Heinrich Anton de Bary     (1831 - 1888)

That fungi can assume such curiously different forms was so unexpected and so startling, that, as the evidence accumulated, fact was not sufficient for some, and fancy reigned in its stead. What Tulasne was able to prove for comparatively large fungi, where it was possible to be certain of genetic connections, was assumed to occur in microscopic forms where reliance had to be placed on the imperfect methods of cultivation then available. Strange stories, or rather stories that now seem strange, had been told of developing yeast, and of moulds, before Tulasne's investigations, but from 1857 to 1969, there was an avalanche of phantasy which threatened to undermine the very foundations of mycology. Mushrooms and Toadstools p. 145

First important book on Slime Molds. de Bary knew from the very beginning that they were big amoebas, not fungi.

in four sections:
1. Development of Protomyces and Physoderma
2. Exoascus pruni and the pocket disease of plum trees
3. On the morphology of the Phalloids
4. Syzygites megalocarpus

This is the paper that followed the life-cycle of P. graminis (a rust fungus that is an important pathogen of just about any Western grain you can think of) and showed that A. berberidis is just a life-stage of P. graminis.
According to Dörfelt, the volume was published in 1866, but bears the date 1865, so that's where you'll find it in the library.

This became a standard textbook, especially in its second edition, and in its English translation

Uredinales, the sequel. Apparently the first set of Researches was very popular.
Like its prequel, it actually bears the date (1866) of the year before it was actually published

This is the work for which he coined the term "symbiosis", originally given as a lecture for a convention of German naturalists. Actually, the concept of symbiosis was already known: de Bary quotes the parasitologist Van Beneden as using the term "mutualism" in a similar sense (so mutualism actually pre-dates symbiosis!). And parasitism is actually a major part of de Bary's concept: his favorite examples are tapeworms, the potato blight, and the fungal disease of silkworms.

Is this a citational glitch, or is De Bary indulging in simultaneous publication?

This is the second edition of the 1866 textbook. Times have changed; the lichens are out, the bacteria are in, and he uses a term for the slime molds that makes it clear that he doesn't consider them fungi. This edition also emphasizes the biology of the organisms it discusses. That may be the reason for the bacteria/lichen switch: nobody really knew much back then about the biological processes of lichens.
Another sign of the changing times: the Introduction tells us how happy it is that he no longer feels obliged to include the chapter refuting spontaneous generation (and thus he can use the room for more productive stuff).
In this book, he also says that the slime molds are really just big amoebas, and he supports the contemporary move to place them (the amoebas) outside the animal and vegetable kingdoms (the first time such a thing had been done). (p. 442-444) He also follows (helps create?) modern understanding when he says that the bacteria have no relationship whatsoever to the fungi, and that furthermore, the bacteria with chlorophyll (our "cyanobacteria") have no essential differences from those with no chlorophyll. (p. 474-475) On the other hand, he clearly considers fungi to be plants, and goes so far as to offer an extended (p.119-126) series of analogies between the alternation of generations in ferns and the alternation of generations in rusts, as "proof" that there is a close biological affinity between the two taxa. Thus, we get fungi as "plants" for another 70-80 years...

The English edition of his famous textbook.

plus 112 pages of index

Glossary

Mushrooms

People

Newsletter

Events