426 CONNECTICUT EXPERIMENT STATION REPORT, IQI2. 
into consideration that they are all botanists with a very extended 
experience in the systematic study of fungi. 
The Andersons have taken the other extreme, namely, that 
the chestnut blight, which they call Endothia parasitica, is 
entirely a distinct species from E. gyrosa, which they call E. 
virginiana. Their conclusion is evidently based on the para- 
sitic habit of the former as compared with the saprophytic 
habit of the latter, the difference between the two in artificial 
cultures, and the slight morphological differences in their 
ascospores. Pantanelli (53) im his recent article might be 
considered as agreeing with the Andersons in considering the 
two as distinct species, since in his conclusions he says: “The 
Diaporthe parasitica Murrill is an Endothia, closely related to, 
but not like, the E. radicalis (Schw.) Fr. Hence it is oppor- 
tune to distinguish it as E. parasitica (Murr.) Anderson.” 
However, Pantanelli was trying to show that these two were 
not entirely identical, and was not really concerned ,in their 
exact relationship, since he stated earlier in a footnote: 
“Recently, November 28, 1912, Professor P. A. Saccardo has 
communicated to me that he regards E. parasitica as a race of 
E. radicalis modified by parasitism. One may then consider 
whether it is a species or a distinct variety, but from the view- 
point of the pathologist it makes no difference.” 
The writer, after a careful study of the blight fungus and 
of Endothia gyrosa, microscopically, in cultures, and in inocula- 
tion experiments, with an opportunity to examine both in the 
field, and also specimens of E. gyrosa on several hosts from 
Europe, has come to the conclusion that these two forms are 
too closely related to be considered distinct species. On the 
other hand, they are certainly distinguished through slight mor- 
phological differences in their ascospores, marked and constant 
cultural differences, and the apparently great difference in their 
parasitic tendencies. These differences lead us to consider the 
blight fungus as a distinct variety of E. gyrosa, which is evi- 
dently the older form from which the blight fungus has been 
derived. 
As previously stated, neither Endothia radicalis nor E. 
gyrosa and its variety parasitica differ enough in their fruiting 
pustules or conidial spores to present any very special distin- 
guishing characters. The ascospores of E. radicalis, however, 
