12 BULLETIN 380, TJ. S. DEPARTMENT OP AGEICTTLTUEE. 



shows only pycnidia. (See PI. V, fig. 2.) His description, how- 

 ever, as well as his unpublished illustrations preserved in the library 

 of the Academy, show clearly that perithecia were present in the 

 material from which the description was made. This is also con- 

 clusively shown by authentic specimens from Schweinitz in at least 

 two European collections, those of Fries at Upsala and Hooker at 

 Kew. A microscopic examination of these specimens shows good 

 perithecia and mature ascospores having the characters and meas- 

 urements given elsewhere in this paper for Endothia fluens (Sow.). 

 (See PL XVII, fig. 9.) As there is no indication in Schweinitz's 

 writings or in his manuscript notes and records that he made more 

 than one collection of this species, there is no reason to doubt that 

 the material at Upsala and Kew is a part of that upon which he 

 based his description of Sphaeria radicalis Schw. The true type 

 specimen of the species is that in Fries's herbarium upon which he 

 based his description, which was added to the diagnosis sent by 

 Schweinitz. 



One year after the description of this species from America it 

 was reported from Italy by Rudolph, in 1829 (66, p. 393), and in 

 1830 Fries (32, p. 541) himself reports the fungus from France. 

 This species had, however, been collected and described before 

 in its pycnidial condition in 1814 by Sowerby (79, pi. 438) under 

 the name of Sphaeria fluens. This was reported in 1836 by Berkeley 

 (8, p. 254) as Sphaeria, gyrosa Schw. A microscopic study of the 

 original material of this species, which was collected by Charles 

 Lyell on chestnut in the Xew Forest in southern England and is 

 now preserved in the Kew Herbarium, leaves no doubt that it is 

 the pycnidial form of Endothia radicalis (Schw.). Plate XVII, fig- 

 ure 3, shows pycnospores from Sowerby's specimen at Kew. This 

 specimen agrees with Sowerby's illustration and is apparently the 

 ©ne from which this figure was made. The pycnospore masses 

 are somewhat larger than usual; otherwise it is typical of E. radi- 

 calis Schw. 



At first it did not seem possible to distinguish the species of 

 Endothia in their pycnidial condition, but thorough microscopic 

 studies of large quantities of material in the field and laboratory in 

 both America and Europe have shown that the two sections of the 

 genus and some of the species can usually be separated with cer- 

 tainty in this stage of their development, as indicated by the tables 

 of measurements and in the photographs of pycnospores, and es- 

 pecially by the stromata of the different species. 



The first description of the ascospores of E. radicalis was given 

 in 1858 by Currey (21. p. 272). who examined the specimens from 

 Schweinitz in Hooker's herbarium at Kew. Currey figured what 

 he believed to be four ascospores. Two are apparently typical E. 



