165 
the one which is the subject of this paper. Later he changed the name 
to Ascochyta rufo-maculans , and it is described under the latter name in 
Saccardo’s Sylloge , although Von Thiimen in Fungi Pomicolicalls it Glceos¬ 
porium rufo-maculans. 
In 1856, in the same journal, Berkeley described and figured a fungus 
on apples under the name of Glceosporium fructigenum, and said: 
It was impossible not to call to mind the little fungus figured upon grapes, * * * 
and the subjoined figure compared with the one there given would at first seem to 
indicate an identity. But the spores were more inclined to bo curved, rather longer, 
aud not so variable in size, and the want of aperithecium separated the two widely 
from each other. * * * I would not affirm that the two productions are essentially 
different, and the more especially because in external appearance and habit they are 
so perfectly identical. 
Ill the Gardeners’ Chronicle for 1859 Mr. Berkeley describes a fun¬ 
gus on peaches and nectarines, Glceosporium Iceticolor , as new to science. 
The description is not accompanied by figures, and it varies in some im¬ 
portant points from that of the two preceding fungi, but in closing Mr. 
Berkeley says: 
A plant of the same genus destructive to apples is figured and described in this 
journal. We may also refer to the very similar production on grapes. 
As we possess no specimens of G. Iceticolor it is impossible to draw 
any conclusion as to whether this is or is not the same as G. fructige¬ 
num. but it does not seem impossible. The chief points of variation may 
be accounted for by the change of host.* 
Still another fungus, or the same fungus under another name, was 
described by Berkeley and Curtis from South Carolina in Grevillea, 
in 1874, as attacking apples. They give it the name Glceosporium versi¬ 
color, and remark that u it is very different in habit from G, fructigenum, 
which also occurs on apples.” 
It is to be noted, however, that the specimen from which Berkeley 
described G. fructigenum was kept in the house, and if this was not the 
case with the fruit from which the other fungus was described there is 
a wide chance for variation, especially in a fungus which varies greatly 
even under the same conditions. 
The herbarium of the Department gives very little aid in reaching 
any decision as to the identity of these fungi. There is one specimen 
labeled G. fructigenum , from Newfield, New Jersey, on rotting pears, 
but I am not sure as to the authority for its identification; and another 
of G. versicolor, from Delaware, which was distributed in Ellis and Ever¬ 
hart’s North American Fungi, No. 1897, on apples. From a comparison 
of the two specimens there seems to be no doubt that they represent 
the same fungus. Of course it is impossible to form a decision which 
would be of any value from these premises, but it is evident that the 
* W. G. Smith has recently figured a fungus on grapes which he calls G. Iceticolor, 
and which from the figures seems to be the same as the G. fructigenum of this article. 
