HoxoGRApn OF THE lai?ouli;eniacl\e. 201 
astonishing zoological anatomy. The same genuR, it mny be mentioned, \vas subbc- 
qnently rechristened llelmintliophana by Peyritsoh, ulio placed it in it«? proper kingdom 
and family, its connection with the Lahoiilbeiilacea) having been previously pointed 
out by Brauer (1871). 
In 1868 an important addition to tlie family w:i^ made by Knoch (ISCS), who 
described as Lahoulbeuia Bccri the interestiiiii; foriii, redescribed in tlie sncceedinsr vonr 
H, Karsten (1869) as Sligmatomyces mmav^ which occurs in middle and wosteni 
Europe on the common liouse-fly. The paper of KarsliMi owcvs \\^ iniporlaiice fo (ho 
fact that this writer was the first to recognize the presence of a highly developed (vpe 
^ of sexuality in these plants, and althougli the account given is largidy inof)rrcrt as to 
the details of morphology and development, the iniportant fni^t of tin* (^\isten('e of a 
trichogyne fertilized by antherozoi<ls Is distinctly emphasized and rightly compared lo 
the similar conditions present in the Floridea}. The use by this writer of sucli terms 
as " archegonium " render it uncertain Avhat his opinion ns to the true position of tlie 
mt was at this time. In a later work (1895) the same writer includes all the 
Laboulbeniaceae in a group of " Stigmatom^ 
j» 
d between the U 
the Pyrenomycetes. The same form, it may be mentioned, was redescribed in 1872 
by Sorokin as Lahoiilbcnia muscce. 
With the exception of a note by Robin in his "Traite dn Microscope," where he 
figures EhacJiomi/ccs piloscllus (Robin) Thaxter, no further contributions of importance 
are met with until the publication by Peyrltsch of the first of his well-known papers on 
the family (1871), in which he describes and figures the '' Lahovlhniia Bcari'' of Knoch 
already referred to, as well as the Arthrorhynchus of Kolenati, discarding the generic 
and specific names given by this writer, and designating the species as '' Laioulhcnia 
NijderyUcer In this paper the existence of apci was somewhat doubtfully made out ; 
but the sexual process described by Karsten was not observed. A new form, Lahoul- 
heiUa Nehrice, was also described and figured. 
Two years later (1873) a second paper by the same author made its appearance, 
in which several new species and genera were described and figured, and a synopsis 
of the whole family appended. In this paper the author for the first time recognizes 
in a measure the grounds which have proved to be the determining Victors in connec- 
tion with generic distinctions in the group. The forms enumerated are twelve in 
number, distributed among five genera, one of which must now be regarded as a syn- 
onym. The general morphology and development is described, in so far as it was 
then understood ; but not withont many inaccuracies, the sexual processes being un- 
determined, except in so flir as concerns the existence of a trichogyne, which was 
'» 
k 
