244 BULLETIN OF THE BUSSEY INSTITUTION. 
speaks of Trichobasis Junci, Str., on Juncus at Portland, Me. This 
may refer to the Uredo of U. Junci. Uredo Junct, Str., if that is what 
is meant by Zrichobasis Junci, Str., has been referred by writers to 
Puccinia caricina and P. Graminis, whether correctly or not we do 
not know, for European writers do not agree upon this point. 
The Uromyces on Brizopyrum spicatum differs from that on Spar- 
tina, in several respects. The Uredo spores are smaller, about .02 mm. 
in diameter, and the teleutospores are about .026 mm. in diameter, and 
are nearly spherical, not having the thickened and pointed extremity. 
It will be noticed that the relative size of the Uredo and Teleutospores 
is reversed in the two species. The form on Lrizopyrum was first 
collected by Olney (1853), Newport, R. I., Herb. Curtis, and in “ Gre- 
villea,’ December, 1874, the specimen is quoted under Puccinia Gra- 
minis, and the fungus is said to be “in a young abnormal state.” No. 
1519, on Andropogon from South Carolina, mentioned in the same 
connection is to be referred to Uromyces Junci. By the kindness of 
Mr. Peck we have been enabled to examine specimens collected by 
Hon. G. W. Clinton, on Brizopyrum at Shelter Island, New York. 
The fungus, which is the same as that found at Wood’s Hole, is referred 
to Uromyces Graminum, Cooke, in the 28th Report of the “ Botanist ° 
of New York State.” Whether to consider the fungus as a true Uro- 
myces, or simply as an undeveloped form of Puccinia Graminis, seems 
to have been differently answered by different writers. We did not 
succeed in making our Wood’s Hole specimens germinate, but they 
were gathered rather early in the season. Occasionally one finds a 
teleutospore which is two-parted like a Puccinia; not, however, like a 
spore of P. Graminis, but, if any thing, more like P. caricina. But, 
an occasional division of a Uromyces spore is not sufficient to remove 
the species to Puccinia. By a similar reasoning, we should be obliged 
to transfer the Puccinia, which are not unfrequently three or even 
four celled, to Phragmidium. It seems to us that Mr. Peck is right in 
considering his plant a UVromyces, and not an undeveloped Puccinia. 
Most certainly it cannot belong to P. Graminis, and it is extremely 
doubtful whether there is any connection with P. caricina. Uredo 
earicina DC., is considered by Leveillé a Uromyces (Ann. des 
Sciences, Sér. 3, Vol. 8, p. 375), but if we are to trust French speci- 
mens of that species in Herb. Curtis it is not the same as the American 
fungus above mentioned. Neither, as far as we know, can the 
