Synopsis of Some Genera of the Large Pyrenomycetes | Page 4

I have a scanty collection also from Cuba from E. B. Sterling.
[Illustration: #Fig. 844.# #Fig. 845.# Camillea Bomba. Fig. 844 on bark;
Fig. 845 on hard wood.]
CAMIILLEA BOMBA (Figs. 844, 845).--Plants globose, sessile, 4-6
mm. in diameter, black, smooth, without any disc. Dehiscing by
irregular fracture. Stroma hollow on the interior (Fig. 846 ×6) filled
with a brown powder, composed of spores mixed with abundant
hyphae remnants of the perithecia and asci. Spores 6-7 × 10-12,
elliptical, pale colored.
[Illustration: #Fig. 846.#]
This seems to be a frequent species in tropical America. I collected it in
Cuba and have specimens from Miss Barrett, Jamaica, and L. J. K.
Brace, Bahamas. The latter specimens grew erumpent from thin bark,

and the broken bark forms a kind of cup at the base of the stroma. A
thin, black mycelial stroma underlies the bark. Those I collected in
Cuba were somewhat larger, and more irregular. Some grew in same
manner, erumpent from thin bark and the broken bark forms a kind of
cup at the base of the stroma, others on the naked, hard wood and grew
more compact. In the latter case the black stroma at the base was
thicker and more in evidence. There is no question but that Camillea
Bomba is cogeneric with Camillea Sagraena, but the gleba of the latter
consists almost entirely of spores, while in the former there is
considerably more hyphae remnants than spores.
CAMILLEA GLOBOSA (Fig. 847).--Plants densely caespitose, sessile,
globose, black, smooth. 7-8 mm. in diameter. Opening by irregular
fracture. Stroma hollow, filled with a brown mass of spores and hyphae
remnants. Spores elliptical.
Léveillé named this from a specimen from Tolima, Columbia, South
America. The type Fig. 847 is all than is known to me. Léveillé spins a
long story about it having spores borne on filaments, merely a wrong
deduction, I think, from his having found filaments (of the perithecia
walls?) mixed with the spores. Saccardo, who evidently did not take
much stock in Léveillé's story, omitted the species, suggesting that it
was a form of Camillea turbinata. Saccardo's conclusions were almost
as bad as Léveillé's.
We have not examined any specimens of Camillea globosa, but suspect
a section would show two divisions of the gleba, as in the next. In fact,
with the exception of the stipe, it appears to be the same plant, and
abundant collections may show them as only sessile and stipitate forms
of the same thing.
[Illustration: #Fig. 847.#]
CAMILLEA POCULIFORMIS (Figs. 848 and 849).--Plants caespitose,
stipitate, globose or obovate, smooth, black, 8-15 mm. in diameter.
Stroma somewhat flattened at apex, opening circumscissally[2] or
breaking irregularly. Stipe 8-10 cm. long, 2-3 mm. thick, black. Stroma
hollow, the interior in two divisions, a narrow layer above, the fertile

portion with a few spores in abundant, hyphae remnants, the lower
(corresponding to the sterile base of a Lycoperdon) of matted hyphae.
Spores short, elliptical, 9 × 14, pale colored, scantily found.
[Illustration: #Fig. 848.# Camillea poculiformis.]
[Illustration: #Fig. 849.#]
The pulverulent mass is rather firm, and remains after the peridium
breaks up. Camillea poculiformis was named Corynelia poculiformis in
Weigel's old exsiccatae, about a hundred years ago. It came from South
America. Years later Montagne published it as Hypoxylon poculiformis,
and Léveillé as Phylacia poculiformis. I can not trace it from Fries'
writings, though no doubt Fries had it and doubtless named it. The old
specimens of Weigel's exsiccatae are found in most museums of
Europe, and all the publishing has been done on this one collection. I
have a nice collection (Fig. 848), made by T. J. Collins in Guatemala.
SPECULATIONS.
The scanty knowledge we have of the real structure of this group of
plants leaves much to speculation. They are all evidently closely related
plants, and I think best classified under one general head, or genus,
Camillea. They are quite different from the Hypoxylons of the
temperate region, although we do not question that the tropical species
are included in Saccardo mostly under Hypoxylon. When we come to
compare what little we know of the species we find several differences
on which "genera" could be based, and no doubt will be in time. In the
original sense, Camillea might be restricted to the two cylindrical
species, C. Leprieurii and C. Bacillum.
Then we have the short, cylindrical or globose forms with persistent or
semi-persistent perithecia, Camillea Labellum, C. Cyclops and C.
turbinata with the intermediate species C. mucronata. The above will
form one, or two, genera, according to taste.
In the following plants we find no perithecia in the ripe specimens,
hence of course they will in time be considered a genus. We believe

there are two distinct differences between the few species we know,
corresponding with the old ideas of Bovista and Lycoperdon in the puff
balls.