CHESTNUT BARK DISEASE. 415 



origin, which no one claims, so far as we know. Again, neither 

 the chestnut blight fungus nor the closely related Endothia 

 gyrosa has ever been reported from Japan, so far as the writer 

 has been able to learn. In order to look into this matter a little 

 more thoroughly, we wrote to three of the leading Japanese 

 mycologists on this point. None of them could give us any 

 information of the occurrence of these fungi there, or of any 

 serious chestnut trouble that could be attributed to them.* One 

 of them naively answered: "Some botanists in your country 

 seem to entertain the opinion that this chestnut blight fungus is 

 of Japanese origin, an apparently plausible opinion in accord- 

 ance with a popular belief in certain quarters of your country that 

 things obnoxious come from the other side of the Pacific. Let 

 us see whether the words of these chestnut prophets prove to 

 be the fact or not." 



(2, 3) We have attempted, under the head "Manner of Dis- 

 tribution," to show that this disease did not originate in one 

 locality, where first reported, and that its spread has not been 

 from a single, but from many centers. 



(4) Regarding Chester's Cytospora on Japanese chestnut, we 

 can say definitely that this was not the blight fungus. We are 

 indebted to the Delaware Experiment Station for the opportunity 

 of examining the herbarium specimen of this, and we find that 

 it is an entirely different fungus, being similar to a Phoma-like 

 fungus not uncommon on dead and dying chestnut sprouts. 



Europe. While Farlow (20, p. 70) was one of the first to 

 call attention to the very close relationship, if not exact identity, 

 of our chestnut blight with Endothia gyrosa as found in Europe, 

 he has made no claim that the disease was introduced into this 

 country from Europe. He merely asks, "Is Diaporthe para- 

 sitic a, as at first supposed, really a species new to science? If 

 so, is it a native species which has hitherto escaped the notice 

 of all mycologists, or has it been introduced from some other 

 country?" One can infer from his article, however, that if the 

 fungus was proved to be an imported one he would favor Europe 

 rather than Japan as being its native home. 



Shear (65, p. 212), however, comes out with a more definite 

 statement as regards the European origin of the fungus, as 

 follows: "As a result of our studies to date, we are of the 

 opinion that Diaporthe parasitica Murr. is the same as Endothia 



