169 
COEMANSIELLA ALABASTRINA. 
By Rupotr Beer, F.L.S. 
(Puatz 487.) 
Tae reappearance, in a different country, of an organism 
which has previously only been recorded on two occasions, the 
latest of which dates back nearly thirty years, seemed to be 
worthy of notice. 
I 
For eleven ee | 
1873, however, Van Tieghem and Le Monnier met with it again, in 
Le Monnier both amplified and corrected Coemans’ description, and 
they figure several stages unknown to their predecessor (‘Recherches 
sur les Mucorinées,’ Ann. des Sci. Nat., tome xvii., 1873, p. 885, 
-135 
_ Voemans had found ‘the conidiophores of his fungus associated 
with an ascal fruit, and although he was unable to trace the 
Probability of such a connection really existing. Van 
description by Lindau in Engler and Prantl’s Pflanzenfamilien 
(1 Theil, 1 Abt., p. 429), I can find no further mention of this form 
i t 
at Shortlands, in Kent, and afterwards kept in a covered dish for 
lays. 
fungus in ha g 
and although I have little to add to Van Tieghem and Le Monnier’s 
account, my independent observations made upon the English 
nging drops of sterilized gelatine horse-dung decoction, 
JouRNAL oF Borany.—Vou. 40. [May, 1902.] 
