260 J- Ramsbottom, 
times a well preserved male nucleus has been found. The two nuclei 
in the ascogonium do not fuse. Their further divisions have not been 
clearly seen, but the ascogonium becomes three-septate. The penultimate 
cell possesses two nuclei which fuse to form the primary ascus nucleus. 
This fusion nucleus divides but the divisions have not been carefully studied. 
From the meagre account given however, it seems as if brachymeiosis 
may occur, eight chromosomes being present in the first two divisions 
and “nous croyons avoir vu quatre chromosomes à la dernière division”. 
Winge draws attention to the fact that whereas Harper, and Blackman 
and Fraser hold that the ascogonium divides into from four to six cells, 
Dangeard and he find that it always becomes three-septate. He suggests 
that this difference may be due to the fact that they have been working 
at different species. In considering this suggestion however one must 
note that all obtained their specimens from the Hop with the exception 
of Winge who obtained his specimens from Melampyrum. If Winge’s 
suggestion were true it would mean that two different species of Sphaero- 
theca attack the Hop and that one of these is also present on Melam¬ 
pyrum the two only being distinguishable by cytological methods x ). In 
spite of his suggestion however, he holds that Dangeard and he are 
correct and that some of Harper’s figures are certainly wrong “En effet, 
nous trouverons assez souvent dans les coupes au microtome, des figures 
correspondantes aux dessins de cet auteur, mais les explications qu’il en 
a données sont fausses. Naturellement, quand on coupe en différents sens 
une ascogone, qui est courbée, qui a trois cellules, dont celle du milieu 
a deux noyaux, les autres un seul noyau chacune, il est possible de voir 
les coupes qui, par orientation erronée, donnent des résultats fautifs-et 
c’est ce qui est arrivé pour Harper.“ But nothing is said of the figures 
of Fraser and Blackman who had knowledge of Dangeard’s criticisms 
when they wrote their note. 
Vallory (1911) has published a preliminary note (without figures) 
on the cytology of Chaetomium Kunzeanum var chlorinum. He records, 
as did Oltmanns and Dangeard, the presence of an ascogonium, un¬ 
accompanied by an antheridium. The ascogonium becomes rolled up on 
itself and divides into portions eventually forming a mass of false tissue 
from the cells of which arise the ascogenous hyphae. 
When a spore germinates it gives rise to a mycelium which is sep¬ 
tate and plurinucleate. The nuclei are very small and show a nucleolus 
but no visible limiting membrane or chromatin. In the hyphae pairs of 
nuclei are very frequently seen which resemble in every particular what 
Blackman and his followers described in the ascogonia of various As¬ 
comycètes (Humana granulata , Lachnea stercorea, Ascophanus carneus etc.) 
and which they considered were female nuclei fusing in pairs. In the 
case of the mycelium Vallory thinks that it cannot be a case of fusing 
nuclei and that the only plausible explanation of the phenomena is that 
the pairs of nuclei are different stages of amitoses where the nuclei are 
more or less separated. This, he states, is shown by the following facts. 
The pairs of nuclei are present in the young actively growing mycelium 
where there is a great increase in the number of nuclei, whereas on the 
1) Sphaerotheca Castagnei var. fuliginea occurs on Melampyrum. It is quite 
distinct. 
