Mat 1, 1914] 



SCIENCE 



653 



it is to be regretted that no such agreement of 

 ■opinion can be recorded. When a full list of 

 synonyms is included, as in the monograph, 

 no great difficulty is likely to be experienced 

 «ven when different authors choose to select 

 different names as the one to be maintained, 

 ■and yet instances will arise which are deplor- 

 able. The very first species in this third 

 volume of the Sydow monograph raises some 

 questions. They reject for it the writer's 

 •combination, Gymnosporangium Blasdaleanum 

 (Diet. & Holw.) Kern, although that specific 

 name is without question the oldest, presum- 

 ably because it was founded on an secidial 

 stage, 2Ecidium Blasdaleanum Diet. & Holw. 

 They also refuse to admit for this species 

 another combination of the writer, G. Libo- 

 cedri (P. Henn.) Kern, although this is 

 founded on the " all important " teleutosporic 

 stage and is the oldest specific name thus ap- 

 plied. Henning^ used the combination 

 Phragmidium Libocedri, cited his specimen in 

 full, and accompanied it with an adequate 

 description. He was in error in suggesting 

 that Gymnosporangium, Libocedri Mayer was 

 the same as his plant, and we can not say that 

 lie transferred the Mayer name to Phragmid- 

 ium, but he nevertheless very evidently did 

 intend to apply the name Phragmidium Libo- 

 cedri to his plant and he characterized it ac- 

 cordingly. To reject this specific name be- 

 cause he did not specially propose it as new 

 seems to be a motive which is contestable and 

 ■of little import. Such a procedure not only 

 seems illogical, and is not only not followed by 

 most botanists, but in many similar cases not 

 l)y the Sydows themselves. They accept G. 

 Sorbi Kern, G. Harlcnessianum Kern, G. 

 PhotinicB Kern, G. hyalinum Kem, G. tuhu- 

 latum Kern, G. transformans Kern and G. 

 hermudianum Earle, although not one of these 

 -was proposed, as a new name in the genus 

 Gymnosporangium! They were all transfers 

 of secidial names as is evidenced by the inclu- 

 sion of the original authors' names in paren- 

 "thesis or the words comb. nov. Why not say 

 that in these instances the establishment of 

 names has not been accomplished if one re- 

 aSedwigia, 37: 271-72, 1898. 



fuses to recognize secidial names and there 

 has been a failure to propose them in Gymno- 

 sporangium as new? In the case of G. Amel- 

 anchieris Ed. Fisch. the matter is somewhat 

 diiferent, for although Amelanchieris is a 

 name proposed by de Candolle for the secidial 

 stage of the plant to which it is now applied, 

 Fischer distinctly stated that he was not trans- 

 ferring de Candolle's name, but proposing an- 

 other just like it as new. This appears to 

 satisfy the conditions which it seems that the 

 Sydows would like to impose and yet in this 

 very instance they have given evidence that 

 they did not regard Fischer's name as a new 

 one but as a transfer, for their TJredineen No. 

 228Y was issued as Gymnosporangium Amel- 

 anchieris (DC.) Ed. Fisch., with JScidium 

 Amelanchieris DC. given in parenthesis as a 

 synonym. To go back again to the first species 

 it is to be noted that the authors after reject- 

 ing the specific names Blasdaleanum and 

 Libocedri for it see fit to retain their ovm 

 name auraniiacum, although there is a Gymno- 

 sporangium aurantiacum of Chevallier* pub- 

 lished in 1826, seventy-eight years earlier. 



As regards the standing of names applied to 

 stages other than the teleutosporic, it seems 

 evident now that these authors will acc«pt 

 them in cases where there is no teleutosporic 

 name. A number of instances have already 

 been cited in a foregoing paragraph. How- 

 ever, in previous parts it is not clear that they 

 have been willing to do this; for example 

 Uromyces Silphii Arth. founded on a specific 

 name, which was originally applied to an 

 secidial stage, has been renamed Uromyces 

 Junci-tenuis Syd. nov. nom.^ 



As already suggested, unusually full and 

 accurate lists of synonyms have been included, 

 but the arrangement of these is not always 

 uniform or of such a nature as to make them 

 most usable. It is not a straight chronological 

 arrangement such as used by many authors, 

 but the names are grouped according to the 

 genera so that specific names belonging to the 

 same genera come together. If the order of the 



iFl. Em. Paris, 1: 424, 1826. 

 6 See Sydow Monog. Ured., Vol. II., fasc. II., 

 p. 289, 1910. 



