ANTHRACNOSE OF CUCURBITS. 13 
noted that the watermelon fungus possessed setze and decided that 
it was a Colletotrichum rather than a Gloeosporium. Since, how- 
ever, the specific name of the watermelon anthracnose antedated 
that of the bean anthracnose by seven years or more, he followed a 
suggestion made by Ellis in 1890 and applied the name Colletotrichum 
lagenarium (Pass.) Ell. and Hals. to the causal organisms of 
both melon and bean anthracnoses. While all later work indicates 
that Halsted was in error in assuming the identity of the anthracnose 
fungi of bean and melon, it appears that his change of generic name 
was well eee Snecande, however, does not recognize this 
name. 
Following Saccardo’s opinion regarding Colletotrichum  oligo- 
chaeium, Priliieux and Delacroix (39), publishing in 1894 on the 
disease as it occurred on melons, considered the above and (Gloco- 
sporvum lagenarvum as separate and distinct species and used the 
former name because their specimens possessed setose acervull. 
Their description of the disease leaves no doubt as to its being 
identical with the one under consideration. 
In his index of 1910, Saccardo (42, v. 19) lists both of the anes 
species and thus recognizes two distinct fungi causing anthracnose 
of cucurbitaceous hosts in addition to Berkeley’s Gloeosporium 
orbiculare. 
In a comparative study of anthracnose fungi in 1898, Miss Stone- 
man (50, p. 88) cultured forms from watermelon and cucumber 
and concluded them to be identical. By similar tests, she found 
bean anthracnose to be quite distinct. She went further, how- 
ever, and described (50, p. 94) as a new species Volutella citrullt 
Stoneman, a form found on a citron fruit in the Ithaca market. 
Pecordine. to her description, this fungus differed from (olletot- 
richum lagenarium in that dense raised stromata were formed on 
lesions and in certain cultural features. This is recognized as a 
species by Saccardo (42, v. 19) in his 1910 index. Since Colletot- 
richum lagenarium is known. to occur on citrons, it seems quite possi- 
ble that the above may be identical with it. On the other hand, no 
inoculations were reported and this Volutella may have Been a 
saprophyte. 
Kvidence that Halsted was mistaken in assuming the identity of 
bean and cucurbit anthracnoses was secured by C. O. Smith (9, p. 28) - 
and Sheldon (46) in 1904, by Edgerton (13) in 1909, and by Kriger 
_ (28, pp. 246, 294) and Shear and Wood (45) in 1913 as a result of 
unsuccessful cross inoculations. 
In 1910 Potebnia (38, p. 82), in Russia, published his opinion that 
_ Colletotrichum oligochaetum Cav. and Gloeosporium lagenarium (Pass.) 
Sacc. and Roum. were the same species, the latter being the non- 
setose form. 
