ENDOTHIA PARASITICA AND RELATED SPECIES. 61 
Inoculations with Endothia gyrosa were also made on numerous 
hosts from which it had never been reported. Six or more inocu- 
lations were made on each host, in the manner described above, ex- 
cept that a part of each series was left unwrapped. The following 
inoculations showed no growth whatever: Those made in Virginia, 
April 4, 1914, on Cornus florida, Fraxinus americana, Juglans cinerea, 
Ilex opaca, Sassafras vartifolium; in Maryland, April 17 and 22, 
1914, on Carya glabra, Cornus florida, Liriodendron tulipifera, Nyssa 
sylvatica, Sassafras variifolium, and Quercus alba; and in New 
York, July 11, 1914, on Betula alba, Prunus serotina, Populus trem- 
uloides, Rhus glabra, Salix sp., and Sassafras variifolium. On Acer 
pennsylvanicum and Carya two out of the six inoculations developed 
a few stromata. These were found only on the tissue injured by 
the cut and there was no evidence of parasitism, 
On Castanea, Fagus, Quercus, and Liquidambar, however, a branch 
inoculated as described above dies back rather faster than the checks. 
This would indicate, as suggested by Clinton (18, p. 419), that 
EF. gyrosa is a weak parasite; that is, that it is able to invade injured 
and dying tissue. 
It is evident from Table III that Endothia gyrosa coming from 
any of the four hosts named will, under favorable circumstances, 
grow on any of the others. Several other interesting facts are 
brought out by the table. Inoculations made with material from 
Liquidambar grew in general more rapidly on Liquidambar than 
on any of the other hosts. In many cases, material from, Liquidam- 
bar failed to grow on Castanea, Fagus, and Quercus, and even when 
inoculations were successful growth was somewhat slower and pyc- 
nidial production less abundant. 
On the other hand, inoculations from Fagus, Quercus, and 
Castanea usually grew less rapidly on Liquidambar than on any 
of the other three hosts. This is, of course, what would be expected 
from the systematic relationships of the host species, and while the 
inoculations made are too few to permit any definite conclusions 
they are nevertheless suggestive. As shown by Table III, Quercus 
prinus proved a very unfavorable host for Endothia gyrosa. 
In all cases inoculations made in the fall (Sept. 15) failed 
to show any growth until the following spring. This corresponds 
with the results in inoculations of E'ndothia parasitica, but it is, of 
course, impossible to determine whether this failure to grow is due 
to the dormant condition of the host or to unfavorable weather con- 
ditions. Perhaps correlated with the results just” noted are the 
unusually poor results obtained from inoculations made in the early 
spring. It will be noted that inoculations made on April 2, 1914, 
were in general much less successful than those made on May 23, 
1914, in exactly the same locality and in many cases on the same 
hosts. 
