Nov. 1905 ] The Genera Balansia and Dothichloe , Etc. 259 
cases the stroma is more or less separated into patches, sometimes 
these patches being rather small when they appear as irregular, 
angular or roughly circular disciform bodies which suggest a 
resemblance to the stromata of Balansia, but differ in the absence 
of the pseudosclerotium, and especially in the fact that the well 
developed stroma of Balansia between the bases of the perithecia 
and the host is lacking. 
As stated above in 1894 I proposed the genus Dothicloe for 
those species of Hypocrella Sacc. which are congeneric with 
Hypocrea atramentosa B. & C. Hypocrella 30 was proposed by 
Saccardo for forms like Hypocrea discoidea B. & Br. and H. atra- 
mentosa B. & C., having asci and spores like Epichloe but the 
stroma of which does not entirely surround the host. 
Hypocrea discoidea and the first species given by Saccardo in 
the Sylloge under the genus 31 Hypocrella phyllogena (Mont.) 
Speg., in my opinion are not congeneric with Hypocrea atr amen - 
tosa B. & C., H. discoidea being thick, discoid and scarlet in color, 
H. Phyllogena being thick, tubercular or discoid (the thickness 
equalling or exceeding the diameter) and whitish in color, accord¬ 
ing to specimens which I have seen in the Herbarium of the 
Museum of Paris; while H. atramentosa is thin, effuse and black. 
Hypocrea atramentosa may be regarded by some as belonging in 
the genus Epichloe, but because of its black stroma in my opinion 
it is not congeneric with Epichloe, though it is closely related and 
should be retained in the Hypocreales just as Balansia and Clavi- 
ceps are, because the perithecia! walls while not very distinct are 
still of a different structure from the tissue of the stroma, although 
Saccardo (1. c.) placed forms of H. atramentosa, example “Do- 
thidea atr ament aria” B. & C. in the Dothidiaceae, and in 1894 I 
considered the species as belonging to the Dothideaceae. The 
genus Dothichloe represents a transition of the Sphaeriales to the 
Dothideales. While I formerly mistook, as stated above, speci¬ 
mens of Hypocrea atramentosa B. & C., which were distributed in 
various Exsiccatae as Hypocrea hypoxylon (Pk.) for “authentic” 
specimens of Peck’s Epichloe hypoxylon, the diagnosis of the 
genus Dothichloe was drawn from fresh specimens of Hypocrea 
atramentosa on leaves of Andropogon from Alabama, and of 
another species on stems of Aristida also from Alabama. The 
specimens on leaves of Andropogon have since been compared 
by me with the type specimens of Hypocrea atramentosa B. & C. 
at Kew and have been found to be identical. It will be sufficient 
therefore to make the necessary correction in the name Dothichloe 
atramentosa (B. & C.) Atkinson, in place of Dothichloe hypoxylon 
(Pk.) Atkinson, and in the synonymy citations. It may be well, 
therefore, in order to make matters clear to repeat here the diag- 
30 Michelia, 1 , 322, 1878. 
31 Syll. Fung, 2 , 579, 1883. 
