. part X,universale, edited Alex. by Trotter, furnished by Reed & Farr (1993) Reedfurnished by & Farr I (1882)–IV edited (1886): P.A. by Vols. I-IV, et volumen (1886): Additamenta IVa Vol. collaboration with Saccardo V (1887): P.A. Vol. with Saccardo VI (1888): P.A. Vol. Saccardo 1 and 2; 1888) P.A. VII (Parts Vol. with Saccardo VIII (1889): P.A. Vol. part universale, IX (1891) Supplementum Vol. part universal, X (1892) Supplementum Vol. part universale, XI (1895) Supplementum Vol. XII (1897) Sylloge Authored Fungorum. Vol. Sydow. XIII (1898). Largely aided P. by Vol. universale, XIV (1899) Supplementum Vol. by etc. authored XV (1901) Synonymia, Vol. universale, XVI (1902) Supplementum Vol. universale, XVII (1905) Supplementum Vol. universale, XVIII (1906) Supplementum Vol. icones fungorum A-L. XIX (1910) Index Vol. icones fungorum, M-Z. XX (1911) Index Vol. universale, XXI (1912) Supplementum Vol. and Alex.part Saccardo VIII. Trotter. P.A. universale, XXII (1913) Supplementum Vol. part IX. and Alex. Saccardo Trotter. P.A. universale, XXIII (1925) Supplementum Vol. with part X, edited by Alex. Trotter, Dominic Saccardo, P.A. by collaboration Saccardo [P.A. G.B. Traverso. (son), Saccardo died 1920]. in XXIV Sectio I. (1926) Supplementum Vol. and both men taught at various preparatory various at taught and both men tracks career academies.eventually Their Botanist diverged, appointed as State Peck with and Ellis again teaching, farming York of New and selling fungus exsiccati. is Fungorum of Sylloge A full of all volumes outline 5 volumes a volumes simultaneously. simultaneously. itself is paged itself was and printed Index (title page) to seems (title in the Systema the in Index In a Presidential lecture, “Dr. Francis Francis “Dr. lecture, a Presidential In (1849-1851) as did Peck (1855–1859), (1849-1851) as did Peck … spoke of the need for more accurate and and need of the accurate for more … spoke regard season, in studies extended to the are of species that and distribution habitat, can be easily identified;familiar or that also as can be data value of such gathered in the importance The regard plants. to unfamiliar on, not to the he would insist work of such popular generally of the and more exclusion as a but Club, of the purpose interesting if work, necessary and basis for that adjunct needs our among value. Chief it is to have list of species are: and accurate 1, a complete least in or at country, the in already found portion of it; 2, some expert northeastern the and deal a in exhibitions our to visit authority speciesthe with way gathered.” final Club’s publication mentions other such clubs: such other mentions publication Club’s (organizedMarch, Club Toadstool in Westfield Boston the than older 1895, and therefore and similar organizations in DedhamClub), (DC), and (NY), Washington York New (MA), (PA). Philadelphia Index Alphabeticus Index the that 3 of Systema volume into bound page was title index Only an undated to the produced Index and the The a newstart signature. III, volume which from makes separately of the inclusion choice. open retroactively a significant bibliography furnishes historical arranged which through in chronological order, and disciplines can of writers some continuity be traced. Coincidentally, Ellis attended Union College Union Ellis attended Coincidentally, The July number of the Boston Mycological the Boston of number July The There is no scientific historical reason to assume reason historical toassume is no scientific There (1976) is especially Ainsworth for he noteworthy 4 3 1 2 END NOTES ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS suggestionsvaluable made to a prior Don Pfister years agomany usual, As this paper. draft of seed Donk the sowed value Anton of the Marinus databases, Modern mycology. in of compilations of leadingincluding botanical those libraries (chiefly included have Garden) Botanical York New The (i.e. compendia and electronic citations, accurate JSTOR, Biodiversity Library, etc.) include Heritage useful this classical in of the publications many discussion. flourishing due, in part, to the foundations the foundations in part, due, to flourishing compilers. laid past and present by

, . 21 century, century, st by its last by its , which is print- , which is print- Index Fungorum

(http://www. (Reed & Farr 1993). (Reed & Farr ), author- of Life Catalogue Catalogus Index of Fungi Index It takes a particular personality takes and It Although not directly in the line of line of the in Although not directly In the few templates completing the the completing few templates the In Index Fungorum mentality compilatory in to persist work. were compilations years, printed many For small (or of solitary product the workers in centered of collaborators,groups but in long-hand on paper. individuals) written a single (i.e. database MyCoPortal; Today, http://mycoportal.org/portal/index.php) almost databases several other can canvas still compilers Individual instantaneously. new information to accumulate continue is no escape from (there for databases mycological is but entry) research data it stands on the shoulders of the great great of the shoulders on the it stands past. of the (and compilers) compilations fungi, of mention nor names databases Literature of Taxonomic be made must second edition (“TL-2”), its for within information pages exhaustive is found data. compiled who such workers the about and lives the open doors into entries Its here mentioned workers of the times registration process, not only are names process, names not only are registration submitted, required also but all for elements including of names, valid publication the typification and are Names diagnosis.given (“identifiers”), number registration a unique or a new accept name and if journals centre a registration without combination are names unregistered such designation, rulednow as not validly published for takes purposes. The system nomenclatural age. electronic of the advantage indexfungorum.org/) IMI, at was initiated co-operation National the US with of the made Collection who generously Fungal used the to produce database the available Sylloge to the index fungi for lichen and species names Generic volume index the from keyed in were of Zahlbruckner’s It L. Hawksworth. son, Julian Director’s on to develop as among a collaboration went CABI, CBS, Research, New and Landcare Zealand. largely database This on-line parallels and subscription-only. acts as an umbrella over several subsidiary over asacts an umbrella (includingdatabases: name-based taxon , which gives accepted Species Fungorum the and provides and synonyms, names of the editions annual now for the input multi-disciplinary based, etc. This service bibliography-based, of the to carry latest tradition is the on the While mycological it great compilations. 21 early art” the in of the is “state VOLUME 7 · NO. 1 (38) MYCOLENS

6 9 8 7 “With cooperation ofO. “With Appel (Charlottenburg), In the preface totheir and Ellis monograph, The finalvolumes ofSylloge fungorum Miltitz’s “ [Vol. (1972)Supplementum XXVI universale, Vol. (1931)Supplementum XXV universale, Vol. (1928)Supplementum II Sectio XXIV are largely also the authors. also are largely Vuillemin, Zahlbruckner. the So “cooperators” (2), Neger, Saccardo (3),Sydows (together, 10), (4), Guilliermond, Heinze, Höhnel, Matruchot Atkinson, Cavara, Bresadola, Dietel Dangaerd, removed in volume 2. zahlreichen anderen Gelehrten.” Atkinson was Weiss und (Wien) Zahlbruckner A. (Freising), Hall (Paramaribo), P. Vuillemin (Nancy), J.E. (Eisenach), P.A. Saccardo (Padua), C.J.J. Van Matruchot L. (Halle, A.S.), (Paris), F.W. Neger Fr.A.S.), von Höhnel Küster E. (Wien), Guilliermond Heinze (Lyon),A. (Halle R. Dangaerd (Poitiers), P. Dietel(Glauchau), (Triento), Fr. Cavara (Catania), P.A. F.Geo. Atkinson (Ithaca), Abbate J. Bresadola the hands andEverhart ofEllis worked. they as These references imply that these works were in [1884–1890] in“Synopsis his Pyrenomycetum system andthat by M.C. adopted Cooke the Saccardian standing intermediate between differentgrouping genera, in of this respect the that ofSaccardo Sylloge in his FloraKryptogamen of Dr. Winter [1884–1887]in Rabenhorst’s (andstatedadopted elsewhere) ismainly that systemEverhart ofclassification “The wrote: fungi). classification systemall for xi–xx1993. Pages are asummary ofSaccardo’s andFarr,Cash volume as Reed 26(1972;see byTrotter amassed was by andcompiled over Asupplement the samedecades. volume company produced which done by Friedlaender &Sohn, Berlin, the same was setby Pergola (Italy) but printing was Saccardo, G.B.Traverso Trotter. andA. Type P.A. (posthumously) son,Dominic andhis by asmall group ofcollaborators: edited comments. Assuch,was itbotanical notonly and auctioneers, prices and andincluded dealers book librarians, for usebybotanists, summarizing literature up botanical to1829, by Alex. Trotter].by Alex. Cash, by compiled Edith E. Edited XI. part Saccardo (son), G.B.Traverso. collaboration by P.A. Saccardo, Dominic Trotter, byAlex. edited X, part with Saccardo (son),Dominic G.B.Traverso. with collaboration byP.A. Saccardo, Trotter, by Alex. edited universale, X, part Saccardo (son),Dominic G.B.Traverso. with collaboration byP.A. Saccardo, Among the authors involume 1were: Handbuch astand-alone” was volume …. The system ….The differs from Annales Mycologici mainly in the were were

.” .” 11 10 “Pritzel’s Thesaurus First inspired by alecture by Joseph Henry, leader century. incomplete andobsoleteby the turn ofthe but also (not mycological/lichenological) Stafleu (1973). For asummary concerning the “ Applicata” plants), medicinal etc. (including group, by geography, toauthors, to“Botanica numerousadded ofliterature indices byplant commentary words appended. To these were entries were often few with included, a very Pritzel’s friend. longtime of10,874 Atotal with by furnished someparts C.W.J. Jessen, posthumously, was published edition second the version. commonly The consulted become 1872, but the reprint has edition ofthe second commencededition in in 1851,the second publication The first helisted. every on seeing humanly(1815–1874) insisted (if possible) bibliography, Pritzel G.A. partly because astandard forbotanical became soon withdealing mathematics andphysics. half-way through the alphabet. reductions the ended with effort 17,1921, vol. 1900, but the of effects World War Iand staff intended tobring literature up to series (IV) scientificliterature for1874–1883.The final 1891,1894,1896,summarized(Series III), Catalog 1879, covered 1864–1873.The the decade series volumessecond oftwo 1877, (Series II), tobring soa the literature aneed was forward, 1968). By the publication ofvol. 6,1872,there Periodicu abbreviations, oninBotanico- carried eventually extractedlist ofthe periodicals andtheir in those volumes acomprehensive was also covered the 1800–1863literature. Embedded ofLondon. Society Royal 1800–1863; the was assumed by project the until toincludeliterature possible itwas from etc.),anddelayed monographs, standing books, literature periodical include only (notfree- up by the Association, mutated somewhat to compendium ofscientificliterature takenwas Association, the ideaofacomprehensive of the Smithsonian Institution, tothe British lichenology. lichenology. and at literaturethe specifically of mycology to overcome with their “Thesaurus,” aimed andSydow Lindau which attemptedaspect the “natural all wellas as sciences.” It was this for the like the proverbial “needle in the haystack,” was orplant pathology literature onmycology relativelywas tosearch, but tofind easy Armed with anauthor’s name, the Threeindices were alsopublished, subject The first sixvolumes, commenced in1867, Catalog was again continued, andvolumes was again 9–11 m-Hunt covered all the covered “hard all sciences” ,” editions, in two published ianum (“BPH,”edition, first Thesaurus,” see Catalog

12 14 13 Begun in 1873by Johann Begun Just Leopold (1841– In day, his Clements known better was for Oudemans, aprominent doctor Dutch medical Mycologici Papers leanyearsfor“ ” andvery the yearofthewas also last “Catalog ofScientific to Vol. 50(1)in 1922.Not coincidentally, this journal The speaking continued (andwriting). andwhoweretitle exclusively page German- whosenames werecolleagues” onthe listed Just of“winning boasted aline-up ofcompetent literature. anannualbe summary ofbotanical Jahresbericht1891), “Botanischer regni vegetabilisregni “ started also untilsole editor 1922.Parenthetically, Fedde andthe following yearbecame co-editor, 1873–1942)became Fedde (Charlottenburg: JahresberichtBotanischer the its journal name to“ changed the series, Just’s andafter edited death (1891), the mid-1880s.Subsequently, workers several Berliners. German-speaking cities, andover-weighted with 20ormore names,included always from andwaned overwaxed the years,but always The rosterhundreds of ofpages. “cooperators” course, in German. number Each included sometimes lengthy. quite Abstracts were, of abstract ofthe paper, sometimes brief, quite title andnumber. The number referred toan with author, entry listed was Each abbreviated “Kryptogamen.” onewas (disciplines), ofwhich into divided “departments” ofbeing advantage successions. “Succession ecology” became became successions. “Succession ecology” static over but time developed in aseries of be consideredas not in afloracould which the ideaofplant successionyears, hedeveloped ofthe observation his floraof that state.Over under Charles Bessey, andClements began mycology. He at studied University ofNebraska research andphilosophy than for ecological names. fungus fifthvolume acomprehensiveall indexof etc.)andtheir andthe fungi, Dicotyledonae, Angiospermae, Monocotyledonae/ by the Gymnospermae/ groups ofplants (i.e. the firstover four pages, 5700 total arranged 2, 1920;vol. 3,1921;vol. 4,1923;vol. 5,1925), in fiveappeared They volumes (vol. 1,1919;vol. Jan Willem Moll put them in publishable form. but someyearslater aconsortium by headed 1906, these massive files remained unpublished, with in plants. associated When hedied fungi and botanist, citations compiled describing .” Repertorium journal tothe survives present “ as untileditor 1942(the death). yearofhis This Leopold Just the publication intoLeopold edited issueEach of“Jahresbericht ” (q.v.). Repertorium novarumRepertorium specierum ” in 1905,andremained .” In 1902,F.K.G. IMA FUNGUS Annales ” had the ” promised to ” promised Just’s Just’s Feddes Feddes MYCOLENS (39) 6: (1967), Vol. III. Vol. Vol. V. Index of Index of Index of Index Vol. I. Vol. II. Vol. . Vol. IV. IV. . Vol. ). Index of ). Index ). Index of ). Index . Boston . Boston , universally , universally . Wallingford: CAB . Wallingford: Introduction to the History of History the to Introduction 3: 94. Saccardo’s Arrangement Saccardo’s . Cambridge: Cambridge University . Cambridge: University Cambridge 1898–1905. 1–30. 1905–1908. 1–28. 1909–1912. 1–16. Taxon and publication. Taxon taxonomic literature 4: 3–6. and Prospect Retrospect International. Mycology Press. 4–8). (unnumbered Mycological Club Lloyd. of C.G. writings mycological the Lloyd. of C.G. writings mycological the Lloyd. of C.G. writings mycological the Lloyd of C.G. writings mycological the 1913–1916. 1–16. Lloyd. of C.G. writings mycological the 1916–1919. 1–24. the herbarium] fungi for fleshy of mounting Mycologia of Botany Ohio fungi. London Journal XIV. 312–326. years of writing on botanical bibliography years of writing (1921- Stafleu Antonie Frans and biography, Literature 1997) published Taxonomic (not to guide literature a one-volume to the fungal of this less botanical – much – names) the research. field of by Received positively was able to obtain Stafleu botanical community, a team of data-gatherers, and assemble funding to scour S. Cowan, chief Richard of whom was leading The botanical libraries world-wide. second seven-volume a mammoth was result Literature edition of Taxonomic coverage, its in it as TL-2. Exhaustive known for information as a source becomehas essential botanicalabout (including mycological) as 1753 to 1940. As Herculean from authors needed, were supplements were, volumes the covering appeared eight in volumes, and have example G. A small through names workers’ repeated been usefulness have of TL-2 of the present of the writing the during references through The full on-line available set is paper. Biodiversity Library. Heritage Intended as a compilation of data gathered over gathered over of data as compilation a Intended Anon. [CG Lloyd] (Cincinnati). undated Anon. [CG Lloyd] (Cincinnati). undated Anon. [CG Lloyd] (Cincinnati). undated REFERENCES GC, R.Ainsworth Ciferri (1955) Mycological DL (1993) IMI:Aitchison EM, Hawksworth GCAinsworth (1976) Anon. (1898) Anon. [CG Lloyd] (Cincinnati undated 21 Anon. [CG Lloyd] (Cincinnati undated on methods (1911) [Note Murrill]. Anon. [WA MJ (1847) DecadesBerkeley of fungi. Decades XII– 63(1935), attempted to give Just’s Botanischer Just’s was no longer was and its issued being years or more, references have been have references years or more, newthousand to some five accumulated twenty the fungus published names during not which were years 1920–39, inclusive, Lists.” included Petrak’s in 1920-1939. lists Petrak’s of Fungi. Index the part index 1. Comprising Cumulative of index and the names of generic index CMIspecies epithets. 1–168. “1956”: 1920-1939. lists Petrak’s of Fungi. Index host part index 2. Comprising Cumulative index, genera, of host index and other index. CMI “1957”: 169–307. substrata Preface: “Dr. Petrak in parts of seven volumes volumes parts of seven in Petrak Preface: “Dr. Abt. 2: 805–1056. (reprinted as Index of as Index (reprinted 2: 805–1056. Abt. Commonwealth 1932–1935 by Fungi 1955). in Mycological Institute (1931), Abt. 1: 449–514. (reprinted as (reprinted 1: 449–514. 60(1931), Abt. Commonwealth 1929 by Fungi of Index 1953). in Mycological Institute of Fungi 1930 by Commonwealth Commonwealth by 1930 of Fungi 1967). in Mycological Institute Index of Fungi. A supplement to Petrak’s lists lists to Petrak’s A supplement of Fungi. Index 1920-1939. CMI “1969”: 1–236. past ten of the course the “In Introduction: 1956. Mycological Institute. Commonwealth 1957. Mycological Institute. Commonwealth contributed significantly by DLH, is somewhat contributed concise most the detailed, represent it may system compiling modern of the summary available to international workers. of fungi,List new of new species and varieties published and new names 1936– combinations Vienna. Petrak, F. 1939 by Botanischer Jahresbericht of Just’s all and varieties new genera, species, combinations, years 1920 to 1935 the of fungi published during 1944. in appearing last contribution the inclusive, Wiltshire, [S.P. informed Petrak Dr. war the After his continued he had of CMI]Director that of all published to 1938.records names down species of new the Index of The in listing fungi Review of the to Supplements (formerly of Fungi January, Mycology in commenced ) was Applied periods parts, each covering separate 1940, and the appeared regularly have since. of six months, lack of compilation the serious remained There years four the publishedof new names during gap of this in learnt Petrak Dr. 1936–1939. When he very records agreedthe kindly suggestionmy to of end his he should list to the complete that part on its undertook Institute 1939, while the list, since to publish the Jahresbericht been allstocks had nearly destroyed.” 1944. Just’s Botanischer Jahresbericht Jahresbericht Botanischer 1944. Just’s 1939. Just’s Botanischer Jahresbericht Jahresbericht Botanischer 1939. Just’s Commonwealth Mycological Institute. 1969. Mycological Institute. Commonwealth Although the narrative concerning recent history, history, recent concerning narrative Although the Mycological Institute.1950. Commonwealth 20 18 19 58(1930),

(first edition) was the first first the was (first edition) which had been introduced as a been which introduced had (1920), Abt. 2: 134–256. (reprinted as 2: 134–256. (reprinted 57(1920), Abt. Commonwealth 1920 by of Fungi Index 1953). in Mycological Institute as 2: 267–336. (reprinted 59(1921), Abt. Commonwealth 1921 by of Fungi Index 1953). in Mycological Institute 2: 291-697. (reprinted 56(1928), Abt. 1922–1928 by of Fungi as Index in Mycological Institute Commonwealth 1953). as 2: 592–631. (reprinted 57(1929), Abt. Commonwealth 1929 by of Fungi Index 1952). in Mycological Institute as Index 1: 447–570. (reprinted Abt. The Botanical Code of Nomenclature, Nomenclature, The Botanical Code of Formen, Namen und wichtigsten Synonyme. Synonyme. wichtigsten und Namen Formen, Jahresbericht Botanischer 1930. Just’s 1931. Just’s Botanischer Jahresbericht Jahresbericht Botanischer 1931. Just’s Jahresbericht. Botanischer 1937. Just’s Jahresbericht Botanischer 1938. Just’s Jahresbericht Botanischer 1938 Just’s spent time in the laboratory Bessey in the time of Charles spent met and there of Nebraska, University the at Shear was better- Clements, Like Clements. (but related) for other disciplinesknown studying spent was A career mycology. than diseases,plant especially fungi, by including herbaria. Shear was stalwart to European trips types be understood must that insisting in and studied causal organism if the was to be identified. accurately American Code of Botanical of Botanical Code American be to the traced Nomenclature summary. systematic such “mechanical declared typification by however, of the recitation mere including means,” the by species the included first in genus Code and the to violate genus of the author by null. typification The such listing render Shear) usually and (and Clements Clements speciesthe original in cited first the genus, means,” “mechanical a and was considered Code. Over of the violation in and therefore were exceptions years, however, subsequent Clements realized and it was found that not & Shear (1931) were (1909) and Clements theyhad not arbitrarythat typification, and in species first followedrule. the slavishly counterweight to European attempts to codify attempts counterweight European to typification which mandated but nomenclature, the fact, once In ranks. allat taxonomic import the mycological understood community the secondwas it typification, of this edition drew attention. C.L. 1931) that Shear in (with Fungi of Genera The a mainstay in biology in a mainstay an remained has and in botany. influence important Petrak, F. Verzeichnis der neuen Arten, Varietäten, Varietäten, Arten, neuen der Verzeichnis F. Petrak, Years before their publishing partnership, Shear publishing partnership, before their Years Comprehensive selection and listing of types selection and listing can Comprehensive 17 16 15 VOLUME 7 · NO. 1 (40) MYCOLENS

Berkeley MJ. Notices ofNorth American fungi. Cooke MC.Synopsis Pyrenomycetum. Clements (1931) ShearCL FE, Clements FE(1909)The Genera of Fungi. Ciferri R(1957–1960) Thesaurus Literaturae Berkeley MJ, Curtis (1856)Acommentary MA on Berkeley MJ, Curtis Centuries MA. ofNorth Berkeley MJ, Curtis Contributions MA. tothe (1875d) Grevillea (1875d) (1876b) Grevillea (1876a) Grevillea (1875c) Grevillea (1875b) Grevillea 3: 145–160. (1875a) Grevillea Grevillea(1874d) 3: 49–64. (1874c) Grevillea (1874b) Grevillea (1874a) Grevillea (1873k) Grevillea Grevillea(1873j) 2:82–84. Grevillea(1873i) 2: 65–69. (1873h) Grevilles Grevillea (1873g) )Grevillea (1873f (1873e) Grevillea Grevillea(1873d) 1: 176–180. (1873c) Grevillea (1873b) Grevillea (1873a) Grevillea (1872c) Grevillea (1872b) Grevillea (1872a) Grevillea (1884) Grevillea (1884) Grevillea Pubishing) (Reprint.58 pls. 1954.New York: Hafner Fungi H.W.Minneapolis: Wilson,227pp. [Vol. [Vol. [Vol. introduction) 1–689 [Vol. [unnumbered volumes] & P. Sydow).1911–1930. Supplementum Mycologicae etLichenologicae 205–224. the Philadelphia Academy ofNatural Science degentium the Synopsis Fungorum media inAmerica Boreali III (1859) Annals andMagazine ofNatural History 12: 417–435. (1853) Annals andMagazine ofNatural History American fungi. 1849d.(11). Silliman’s Journal 1849:93–95. 1849c. (10).Silliman’s Journal 1849:185–188. 1849b. (9). (8). Silliman’s1849a. Journal 1849:401–403 ofNorth America. mycology 4: 284–296. ] (1960) = Letters R–Z. 2159–3100. 4] (1960)=LettersR–Z. 1479–2156. 3] (1959)=LettersL–Q. 690–1476 E–K 2] (1958)=Letters A–D1] (1957)=Letters (with . New York: H.W. Wilson,498pp+ , by L.D. Journal deSchweinitz. of Silliman’s Journal 1849:171–175. 13:8–16,41–45 12:102–113. 2:49–53. 4:1–16. 3:1–17. 1:161–166. 1:62–71 2:3–7. 4:93–108. 3:97–112. 2:153–157. 1:97–102 1:33–39. 2:17–20. 4:141–162. 2:177–181. 1:145–150. 1:49–55. 2:97–101. 2:33–35. 4 : 45–52. The Genera of (G. Lindau (G.Lindau 2:

Farlow WG, (1891) AB Seymour Greuter W, Ahti T, Samson Pitt RA, JI, Farjon A, Greuter W, Crosby RD RD, Reveal Hoogland “G.H.L.” (1808)Index Botanicus omnes sistens Fries T, Fries Fries’s R(1955)Elias autobiography. Farr Stafleu Leussink JA, ER, FA (1979) Index Farlow WG, (1890) AB Seymour Farlow WG, (1888) AB Seymour Everhart JB, Ellis (1892)The BM North American Bibliothecae J(1798–1800)Catalogus Dryander onnames catalogue David (2002)Apreliminary JC Gr Hitchcock E(1829)Catalog ofAnimals andPlants euter W, Farr Brummitt N, Kilian RK, Kirk E, (1887) Grevi and Lemnaceae.Regnum Vegetabile families Landolt E(1993b) Names in current use in the e il etab Veg andfungi. plants,vascular bryophytes, NCU–1. Family names in current use for Grolle MJ, ZijlstraJL, G,David (1993a) JC Dieterich. 34(unnumbered) pages. varietatibus etsynonymis Methodica Fungorum enumerates una cun fungorum species portraits). 151–160 +two Friesia 100,101,102. vols. Nominum Genericorum. RegnumVegetabile Cambridge 135–219. oftheindex fungi ofthe United States. Gamopetalae–Apetalae oftheindex fungi ofthe United States (Introduction July as isdated 31,1888). I. Polypetala host–index ofthe fungi ofthe United States Pyrenomycetes Tome 5:Supplements Tome 4:Minerologi Tome 3:Botanici. 9Nov. 1797.i–xxiii +1–656. Tome 2:Zoologie Tome 1:Scriptores generales Societatis Praecidis caet.London. Regiae Intimo,Consilis Baroneti, Equitis, Balnei a Historico–naturalis Josephi Regi Banks (16): unpaginated abovethe offamily. rank of fungi (1890) Grevillea (1890) Grevillea (1889) Grevillea (1889) Grevillea 17:49–52,85–93. (1888) Grevillea (1888) Grevillea (1886) (1885) Grevillea (1885) Grevillea of Massachusetts e il etab Veg current use forextant Regnum plant genera. (1993c) Silva NCU–3.PM, PC Names in 5:139–150(with extensive notes,pp Grevillea Trichocomaceae 126:1–95. 129:1–146. e. Cambridge, 51pp+addendum. llea . Newfield, NJ. . Newfield, 791pp. . 142pp.Amherst. in D.C.H. Persoonii 14:93–97. 19:50–51. 18:61–67,75–80. 18:13–17,28–33. 17:25–28 16:16–20,50–56,87–92. 15:80–86,122–125 14:14–17,46–56 13:61–72,100–109 , Cladoniaceae . Cambridge, 53–133. . Gottingae. Henricum. Gottingae. A provisionalhost– A provisionalhost– A provisional

128 Constancea , Pinaceae . Part II. Part III. : 1–150. Synopsis Regnum . Part 83

Peck CH (1872) Report ofthePeck State (1872)Report CH Botanist. Persoon (1801) CH Persoon (1822) CH Petersen (1975b) and infraspecific Specific RH Petersen and infraspecific (1975a) Specific RH Nees (1816–1817) von CGD Esenbeck Oudemans (1919-1925)Enumeratio CAJA Montagne (1856)Sylloge JFC Genericum Specierumque Miltitz FFvon (1829). G,SydowLindau P(1908)Thesaurus Litteraturae (1963)CatalogusLamb IM Lichenum Universalis Kellerman WA (1907)Saccardo’s recent Just Jahresbericht: Ed.(1873–1922).Botanischer L, Jarvis ofChaos: C(2007)Order Out Linnaean Vol. 5.1925:1–908. Vol. 4.1923:1–1231. Vol. 3.1921:1–1313. Natural: 41–108. History Annual ofthe New Report York State Museum of Tab. i–iv +1–240;(Part 2)pp.241–706. HenricumGöttingen:. Dieterich. + (Part 1)xxx names for fungi used innames used 1821.Patt forfungi and C, II. Introduction, AandB. innames used 1821.Part forfungi I. 356 pp. Vol. 2.1920:1–1069. Vol. 1.1919:1–1230. posthumously Moll]. by JW Systematica Fungorum. volumes published [all Pilzeder und Schwämme Systematico Exposuit Reductas, nonnullasque Novas Interjectas, Ordine Iconibusque Illustratas, nunc adDiagnosim Cryptogamarum quasinvariis operibus Descriptas Rücker known [also Botanica”] “Bibliotheca as Preiseder und Recensionen. Buchhändler und Auctionatoren :mit Angaben Literatur: fürBotaniker, Bibliothekare, Vol. V. 526pp. VII]. (1917)[Kapetula Vol. IV. (1916)[Volumen quartum. Kapetilen 1907–1910. 788pp. Vo.l. title changed (1913)[slightly page]. III. Vol. 808pp. (1909)M–Z. II. Vol. 1.(1908)A–L.903pp. York: Johnson Reprint, undated). Mycologia Applicata praecipue omnium quaeadhucScriptasunt de HabitaMycologicae Ratione etLichenologicae York: Press. Ronald inter annos 1932et1960divulgatorum. Journal ofMycology arrangement andnomenclature ofthe fungi. Berlin. [1886–1922under various editors]. Botanischen Literature Länder aller Systematisch geordnetes der Repertorium Museum. andthe ofLondon Natural Society History plant namesandtheir types. titulorum, sed argumenta]titulorum, 609pp. sed I–VI. Respiciuntur nonprimae litterae Synopsis Methodica Fungorum. Mycologia Europeae. Handbuch Botanischen der . 498pp.Paris. 13(6):242–246. . Leipzig: Borntraeger. [New . Leipzig: Mycotaxon . Würtsburg. 339pp. 272 pp. Berlin. A. 272pp.Berlin. A. London: Linnaean London: IMA FUNGUS 1:149–188. . Vols. I–L. Das System Erlangen. Erlangen. New 24 th

MYCOLENS (41)

.

[of [of . . Utrecht. . Utrecht. 8): 1–209. Index Bulletin of the of the Bulletin no. 32 (Mycol. Ser. Ser. no. 32 (Mycol. . 2 ed., 6: 1–64 Calatogus Lichenum Nomenclator Botanicus Nomenclator . 1: 1868–1877 2: 1878–1890 3: 1891–1899 4: 1900–1907 5: 1908–1912. Stuttgart & Tubingen. Tubingen. & Stuttgart 1: 1821 (includingPt. cryptogams) 2: 1824 Pt. 1: 1840. Pt. 2: 1841. Pt. Lloydmycological of C.G. 1898–1925. writings Library Lloyd of the Bulletin 7): 1–64. Lloyd. proposed C.G. by names Ser. no. 35 (Mycol. Library Lloyd 1868–1912. York], New Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. Vol. in Rabenhorst,L. Pyreno-myceten, und von Deutschland, Kryptogamen–Flora der und Oesterreich Schweiz (1884), 65–528 (1885), 529–800 (1886), 801–928 (1887). 10 . Leipzig: In Universalis Borntraeger. volumes: 1: 1921–1922. Pt. 2: 1922–1924. Pt. 3: 1924–1925. Pt. 4: 1926–1927. Pt. 5: 1927–1928. Pt. 6: 1929–1930. Pt. 7: 1930–1932. Pt. 8: 1931–1934. Pt. 10: 1938–1940. Pt. Lamb IM by (1963), Continued lichenum Nominum Vindobonae. 735 pp. Botanist Reports State of the Annual Peck] 22: 119–130. with dates, commentaries and types commentaries dates, with 556 pp. Nomenclator Botanicus. Nomenclator EG (1840–41) Steudel Stuttgart. (1933) General to the index JA Stevenson new JA, EK (1936) The Cash fungus Stevenson G (1884–87) Ascomyceten: Gymnoasceen Winter Zahlbruckner A (1921–1940) Nomenclator Fungorum (1862) Nomenclator WM Streinz Horton L (ed.) [Charles (1980–1988). Vogelenzang Steudel EG (1821–1824) Steudel Stafleu FA (1973) Pritzel and . Taxon his Thesaurus Pritzel FA (1973) Stafleu , 7: Sylloge

nd 5(3): , n.s. 4: . New . New Catalog Catalog Proceedings xix + 768 pp. Transactions of Transactions Codex Botanicus Botanicus Codex 230, 535 p. 230, 417 p. 230, 445 p. , Halifax 230, 353 pp. 230, 240 pp. . Vols. 1–17. London 1–17. and . Vols. Bulletin 8: 11–15. 7(4): 461. Proceedings and Transactions of and Transactions Proceedings Schriften. Naturforschuch Gesellschaft Naturforschuch Schriften. , volumes I–XXV in XXIX 1882– I–XXV , volumes . Continuatio et finis. 815 pp. + lxix, . Continuatio : 20–131 [Reprint (1976), J. Cramer.] (1976), J. 1: 20–131 [Reprint Fungorum Reed of the Library1972. Contributions and xx Fungus. + 814 pp. US National . 2 vols. Leipzig:Linnaeanus Otto Wiegand. . 86 pp. MSA 2 America and in North (1983) Vol. 3, D–G. Bulletin (1983) Vol. Scotian fungi. (1982) Vol. 2. C. (1982) Vol. Bulletin 4, H–L. (1985) Vol. Leipzig, 6: 296. Sciences Natural of Institute Scotian Nova the 18–19 Mycological Writings of Franz Petrak of Franz Writings Mycological Industrial and Zealand of Scientific Department Research. 1, Bulletin (1981) Vol. Bulletin 5, M–O. (1986) Vol. superioris. borealis Transactions mediaAmerica degentium. Society Philosophical American of the 141–316. Scotian Nova of the and Transactions Proceedings Sciiences of Natural Institute 188–192; 247–253; 332–333. Scotian fungi. Proceedings and Sciences Natural of Institute Scotian Nova the of Institute Scotian Nova of the and Transactions Sciences Natural and collections publications botanical guide to addenda + 77 pp index.addenda of Scientific Papers of Scientific italicorum systemate pyrenomycetum carpologico Giornale dispositorum. Nuovo Botanico Italiono Pyrenomycetum Sylloge I. hucusque cognitorum. I. hucusque cognitorum. omnium Pyrenomycologae II. hucusque cognitorum. universae International Mycological Congress. International Cambridge. Index to Saccardo’s to DF (1993) Index Reed CF Farr HEF (1835–1839; “1840”) Richter Rogers DP (1981) A Brief of Mycology History Somers J (1890) Additions to the list of Nova list of Nova to the J (1890) Additions Somers Scotian fungi. J (1891) Nova Somers Schweinitz LD (1822) Synopsis fungorum Carolinae fungorum Carolinae LDSchweinitz (1822) Synopsis fungorum in LDSchweinitz (1834) Synopsis Scotia fungi and mosses. J (1882) Nova Somers list of Nova to the J (1887) Additions Somers A selective Literature: (1967) Taxonomic FA Stafleu An Annotated Index to the the to Index GJ Annotated Samuels (1981–86) An Sylloge fungorum omnium omnium fungorum (1882) Sylloge PA Saccardo omnium fungorum (1883) Sylloge PA Saccardo Royal Society (London). (1867–1921) Conspectus (1875) genera PA Saccardo

17: 5: 17: 4: . 4 vols . 4 vols m ione : 151–165. Mycotaxon Systema Systema 2

. Edit 6: IMA Fungus Mycotaxon Observationes Observationes 4: 221–230. Mycologia Memoirs Mycologia 72: 1–120.

as a sanctioning book. as a sanctioning 3: 239–260. 4: 185–210. 5: 415–422. 6: 127–166. 6: 78–126. 17: 148–230. , by E.M. Fries (reprint edition by (reprint E.M., by Fries novam reformatam curavit G. A. Pritzel. Lipsiae G. A. Pritzel. curavit reformatam novam [Reprint 1872 [I87I–I877]. Brockhaus FA. (1972): Königstein: Antiquariat.] Otto Koeltz 1–161. inde a rerum botanicarum gentium omnium usque tempora ad nostra initiis [as vols. 1(1), 1(2), 2(1) and 2(2). Kassel: T. [as vols. Kassel: 1(1), 1(2), 2(1) and 2(2). T. Fischer. mycological of taxonomic bibliography 1753–1821. literature Mycologici, Systema Mycologicum, Elenchus Elenchus Mycologicum, Systema Mycologici, Fungorum Associazione Micologica Mycotaxon Bresadola). 58: 499–501. legacy Fries. of Elias Magnus 99–114. Mycologicum Mycologie Cryptogamie, Schaeffer’s “Bavarian Fungi.” Fungi.” “Bavarian Schaeffer’s 145–154. III. for fungi D–G. used 1821. Part names in Mycotaxon H–M. for fungi used 1821. IV. names in Mycotaxon Dillen. Jacob of John mycological work Mycotaxon “History of Fungusses.” Bolton’s 498–510. des Champignons.” “Histoire Bulliard’s Mycotaxon N–Z. for fungi 1821. V. usednames in Mycotaxon and M.A. Berkeley Curtis. of M.J. association Mycologica Bibliotheca . Mycotaxon Mycologicae Observationes Fries’s 87–147. of English Figures Fungi.” “Coloured Sowerby’s Mycotaxon of Fries’s use associated the with supplement to Part I. Mycotaxon I. to Part supplement Thesaurus Literaturae Botanicae Botanicae Literaturae GA (1872) Thesaurus Pritzel Pfister DH, Boise JR,Pfister Eifler MA (1990) A Petersen RH Knudsen H (2015) The mycological H (2015) The RH Knudsen Petersen Botanicus L (1873–74) Nomenclator Pfeiffer Petersen RH (1996) [review] Petersen Petersen RH (1976a) An annotated index for J.C. for J.C. index RH annotated (1976a) An Petersen RH Specificinfraspecific and (1976b) Petersen Specificinfraspecific RH and (1976c). Petersen the RH into (1977a) Some insights Petersen for index annotated RH An (1977b) Petersen for index annotated An RH (1977c) Petersen RH (1977d) SpecificinfraspecificPetersen and mycological The RH (1980) “B. & C.”: Petersen for E.M. index RH annotated (1983a) An Petersen for James index annotated RH An (1983b) Petersen problems Some RH perplexing (1983c) Petersen VOLUME 7 · NO. 1