Xkw York Agricultural ExrERiMEKT Station. 355 



Table III. — Present Classiticatiox of Sph^ekopsis Found on Different 



Hosts. 



Pear tree twigs Sphscropsis sp. Apparently same as 



on plum. 



Quince tree limbs Spliseropsis eydonise, C. and E. 



Black rot of apple, pear, and quince 



fruits Sphseropsis malorum, Pk. 



Apple tree, bark Sphisropsis mali ( West. ) , Sacc. 



Apple tree, decorticated wood Splioeropsis cinerea (C. and E.), Sacc. 



Japanese plum, Prunus triflora Sphferopsis sp. 



Hawthorn, Crata?gus oxyacantha, L. Sphreropsis demersa (Bon.), Sacc. 



Persimmon, Diospyros virginiana, L. Splisnropsis sp. 



Wild crab, Pyrus coronaria, L Sphceropsis — New sp ? 



Sumach, Rhus typhina, L Sphseropsis sumachi (Schw.), C. and 



E. 



Bitter sweet, Celastrus scandens, L. . . Sphteropsis celastrina, Pk. 



Apricot, Prunus armenica, L Apparently same as on plum. 



Choke cherry, Prunus virginiana L. . Sphaeropsis cerasina, Pk. 

 Hop hornbeam, Ostrya virginica, 



Willd. ( decoi-ticated wood) Sphteropsis sp. 



Mulberry, Morus alba, L Sphteropsis mori, Berlese. 



European plum, Prunus domestica, L. Same as on Japanese plum. 



Elder, Sambucus canadensis, L Sphaeropsis sambuei, Pk. 



Pear leg-ves Sphaeropsis mali, West., foliicolous 



form. 



A dis(3ussion of the relation of these species will be out of 

 place at this time. However it may be pointed ont that the inocn- 

 lation experiments prove that the species occurring on apple-tree 

 bark, S. mali, and on decorticated apple-tree wood, 8. cinerea, are 

 the same; also that these species are identical with the black rot 

 fungus, S. tnalorum. Thus it will be seen that some interesting 

 questions in nomenclature are involved. Which of these names 

 should stand, if either, or whether they will all prove to be 

 synonyms can only be determined after a careful study of the 

 entire genus is made. 



In former papers by the writer referred to on page 333 mention 

 was made of the fungus, Sphaeropsis malorum Pk., as being the 

 probable cause of the !N"ew York apple-tree canker. It is there- 

 fore suggested that this name be retained for the present in order 

 that still further confusion in nomenclature mav be avoided. 



BODY BLTGITT OF PEAR TREES. 

 In the spring of 1898 when the preliminary studies with apple 

 canker were begun a few inoculations were made in the larger 



