V. H. Blackman 325 



a grounding in physics and chemistry. No attempt should be made 

 to make of the mycologist a competent physiologist, but such training 

 must be given as will enable the student to appreciate the physiological 

 outlook and to co-operate with the plant ])hysiologist. 



The training of the student should include field work even before he 

 specialises in mycology. Ordinary botanical training with its teaching 

 by types and its broad generalisations accentuates the similarities of 

 plants and minimises their differences. Field work corrects this view, 

 to which all of us are prone owing to the psychological desire for 

 simplification; for it brings home the marked differences, not only 

 morphological but physiological, between one plant and another. In 

 the actual mycological training there should be as much acquaintance 

 with disease in the field as is practically possible. 



Finally one may point out that a plant pathological problem has 

 usually such wide scientific implications that commonly no one man can 

 hope to solve a problem unaided. For the control of disease the combined 

 attack of the mycologist, plant physiologist and plant breeder is required, 

 in other words, team work, as the Americans call it, is essential. 



Finally I would repeat that if mycological research is to develop 

 along lines which will be of the greatest value in practice the investigator 

 must be a man of wide outlook, one who not onlv will know when to 

 call in the plant breeder and the plant physiologist but also will be able 

 to appreciate their point of view and to combine with them in an attack 

 on the problems of economic plant pathology. 



22—2 



