General Features 299 



have been found capping the endoascus. If this is not true, what 

 is the significance of the thimbles always found in the field or 

 making an examination of the species. Perhaps more field study 

 may serve to answer this question. 



From her studies Miss Butler concludes that the Patellariaceae 

 do not belong with the stomatous discomycetes, but are more 

 closely related to the disco-lichens on the one hand and the 

 p\renom\cetcs on the other. The following suggestions arc 

 offered : 



DiSCOMYCETOUS FuNGI 



Spores discharged directh' through a definite pore (ascostome) 



in the ascus wall. Stomatae. 



Ascostome provided with a Hd (opercuUim). Opercidatae. 



Ascostome without lid. Inoperculatae. 



Spores not discharged directh through a definite pore or asco- 

 stome but from the end of the protruding endoascus. Astomatae. 



The Astomatae would include Patellaria and a number of 

 genera now placed in the Patellariaceae and possibly the disco- 

 lichens. The absence of a definite ascostome may be a morpho- 

 logical character on which to separate so-called disco-lichens 

 from the other discomycetes or cup-fungi as now known. 



The writer has been criticized and justly, on several points in 

 his proposed classification. Nannfeldt claims that PhiUipsia, 

 Cookeina and Wynnea should be brought together because of the 

 several characters which they share in common, i.e. the inordi- 

 nately small and eccentrically placed ascostomes, and the unequal 

 sided, fusoid, longitudinally striated spores. We agree that these 

 characters do indicate a close relationship and perhaps should 

 take precedence over the external characters, such as the sym- 

 metrical or one-sided character of the apothecia, which were 

 used in the proposed classification. Any classification adopted 

 now is only tentative and doubtless many changes will be made 

 as our knowledge advances. 



Nomenclature (page 33) 



When the original text of this work was published the writer 

 followed the old American Code of Nomenclature, as indicated 

 in the introduction. Since that time, however, in the interests 

 of international harmony we have subscribed to the International 

 Rules of Botanical Nomenclature, as adopted by the Cambridge 

 Congress in 1930. Should these rules be applied throughout to 



