214 A, Barclay — Additional Uredineae /rom Simla. [No. 3, 



summit which is not thickened. Their surfaces were smooth, and they 

 measured when just wetted 44 — 40 X 36 — 34;u.. 



This is doubtless Uromyces amhiens, but I have no access to the 

 measurements of the spores. Cooke's specimens apparently came from 

 the Himalayas. 



BCBMIPUOCIlSriA. 



PUCCINIA SOKGHI, Schw. 



On Zea Mays, Linn. 



I had long searched in fields of maize for a Uredine, but without 

 success until 1890 when I found it in some fields at Mashobra. Up to 

 this time I was acquainted with the fungus only on Scn-ghum vulgare, on 

 specimens of the plant sent to me for examination from the Poona 

 district. But this is absolutely the first record of its existence on maize 

 in India, so far as I am aware. My specimens were gathered early in 

 October. Pustules were found abundantly on both leaf surfaces, some 

 covered entirely with a scale of epidermis, whilst others were more or 

 less naked. The covered pustules contained uredospores, the naked 

 ones mostly teleutospores, and the perfectly matured open ones, which 

 are inky black, only teleutospores. Some pustules were minute and 

 circular, others long and even linear. 



The uredospores are pale brownish red, round to oval, beset with 

 shallow warts or short spines, and measure when just wetted 30 — 26 x 

 26 — 20/A. By applying sulphuric acid I detected 3 germ pores in each 

 spore, arranged around the short equator. 



The teleutospores are firmly attached, breaking off with a portion of 

 stalk adhering. They are reddish brown, rounded at both ends, thicken- 

 ed at the free end, constricted at the septum, and apparently smooth on 

 the surface. When just wetted they measured 42 — 32 X 18 — 16/a. They 

 refused to germinate immediately after ripening. There were no 



paraphyses. 



This fungus is much more like Puce. Sorghi than that which grows 

 on Sorghum vulgare, and which I have described elsewhere.* In the 

 first place the fungus on Zea has no paraphyses, and in the second the 

 measurements of both uredo- and teleutospores approximate those given 

 for Fucc. Sorqhi much more closely. In the publication above alluded 

 to I referred the parasite on Sorghur)i with hesitation to P. Sorghi. I 

 am now inclined to think that the latter is a different species. Lastly, 

 even later I found a Fuccinia on Fennisetum typhoideum, Rich. (Bajra) 



* Journal of Botany, Sept. 1890. 



