New Proposals Relating to the Genera of the Boletaceae

THE TYPIFICATION OF BOLETUS, SUILLUS AND LECCINUM (FUNGI)

“…The typification by Murrill in 1909 on the first species, Leccinum aurantiacum, or by Snell (1942) This included Donk (1955) despite his opinion that "the selection of a species of the Boletus element in its strictest and current sense would have been a judicious choice." There are various reasons to justify the selection of L. aurantiacum: it may indeed have been cited first by Gray because it was considered typical.…”

“…The second anomaly was the decision of Snell (1942) to arbitrarily typify this largely forgotten generic name and apply it to a restricted group of species for which the name Krombholziella Maire was correct.…”

LECCINUM AND THE QUESTION OF SUPERFLUOUS NAMES (FUNGI: BOLETACEAE)

“…Leccinum Snell 1942non S. F. Gray 1821 Leccinum S. F. Gray was a name which was used by no authors after Gray, up to 1942. The sole mention of this name between 1821-1942 was Murrill's citation of Leccinum among synonyms of Ceriomyces Murr. = Boletus Fr.…”

“…in the current, more or less restricted sense with the type Boletus edulis was generally accepted by almost all modem mycologists, e.g., by Gilbert (1931), Konrad (1932), Singer (1947) etc. Also Snell had adopted this modem concept of Boletus (see Snell, 1941). If Boletus edulis was generally accepted as the type of Boletus, then the name Leccinum S. F. Gray was to be treated as illegitimate because Art.…”

“…This citation, however, is a misinterpretation of facts. According to the nomenclatural rules Leccinum in Snell's sense is to be written: Leccinum Snell 1942 non S. F. Gray 182 I.…”