nmm sP

More documents

Recommendations

Info

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

$~\\~SAnfF~~~ ,$

J30 THE BRITISH SMUT FUNGI THKBN, R. (1937). Gtewjimung und Kultur von monokaryotischem tmd dikaryotischem Myzel. Ein Beitrag zur Physiologie tind Genetik des Gerstenflugbrandes {Vstilago nuda (Jens) Kellerai. et Sw.).—Z. Bot., xxxi, pp. 337-91. j (1938). Kritische Versuohe zur Resistenzpriifungder GerstegegenFhighvaxid (Vstilago nuda (Jens.) KeUerm. et Sw.).—KiXhn. Arch., xliv, pp. 211-31.) (1941). t)^ber Zustandekommen und Erhaltung der Dikaryophase'von Vstilago nuda (Jensen) KeUerm. et Sw. und Vstilago iritici (Persoon) Jensen.—Z. J5oJ., xxxvi,pp. 449-98. TiEMANN, A. (1925). Untersuchungen iiber die Empfanglichkeit des Sommerweizens fiir Vstilago iritici und den Einfluss der ausseren Bedingungen dieser Krankheit.—Kilhn. Archiv, ix, p. 405. TiNGEY, D. C, & TOLLMAN, B. (1934). Inheritance of resistance to loose smut in certain wheat crosses.—J. agric. -Res., xlviii, pp. 631-55. TiSDALB, W. H. (1923). An effective method of inoculating barley with covered smut.—• Phytopathology, xiii, pp. 551-4. DUNCAN, G. H., & LEIGHTY, C. E. (1923). Flagsmut of wheat, with special reference to varietal resistance.—Bull. III. agric. Exp. Sta. 242, pp. 510-38. & JOHNSTON, C. O. (1926). A study of smut resistance in corn seedlings grown in the greenhouse.—J. agric, Mes., xxxii, pp. 649-68. & TAPKE, V. F. (1924). Infection of barley by Vstilago nuda through seed inoculation.—J. agric. Bes., xxix, pp. 263-84. TxjLASNE, L. R. (1854). Second Memoire sxir les Uredinees et les Ustilaginees.—Ann. Sci. nat., Ser. 4, ii, pp. 77-196. (1866). Super Priesiano Taphrinarum genere et Acalyptospora Mazeriana, accedente Ustilaginis marinae Dtir. abrumbratione.—Ann. Sci'. nat., Ser. 5, v, pp. 122-36. & TxJLASNE, C. (1847). Memoire sur les Ustilaginees comparees aux Uredinees.—Ann. Sci. nat., Ser. 3, vii, pp. 12-127. TYLER, L. J. (1938). Variation in Sphacelotheca sorghi (Link) Clinton.—Tech. Bull. Minn. agric. Exp. Sta. 133. —— & SHUMWAY, C. P. (1935). Hybridization between Sphacelotheca sorghi and Sorosporium reilianum.—Phytopathology, xxv, pp. 375-6. UTTEK, L. G. (1938). Culture and inoculation studies on races of the loose and covered smuts of oats.—Amer. J, Bot., xxv, pp. 198-210. VAHBEDUDDIN, SYED (1936a). HyhridizB.tionhetweenSphacelothecacruentaan.dSorosporium reilianum.—Phytopathology, xxvi, p. 111. •—•— (1936 b). Observations and experiments on diseases of plants in Hyderabad State, India.—Proc. Minn. Acad. Sci. iv, pp. 47-50. VANDBBWAUiB, R. (1932). A contribution to the study of the smut diseases of barley.—• Bull. Inst, agron. Gemhloux, i, pp. 291-322. —— (1942). Note sur la biologie d'Vstilago nuda tritici Schaf.—Bull. Inst, agron. Oembloux, xi, pp. 103-13. (1945). Une methode rapide d'inoculation florale du froment et de I'orge par Vstilago nuda (Jens.) et V. nuda tritici (Schaf.).—Parasitica, i, pp. 58-63. VANTEEPOOL, T. C. (1932). Cultural and inoculation methods with Tilletia spp.—Science, N.S., Ixxv, pp. 22-3. VASEY, H. E. (1918). Millet smuts and their control.—Bull. Colo, agric. Exp. Sta. 242, 22 pp. VATJGHAN, E. K. (1938). A race of Vstilago avenae capable of infecting Black Mesdag Oats.— Phytopathology, xxviii, pp. 660-1. VAVILOV, N. (1918). Immunity of plants to infectious diseases. Moscow. VBBWOEKD, L. (1929). The biology, parasitism and control of Vrocystis tritici Koern., the causal organism of flag smut in wheat (Triticum spp.) recording the occurrence of Vrocystis occulta (Walh.) Rab., in South Africa as the cause of 'stem smut' in rye.— Sci. Bull. S. Afr. Dep. Agric. 76, 59 pp. ViENNOT-BoTCBQiN, G. (1937). Les deformations parasitaires provoquees par les Vstilaginees. 189 pp. Paris. VoLKAET, A. (1939), Der Roggensteinbrand (Tilletia secalis (Corda) Kcke.).—Ber. Schweiz. bot. Oes., xlix, pp. 495-503. WAIKEB, D. (1948). Tilletia (?) sphagni Nawaschin: a new British record.—Naturalist, 194:8, p. 153. WALKER, J. C, JONES, H. A., & CLARKE, A. E. (1944). Smut resistance in an Allium species hybrid.—J. agric. Res., Ixix, pp. 1-8. & JONES, L. R. (1921). Relation of soil temperature and other factors to onion smut infection.—J. agric. Res., xxii, pp. 235-62. & WELMAN, F. L. (1926). Relation of temperature to spore germination and growth of Vrocystis cepulae.—J. agric. Res., xxxii, pp. 133-46.
EEFEEENCES 131 WAXTBE, J. M. (1934). The mode of entrance of Ustilago zeae into corn.—Phytopathology, xxiv, pp. 1012-20. WANG, C. S. (1936). Viability and longevity of chlamydospores of Ustilago crameri.— Phytopathology, xxvi, pp. 1086-7. (1938). The formation of chlamydospores of Ustilago cratneri'K.cke. on artificial media.— Phytopathology, xxviii, pp. 860-1. (1943). Studies on cj^ology of Ustilago crameri.'—Phytopathology, xxxiii, pp. 1122-33. WANG, MLLB D. T. (1932). Observations eytologiques sur VUstilago hordei (Pers.) Kell. et Sw.—C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris, cxcv, pp. 1041-4. (1934). Contribution a I'etude des TJstilaginees (cytologie du parasite et pathologie de la cellule bote).—Botaniste, Ser. xxvi, pp. 540-670. WAKD, H. MAESHAIL (1887). On the structure and life-history of Entyloma ranunculi (Bonorden).^—Philos. Trans, roy. Soc, B., clxxviii, pp. 173-85. WEBER, C. (1884). tTber den Pilz der Wiirzelanschwellungen von Juncus bufonius.—Bot. Z., xlii, pp. 369-79. WELSH, J. N. (1932). The effect of smut on rust development and plant vigour in oats.— Sci. Agric, xiii, pp. 154-64. WERTH, E. (1913). Zur Biologie des Antherenbrandes.—Arb. biol. Anst. Land- u. Forstw., viii, pp. 427-50. WESTERN, J. H. (1936 a). Some aspects of biological specialization'on the oat smut fungi. (Thesis submitted to University of Wales in fulfilment of requirements for Ph.D.) (1936 b). The biology of oat smuts, iv. The invasion of some susceptible and resistant oat varieties, including Markton, by selected biological species of smut (Ustilago avenae (Pers.) Jens, and (Ustilago kolleri (Wille)).—Ann. appl. Biol., xxiii, pp. 245-63. , (1937). Sexual fusion in Ustilago avenae under natural conditions.—Phytopathology, xxvii, pp. 547-53. WHITE, H. L. (1936). Anther smut of perpetual flowering carnations.—Gdnrs' Ohron., c, p. 254. WILKINSON, R. E., & KENT, G. C. (1945). Some factors determining the infection of com by Ustilago zeae (Beckm.) linger.—Iowa St. Coll. J. Sci., xix, pp. 401-13. WILSON, M. (1915). Life-history and cytology of Tuburcinia primulicola.—Bep. Brit. Ass., pp. 730-1. WINTER, G. (1876). Einige Notizen iiber die Familien der Ustilagineen.—Flora, x and xi, pp. 145-52, 161-72. (1881). Die Pilze Deutschlands, Oesterreichs und der Sehweiz (Rabenhorst, Kryptogamen).—Flora von Deutschland, Oesterreich und der Sehweiz., 2nd ed., i, pp. 79-131. Leipzig. WiSMBR, C.A. (1934). Inheritance of resistance of bimt and leaf rust in the wheat cross, Oro X Temnarq.—Phytopathology, xxiv, pp. 762-79. WiTTicH, F. W., & STAKMAN, E. C. (1937). Case of respiratory allergy due to inhalation of grain smuts.—J. Allergy, viii, pp. 189-93. WOLF, R. (1873). Beitrag zur Kenntniss der Ustilagineen. Der Roggenstengelbrand, Urocystis occulta Rabh.—Bot. Ztg, xxxi, pp. 657-61, 673-7, 689-95. (1874 a). Der Brand des Oetreides, seine Ursachen und seine Verhiitung. Halle. (1874 b). Notiz.—Bot. Ztg, xxxii, pp. 814^16. WOODWARD, R. W., & TINGBY, D. C. (1941). Inoculation experiments with covered smut of barley.—J. Amer. Soc. Agron., xxxiii, pp. 633-42. WOOLMAN, H. M. (1930). Infection phenomena and host reactions caused by Tilletia tritici in susceptible and nonsusceptible varieties of wheat.—Phytopathology, xx, pp. 637-52. & HuMPHBEY, H. B. (1924). Summary of' literature on bunt, or stinking smut, of wheat.—Bull. U.S. Dep. Agric, 1210, 44 pp. WoEONiN, M. (1882). Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Ustilagineen. Abdruck Abhandl. Senckenb. naturf. Ges., xii, pp. 559-91. YATZYNINA, CLAUDINE N. (1927). Dry disinfection of millet seed.—La Defense des Plantes, Leningr., iv, pp. 154^8. YEN, W. Y. (1937). Becherches systematiques, biologiques et eytologiques sur les UstUaginees de Chine. Thfeses presentees a la Faculte des Sciences de I'Universit^ de Paris, A, No. 341, No. d'ordre 365. (1938). Germination des spores de quelques Ustilaginees.—Bull. Soc. mycol. Fr., liii, pp. 339-45. YOUNG, P. A. (1935). A new variety of Tilletia tritici in Montana.—Abs. in Phytopathology, XXV, p. 40. Yu, T.F., HWANG, L., & TSIANG, C.T. (1936). Varietal resistance and susceptibility of wheats to flag smut (Urocystis tritici Koem.). iii. Physiologic specialization in Urocystis tritici Koem.—Bull. chin. bot. Soc, ii, pp. 111-13.
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 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: BEFERENCES 129 STAKMAK, E. C, XCEEN
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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?