NEMATODE DISEASE OF WHEAT. 6 
The correct designation, therefore, becomes Tylenehus tritici (Stein- 
buch) Bastian. Two years later, in 1866. Schneider (32) gives the 
scientific name of the organism as Angidllula scandens. 
In view of the above brief resume of the work of those investiga- 
tors who took some part in naming the parasite, its proper synonymy 
chronologically recorded would seem to be as follows: 
Tylenehus tritici (Steinbnch) Bastian, 1864. 
■ Vibrio tritici Steinbuch, 1799. 
Vibrio tritici Bauer, 1823. 
Rhabditis tritici Dujarclin, 1845. 
Angidllula graminearum Diesing, 1850. 
Tylenehus tritici Bastian, 1864. 
Anguillula scandens Schneider, 1866. 
Following Roffredi's (31) publication of 1776, many papers on 
the disease appeared in European literature, some of which have been 
mentioned. They were for the most part discussions as to the cor- 
rectness of the observations of Roffredi, and contributed little to 
what was already known about the trouble until the monograph of 
Davaine (11) appeare.d in 1857. In it he gives practically all that is 
known to-day about the etiology of the disease, lucidly describes and 
illustrates the different stages in the development of the parasite, and 
records the results of physiological researches on the nematode which 
furnish a basis for its control. His work largely silenced the dis- 
cussion that had prevailed in the literature as to the cause of the 
disease, some investigators having confused the trouble with stinking 
smut of wheat (Tilt-etia tritici). 
Many papers appear in European literature after Davaine's pub- 
lication, but in general they deal mainly with the occurrence and dis- 
tribution of the disease and add little to what had previously been 
recorded. Marcinowski's (22) valuable contribution of 1909, how- 
ever, added considerably to our knowledge of the pathogenicity and 
physiology of the parasite. Since that time no publications of major 
importance relating to the disease have been found. 
In the United States the occurrence of the eelworm disease of 
wheat seems to have been first recognized by Johnson (19), who 
in 1909 recorded that it had been found in California by members 
of the staff of the Office of Cereal Investigations of the Bureau of 
Plant Industry, and had been authentically reported to him to 
occur in New York, Georgia, and West Virginia. There appear 
to have been no other records of the trouble in North America un- 
til Fromme (14) in 1917 published a short note stating that he 
had found it at one point in Virginia. Since that time the 
writer (7, 8) has reported its wide prevalence in Virginia and its 
limited occurrence in other States, has described the general nature 
