68 THE SAPROLEGNIACEAE 



club-shaped or spherical, formed in large numbers, mostly on smaller 

 threads, e. g., 6ox80[i. or 57x70^^. Later the threads fall into more or 

 less numerous structures in rows, which become sporangia, oogonia 

 or gemmae, so that chains of oogonia or spo'-angia pure or mixed result. 

 There occur also structures in more or less sympodial arrangement; 

 often on the ends of hyphae are swollen sporangia or oogonia or both ; 

 oogonia also occur in empty sporangia. Form of secondary sporangia 

 very various; often when in rows there is a lower stalk piece and an 

 upper swollen part; or they may be spherical with a slender discharge 

 neck. Oogonia spherical or seldom more or less elongated with rather 

 thick membrane and a few not conspicuous pits, often with a solid pro- 

 jection from the wall below; diameter 50-701J., or also joxgoii. or 40x6o;x. 

 Eggs spherical 1-15, mostly 4-8, 23-26'^ thick; position of the oogonia 

 as various as the sporangia; anther idia never observed. 



"Hamburg; on ant eggs in a swamp; several times found and long 

 cultivated pure. The species is related to S. tonilosa as well as to S. 

 monilifera. When the oogonia occur in chains they remind one of the 

 last species where such an appearance is typical. We can state cer- 

 tainly, however, that this species is different." He goes on to say that 

 this is very near perhaps identical with S. rhaetica Maurizio, of which 

 he can not get a clear idea from description and figures. Minden gives 

 no figures. 



In one form observed by Minden certain branched twigs occur 

 rather numerously and appear like antheridial branches, but do not 

 apply themselves to oogonia. 



Saprolegnia crustosa Maurizio. (A group species.) Mitt. d. Deutsch. 

 Fischerei-Vereins 7: 52. 1899. 



This species includes three varieties, none of which is indicated as 

 the typical. It is therefore a question if Maurizio's arrangement can 

 stand as he has it. He calls this " SammeJspecles der Saprolegnia crus- 

 tosa sp. nov." There are no figures. He says: "We could consider 

 the three varieties here described as good species, were we not already 

 familiar with such numerous representatives of this genus that are so 

 closely related. Sooner or later, the extension of our knowledge of the 

 water fungi will lead to a more systematic arrangement. The discovery 

 of conidia in the genus Saprolegnia looks necessarily to a change in the 

 classification of deBary. The fungus here described, which also bears 

 conidia, cannot be in any way placed in the system of deBary or of Fischer 

 in Rabenhorst's Krypt. Flora. I refer to 5. paradoxa sp. nov., 5. fnr- 

 cata sp. nov. and the earlier described species with conidia. In spite 

 of the authoritative work of Fischer, it is ni}' opinion that we have here 

 a new group.* : "" 



*This kind of talk is a good illustration of Maurizio's unbalanced judgment. There 

 is nothing to his great claim of having found conidia in the Saprole^niaceae. 



