BARKER'S account of the morphology and development of Monascus in the early part of I903,' as will be remembered, was shortly afterward questioned in a contradictory paper by IKENO.2 IKENO gave, in fact, a diametrically opposite interpretation of certain of the more important phenomena connected with the spore formation in this fungus, and even went so far as to assert positively that BARKER'S "Samsu " fungus did not belong to the genus Monascus. If BARKER is right, then Monascus shows close resemblances to other Ascomycetes; if, on the other hand, IKENO'S views are correct, the fungus is an aberrant form. The main points of difference between these opposed views may be concisely stated as follows. BARKER maintains that sexual reproduction results in the formation of ascogenous hyphae. The ascogonium consists, according to him, of an elongated penultimate cell; while the original terminal cell, which is pushed over to one side by the growth of the enlarging ascogonium, constitutes an antheridial branch. Fusion takes place between the two, the elongated tip of the female cell functioning in this act as a kind of trichogyne. After fusion, this tip portion is cut off by a septum and its protoplasmic contents, as well as that of the antheridial branch, finally become disorganized and eventually disappear. It is the cut off penultimate cell of the ascogonial branch, called by BARKER the "central cell," which still further develops and produces the ascogenous hyphae. This central cell becomes enormously swollen and is invested at maturity almost completely by a mass of closely clasping sterile hyphae. During its enlargement and development it affords protection and nutriment to the growing ascogenous hyphae. The latter