184 MONOGRAPH ОЕ CHAETOMIUM AND ASCOTRICHA 
Ch. elatum were published by Kunze and Greville previous to the 
time Fries introduced the name comatum into the genus, and so 
far as the present writer is aware, no figures under the name Ch. 
comatum have ever appeared, it seems best to arrange Ch. coma- 
tum as a synonym under Ch. elatum Kze. 
In 1833 this plant was re-described by Wallroth under the 
name Ch. pannosum. Zopf (113) in 1881 listed and figured Wall- 
roth’s species, and stated in connection with his description of 
Ch. elatum Kze. that the two forms differed on account of the fact 
that in the former the mycelium was red brown, while in Ch. elatum 
it was a golden color. His figures of Ch. pannosum, however, show 
characteristics identical with those of Ch. elatum, and even though 
the present writer, in all cultures of this plant, has found the 
mycelium varying only from white to yellow and greenish-yellow, 
he is inclined to disagree with Zopf regarding the separation of 
these forms into two species, and rather to list Ch. pannosum аз а 
synonym under Ch. elatum. The writer is led to question if 
color-producing bacteria which so easily contaminate cultures, 
or some change such as peculiar fading induced by the environ- 
ment or substratum, would not account for the appearance which 
Zopf found in his cultures. 
The species was re-described and figured by Corda in 1837 
as Ch. lageniforme, and again by Rabenhorst in 1851 as Ch. 
graminis. While Rabenhorst speaks of the hairs of his species 
as somewhat simple and not intertwined, it has been found from 
а study of authentic exsiccati specimens, in Klotzsch. Herb. Мус. 
No. 1555, that they are no less branched nor intertwined than in 
Ch. elatum. 
Fuckel (40) listed this plant in 1861 as Ch. graminicola and 
distributed specimens under that name in Fungi Rhenani Хо. 647. 
It should be stated here that Fuckel used Rabenhorst’s name in 
connection with his specimens. It has been impossible to find 
any reason for the use of the name graminicola. The writer is 
led to the conclusion that graminis is the basis for this usage and 
that Fuckel has mistaken this for graminicola. The form to 
which Fuckel in 1869 called attention in the Symbolae Myco- 
logicae (p. 90) under the name Ch. Fieberi is without question 
' identical with Ch. elatum. 
