r
they are replete with a somewhat gelatinous granulose mass, containing
subglobose sporidia. The above is a description of the usual appearance
of this plant. A variety, however, occurs in the form of a ring or
anmdus, the centre being unoccupied. Sometimes the perithecia are
scattered in irregular groups, of few together, and may even occur solitary.
My friend Professor K u n z e of Leipsic, has given an excellent
history of this very singular plant in his instructive work
“ IMykologische Hefte.” Pie has observed, what indeed must
strike every one who dissects it, how greatly it resembles the
genus Erysiphe {Alphitomorpha, W a l l r .) ; and he adds,
that it is intermediate, as it were, between that genus and
Sphæria.
F r i e s , in his excellent system, has placed it in his Xyloma
division of Dothidea ; but I must confess I do not find its
structure to accord sufficiently with Dothidea, to admit it as a
species. I have therefore retained the name appropriated to it
by S p r e n g e l , and published by K u n z e . In a short time I
shall be able to contrast it with Dothidea hetulina and D. Ulmi,
which are somewhat similar in external character, hut have no
analytical resemblance. Nearly allied, however, to Lasiobotrys
Loniceræ, is a plant which I had the pleasure of lately
receiving from Dr M o u g e o t , produced, I think, upon a leaf
of Ruhus Idæus. After a careful examination, I can scarcely
find any specific difference, though such may still exist.
Fig. 1. L. Lonkertg, nat. size. Fig. 2. A plant before the epidermis has been
ruptured, and a portion o f another with the epidermis partly removed.
Fig. S. Perithecia. Fig. 4. A perithecium viewed from below. Fig. 5. The
same in another point o f view. Fig. 6. Section o f a perithecium. Fig. 7.
Sporidia.—All but Fig. 1. more or less magnifed.
I
\ i
■■ -if'