CONTRIBUTION TOWARD A MONOGRAPH OF RAMARIA. I. SOME CLASSIC SPECIES REDESCRIBED

Clavaria flavescens, C. flava, C. aurea, C. pallida, and C. rubella, species originally described by J. C. Schaeffer and currently placed in Ramaria, are reexamined and redescribed in modern terms following studies of original literature and specimens from type localities. OVER THE YEARS, species described in early, eventually obscure literature are often invested with characters not originally included, or their descriptions changed to fit a similar local organism. In many cases, these names come to represent a composite "taxon," and it becomes necessary to redefine the name more closely to allow more accurate identification of the taxon truly described. In Ramaria, for example, two names in extremely common usage throughout the world are R. (Clavaria) flava and R. (Clavaria) aurca. The impression is created that these "two" taxa are cosmopolitan, found either in typical or variant form on every continent. In fact, even in Europe where the names originated, contradictory concepts of their identities abound, including several apparently undescribed or moribund taxa, viz. C. flava Schaeffer vs. C. flava sensu Bresadola. Of the oldest and most popular names are those coined by Jacob Christian Schaeffer. Schaeffer's home and collecting grounds were in Bavaria, in and near Regensburg, and it is essential to sample the fungus flora of that region to become acquainted with the taxa he described. In some instances (i.e., Clavaria rufescens) I am not yet convinced that modern circumscriptions of Schaeffer's names are possible, although convincing clues are becoming available. In other cases, however, I feel that modern identities are possible, as reported here. Schaeffer authored two major works (Schaeffer 1759, 1762, 1763, 1774a, b) the second of which was composed of four volumes. The date of appearance of Schaeffer's last volume is uncertain. Although the title page reads 1800, a number of literature citations to Schaeffer's names exist before that date, convincing me that the date following Schaeffer's preface, 1774, is correct, as Donk (personal communication) regarded it. Several considerations enter into a search for identities for such classic species. First, when ac1 Received for publication 23 July 1973. This project was supported in part by National Science Foundation Grant GB 32104 and represents contribution No. 416 from the Botanical Laboratories, University of Tennessee. curate color is essential to identification, as in Ramaria, examination of one copy of such handcolored illustrations is not enough. Accordingly, I have examined Schaeffer's volumes at K, NCU, NY, L, Lloyd Library (Cincinnati), Universitait Regensburg, and Universite de Liege. Given minor color discrepancies in individual copies (i.e., the color of C. flava in the volumes at Liege), the color is astonishingly consistent throughout the distribution. Second, subsequent literature is important only as the authors had personal links to the original author. For example, Persoon's (1800) commentary on Schaeffer's work and Fries' publications cannot be trusted to reliably reflect Schaeffer's concepts, for neither author had personal connection with Schaeffer but only possessed the same evidence as all subsequent authors. Third, when herbarium material in subsequent extralimital classic herbaria (e.g., Swedish specimens in herb. Fries) seems to fulfill Schaeffer's description, care must be taken to ascertain the occurrence of such taxa in the Bavarian "topotype" area. Strangely, specimens of this genus from Bavaria are not common, but the exsiccati of Starcs, relatively widely distributed (in USA at BPI and NY to my knowledge), and specimens in herb. Killermann at Munich often verify distribution of such taxa. Finally, descriptions that differ from those of Schaeffer must be examined carefully. For example, the notion that the fruit body base in R. flava stains deep red or winecolored apparently arose fairly early, possibly in Fries' concept. Bresadola (1932) illustrated R. flava with a red base, and his concept was perpetuated by Konrad & Maublanc (1926) and Corner (1950, 1966, 1970). The idea was not mentioned or illustrated by Schaeffer and, consequently, must be rejected. It may be argued that Schaeffer's illustrations must serve as types for his specific epithets, so only representative specimens are specified herein. Colors are cited from Seguy (1936) by numbers in parentheses followed by S, and from Ridgway (1912) in quotes. Recipes for macrochemicals may be found in Singer (1962) and Marr and