658 THE PHYLOGENY OF THE FUNGI 



which reached to the cortex produced the multipilar structure. By further 

 emphasis upon the axial branch and reduction of the lateral branches the 

 unipileate condition doubtless arose. These two types of structure are 

 present in the Phallales which doubtless have close kinship with the 

 simpler, multipilar Hysterangiaceae. The Tulostomataceae perhaps have 

 their origin near those Lycoperdaceae in which a stipe-like base shows 

 itself and where a columella is sometimes clearly beginning to develop. 



All the foregoing brings us to Elasmomyces, with its close kinship to 

 Russula and Ladarius and to Secotium which has many analogies with 

 other Agaricaceae. This leads to the consideration of the possibility that 

 these higher Gasteromyceteae arose from the Agaricaceae and that the 

 evolution has been from these, by simplification and reduction, until 

 ultimately the minute, one-chambered forms may be considered to have 

 reached the furthest point in evolution away from the ancestral higher 

 Hymenomyceteae instead of representing forms that have changed only 

 a little from lower Hymenomyceteae. (Fig. 210.) 



Holm (1949) suggests that the Gasteromyceteae may be polyphyletic, 

 with part of the group, e.g. Hymenogastrales, derived from the Tuberales 

 and part, such as some of the forms like Elasnio7nyces, etc., from the 

 Agaricales. He emphasizes the similarity of ontogeny of the spore fruits of 

 Hymenogaster with that of some species of Tuber. In the latter, according 

 to Greis (1938) typical clamp connections are found early in the course of 

 development. 



Literature Cited 



Atkinson, George F.: Some problems in the evolution of the lower fungi, Ann. 



MycoL, 7(5) :441-472. Figs. 1-20. 1909. 

 : Phylogeny and relationships in the Ascomycetes, Ann. Missouri Botan. 



Garden, 2(1-2) :315-376. Figs. 1-10. 1914. 

 de Bary, Anton: Vergleichende Morphologic und Biologic der Pilze, Mycetezoen 



und Bacterien, xvi + 588 pp. 198 figs. Leipzig, Wilhelm Engelmann, 1884. 

 Bessey, Ernst A.: Some problems in fungus phylogeny, Mtjcologia, 34(4) :355- 



379. Figs. 1-5. 1942. 

 : Studies on Pilobolus: P. kleinii and P. longipes, Papers Mich. Acad. Sci., 



32:15-25. Pis. 1-3. 1946 (1948). 

 Borgesen, F.: Marine algae from the Canary Islands: III. Rhodophyceae, 1. 



Bangiales and Nemalionales, Kgl. Danske Videnskab. Selskab Biol. Medd. VI, 



6:1-97. Kobenhavn. 1927. 

 Brefeld, Oscar: Basidiomyceten: III. Autobasidiomyceten und die Begrundung 



des natiirlichen Systems der Pilze, Untersuchungen aus dem Gesammt- 



gebiete der Mykologie, Heft. 8, pp. 1-305. P/s. 1-12. Leipzig, Arthur Felix, 



1889. 

 BucHOLTZ, F.: Zur Morphologic und Systematik der Fungi hypogaei, Ann. 



MycoL, 1(2) :152-174. Pis. 4-5. 1903. 

 Buller, a. H. Reginald: Researches on Fungi, vol. 5, pp. i-xiii, 1-416. Figs. 



1-174. London, Longmans, Green and Co., 1933. (Especially p. 154, Fig. 78.) 



