Classification of Ohio Ascomycetes 
13 
Whatever consideration we may give to somatic characters and 
carpologic structure as a basis for classification, it seems certain that 
the character of reproductive tracts forms a more valuable criterion. 
Yet it needs to be kept in mind that sometimes, as in the Collemaccac, 
forms which differ greatly with respect to structure of sexual organs and 
sexual behavior are so much alike with respect to vegetative characters 
and mature carpologic structure that the latter features have had greater 
weight in taxonomic disposition. The plant studied by Miss Bachman 
(1 and 2 ) illustrates well the point suggested above. It is probably more 
primitive than members of the Collcinaccae whose sexual reproductive 
areas, show spermatia in spermagonia, the evolution of the male repro¬ 
ductive area having probably lagged while carpologic structure and 
somatic conditions advanced in the direction followed in the evolution of 
the genus Collcma. In spite of the rather striking resemblance of the 
reproductive areas of the so-called Collcma piilposum studied by Miss 
Bachman and those of Ascobolits carbonariits examined by Dodge (23), 
one cannot overlook somatic characters, to the extent of placing the 
former plant with the Ascobolaccac rather than with the Collcmaccae. 
This is one striking instance in which vegetative characters and carpo¬ 
logic structure have great value in classification; but it is scarcely possible 
that plants which have such different male reproductive areas as Miss 
Bachman’s plant and the one examined by Stahl (59) (Fig. 5) should 
both be assigned to the same species, Collcma pitlposum. 
Studies of certain ascomycetes show that forms which differ greatly 
with respect to somatic and carpologic structure and therefore are far 
removed from each other in present systems of classification have very 
similar reproductive areas, while others much alike with respect to 
somatic and carpologic structure, but very different in regard to male or 
female reproductive areas or both, have been placed in the same family, 
the same genus, or even in the same species. For instance, the genus 
Ascobolits shows a wide range of variation with respect to sexual areas, 
while the range is much wider for the Ascobolaccac as a whole. A full 
discussion of conditions found in this family may be found in one of the 
papers cited from Dodge (23). Wdiile the student who deals with 
ascomycetes from the taxonomic point of view must endeavor to famil¬ 
iarize himself with all studies of the life histories of these fungi, it is by 
no means clear at present just what changes should be made in existing 
systems of classification on account of the facts more or less clearly, 
fully, and certainly ascertained regarding reproductive processes and 
ontogeny. At least, a good deal of conservatism may well be observed 
