Masters Theses

Date of Award

3-1951

Degree Type

Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Science

Major

Botany

Major Professor

Russell B. Stevens

Committee Members

A.J. Sharp & Lowell Bailey

Abstract

Myxomycetes, with their curious combination of plant-like and animal-like characteristics, have intrigued biologists for over two centuries. Micheli in 1729 described several forms so accurately that his genera, and in some cases species, still can be recognized. Linnaeus, though contributing nothing himself, was able to include descriptions of seven species in his Species Plantarum. Micheli and Fries, among early biologists, recognized and commented on the plasmodial stage. They believed, as had their predecessors, that the Myxomycetes belong in the Gasteromycetes. Schrader in 1797 was one of the first to dissent from this view. However, final proof of the differences between Myxomycetes and Gastromycetes was provided by De Bary.

Modern understanding of this group began with De Bary (1854) who noted that the spores of Trichia rubuginosa, on germination, gave rise to flagellated swarm-cells and not the expected mycelial tube. De Bary's monograph (1864), and Cienkowski's studies in 1863 on plasmodia, established the generalized life-cycle of slime molds.

The taxonomic position of Myxomycetes long has been a subject of debate. Some consider slime molds as protozoa and exclude them from the Plant Kingdom, (Bessey, 1950). De Bary referred to them at first as being among the lowest animals, but later he concluded that the question whether they were plants or animals was of no consequence. Schroter (1899) considered that they are plants belonging to the phylum Myxothallophta. Recently Martin (1932) has classified slime molds as a class of true fungi coordinate in rank with the Phycomycetes, Ascomycetes, and Basidiomycetes.

Download
Files over 3MB may be slow to open. For best results, right-click and select "save as..."

Included in

Botany Commons

Share

COinS