nmm sP

More documents

Recommendations

Info

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

$~\\~SAnfF~~~ ,$

122 THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI KNIBP, H. (1921). Uber Vrocystis anemones (Pers.) Wint.—Z. Bot., xiii, pp. 289-311. (1926). tJber Artkreuzungen bei Brandpilzen.—Z. Pilzk. (NiS.), v, pp. 217-47. (1928). Die Sexualitdt derniederen Pflanzen. 544 pp. | KoBHiBB, B. (1935). Seed treatments for the control of certain diseases of wheat, oats and barley.—Bull. III. agric. Exp. Sta. 420, pp. 499-575. . KoLK, L. A. (1930). Relation of host pathogen in the oat srmitJUstilago avenae.—Bull. Torrey bot. CI., Ivii, pp. 443-507. ' (1943). Germination of grass smuts.—Amer. J. Bot., xxx, pp.1317-30. KoBNFBU), A. (1937). Bekampfung des Maisbeutenbrandes auf biologisoher Gmndlage.—. Z. PflKranlch., xlvii, pp. 277-97. KosTOFF, D. (1938). Triticum timococcum, the most immune wheat experimentally produced.—Chron. bot., iv, pp. 213-14. KotTBSANOFF, A. L. (1926). On the effect of Ustilago tritici on the respiration and transpiration of wheat.—Morbi Plantarum, xv, pp. 57-71. KEBITIOW, K. W. (1943 a). Ustilago striaeformis, i. Germination of chlamydospores and cultvire of forma agrostidis on artificial media.—Phytopathology, xxxiii, pp. 707-12. (1943 b). Ustilago striaeformis. ii. Temperature as a factor influencing development of smutted plants of Poa pratensis L. and germination of fresh chlamydospores.—Phytopathology, xxxiii, pp. 1055-63. —•—• (1945). Ustilago striaeformis. iii. A further study of factors that influence afterripening of chlamydospores from Poa pratensis.—Phytopathology, xxxv, pp. 152-7. —•—• & MYBBS, W. M. (1944). Prevalence and distribution of stripe srhut of Poa pratensis in some pastures of Pennsylvania.—Phytopathology, xxxiv, pp. 411-15. KiJHif, J. (1858). Die Krankheiten der Kulturgewachse, ihre Vrsaohen und ihre Verhiitung. 312 pp. Berlin. (1877). Ustilago grandis Fries.—Hedwigia, xvi, j>. 125. (1883). Paipalopsis irmischiae, ein neuer Pilzparasit unseres Florengebietes.—Hedvngia, xxii, pp. 30-1. (1892). tJber die Entwicklungsgeschichte des Primelbrandes.—Ber. naturf. Ges. Halle, pp. 109-15. LANDEN , E. W. (1939). The spectral sensitivity of spores and sporidia of Ustilago zeae to mono - chromatic ultraviolet light.—J. cell. comp. Physiol, xiv, pp. 217-26 {R.A.M., xix, p. 84). LAKG, W, (1909). Die Bliiteninfektion beim Weizenflugbrand.—Zbl. Baht., Abt. 2, xxv, pp. 86-101. (1912). Zum Parasitismus der Brandpilze.—Jber. Ver. angew. Bot., x, pp. 172-80. (1917 a). tJber die Beeii"iflussung der Wirtpflanze duroh Tilletia'tritici.—Z. PflKrankh., xxvii, pp. 80-99. (1917 b). Zur Ansteokvmg der Gerste durch Ustilago nuda.—Ber. dtsch. bot. Ges., xxxv, pp. 4-20. LANGE DE LA CAMP, MARIA (1936). Gewinnung und Kultur der Haplonten von Ustilago tritici.—Phytopath. Z., ix, pp. 455-77. (1940). Bluteninfektionen mit Myzel von Ustilago tritici.—Z. PflKranlch., i, pp. 142-80. LABOSE, E., & VANDEEWAIJLE, R. (1937). Quelques resultats d'infection artificielle d'Ustilago ntida tritici Schaff. sur le froment.—Bull. Inst, agron. Oembloux, vi, pp. 81-7. (1939). Nouvelles reoherches sur le Charbon du Froment.—Bull. Inst, agron. Gembloux, viii, pp. 205-14. LASKABIS, T. (1939). The occurrence of lysis in certain crosses of Sphacelotheca sorghi.— Abs. in Phytopathology, xxix, p. 14. (1941). A heritable lysis in germinating chlamydospores of Sphacelotheca sorghi.— Phytopathology, xxxi, pp. 254^63. LASSEB, E. (1938). Der Binfluss von Licht und Jarowisation auf den BefaU von Weizen, Hafer und Gerste durch Tilletia, Ustilago und Helminthosporium.—Kiihn-Arch., xUv, pp. 161-210. LEACH, J. G., LOWTHEE, C. V., & RYAN, MABY A. (1946). Stripe smut {Ustilago striaeformis), in relation to blue grass improvement.-—Phytopathology, xxxvi, pp. 57-72. • & RYAN^, M. A. (1946). The cytology of Ustilago striiformis forma poae-pratensis in artificial culture.—Phytopathology, xxxvi, pp. 876-86. LBITZKE, B. (1937). Infektionsversuche mit Haferflugbrand-Sporen-Gemischen.—Phytopath. Z., X, pp. 504-53. LBUKEL, R. W. (1936). Factors influencing infection of barley by loose smut.—Phytopathology, xxvi, pp. 630-42. (1948). Recent developments in seed treatment.—Bot. Rev., xiv, pp. 235-9. , STANTON, T. R., & STEVIINS, H. (1938). Comparison of different methods of inoculating oat seed with smut.—J. Amer. Soc. Agron., xxx, pp. 878-82.
REFEBENCES 123 LiMBOtruN, E. J. (1931). Flag smut of wheat variety resistance tests 1926-30.—J. Dep. Agric. W. Aust., Ser. 2, viii, pp. 214r-17. LING, LBB (1940 a). Factors affecting spore germination and growth of Urocystis occulta in culture.—Phytopathology, xxx, pp. 579-91. (1940 b). The histology of infection of susceptible and resistant selfed lines of rye by the rye smut fungus, Urocystis occulta.—Phytopathology, xxx, pp. 926-35. • • (1941). Factors affecting infection in rye smut and subsequent development of the fungus in the host.—Phytopathology, xxxi, pp. 617-33. LINN, M. B., & NEWHALL, A. G. (1948). Comparison of two methods of pelleting onion seed in the control of smut.—Phytopathology, xxxviii, pp. 218—21. LiEO, J. J. (1922). 'Gher die Gattung Tuburcinia Fries.—Ann. Univ. Fenn. Aboensis, Ser. A, i, pp. 1-153. (1924). Die Ustilagineen Finnlands, i. 636 pp. • (1938). Die Ustilagineen Finnlands, ii. 720 pp. LIVINGSTON, J. E. (1942). The inheritance of resistance to Ustilago nuda.—Phytopathology, xxxii, pp. 451-66. ;• & KNEEN, ERIC (1944). A rag-doll technique for the inoculation of wheat with bunt (Tilletia levis).—Phytopathology, xxxiv, pp. 124^8. LoBiK, V. 1. (1930). On the occurrence of bimt, Tilletia foetens (Berk, et Curt.) Trel. on rye (Secale cereale).—Bull. N. Caucasian PI. Prot. Sta. Eostoff-on-Don, vi-vii, pp. 165-6. & DAHLSTBEM, A. F. (1936). Improvement of methods for the germination of wheat bunt spores in the laboratory.—Summ. sci. Res. Wk Inst. PI. Prot. Leningr., 1935, 177-8. LowTHEB, C. V. (1948). Low temperature as a factor in the germination of dwarf bunt chlamydospores.—Phytopathology, xxxviii, pp. 309-10. LuTHBA, J. C. (1941). Solar treatment of wheat loose smut.—Indian Fmg, ii, pp. 416-18. & SATTAE, A. (1943). Some experiments on the control of loose smut, Ustilago tritici (Pers.) Jens, of wheat.—Indian J. agric. Sci., iv, pp. 177-99. LuTMANS, B. F. (1910). Some contributions to the life-history and cytology of the smuts.—• Trans. Wis. Acad. Sci., xvi, pp. 1191-1244. MADDOX, F. (1895). Experiments at Eastfield, Dept. Agric., Tasmania. • (1897). Notes and results on agricultural experiments carried on under the auspices of the Council of Agriculture of Tasmania at Eastfield, Nevmham, Launceston, Tasmania. MAGNUS, P. (1875). Mycologisohe Mittheilungen.—Hedungia, xiv, pp. 17-21. (1888). Ueber einige Arten der Gattung Schinzia Naeg.—Ber. dtsch. bot. Oes., vi, pp. 100-4. MAIRB, R. (1900). Quelques Uredinees et TJstilaginees nouvelles ou peu connues.—Bidl. Soc. mycol. Fr., xvi, pp. 65-72. MABOHEL, E., & STEENON, F. (1925). Sur les rapports existant entre les formes conidiennes du type Ramularia et le genre Entylonta.—Bull. Soc. Bot. Belg., Ivii (N.S. 7), pp. 51-5. MABCHIONATTO, J. B. (1930). Sobre algunos hongos parasites de las gramineas toxicos para el ganado.^—Bol. Minist. Agric., Buenos Aires, xxix, pp. 457-62. MAEKOVA, M. F. (1927). Races biologiques de VUrocystis anemones W.—Morbi Plantarum, xvi, pp. 135-40. [French summary.] ^ • MAEQTJAND, C. U. B. (1922). Varieties of oats in cultivation.—Bull. Welsh Plant Breed. Sta., Ser. C, ii, pp. 2-44. MARTIN, H. (1940). The scientific principles of plant protection. 385 pp., London. MAETIN, J. FosTEE (1936). Reaction of wheat varieties to composites of races of bunt occurring in the Pacific North West.—J. Amer. Soc. Agron., xxviii, pp. 672-81. MAETIN, W. J., & KEENKAMP, M. F. (1941). Variation in cultures of certain grass smuts.— Phytopathology, xxxi, pp. 761-3. (1943). A study of the genetics of Sorosporium syntherismae and Sphacelotheca panicimiliacei.—Phytopathology, xxxiii, pp. 569-85. MASON, F. A. (1928). Ustilago ornithogali (Schmidt et Kze.) Magnus, newly recorded in Britam.—Naturalist, 1928, pp. 169-70. MASSBE, G. (1899). A revision of the genus Tilletia.—Kev> Bull., 1899, pp. 141-59. MASSEE, I. (1914). Observations on the life-history of Ustilago vaillantii Tul.—J. econ. Biol., ix, pp. 9-14. MAYEEHOFFEE, E., & DEAGISIC, B. (1938). Weiterer Berioht iiber kindliche Maisbrandvergiftungen (Ustilaginismus).—Z. Kinderheilk., lix, pp. 543-52. MoAxpiNB, D. (1910). The smuts of AuMralia, their structure, life-history, treatment, and classification. 285 pp., Melbourne.
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 and 120: REFERENCES 117 ^ DniON WESTON, W. A
Page 121 and 122: REFERENCES 119 GRIFFITHS, MAEIOK A.
Page 123: REFERENCES 121 HtjTTiG, W. (1933).
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?