160 DopGE: RELATIONSHIPS OF FLORIDEAE AND ASCOMYCETES 
phology of the Ascomycetes that the asci arise from outgrowths of 
the ascogonia and that the paraphyses do not originate in the 
same manner or from the same cells. A further interesting feature 
in this connection is found in the fact that, in certain forms like 
Pyronema, the mildews, Ascobolus furfuraceus, Lasiobolus equinus, 
etc., only one cell gives rise to ascogenous hyphae, while in 
Thecotheus (70), Ascophanus carneus (27), Ascobolus glaber (3%) 
A. carbonarius (37), Lachnea cretea (44), and in the lichens (FIG. 
7), so far as this process has been noted (9, 32, 65, 3), there are 
several ascogenous cells in the ascogonium. 
As noted above, De Bary (5) discovered that the apothecium of 
Pyronema originates from a rosette of paired swollen hyphae, and 
his figures show correctly the general form of these hyphae and 
the tube-like structures connecting the pairs. Bornet and 
Thuret published their account of fecundation in the red algae 
in 1867 (14) and gave the name trichogyne to the receptive elonga- 
tion of the carpogonium. The following year we have the first 
clear statement of the morphological resemblance between the 
reproductive structures of the red algae and the Ascomycetes as 
represented by Pyronema. Sachs (75) noted the likeness of the 
oégonium with its trichogyne to the corresponding structures in 
the Florideae and likewise the similarity of the fruit body of the 
Ascomycetes to that of such forms as Lejolisia (Fic. 6, F). He also 
pointed out the difference between the antheridia of Pyronema and 
those of the red algae. Judging from Sachs’ repeated references 
to De Bary in this connection it is not at all unlikely that it was 
De Bary who originally pointed out these similarities, for in 1870 
(4) he states very clearly the evidence upon which a relationship 
between the two groups might be assumed. He showed also how 
it might be possible to derive the Ascomycetes from such forms as 
Peronospora, but at this time he maintained that the evidence at 
hand was not sufficient to justify a conclusion in favor of either 
hypothesis. His latest attitude on this question may perhaps be 
inferred from a note by Sachs (76) where it is said in reference to 
the derivation of the Ascomycetes from the Rhodophyceae: 
“von den Rhodophyceen sind die Ascomyceten (oder wenigstens 
die Discomyceten) abzuleiten, worauf vorwiegend die Procarpien 
beider hinweisen’’; to which is added the footnote, ‘‘soweit ich 
