REPORT OF THE STATE HOTANJST I917 49 



Diatrypella missouriensis E. & E. 



On (lead branches of Corylus. West Albany. C. H. Peck. 

 November (as Diatrypella f r o s t i i (Peck) Sacc.) . The 

 narrow, relativel}- few-spored asci and the other characters appear 

 to distinguish this from D . f r o s t i i , the typical form of which 

 is found on Acer. 



Dinemasporium hispidulum (Schrad.) Sacc. 



On dead and decorticated shoots of S a m b u c u s c a n a d c n - 

 sis. North Greenbush. C. H. Peck, June. Also collected by 

 Peck on decayed wood of Ulmus at Menands, and on shoots of 

 Viburnum d e n t a t u m at West Albany. 



Dinemasporium robiniae Gerard 

 D. a c e r i n u ni Peck 



Poughkeepsie, on decorticated wood of R o b i n i a p s e u d o - 

 acacia, W. R. Gerard (cotype material). Albany, on decorti- 

 cated wood, of Ulmus a m e r i c a n a , C. H. Peck. Buffalo, on 

 decorticated wood of Acer, G. W. Clinton (type of D . aceri- 

 num Peck, 26th Rep't, p. "jy). Bethlehem, on decorticated wood 

 of Ulmus, C. H. Peck (as D . hispidulum var.). North Green- 

 bush on decorticated wood of P o p u 1 u s d e 1 1 o i d e s , C. H. 

 Peck (as D. acerinum). Petersburg on decorticated wood of 

 Acer, C. H. Peck (as D. robiniae). Carlton, Orleans county, 

 on dead, decorticated branches of Rhus toxicodendron, 

 C. E. Fairman, March i, 1888 (as D. acerinum Pk.). 



The spores of D. robiniae Gerard are generally but not 

 invariably smaller than the others cited. No other difiference 

 appears. The Albany collection on Ulmus has many spores larger 

 than any seen in the so-called D . acerinum. It has also the 

 longest pycnidial bristles, but it grades into D. acerinum and 

 into the type of D. robiniae. A careful comparison of the 

 material cited above would seem to indicate that D . acerinum 

 is but a mere form, and not a constant form, ofD. robiniae. 



Diplodia sarmentorum Fr. 



D. petiolaris Peck 



In 1872 Doctor Peck described a D i p 1 o d i a petiolaris on 



what he supposed to be fallen petioles of Fraxinus. An examination 



of the type material reveals the fact that he must have erred in the 



determination of the host which proves to be fragments of the dead 



