published a figure of it, which is perhaps the least accurate of
any in his collection. Subsequently, though a great number
of species have been described, good representations are still
wanting ; unless, indeed, the unpublished figures of the late
H e d w i g (the son), which I have not seen, are deserving of that
name.
Mr G r a y , retains under Puccinia, only those species which
have their sporidia divided into many cells ; the plant for which
M i c h e l i at first constituted the genus being also, but judiciously
removed by D e C a n d o l l e . P e r s o o n , in his T ra ité
sur les Champignons comestibles, seems to consider such an
arrangement necessary ; and alludes to a new genus formed to
receive Puccinia graminis, Rosæ, Rubi, Potentilloe, &c. called
Aregma, hut does not name the author. I cannot myself perceive
the propriety of this division, especially as there are species
so intermediate, that much uncertainty and want of precision
would be the inevitable result ; tlian which nothing can
be more discouraging to the student of so intricate a family.
Mr G r a y has even constituted a genus of those Pucciniæ
which have two cells, and raised Coeomurus, one of L i n k ’s
sections of Cæoma to the same rank, from possessing only one
cell.
Puccinia Rosæ is very frequently accompanied by Uredo
miniata; insomuch that it has been described as a parasite upon
the latter : it is, however, often found without it. In F h r a
Danica the Uredo is figured intermixed with the Puccinia.
Fig. 1. A leaflet o f Rosa centifolia, with Puccinia Rosæ, nat. size. Fig. 2. The
Puccinia magnified. Fig. S. Sporidia highly magnified.