THE CLASSIFICATION OF PLANTS 



2143 



since the classification of the Fungi is based upon the structure of the 

 sexual reproductive organs, which are lacking in the Fungi Imperfecti, any 

 classification of them must be purely artificial. They therefore put forward 

 no new views and follow those laid down in the first edition of Saccardo. 

 The Myxomycetes they exclude from the classification as well as tlie 

 Acrasiales, a view which was shared by Gwynne Vaughan and Barnes, who 

 excluded the Plasmodiophorales. Later specialists on these groups, how- 

 ever, have shown their striking similarity to the Chytridiales and they are 

 now usually included among the lower Fungi. 



In 1930 Fitzpatrick published his "Lower Fungi; Phycomycetes " 

 in which he outlined his ideas of the relationship of the lower Fungi to the 

 rest of the Plant Kingdom. Since this takes into account recent work it is 

 desirable to quote his outline of the Thallophyta: 



Though agreeing with Gaumann and Dodge in excluding the Myxo- 

 mycetes and the Acrasieae from the true Fungi it is interesting to find these 

 groups elevated to such a relatively important position. The Plasmodio- 

 phorales here are included in the Chytridiales. 



In the same volume of " Cryptogamic Botany " as that containing the 

 Algae, Smith also treats the Fungi. He does not entirely follow Dodge but 

 enlarges the classification of the Fungi still further, incorporating the lower 

 groups referred to above, while at the same time expanding the Phycomy- 

 cetes to include additional forms. The following is an outline of his method : 



II, 



Myxothallophyta 



a. Myxomycetae 



1. Endosporeae 



2. Exosporeae 

 p. Phytomyxinae 



I. Plasmodiophorales 

 y. Acrasiae. 

 I. Acrasiales 



Eumycetae 



a. P/ivconiycetae 

 I. Chytridiales 



