Feb., 1922] LA RUE AND BARTLETT — PESTALOZZIA GUEPINI 
91 
group, and on the whole no. 14 seems the most outstanding one to be left 
outside the group. 
This rough analysis shows us that our 35 strains fall into the following 
fourteen groups: 
I. Strains i and 2, from leaf spot of cocoanut palm. Spores about 20.2 /i: append- 
ages I 1.2 IX. 
II, Strains 3 and 4, from leaf spot of cocoanut palm; nos. 19, 22, and 24, from bark 
of trunk of Hevea; nos. 21 and 23, from leaf and twig of Hevea, respectively. 
Spores about 22.7 ^t; appendages 19.4 
III. Strains 5 and 6, from leaf spot of cocoanut palm; nos. 15, 16, and 17, from Hevea 
leaves; nos. 18 and 20, from wood of Hevea sapling above wound. Spores 
about 22.2 ju; appendages 22.0 jx. 
IV. Strain 7, from milk of infected cocoanut, drawn from fruit under sterile condi- 
tions. Spores about 24.2 appendages 16.4 ix. 
V. Strain 8, from leaf spot of oil palm. Spores about 24.6 /x; appendages 26.3 /x. 
VI. Strain 9, from leaf spot of cocoanut palm; no. 10, from leaf spot of betel-nut 
palm; nos. 34 and 35, from leaf spot of Hevea leaves. Spores about 27.7 ^t; 
appendages 23.8 ix. 
VII, Strains no. 11, from gray blight of tea (leaf), and no. 25, from Hevea twig. 
Spores about 23.3 ju; appendages 24.3 ^l. 
VIIL Strain 12, from gray blight of tea (leaf). Spores about 26.4 ix; appendages 
28.7 AC. 
IX. Strain 13, from gray blight of tea (leaf). Spores about 29.4 /x; appendages 
30,0 IX. 
X. Strain no. 14, from wood of Hevea sapling above wound. Spores about 20.7 ^i; 
appendages 25.1 fx. 
XI. Strains 26 and 27, from wood of sapling Hevea and young leaf of Hevea, re- 
spectively. Spores about 23.7 ix\ appendages 22.1 [x. 
XII. Strains 28, 29, and 30, from bark of large Hevea branch, killed by lightning, 
wood of Hevea sapling, and young Hevea leaf, respectively. Spores about 
24.3 m; appendages 24.3 ix. 
XIII. Strains 31 and 32, from Hevea leaves. Spores about 25.5 ix; appendages 22.8 ix. 
XIV. Strain 33, from young Hevea leaf. Spores about 26.2 ^t; appendages 13.4 yu- 
Summary 
1. The tropical Pestalozzias of such hosts as the cocoanut palm, Hevea, 
tea, etc., have not been critically differentiated by past authors, the names 
P. palmarum and P. Guepini being used according to individual preference 
for one or the other. These supposed species are incapable of definition. 
2. Statistical studies of thirty-five isolations from cocoanut palm, oil 
palm, betel-nut palm, Hevea, and tea, show that numerous strains, morpho- 
logically distinct from one another, may be isolated, and that these strains 
do not appear to be confined to particular hosts. 
3. It appears that by using a sufficiently refined technique a nominal 
species such as Pestalozzia Guepini might be resolved into an indefinite 
number of demonstrably distinct strains, the number depending only upon 
the precision of the methods. In illustration, we have shown a possible 
allocation of our thirty-five strains to fourteen groups, each of which contains 
one or more strains that cannot be placed in any other group. 
