76 THE SAPROLEGNIACEAE 



S. Libertiae (Bory) Kiitz. Species Algarum. Lipsiae, 1849. This is thought by Fischer 

 to be Apodya laclea. Too imperfectly described to distinguish are 5. Candida, S. 

 tenuis and 5. saccata published at tha same time by Kutzing. 



S. miicnphaga Smith. Gardeners Chron. 22: 245, fig. 50. 1884. Not a Saprolegnia; 

 possibly a Pythium. 



S. pJiilomukes Smith. Gardeners Chron. 22: 245. 1884. Illustrated in the same, 20: 

 781, fig. 140. 1883. l<io\. a. Saprolegnia; pos<s\h\y & Pythium. 



S. corcagiensis Hartog. Quart. Jour. Mic. Sci. 27: 429. 1887. Said to be constricted as 

 in Leplomilus and with similar sporangia, but with oogonia. Needs further study. 



5. quisqiiiliarum Roumeg. Fungi Selecti Exsiccati. Cent 60, No. 5932. 1891. Humph- 

 rey states that the specimen fails to show anything in this family. 



5. eJongata Massee. British Fungi, p. 217. 1891. Apparently based on mixed mate- 

 rial, in part a Pythium and in part a Saprolegnia. 



S. sp. (Pieters No. 66.) Bot. Gaz. 60: 483. 1915. This is a sterile Saprolegnia from 

 Michigan studied by Pieters for eighteen months. It yielded abundant harvests of 

 round single gemmae but no oogonia. 



APLANES deBary, 1888, p. 613. 



This genus was established by deBary on a single character, the 

 absence of any swimming stage in the spores, which remain in the spor- 

 angium and sprout there by germ tubes through the sporangial wall; 

 otherwise as in Achlya. There has always been some uncertainty about 

 the sporangia, as Reinsch's Achlya Braiinii which was considered the 

 same as A planes by deBary was described as having dictiosporangia, the 

 spores emerging singly through the sporangial wall and leaving behind a 

 "cell net" which quickly disappeared. Reinsch writes in a confused way 

 about the sporangia and one of his figures (as well as the explanation 

 of figures) distinctly contradicts his statements, as it shows two sporangia 

 with distinct papillae of emergence as in Saprolegnia or Achlya. Still 

 further confusion is caused by his reference under A. Brannii in the text 

 to a figure (pi. 14, fig. 9) showing four empty sporangia emptying as in 

 Achlya, but in the explanation of figures putting it under Saprolegnia 

 sp. No. 2. On page 287 he says that the sporangia are usually borne 

 on threads that do not bear oogonia; on page 297 that they are borne 

 on difi'erent plants. It has been assumed that because of mixed material 

 or from some other cause his observations were not correct. 



Fortunately the only species heretofore assigned to the genus has 

 strongly marked characters and Fischer and others have extended the 

 generic description so as to include a number of the characters of the 

 species, ^^"e are now convinced that Saprolegnia Treleaseana is co-generic 

 with Aplanes Braunii {A. androgynits) and that the genus should be re- 

 defined so as to include it, as neither species can be properly assigned to 



