BRITISH SPHJSRIACEI. 
89 
Venturia glomerata. CTce . — Grevillea iii., p. 69. On leaves of 
Geranium dissectum. 
Venturia alchemillae. B. 8r Br . — Ann. Nat. Hist., No. 1,493*. 
On leaves of Alchemilla. 
Genus 15. PYRENOPHORA. Fr.— Handbk., p. 925. 
Species, Handbk., No. 2,785. 
Pyrenophora trichostoma. Fr . — Grevillea v., p. 122. On 
rotting straw. 
\_Cephalotheca sulphurea , Fckl., belongs to the Perisporiacei.] 
RECENT EXPERIMENTS BY DR. MINKS. 
“ LICHENS NOT PARASITICAL FUNGI ON ALGiE.” 
I have demonstrated in my two publications, “ Cryptogamic 
illustree, Famille des Lichens,” 1868, and u Famille des Cham- 
pignons,” 1870-72, p. 54), the impossibility of fusing together the 
two classes of lichens and fungi as they were understood by Lin- 
naeus and his contemporaries. Any one who has read my argu- 
ments, which are supported by numerous facts, will have been able 
to judge of the little value which can be placed on M. Schwen- 
dener’s system, which declares that the gonidia of Lichens are 
Algae enveloped in a parasitical fungus. I had insisted on a much 
more rational doctrine — that of M. Tulasne — which is explained in 
his excellent memoir, “ Histoire organographique et physiologique 
des Lichens,” 1852, according to which the gonidia belong to the 
Lichens. 
Cryptogamists have had before them, since the year 1868, the 
date of M. Schwendener’s first memoir, two contrary systems. 
Each of these systems has been supported or combatted by learned 
observers. The conscientious and complete treatise published in 
1877 by M. Th. Brisson, of Lenharree, under the title of “ Ex- 
amen critique de la theorie de M. Schwendener,” will be read with 
great interest. It must be recorded here to his credit, that M. Th. 
Brisson is the only French botanist who has protested against this 
algolichenic theory, and who, while noticing that none of the sup- 
porters or opponents of M. Schwendener’s ideas had brought for- 
ward M. Tulasne’s doctrines, has expressed the very just opinion 
that the author of the organographic history of lichens is the clear- 
sighted physiologist who has approached most closely to what now 
seems to be the truth. 
In the camp of the German experimentalist, Mons. de Bary, 
Max-Reess, E. Bornet, and Treub range themselves. In the 
opposite camp, that is to say, among those who combatted M. 
Schwendener’s theories, although with reserve, figure Messrs. 
