64 The Philippine Journal of Science isis 
having shown that Oospora Wallroth is an organism entirely 
different from those under discussion. 
Sphaerotilus Kuetz. (1883). This name was adopted by Engler 
for the group including Cladothrix (Streptothrix) foersteri 
Cohn, with which he included Actinomyces bovis Harz. This 
disposition was undoubtedly due to the old misapprehension as 
to the distinction between Cladothrix and Streptothrix. 
Actinobacillus Lignieres and Spitz (1902). This name was ap- 
plied by Lignieres and Spitz to a supposed subtype of this group. 
The distinction has not been recognized, and by most authors 
the name is considered a synonym. 
Carteria Musgrave and Clegg (1908). The adoption of this 
new name (as “Carterii”) was tentatively suggested by Mus- 
grave and Clegg as possibly advantageous for the purpose of 
avoiding further controversy, although they did not definitely 
advocate this highly informal procedure. 
Nocardia Trevisan (1889). This name was adopted by de 
Toni and Trevisan to cover the entire group. Blanchard used 
it for a time in its original application and Wright (1894) 
adopted it for nonpathogenic strains only. As many other 
authors use it in one sense or another, of late it has gained 
much prestige. Vuillemin, and Chalmers and Christopherson 
have recently adopted it for the entire genus. 
The validity of this name we deny on the grounds indicated 
in the discussion that follows. 
Discomyces Rivolta (1878). This name was definitely sub- 
stituted by Rivolta for Actinomyces, with the change of name 
of Bollinger’s fungus to Discomyces bovis. It was practically 
ignored until Blanchard (1900) argued its priority over Nocar- 
dia. Subsequently Gedoelst, Brumpt, Manson, Stitt, and for 
a time Castellani and Chalmers, adopted it. 
As indicated in the discussion this name is clearly valid over 
Actinomyces and all subsequent names. 
DISCUSSION 
Before considering the validity of Discomyces for this group 
over Nocardia and Actino cladothrix, it is necessary to emphasize 
the invalidity of two older terms that have gained general 
recognition. 
Streptothrix Cohn (1875) is invalidated hy Streptothrix Corda 
(1839). It has been argued that there is doubt as to what 
organism is referred to by Corda’s name. This is apparently 
not the case for in recent years several new species have 
been described in Corda’s genus. Streptothrix Corda is unques- 
