Feb., 1902.] Botanical Correspondence. 213 



41. Ustilago syntherismae Schw. 



On Panicum proliferum lyam. 



Columbus, Ohio. October 5, 1901. 



Coll. F. J. Tyler and O. E. Jennings. 



" Ustilago (Caeomasubgen. Uredo) sjiitherismae, !>. v. S. C. in 

 vaginis etiani junioribiis sese ostendit ante evolutioneni. Sporidiis 

 cinereo-atro viridibus, laxissiine effusis inquinantibus." L. D. de 

 Schweinitz, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 

 Philadelphia, 4: 290. 1S34. 



42. Ustilago tritici (Pers.) Jensen. 



Uredo tritici Persoon. 



On Triticttm sativum Lam. 



Columbus, Ohio. June 12, 1901. 



Coll. W. A. Kellerman. 



" Uredo segetnni : pnlvere copioso nigro in graminiim spiculis 

 s. glumis proveniente. (Disp. meth. fnng., p. 56.) 



" Reticularia segetuni, fusco-nigricans graniinuni parasitica, 

 intus filanientosa. (Bull, champ, i. pag. 90. t. 472. f. 2.) 



'' d. Uredo tritici: sul^effusa." D. C. H. Persoon, Synopsis 

 Methodica Fungornm, i : 224. iSoi. 



BOTANICAL CORRESPONDENCE AND NOTES 

 FOR AMATEURS, IIL 



Conducted by W. A. Keli^ERMAN. 



I^ii// p. Mr. F. H. Burglehaits, of Toledo, .sends the following- 

 note : "I have fotind in working over Rtibus americana Britton, 

 that the description in Gray's and Britton's Mantials — "stems 

 annual, herbaceous, or slightly woody" — does not accurately 

 cover the common form here. All the specimens taken here have 

 six inches or more of woody stem of previous year's growth. Tiie 

 new flowering stems are delicate, herbaceous, generally branching 

 from the stem of the previous year. Is this generally the case in 

 Ohio ? " 



Mr. F. J. Tyler examined the specimens in the Ohio Herbarittm 

 and found " the branches coming from a stem of previotis year's 

 growth. This old stem was in some cases three inches high, btit 

 mostly it had been killed to the surface of the ground ; the yotmg 

 branches started from buds which had been protected by leaf 

 mold or soil. Probably the description in the floras referred to 

 by Mr. Burglehaus is correct for all cases except wdiere the plant 

 is protected. 



//6v;^ 10. Occasion will be taken here to call attention to a 

 note which Mr. Burglehaus published in Torreya, 1 : 55, relative* 

 to .specimens of Circaea Ititetiana found at Toledo, July 29, 1900, 

 with smooth fruit . These were growing with the ordinary Circaea 

 lutetiana, which otherwise they resembled. Dr. Britton stated 



