252 
Journal of Mycology 
[Vol. 11 
In September 1903 I had the opportunity of examining the 
type material of Dothidea vorax B. &. C. in the Herbarium of the 
Royal Gardens at Kew, England. This species is based on two 
different genera and three species. The part of the type on spikes 
of Carex from India is a Balansia, while the part on Panicum. 
from South Carolina is probably Hypocrea atramentosa B. & C. 
The Balansia specimens of the Dothidea vorax B. & C. 
resemble in some respects the Epichloe hypoxylon Pk., but I 
believe it differs sufficiently to retain it as a distinct species. The 
sclerotium is much larger, more irregular and of a coarser struc¬ 
ture while the fruiting stromata have also a coarser and rougher 
exterior and are not so prominently constricted at the point of 
attachment to the substratum. But it is a closely related species, 
striking out the effused forms on Uniola and Panicum from South 
Carolina. Saccardo 14 in 1883 founded the genus Ophiodothis on 
Dothidea vorax B. and C., since it was not propely located in 
Dothidea. Ophiodothis, however, cannot stand for this species 
since Balansia antedates it by three years. 
Under what genus name then shall these specimens of Balan¬ 
sia stand? Balansia Spegazzini ( 1 . c.) was well founded in 1880. 
but the genus Ephelis Fries was founded in 1849. 15 Although 
the type species was an imperfect fungus it was placed in the 
discomycetes. Phillips 16 uses Ephelis in an entirely different 
sense for that of true discomycetes with ascigerous forms hav¬ 
ing no relationship to the true Ephelis, which is the conidial stage 
of Balansia, one of the Hypocreales. In fact the type species, 
Ephelis mexicana Fr., may be the conidial stage of the Balansia 
collected by Long from Texas, and Ellis ( 1 . c.) suggests, in the 
description of E. borealis on Danthonia spicata from Nova Sco¬ 
tia, that it may be identical with E. mexicana Fr. Since Ephelis 
represented at first an imperfect stage it should not I believe 
replace a well founded genus of a perfect form though described 
at a later date, though I am aware that some writers probably 
hold the opposite view. Balansia Spegazzini then is the proper 
genus name to employ, and the diagnosis emended may be given 
as follows: 
Balansia Spegazzini, Fungi Guar. Pugill. I, 1880 Emend. 
Atkinson. 
Sclerotium composite, formed of the affected parts of the 
host, which are imbedded in a well developed and more or less 
compact fungus tissue, the elements of which also penetrate the 
stromata). In later publications the latter orthography is used. How¬ 
ever, the species name has no standing, since a description of it under 
this name was never published. See note relative to this later in the 
present article. 
14 Syll. Fung., 652, 1883. 
16 Summa Veg., Scand., 370, 1849. 
10 Manual Brit. Disc., 358, 1887. 
