Fungus of Loliuvi. 



257 



The follo\ving results show that Lolium pereiuit is just as strik- 

 ing an example of a i'ungiis-toiitainin«r fruit as J.olimn tennihw 

 fum, and that the numl)er of eitlier <,M-aiiis devoid of the fungus 

 is remarkably small. In fact, they suggest tliat probably all grains 

 of Darnel and, English rye grass contain this second organism, and 

 failure to discern it in some grains is due to the fact that it is 

 present in such minute quantities in the mature grain that it needs 

 special care and staining to bring the hyphae out, or, as this paper 

 proceeds, a second alternative will be considered (p. 293). 



Loliani teniuhufnin. L, 



Locality 



No. of jfraiiis 

 examined 



Kiiiijs:. pres. 



Victoria 





93 



93 



Northam, W. Aust. 





9 



9 



Katanning, W. Aust. 





27 



27 



Kew, England 





31 



31 



Cambridge, England^^ 





9 



9 



Total 



169 



109 



Fuii(f. abs. 



Lolium pere-nne, L. 



Locality 

 Victoria 

 Cowra, N.S.W. 

 New Zealand 

 South Africa 

 Scotland 

 Ireland 



Total 



No. of ^Trains 

 examined 





Fumr. pies. 



53 



- 



53 



12 



- 



12 



4 



- 



4 



18 



- 



18 



11 



- 



11 



17 



_ 



17 



ni 



115 



Fung. abs. 



Although former workers have recorded the presence of the fungus 

 in Lolium jyercnne, previously it has been thought to be very spar- 

 ingly distributed in this species. The above results show that this is 

 not actually so. It has also been suggested that the toxicity of Darnel 

 is due to its fungal component, but since English' rye grass shows a 

 regularly occurring hyphal layer as well as Darnel, tliis suggestion 



3. The " seeds ' of this Cambridge sample were much smaller than those 

 of any of the Australian samples. Frequently also on hand-sectioning no 

 hyphal layer was evident, but several of the grains were microtomed, and 

 further examination then showed distinct hyphae in the scutellum and 

 embryo. Possibly the plants yielding the grain were grown under condi- 

 tions which did not favour the luxuriant development of the fungus, so that 

 the absence of the extra-cellular hyphal layer was more common in this 

 sample than is usually the case. Only these grains which were actually 

 microtomed are included in the above list. 



