LEAF-SPOT OF ALFALFA AND RED CLOVER. 11 
except at a certain period in the summer is not adequately explained 
by his extraordinary theory of a periodicity in the vegetative vigor 
of the fungus. In the second place, inoculations with this Phyllo- 
sticta whether upon alfalfa or upon clover produced lesions which 
bore only the pycnidia of the Phyllosticta, never the apothecia of the 
Pseudopeziza. These cultures obtained under doubtful conditions 
produced ascospores neither in culture nor as a result of inoculation. 
Thus, the evidence which Voges presents, judged entirely by itself, 
does not prove or even clearly indicate that he ever had “Psu ayaeoiae 
in culture. It does not appear, however, that the work of Voges 
has been widely accepted, at least not in America, even though the 
report of his work as presented in the Experiment Station Record + 
is incorrect or misleading in almost every detail, causing his conclu- 
sions to appear much more justifiable than when they are read in 
the original article. 
In the same year that the article by Voges was published Voglino 
(1909, pp. 226-228) in Italy presented evidence which he believed 
indicates that Gloeosporium caulivorum YWirch. or G@. trifolii Pk., 
which in his opinion may be identical with it, is the conidial stage 
of Pseudopeziza on Trifolium pratense. His evidence was obtained 
both from observation and from cultures. In a certain field consid- 
erably injured by Gloeosporium he finds apothecia of Pseudopeziza 
trifolii developing in close association with the acervuli of the 
Gloeosporium. Later he makes cultures from conidia obtained from 
stems on a clover decoction with gelatin, and in a single culture he 
found after 30 days three apothecia of a fungus which he assumes 
to be a Pseudopeziza. On the basis of this evidence he decides 
that the Gloeosporium must be the conidial stage of Pseudopeziza. 
The account which Voglino gives of his work is very brief and 
bare of details. No mention of inoculations is made. No descrip- 
tion of the Pseudopeziza which he regards as Pseudopeziza trifolit 
is given. It is not clear from his account that he obtained a pure 
culture. Therefore his results can hardly be regarded as having 
more than a suggestive value. 
This review of European literature brings us to the eonclision 
that, with the possible exception of the description by Brefeld of 
conidia in culture, there is no conclusive observational or experi- 
mental evidence that either of these Pseudopezizas has an associated 
condidial stage. 
PHYSIOLOGY OF THE FUNGI. 
ISOLATION OF THE FUNGI. 
Efforts to isolate these fungi by ordinary methods were continued 
for a a, long time without avail. The first success was jyobtained by 
1 Bpevinient Station Record, v. 22, no. 7, p. 648. 
