[Vor. 3 
8 ANNALS OF THE MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN 
where the drip from the defective roof falls on the seed-bed. 
The mycelium is described as spreading rapidly in the form 
of a web over the diseased plants and adjacent soil. Some 
observations were made by Stibbe (’06) who also reported 
that the disease may appear as early as during the first few 
days of growth. Koorders (706) observed the disease in a 
young plantation. An examination of affected stems and roots 
was made, and a colorless, septate mycelium was found, but 
there were no evidences of fruiting stages. From these earlier 
observations of the Cinchona diseases in Java we have only 
the above evidences of the effect upon the host to suggest 
Rhizoctonia or a related fungus. 
The investigations of Rant (208, 714, 715, '15*), previously 
referred to, are sufficiently complete in all partieulars to en- 
able us to identify the fungus as Rhizoctonia. To this dis- 
ease he applies the term ‘торо’? and ‘‘hamamopo’’ rather 
than the Dutch ‘‘Schimmeldraadjes.’’ He found the effects 
upon the host to be as previously described, and noted particu- 
larly that the cobweb-like growth of the mycelium over the 
soil and dead plants occurred in a characteristic fashion when 
the area over the seed-bed was moist. He also emphasizes the 
point that fragments of soil are firmly held together by the 
growth of the fungous mycelium. Referring again to the 
distinctive characteristics of Rhizoctonia enumerated earlier, 
we find that his work covers every point there indicated. The 
fungus was found to affect not only Cinchona seedlings but 
was also found in his garden upon the following: Lychnis 
diurna, Rudbeckia sp., Lobelia erinus, Conyza angustifolia, 
Bidens pilosa, Antirrhinum majus, red beet, endive, cabbage, 
and lettuce. Culturing the fungus upon peptone glucose agar 
he obtained a good growth with all the characteristics of Rhi- 
zoctonia which have been referred to in my previous paper. 
Comparing his measurements with those previously reported, 
it is found that there is a close agreement throughout. The 
measurements also agree with those of Aderhold (’97). Rant 
also instituted a comparison between this fungus and Botry- 
tis cinerea, and the results well emphasize the differences be- 
tween these two organisms. He found likewise that the 
