Australasian PezizalesThe Australasian Pezizales in the Herbarium of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew by M. A.RifaiReview by: R. W. G. DennisKew Bulletin, Vol. 25, No. 1 (1971), pp. 35-38Published by: Springer on behalf of Royal Botanic Gardens, KewStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4103135 .Accessed: 11/10/2012 15:16

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew and Springer are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to Kew Bulletin.

http://www.jstor.org

BOOK REVIEWS 35

At last a plant pathologists' manual.-This handbook* bears the marks of having been rather hurriedly rounded off so as to appear in time for the International Congress of Plant Pathology. There is, for instance, a pious exhortation to us all to use SI units but I did not notice any in use in the text, indeed 'gal/acre', which must annoy metric users, occurs often. In spite of this, one cannot fail to notice the breadth of its coverage and the consider- able detail in which most of the subjects are dealt with. There is a long group of sections covering various kinds of techniques, and other important chapters deal with the various groups of pathogens, fungi, bacteria, viruses and nematodes, and the diseases which they cause. There is even a useful ele- mentary guide to the principles of agricultural entomology, which subject is unjustifiably ignored in most plant pathological texts.

In his preface, Dr. G. C. Ainsworth says that the problem was rather to decide what to leave out than what to include, but I wish the book had been twice as long. A manual must inevitably contain a large nucleus of fairly common knowledge in order to provide pegs on which to hang the more esoteric matter. As one prunes, the proportion of trunk to twigs is increased yet it is the twigs which bear the fruit. Thus, the article on non-pathogenic diseases, which are probably at least as important as the pathogenic ones but about which most plant pathologists have scanty knowledge, has been cut to 3 pages of text so that it only tells you what every schoolboy already knows on the subject. And what is the use of stating, almost without qualification, that 'non-parasitic diseases are closely related to diseases induced by patho- gens'? (Secretaries of debating societies please note.) Other examples of too rigorous selection may be found in the glossary, which defines everyday expressions like 'imperfect state' (badly in this instance) yet ignores words like 'occult' on the differing meanings of which we need an authoritative guide. Incidentally, if you want a definition of 'sooty mould' you have to look up two cross-references to find the answer, and the answer merits about gamma minus.

Nevertheless, I should be doing a great disservice to plant pathology and the C.M.I. if I were to give the impression that this is a poor book. It simply has the demerits of a pioneer work and I recommend anybody with even the remotest concern with plant pathology to buy a copy; it is very reasonably priced. I look forward to a mature second edition and meanwhile I am sure I shall refer to the original frequently and rely on it heavily.

D. M. DRING

Australasian Pezizales.-It is well to state at the outset that this contri- bution* by a newcomer to Discomycete taxonomy is a major work and a worthy companion to Madame le Gal's monumental 'Les Discomycetes de Madagascar' which may, indeed, have served as its model. The book is also an instructive demonstration of the impressive advances which may result

* Plant Pathologist's Pocketbook, 1968. Pp. 267, 8 tables, I figure. Kew; Commonwealth Mycological Institute. Price I '50o. * The Australasian Pezizales in the Herbarium of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. By M. A. Rifai. Pp. 295, 292 black-and-white figures. Verhandelingen der Koninklijke Nederland6e Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afd. Natuurkunde II, 57(3). Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Co., 1968. Price

&?4"I o.

36 KEW BULLETIN VOL. 25(1)

from close co-operation between a university department of botany and one of the national herbaria, when the research facilities of the former are brought to bear on the accumulated but still undigested treasures of the latter. In this instance not only did Kew have to offer numerous types, including some of Rodway's badly described Tasmanian species, and the old material on which Cooke's 'Handbook of Australian Fungi' was based but also a large number of recent better preserved and annotated collections received for naming from an enthusiastic amateur in Victoria and from various sources in South Australia, New Zealand, New Caledonia, the Solomon Islands and New Guinea.

The system adopted by Rifai is basically that of le Gal though the marked differences between Sarcoscyphaceae and the remaining Pezizales are regarded as justifying their relegation to a separate suborder Sarcoscyphineae. In defining this family more stress is laid on the long cylindric suboperculate asci with long flexuous hyphoid bases than on the prosenchymatous character of the excipulum. The Sarcoscyphaceae are regarded as possibly resembling the common ancestral stock of both the fully operculate Pezizineae and the inoperculate Helotiales, and Wynnea Berk. & Curt. is suggested to be a notably primitive genus. A single species, tentatively identified with the imperfectly known Himalayan W. macrotis (Berk.) Berk., is described from the Solomon Islands. In subdividing the family the presence of hymenial hairs in genera assigned to the Urnuleae is cited as an additional character separating them from the Sarcoscypheae and supports the modern tendency to transfer the extralimital genus Desmazierella Lib. from Humariaceae to Sarcoscyphaceae: Urnuleae. Boedijnopeziza Ito & Imai is upheld as distinct from Cookeina Kuntze and a new genus Aurophora is proposed for Peziza dochmia Berk. & Curt., usually referred to Phillipsia Berk., because there is a gelatinous matrix to its medullary tissue. The only collection of Sarcoscypha coccinea (Jacq. ex S. F. Gray) Lamb. cited for which collector's data were available had the apothecia white when fresh and it is to be hoped Australian mycologists will ascertain if this unpigmented condition is characteristic of the Australian race. It would seem to be rare elsewhere.

In Morchellaceae Australian records of Disciotis Bond. and Mitrophora Lev. are shown to have been based on misdeterminationis but the two cosmo- politan aggregate species of Morchella St. Amans sensu stricto are apparently widespread in the eastern states of Australia.

In Helvellaceae the large north temperate genus Helvella L. ex St. Amans is

represented in Australasia as yet solely by the cosmopolitan H. villosa (Hedw. ex Kuntze) Dissing & Nannf., but the author remarks in passing that those who choose to recognize the segregate genus Macropodia Fuckel-a name nomenclatorially untenable-can find a valid name for it in Macro-

scyphus S. F. Gray (1821). A third species of the curious columnar-apothecial genus Underwoodia Peck is described from Victoria as U. beatonii and it is worth noting that this is only critically distinct from U. fuegiana (Speg.) Gamundi from Tierra del Fuego.

Because of their nonamyloid asci the Otideae are transferred from Pezi- zaceae to Humariaceae. In spite of numerous published records by earlier authors no Australian collections referable to Otidea could be traced but, in a full discussion of the names and their typification, Otidea Fuckel (1870) is upheld as the correct name for those fungi referred by most American authors to Scodellina S. F. Gray (1821) and the latter name is so typified as to

BOOK REVIEWS 37 become a synonym of Peziza St. Amans. Le Gal's use of the name Barlaeina Sacc. is shown to be a misapplication and Marcelleina Brumm. Korf & Rifai is proposed to replace it, with Ascobolus persoonii Crouan as type-species. Typification of Humaria Fuckel, already much disputed, is discussed in detail and decided in favour of Peziza scutellata L. ex St. Amans. This possibly needs reconsideration since it at once calls for conservation of Scutellinia Lambotte if current usage is to be preserved and also implies acceptance of Mycolachnea R. Maire in place of Humaria as interpreted by several authors including Eckblad (1968) who has expanded it to embrace the nomenclatorially invalid but taxonomically acceptable genus Trichophaea Boud. from which it was distinguished solely on gross morphology. Moreover Humaria is the basis of the generally accepted family name Humariaceae and of late years a tradition seems to be developing among mycologists that such generic names, however invalid, must be conserved at all costs. Two new genera, Nothojafnea and Jafneadelphus, are proposed for Australian members of the tribe Lachneae with warted ascospores, not comfortably to be accommodated in either of Boudier's north temperate genera Tricharia, Trichophaea or 'Lachnea' (= Mycolachnea). Again it is worth noting that Jafneadelphusferrugineus (Phill.) Rifai from Victoria and Tasmania is only critically distinct from J. argentinus Rifai of Tierra del Fuego. This is not an exclusively south temperate genus, however, for there is a subspecies of J.ferrugineus in Japan.

In Humariaceae: Ciliarieae two new monotypic genera Geneosperma and Rhizoblepharia, the former extralimital, are proposed on ascospore characters and Coprobia Boud. is transferred to the tribe, in spite of its hairless apothecia, because its double-walled ascospores closely resemble those of Cheilymenia Boud. Several less precise correlated characters suggest that this is a natural relationship though the new position of the genus may make it less easy to key out on easily recognizable morphological features. The same principle of attaching more significance to ascospore structure than to the mere presence or absence of hairs leads to Anthracobia, Melastiza and Leucoscypha being transferred from Ciliarieae to Aleurieae. Le Gal's fusion of Leucoscypha Boud. with Neottiella (Cook.) Sacc. is upheld but it is pointed out that the former name has priority. A new genus Inermisia is proposed to accommodate Pezizafusispora Berk., commonly referred to Octospora S. F. Gray (= Humaria auct. non Fuckel = Humarina Seaver). This is one of those common British and north temperate species with bipolar distribution whose oldest name proves to be based on a south temperate type, in this case from Tasmania. In Pulvinula Boud. attention is drawn to the shape of the ascus base as a character separating otherwise similar species in a genus where ascospore characters are less helpful than usual.

'The family Pezizaceae is characterized chiefly by the positive iodine reaction of its asci' and the reader is not warned that occasional collections may be encountered in which it is difficult or impossible to demonstrate this. Because of the iodine reaction lodophanus Korf and the extralimital Boudiera Cooke are referred here instead of to Ascobolaceae where they were formerly placed because of the shape of the asci. Separation of Plicaria Fuckel with globose ascospores from Peziza St. Amans with elliptical ascospores is upheld because of a number of significant though less precise correlated characters. British and European mycologists should note that the familiar P. leiocarpa (Curr.) Rehm is another species to be renamed in favour of an earlier synonym based on an Australasian type and becomes P. endocarpoides (Berk.)

38 KEW BULLETIN VOL. 25(I)

Rifai. The little known genus Sphaerosoma Klotzsch possibly also belongs in Pezizaceae but the Australian S. trispora McLennan & Cookson is excluded as a species of uncertain position, possibly belonging to Svrcekia Kubiaka.

The Australian Ascobolaceae are listed and their ascospores figured but are not described in detail because of their thorough treatment in van Brumm- elen's recent monograph. Lasiobolus Sacc. is referred to Thelebolaceae and Pyronema Carus to the monotypic family Pyronemataceae with a comment that its affinities may be found to be with Humariaceae.

The book is illustrated with numerous accurate and beautiful line-drawings of ascospores, hymenial characters and excipular structure. That an un- usually large number of misprints occur throughout the text-for example three on page 226 alone-is perhaps to be attributed to the difficulties inherent in typesetting and publishing in a foreign tongue and cannot seriously impair the usefulness of the work.

R. W. G. DENNIS

Studies of variation.-This book* is a collection of reprints aiming to give the student in a readily accessible form an illustration of the problems investigated by plant systematists and the variety of techniques used in investigating them. Thirty papers are photographically reproduced, each retaining its original format and typography (and errors!), exemplifying studies, on levels ranging from the family to the population, in anatomy, morphology, embryology, cytology, genetics, biochemistry and genecology. Reproduction is good, even half-tones can mostly still be considered of satisfactory quality, and as a paper-back the book is not unreasonably priced. It is, however, far too long and too indigestible to be used by the student as anything but an occasional reference text, and will not therefore be bought by him. It will thus depend upon those who teach to bring notice of it to the student. Moreover, unlike the original journals themselves it will not be cited when the papers it contains are referred to. There is doubt, therefore, if it will in practice prove more 'readily accessible' to the student than the originals. Yet it could have had the great advantage of providing a medium for informed comment on the papers themselves. Unfortunately this oppor- tunity has been largely neglected. True, the compiler gives a short general introduction, short introductions to each of the four sections into which the book is divided, and a short list of important and useful references at the end, but by no means enough guidance is given to the user on the interpre- tation of the papers, their significance, points of interest they exemplify, their

shortcomings and their merits. Finally, a large part of the book is not con- cerned with systematics at all. Although some of the authors indeed do apply their results to systematics, many of the included papers are merely studies of variation and its causes and are not concerned with the clarification of

systematic problems. The title of this collection is therefore rather misleading. The essence of the systematist is that he is a consumer of data, not a producer thereof, yet here all the emphasis is on his secondary r61le as fact-finder, and his transcendental, far more important synthetic r61le is largely ignored. In fact, of the methodology of systematics itself there is precious little. Even

* Papers on Plant Systematics. Selected by Robert Ornduff. Pp. x + 429, numerous illustrations reproduced from the originals. Boston, U.S.A.: Little, Brown & Co., 1967. Price $6.oo.