441 





of any pycnidial wall. The spores measure 5-6 x 2-2*5 ji, 

 although occasional ones reach as high as 8*5 /x long. They are 

 all obviously the same, and agree excellently well with the 

 description of Phoma Lagenariae, Thiim., of which there are 

 unfortunately no specimens for comparison. Saccardo, who also 

 had not seen specimens, lists Thiimen's species under the name 

 P. lagenicola. 



The following is the description of Cooke's specimens, named 

 " Phoma Lagenariae ," Cooke in Herb. 



Spots up to 2 cm. across, roundish or (if contiguous) angular, 

 greyish-ferruginous, with a darker border. Pustules densely 

 gregarious, subepidermal, 200-250 // diam., blackish, paler in 



2-2-5 fi 



Spores 

 rarely 



the centre where the epidermis at length bursts open 



ovoid or oblong, hyaline, continuous, 5-6 x v r9 



longer, usually rounded at the ends, often with one or more 

 guttules; sporophores subulate-acicular, acute, crowded, 20-25 

 x 1*5 //, rising from a faintly brownish stratum. (Fig. 6, 6.) 



On epicarp of Lagenaria vulgaris, Marseilles, 1873, no. 55 ! 



There is no indication by whom it was sent to Cooke, but the 

 writing is distinctly French. If, as seems hardly in the slightest 

 degree doubtful, it is identical with Thumen's species, its name 



according to the rules must be Gloesporium Lagenariae; it does 

 not agree vrith anv other described. There are no setae visible. 

 Thumen's species was gathered by Moller in 18T9. 



c 



Fig. 6. a, "Phoma hysteriiformis" ; b, "Phoma lagenicola", from 



Marseilles ; c, Colletotrichum Janiphae. 



» 



It may here be mentioned that, though no specimens have been 

 seen, Phoma Lagenariae, Sacc. (Syll. iii. 148) (SpJiaeropsis Lage- 

 nariae, Thiim.) is according to the description merely a young 

 state of some Diplodia, and the same guess might be hazarded 

 for Phoma Citrulli, Berk. & Curt., and for Phoma seminalis, 



be the same species. But, to show 



the danger of such methods, it should be noticed that, in the 

 same way, and apparently on equally good grounds, one might 

 have conjectured that Phoma Lagenariae, Cooke was the same as 

 Phoma cucurbitalis , Berk. & Curt., and this conjecture would 

 have h 



may 



e Deen wrong. 



D 



