On Oidiopsis taurica (Lev.), an endophytic member 
of the Erysiphaceae 1 . 
BY 
ERNEST S. SALMON, F.L.S., 
South-Eastern Agricultural College , Wye, Kent. 
With Plates XIII and XIV. 
I N a preliminary note published ( 1 ) at the beginning of last year, I called 
attention to the fact that Erysiphe taurica Lev. is endophytic in its 
conidial stage, the conidiophores being sent through the stomatal apertures 
into the open air from intercellular hyphae in the mesophyll of the leaf, 
instead of arising from a superficial mycelium on the surface of the leaf, 
as in all hitherto known species of the Erysiphaceae. Further, the coni- 
diophore is frequently found to be branched, a character not previously 
known to occur in the Family. 
During the past year I have examined a large number of specimens 
of E. taurica in the conidial and perithecial stages 2 , and I propose now to 
give the results of this examination, and also to make some observations on 
the life-history of E. taurica , and on the systematic position of the species. 
It may be mentioned here that one result of the examination of the collected 
material has been the establishment of the identity of several recently 
published fungi with E. taurica. 
In the early stages of the conidial condition E. taurica in no way 
resembles the other species of the Erysiphaceae. This is due to two 
peculiarities, viz. the complete absence at this stage of any mycelium on 
the surface of the leaf, and the presence of conidiophores emerging singly 
or in bundles through the stomatal apertures (see Figs. 5-7, 12, 13, 17). 
The conidiophore is thin-walled, septate, flaccid, 200 to 700 /x, or more, in 
length, sometimes simple 3 , but more often branched. The branching is 
1 From the Jodrell Laboratory, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. 
2 All the material mentioned in the present paper is deposited in the Kew Herbarium. 
3 It is possible that the simple conidiophore becomes branched at a later stage through the 
production of lateral branches. In the example shown in Fig. 6 the lateral branches evidently 
arose at a late stage in the growth of the conidiophore, as shown by the fact that the walls of the 
main axis are comparatively thick, while the walls of the developing lateral branch are very thin 
(see x, X s ). Compare also Fig. 13. 
f Annals of Botany, Vol. XX. No. LXXVIII. April, 1906.] 
