Gnomonia ery thro stoma ) Pers. 
593 
It is considered that the nuclei present in the differentiated part of the 
‘ coil ’ have become larger in size by a process of growth, no fusion having 
been observed before their occurrence. By comparison with certain Lichens 
and with Poly stigma these larger cells in the midst of the ‘ coil ’ are to be 
interpreted as ascogonial cells, while the surrounding cells are purely nutri¬ 
tive and protective in function. On the other hand the ascogonial cells are 
not so clearly defined in Gnomonia as in the Lichens and in Polystigma. 
There can be no doubt that in Gnomonia more than one ascogonium is 
usually present in the ‘coil which later gives rise to a single perithecium ; 
while in Poly stigma, according to Fisch and Frank, the perithecium gene¬ 
rally develops in association with a single ascogonium. 
It has already been mentioned that spermatia in considerable numbers 
have been seen attached to the trichogynes. No evidence was obtained 
that the nucleus of a spermatium fused with the single nucleus usually 
present in the terminal cell of a trichogyne, or that it passed downwards to 
the larger ascogonial cells. In fact the single nucleus of the apical part of 
the trichogyne often shows signs of disorganization as soon as the trichogyne 
has passed beyond the stoma, and this unhealthy condition frequently 
extends to several of the nuclei in the cells immediately below. Frank 
states in his account of Polystigma rubrum that where spermatia adhered to 
the trichogynes the former seemed to be poorer in contents. He concluded 
from this that the nuclei of the spermatia passed into the trichogynes and 
performed a fertilizing function. It would appear, however, that the apparent 
diminution of protoplasmic contents might be just as readily explained by 
the process of disorganization which the spermatia would naturally undergo 
if they remained for any length of time on the exposed trichogynes. It is 
clear that the mere adhesion of spermatia to the trichogynes is no evidence 
for their fertilizing function. 
During this investigation of Gnomonia , coils, apparently normal, have 
been frequently seen, to the trichogynes of which no spermatia were adher¬ 
ing. A more surprising phenomenon has been observed in that the tricho¬ 
gynes sometimes grow out from small groups of hyphae in which no 
ascogonia can be seen, and which therefore cannot be considered to be 
of the same nature as the £ coils Trichogynes have also been seen grow¬ 
ing from ordinary hyphae which were not massed together (Fig. 12). Frank 
also mentions this fact, but appears to attach no significance to it. The 
nuclei of the cells in immediate connexion with such trichogynes are in no 
way different from ordinary vegetative nuclei. It was not only in material 
gathered early in the season that trichogynes were found apart from the 
‘ coils but that obtained much later showed the same phenomenon. Hence 
the view that the vegetative cells below these trichogynes develop later into 
‘ coils ’ cannot be entertained. 
I observed also a group of trichogynes in connexion with the margin 
