[ Vor. 3 
22 ANNALS OF THE MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN 
this connection it should be said that no inoculations carried 
out in the greenhouse up to the present have given positive 
results. As a source of infection I have employed (1) dis- 
eased cotton roots fresh from the field (showing the Ozoniwm 
in abundance), (2) fresh conidia, and (3) cultures from dis- 
eased roots. It is apparent that the conditions for infection 
have not been made satisfactory. Such experiments are to be 
continued both in the greenhouse and in the field. 
It has been found difficult to place the fungus satisfactorily 
in any established genus of the Hyphomycetes. While in the 
manner of conidial production it is undoubtedly related to 
such genera as Phymatotrichum, Botryosporium, Rhinotri- 
chum, ete., it does not exhibit all the characteristics of any 
of these genera. Nevertheless, it has seemed best, after ex- 
amining all available exsiccati material of forms which might 
be related, to place the fungus tentatively in the genus Phy- 
matotrichum, and, if Bonorden’s figure (Handb. d. allgem. 
Myk. pl. 8, f. 181) is correct, fairly close to P. pyramidale 
Bon. The fungus is clearly excluded from Botryosporium, 
the conidiophores of which are erect, with conidia produced 
on sterigmata. Slightly emended, the genus Phymatotr- 
chum would be of taxonomic convenience. In placing the 
Texas cotton fungus in this genus, I would not convey the 
impression that this fungus is considered to belong to the 
Ascomycetes. Accepting Shear’s specific name, a revised 
description of the organism is appended. 
Phymatotrichum omnivorum (Shear) Dugear, n. comb. 
Hyphae diverse, forming on the host (1) a loose weft of 
large, branched cells, producing more rigid hyphae with acic- 
'It should be noted that the genus Phymatotrichum ër E d. 
allgem. Myk. p. 116. pl. 8, f. 181. n was at first reduced t seetion of 
Botrytis by Saceardo (Sylloge ere 86). | Later, however, he ion it to 
generic rank (Sylloge 16:1033. 02) P^ aecommodate a speeies of Oudemans. 
Costantin y Mucédinées San pp. 44-46. f. 12. 1888) Se a detailed de- 
scription a fungus, which was obv Ж considered We intei v pyramidale 
Bon., see the name Botryosporium pyramidale Cost ere 57 little doubt 
that the D figured by Cos — is “prope rly plac ed. However, the source of 
Costantin rial was apparently the original specimen of Bor onorden, and 
since his eg D in many Se from that of Bonorden, it is perhaps E 
to Ces estion the identi EA D the two fungi. Lindau (Rabenhorst's Kryptogam 
flora 1 (Abt. 8) :117 04) spe to ge the views of Costantin. He also vites 
As exsiccati, 2 Micr. sel. 
