PAPERS ON BOTANY 165 



PhyUacliora pomigena (Schw.) Sacc. 

 Leptothyrimn Ponii Selby. 



but does not belong to any of these. 



7. Its characters warrant the erection of a new genus. 



8. For this the name Gloeodes is proposed. 



9. The names fly speck and sooty blotch have been 

 commonly confounded, and some have held that the two 

 merely represent forms of one fungus. The evidence is 

 opposed to this view and the two should be regarded as 

 separate fungi, unless full proof that they are connected 

 can be adduced. 



10. Arguments against the fly speck and sooty blotch 

 being identical are: (a) the two are frequently found 

 separate; (b) an antagonism often appears to exist be- 

 tween the two, as a sharp line of demarkation is observed 

 when their colonies approach each other; (c) the mor- 

 phology of the cell aggregations is dissimilar; (d) the 

 mycelium radiating from the cell aggregations is dis- 

 similar; (e) there is a marked difference in geographical 

 range of the two fungi. 



11. Sooty blotch is controlled by correct orchard man- 

 agement. 



12. The fungus does not spread appreciably in stor- 

 age. 



13. Sooty blotch was easily removed from the surface 

 of apple fruits after immersion in Javelle water for a 

 short time. 



ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY 

 Schweinitz, L. D. 



1832. Dothidea pomigena. Trans. Am. Phil. Soc. N. S. 4, p. 232. 

 The first recorded notice of sooty blotch. Said to be fre- 

 quently found on mature apples, Newton Pippins, in 

 Penn. A technical Latin description is given. 



Montague, C, et Fries. 



1834. Labrella Pomi Montag. mss. (Fr. in litt.) In Cryptogames 

 nouvelles de France. Ann. Sc. Nat. hot. 2, 1, p. 347. 

 Authors give a very brief Latin description. State 

 spores are globular. 



