May 31,1924 
Fusarium moniliforme 
917 
NOMENCLATURE AND SYNOMOMY 
From the evidence previously presented it seems reasonable to consider the 
variations in conidial cultures of strains Y 15, Y 29, A t and A 2 within the range of 
variations in a species of this group. While each of these conidial strains differs 
slightly from Fusarium moniliforme as originally described by Sheldon (23), all 
agree in having moniliform microconidia and 3- to 5-septate macroconidia of the 
same general type. The evidence is clear that an ascigerous stage has been 
produced in culture by permitting conidial strains Y 15 and Y 29 to grow together. 
The problem, then, is to choose a binomial to meet the situation, both from 
the standpoint of the ascigerous stage and from that of the conidial stage. 
ASCIGEROUS STAGE 
The first attempt to solve the problem was an effort to find some previously 
described species of Gibberella with which the perfect stage might be placed. 
Gibberella acervalis seemed to be the only one to consider seriously. This species 
was suggested by a statement of Holbert and Hoffer (12) that G. acervalis 
(Moug.) Wr. non Sacc. was associated with root-, stalk-, and ear-rots of corn, and 
the fact that a culture received from them was found to have microconidia in 
chains and macroconidia of the Fusarium moniliforme type. 
Gibberella acervalis (Moug.) Wr. non Sacc. is figured by Wollenweber (29, 
Pl. 2 to 4)- No complete description under this name has been found. Only 
ascospores and macroconidia are included by Wollenweber. The ascospores 
are 1-septate with limits of measurements 4.5 to 5.5 by 12 to 17/*. Macroconidia 
are pictured on two of the three plates devoted to G. acervalis . Those on Plate 2 
are 3-septate, 2.75 to 3.25 by 25 to 38/*. Those on Plate 3 are 3- (3 to 5-) septate, 
2.25 to 3 by 30 to 50/*. On both plates Wollenweber comments that the relation 
of the conidia to the perfect stage is doubtful, but on Plate 2 a peculiarity in the 
Latin construction suggests that the intended meaning may have been to state 
that there was no doubt as to the genetic relationship. The fungus is reported 
as having been found only on wood, such as branches of alder, roots of oak, 
branches of willow, and juniper. 
The size and form of the ascospores and macroconidia described by Wollen¬ 
weber correspond rather closely with those of the fungus under consideration 
in this paper. However, no 3-septate ascospores are mentioned, and no micro¬ 
conidia, to say nothing of microconidia in chains, and the substrata for the two 
are widely different. 
Gibberella acervalis (Moug.) Sacc. (21 p. 318) seems no more likely to be the 
perfect stage of the corn fungus than G . acervalis (Moug.) Wr. It is described as 
having only 3-septate ascospores, 6 by 8/*, and includes a spermogonial stage with 
spermogonia about a third as large as the perithecia, and spermatia very small, 
cylindrical, and oscillatory. It also is reported as having been found on wood. 
It would seem, therefore, that neither Gibberella acervalis (Moug.) Wr. nor 
G. acervalis (Moug.) Sacc. covers the present case. 
CONIDIAL STAGE 
Norton and Chen (15) call attention to the fact that the fungus Oospora 
verticilloides Sacc. is very similar to or identical with Sheldon’s (23) Fusarium 
moniliforme . They use the name 0. verticilloides for the fungus from sweetcorn 
seed with which they were working, and add that if it should produce Fusarium 
macroconidia it would be identical with F. moniliforme Sheldon, but that the 
logical name for the fungus would be Fusarium verticilloides . Cultures kindly 
supplied by Norton and Chen produced Fusarium macroconidia when grown on 
oat agar in the present investigations.' 
96039—24t-6 
