nmm sP

More documents

Recommendations

Info

$WI LD R LATI\IES CROP PLANTS IN INDIA$

$~\\~SAnfF~~~ ,$

118 THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI FISCHER, G. W., & HIESCHHOBN, E. (1945 a). A critical study of some species of VsHlago causing stem smut on various grasses.—Mycologia, xxxvii, pp. 236-66. (1945 b). The Ustilaginales or 'Smuts' of Washington.—W^sh. agr. Exp. Sta. Bull. 459, 83 pp. —— & HoLTON, C. S. (1941). Inheritance of sorus characters in hybrids between Vstilago avenae and U. perennans.—Mycologia, xxxiii, pp. 565-67. j (1943). Studies of the susceptibility of forage grasses to cereal smut fungi, iv. Cross inoculation experiments with Urocystis tritici, U. occulta, and! U. agropyri.—Phytopathology, xxxiii, pp. 910-21. FISCHER VON WAIDHEIM, A. (1867). Sur la structure des spores des Ustilaginees.—Bull. Soc. Nat. Moscou, xl, pp. 242. (1869). Beitrage zur Biologie vmd Entwicklungsgeschichte der Ustilagineen.—Jb.wiss. Bat., vii, pp. 61-145. FiTTSCHBN, H. H. (1939). Weitere Beitrage ztir Ziichtimg steinbrand-resistenter Weizenaorten.—Phytopath. Z., xii, pp. 169-218. FLEROTT, B. K. (1923). Contribution to the cytology of Ustilago avenae Pers. based on cultures m vitro [translated title].—Trans, mycol. phytopath. Sect. Russian hot. Soc, i. Trans. Moscow Branch, pp. 23-36. FLOR, H. H. (1932 a). HeterothaUism and hybridization in Tilletia tritici and T. levis.— J. agric. Res., xliv, pp. 49—59. (1932 b). The production of bunt chlamydospores in the vegetative tissue of the wheat plant.—Phytopathology, xxii, pp. 661-4. (1933). Studies on the physiologic specialization in Tilletia tritici and T. levis in the Pacific Northwest.—J. agric. Res., xlvii, pp. 193-213. FREEMAK, E. M., & JOHNSON, E. C. (1909). The loose smuts of barley and wheat.—Bull. U.S. Bur. PL Ind. 152, 48 pp. GAGE, G. R. (1927). Studies of the life history of Ustilago avenae (Pers.) Jens, and of Ustilago levis (Kell. & Swing.) Magn.—Mem. Cornell agric. Exper. Sta., 109, 33 pp. GAINES, E. F. (1920). The inheritance of resistance to bunt in stinking smut of wheat.—• J. Amer. Soc. Agron,, xii, pp. 124^32. (1925 a). Resistance to covered smut in varieties and hybrids of oats.—J. Amer. Soc. Agron., xvii, pp. 775-89. (1925 b). The ioheritance of disease resistance in wheat and oats.—Phytopathology, XV, pp. 341-9. & SINGLETON, H. P, (1926). Genetics of Marquis and Turkey wheat in respect to bunt resistance, winter habit and awnlessness.—J. agric. Res., xxxii, pp. 165—81. (1928). New physiological forms of Tilletia levis and T. tritici.—Phytopathology, xviii, pp. 579-88. —•—• & SMITH, W. K. (1933). Reaction of varieties and hybrids of wheat to physiologic forms of bunt.-^J. Amer. Soc. Agron., xxv, pp. 273-84. & STEVENSON, F. J. (1922). Rye-wheat and wheat-rye hybrids.—J. Heredity, xiii, pp. 81-90. (1923). Occurrence of bunt in rye.—Phytopathology, xiii, pp. 210-15. GABBEE, R. J., GiDDiNG, N. J., & HOOVER, M. M. (1929). Breeding for disease resistance with particular reference to the smut of oats.'—Scient. Agric., ix, pp. 103-15. GASSNEB, G. (1923). Biologische Grundlagen der Priifung von Beizmitteln zur Steinbrandbekampfung.—Arb. biol. (Anst.-Reichsanst.), Berl., xi, pp. 339-72. (1938). Untersuchungen iiber Keimgeschwindigkeit und Infektionsvermogen verschiedener Stamme von Tilletia foetens und T. tritici.—Phytopath. Z., xi, pp. 489-516. GAtTDiNBAu, M. (1932). Sur quelques facteura de I'infection du ble par la carie, Tilletia tritici (Bjerk.) Wint.—Ann. Epiphyt., xviii, pp. 340-55. GIBES, J. G., BAYLIS, G. T. S., & BLACKMORE, L. (1941). Experiments in control of onion smut {Urocystis cepulae Frost).^—N.Z. J. Sci. Tech., A, xxii, pp. 162-6. GOLDSCHMIDT, V. (1928). Vererbungsversuche mit den biologischen Arten' des Antherenbrandes (Ustilago violacea Pers.). Bin Beitrag zur Frage der parasitaren Spezialisienxng. —Bot. Ztg, xxi, pp. 1-90. GORDON, H. D. (1938). Note on a rare beetle, Cartodera filum Aube, eating fungus spores.— Trans. Brit, mycol. Soc, xxi, pp. 193-7. GoEENZ, A. M., & WAIKBE, J. C. (1947). Influence of methocel sticker on the efiectiveness of arasan for onion smut control.—Phytopathology, xxxvii, p. 7. GEBBN, D. E. (1932). Smut of dahlias caused by Entyloma dahliae (Sydow).—J. R. hort. Soc, Ivii, pp. 332-9. GRBVEL, F. K. (1930). Investigations on the occvu:rence of biological strains of the loose smut of wheat (Ustilago tritici).—Phytopath. Z., ii, pp. 209-34.
REFERENCES 119 GRIFFITHS, MAEIOK A. (1924). Experiaients with flag smut of wheat and the causal fungus Vrocystis tritici Kcke.—J. agric. Res., xxvii, pp. 425-49. (1928). Smut susceptibility of naturally resistant com when artificially inoculated.— J. agric. Bes., xxxvi, pp. 77-89. • & HuMPHBBY, H. B. (1929). Smuts and rusts produced in cereals by hypodermic injection of inoculum.—J. agric. Res., xxxviii, pp. 623-7. GROVE, W. B. (1937). British stem- and leaf-fungi {Coelomycetes), ii. 407 pp. GBiJss, J. (1902). Biologische Erscheinungen bei der Cultivierung von Vstilago maydis.— Ber. dtseh. bot. Oes., xx, pp. 212-20. GwYNKE-VA-UGHAii, H. C. I., & BABNBS, B. (1927). The structure and development of fungi. 384 pp. 'HAABBING, F. (1930). Eine Infektionsmethode fiir Haferflugbrand {Vstilago avenae, Jens.) und ihre Anwendung zu Beiz- und Immunitatsversucben im Laboratorium und Feld.— Bot. Arch., xxix, pp, 444-73. HAHNE, J. (1925). Untersuchungen iiber die Keimungsbedingungen von KHefio-sporen.— Kiihn-Arch., ix, pp. 157-263. HANNA, W. F. (1924). The dry needle method of making monosporous cultures of Hymenomycetes and other fungi.—Ann. Bot., Lond., xxxviii, pp. 791-5. (1928). A simple apparatus for isolating single spores.—Phytopathology, xviii, pp. 1017-21. (1929). Studies in the physiology and cytology of Vstilago zeae and Sorosporium reilianium.—Phytopathology, xix, pp. 415-42. (1932). The odor of bunt spores.—Phytopathology, xxii, pp. 978-9. • (1934). The physiology of the fungi causing btmt of wheat.—Proc. fifth Pacif. sci. Congr., pp. 3195-204. (1936). Efiect of vernalization on the incidence of loose smut in wheat.—Sci. Agric., xvi, pp. 404-7. (1937). Physiological forms of loose smut of wheat,—Oanad. J. Res., Sect. C, xv, pp. 141-53. (1938). The discharge of conidia in species of Entyloma.—Mycologia, xxx, pp. 526-36. & Popp, W. (1932). Physiologic forms of loose smut of wheat.—Abs. in Phytopathology, xxii, p. 11. , ViCKBEY, H. B., & PtJCHBB, G. W. (1932). The isolation of trimethylamine from spores of Tilletia levis, the stinking smut of wheat.—J, biol, Chem., xcvii, pp. 351-8. HANSING, E. D., & MBLCHEES, L. E. (1945). Further studies on the oocmrence and distribution of physiologic races of Tilletia foetida in Kansas.—Trans. Kans. Acad. Sci., xlviii, pp. 71-7. HBYNB, E. J., & MELCHEBS, L. E. (1945). Studies on smut resistant oats for Kansas.^— J. Amer. Soc. Agron., xxxvii, pp. 499-508. HAEPBB, R. A. (1899). Nuclear phenomena in certain stages in the development of the smuts.—Trans. Wis. Acad. Sci. Arts Lett., xii, pp. 475-98. HABBIS, L. H. (1939 a). Allergy to grain dusts and smuts.—J. Allergy, x, pp. 327-36. (1939 b). The nature of the grain dust antigen. Crossed reactions to grain dusts and smuts.—J. Allergy, x, pp. 433-42. HAYES, H. K., STAKMAN, E. C, GBIPFEB, F., & CHEISTENSEN, J. J. (1924). Reactions of seUed lines of maize to Vstilago zeae.—Phytopathology, xiv, pp. 268-79. HBALD, P. D. (1921). The relation of spore load to the per cent, of stinking smut appearing in the crop.—Phytopathology, xi, pp. 269-78. & BoYLK, L. W. (1923). Further notes on the relation of the spore load to the per cent. of stinking smut appearing in the crop.—Phytopathology, xiii, pp. 334r-7. & GAINES, E. F. (1930). The control of bunt or stinking smut of wheat.—Bull. Wash. agric. Exp. Sta., 241. HBCKE, L. (1904). Ein innerer Krankheitskeim des Flugbrandes im Getreidekorn.—Z. landw. VersWes. Ost., 59-67. (1907). Die Triebinfektion bei Brandpilzen.—Z. landw. VersWes. Ost., 572. (1926). DieAnsteckungvonBIattachselknospendurch Vstilagoviolacea{FeTa.)Fuck.— Fortschr. Landw., i, 150-1. HBEZBEEO, P. (1895). Vergleickende Vntersuchungen iiber landwirtschaftlich vnchtige Augbrandarten. Diss. Halle. (Beitrage zur Physiologie und Morphologic niederen Organismen.) 36 pp. HiBSCHHOKN, ELISA (1941 a). Algunos caracteres de las Tilletia spp. que producen les 'caries' del Trigo en la chacra experimental 'La Prevision'.—Bol. Chacra exp. 'La Previsidn', iii, pp. 105-9. (1941 b). Nota sobre ' Vstilago buUata\—Rev. argent. Agron., viii, pp. 160-4.
Page 1 and 2:
THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI ^ (USTILAGIN
Page 3:
FOREWORD THIS volume was started wh
Page 6 and 7:
6 PBEFACE We also acknowledge the b
Page 9 and 10:
INTRODUCTION THE smut fungi, which
Page 11 and 12:
INTRODUCTION H of bushels of wheat
Page 14 and 15:
FIG. 1. Vstilago avenae on Arrhenat
Page 16:
^^ THE BBITISH SMUT FUNGI Young hea
Page 19 and 20:
BIOLOGY 15 less than the normal, in
Page 21 and 22:
BIOLOGy 17 and united with it, fina
Page 23 and 24:
BIOLOGY 19 eermination in a collect
Page 25 and 26:
BIOLOGY 21 genus, and the manner of
Page 27 and 28:
BIOLOGY 23 species of Entyloma, and
Page 29 and 30:
3036^ BIOLOGY 25 in others. Dickins
Page 31 and 32:
CYTOLOGY THE discovery of nuclei in
Page 33 and 34:
GENETICS INCOMPATIBILITY KNIEP'S di
Page 35 and 36:
GENETICS • 31 direction of growth
Page 37 and 38:
GENETICS 35 when a few sporidia fro
Page 39 and 40:
GENETICS 37 lines retained their di
Page 41 and 42:
TECHNIQUE COLLECTION AND EXAMINATIO
Page 43 and 44:
TECHNIQUE 41 be undesirable. Weak a
Page 45 and 46:
TECHNIQUE 43 in one season (see p.
Page 47 and 48:
TECHNIQUE 45 barley with loose smut
Page 49 and 50:
TECHNIQUE 47 (1939), Holton & Heald
Page 51 and 52:
TECHNIQUE 49 Allen's, modification
Page 53 and 54:
CLASSIFICATION THE morphological ch
Page 55 and 56:
THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI MOST of the
Page 57 and 58:
FIG. 2. Spore geimination in Ustila
Page 59 and 60:
THE BRITISH SMUT FUJJGI 57 from one
Page 61 and 62:
THE BRITISH SMUT FUKGI 59 of exsert
Page 63 and 64:
THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 61 noticeabl
Page 65 and 66:
THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 63 Evidence
Page 67 and 68:
THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 65 winter in
Page 69 and 70: THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 67 Ustilago
Page 71 and 72: THE BRITISH SMUT FUlJGI 69 material
Page 73 and 74: THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 71 results o
Page 75 and 76: THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 73 TTstilago
Page 77 and 78: THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 75 Species i
Page 79 and 80: " TJSE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 77 Ustila
Page 81 and 82: THE BKITISH SMUT FUNGI 79 On Carex
Page 83 and 84: THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 81 Exsiccati
Page 85 and 86: THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 83 Tilletia
Page 87 and 88: THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 85 bunt ball
Page 89 and 90: THE BEITISH SMUT FUNGI 87 globose t
Page 91 and 92: THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 89 FIG. 13.
Page 93 and 94: FIG. 15. Spore geimination in Taboi
Page 95 and 96: FIG. 17. Spore germination in Urocy
Page 97 and 98: THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 95 separate
Page 99 and 100: THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 97 8ori in t
Page 101 and 102: THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 99 Urocystis
Page 103 and 104: 30390 THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 101 pr
Page 105 and 106: FIG. 20. Spore geimination in Entyl
Page 107 and 108: THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 105 Sori in
Page 109 and 110: On Ranunculus ficariae and B. scler
Page 111 and 112: THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 109 Infectio
Page 113 and 114: THE BKITISH SMUT FUNGI 111 [Sporidi
Page 115 and 116: THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI 113 Ustilago
Page 117 and 118: REFEEENCES 115 BBETT, M. A. (1940).
Page 119: REFERENCES 117 ^ DniON WESTON, W. A
Page 123 and 124: REFERENCES 121 HtjTTiG, W. (1933).
Page 125 and 126: REFEBENCES 123 LiMBOtruN, E. J. (19
Page 127 and 128: REFERENCES 125 NOBLE, E. J. (1934).
Page 129 and 130: REFERENCES 127 RoDENHiSEE, H. A., &
Page 131 and 132: BEFERENCES 129 STAKMAK, E. C, XCEEN
Page 133 and 134: EEFEEENCES 131 WAXTBE, J. M. (1934)
Page 135 and 136: INDEX to generic and specific names
Page 137 and 138: Muscari Ustilago vaillantii, 59 Myo
Page 139 and 140: Ustilago ficuum Reich., 113 —flps
Page 141 and 142: 2i}:y0 ANDHRA PRADESH AGRICULTURAL
show all

nmm sP

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?