Illustrations of Fungi which Grow in Bavaria and the Palatinate around Ratisbon

which, alas, are still used back and forth, were completely neglected due to being somewhat unsuitable for the purpose.

Furthermore, many smaller fungi—such as Sphaeriae, Trichiae, Pezizae, etc.—which nevertheless constitute a vast number, were omitted; these have been more thoroughly investigated in our own time original: "*) Quod cum aliis desideriis appendice, huic operi addenda, sublatum ire speco." This I hope to rectify, along with other desiderata, in an appendix to be added to this work..

Moreover, the artists, however skilled, did not attend to the form or connection of certain subtle parts in their delineations of fungi in the manner that is nonetheless required for more accurate discrimination, given such a great abundance of species already discovered or yet to be discovered. This applies especially to the gills of Agarics, the tubes of Boleti, the warts of Lycoperdons puffballs, etc.

Finally, regarding the Author's own commentary appearing in the fourth volume under the title General Index, the so-called specific Differences, written according to botanical rules, are entirely lacking therein. For those which Schaeffer established lean more toward the likeness of brief descriptions, for which they have sometimes been taken by other botanists original: "**) Ni fallor, multae quoque ejus differentiae non ad viva fungorum exemplaria, sed ad icones ipsas sunt institutae; imprimis hoc elucet, ubi pilei striati aut filamentosi etc. mentio injicitur. Verum quam mancae tales sint, quis ignorat?" If I am not mistaken, many of his differences were also established not from live specimens of fungi, but from the illustrations themselves; this is especially evident where mention is made of striated or filamentous caps, etc. But who is unaware of how deficient such things are?. Some synonyms cited therein, although those belonging to