254 PHYTOPHTHORA MEADIl n. Sp. ON HEVEA BRASILIENSIS 



from p. Golocasiw in that no part of the conidiophore adheres to the sporangium 

 after its separation, in the smaller zoospores, and in the absence of 

 chlamydospores. It differs from P. Allii and P. Melongence m the larger 

 oogonia and oospores, and in the greater thickness of the oospore-wall, and also 

 from the latter in the larger sporangia and in the absence of chlamydospores. 

 It differs from P. arecce in the more elongated sporangia, and in the smaller 

 oospores. From P. Thalictri, a possible member of this group, it differs in 

 the larger sporangia and oogonia, and in the slightly larger oospores. 



As this fungus cannot be included in any of the above species, the name 

 P. Meadii was proposed for it, and the description published first in the Journal 

 of the Bombay Natural History Society, Vol. 25, page 760, is as follows : — 

 Phjtoplitkora Meadii no v. spec, mycelio ramoso ex hyphis primo continuis 

 tandem septatis, 3 — 6/x usque ad IO/a crassis, inter et intracellularibus ; 

 sporangiophoris ramosis 10 — 200//. longis sed aliquanto brevibus ; sporangiis 

 inversipyriformibus sed variis, terminalibus vel lateralibus, in fructibus 

 33 — 67 X 14 — •28/x, in aqua submersis 20 — 44 x 16 — 29)it ; zoosporis ovatis vel elli- 

 psoideis, biciliatis, ciliis 16 — 26/x longis, sporis globosis 7 — 10/*; oogoniis 

 pyriformis, hyalinis,. Icvibus vel rugosis, in fmctibus 20 — 48 x 20 — 40ju, in cultibus 

 22 — 49 X 20 — 45 fx ; antheridiis persistentibus, hyalinis, rotundis vel ovoideis, 

 levibus 8 — 16 x 10 — 16|u,, et oogonii basem et oogoniophori partem circum- 

 claudentibus ; oosporis sphaericis, in fractibus 18 — 28 X 18 — 26/ji in cultibus 

 16 — 32x15 — 32/x membrana 2 — 4/x crassa, mellea aut fulva, levi. 



Hab. in fohis, fructibus, ramis, cortice Hevece brasiliensis. 



Travancore, Cochin, Malabar, Indise orient. 



Seeing that it has been stated that P. Faheri is the cause of fruit-rot and 

 leaf-fall of Hevea in Ceylon, parallel cultures of the South Indian fungus and 

 P. Faheri were grown, and inoculations made of both on Hevea and cacao fi-uits, 

 Mr. Fetch, the Government Botanist and Mycologist, Koyal Botanic Gardens, 

 Peradeniya, very kindly sent me excellent specimens of cacao fruits attacked 

 by P. Faheri, and the study of the fungus was made, and the inoculative material 

 was derived from these specimens. The comparison is given in some detail. 

 The difference between the sporangia of the two fmigi is small, and this led 

 me at first to think that the fungus on Hevea in South India was P. FaberiJ 

 The limits of the measurements of sporangia on fruits are fairly close. While in 



1 McRae, W., and Sundararaman, S. " T>af-fall of Hevea" The Planters' Chronicle, X. 

 pp. 452—454, 1915. Also " Proceedings of the Annual Mooting of tho United Planters' Asso- 

 oiation of Southern India," pp. 69^-76, 1916. 



