The announcement[8] by Schwendener[9] of the dual hypothesis solved the
problem for most students, though the relation between the two symbionts
is still a subject of controversy. The explanation given by Schwendener,
and still held by some[10], that lichens were merely fungi parasitic on
algae, was indeed a very inadequate conception of the lichen plant, and
it was hotly contested by various lichenologists. Lauder Lindsay[11]
dismissed the theory as “merely the most recent instance of German
transcendentalism applied to the Lichens.” Earlier still, Nylander[12],
in a paper dealing with cephalodia and their peculiar gonidia, had
denounced it: “Locum sic suum dignum occupat algolichenomachia inter
historias ridiculas, quae hodie haud paucae circa lichenes, majore
imaginatione quam scientia, enarrantur.” He never changed his attitude
and Crombie[13], wholly agreeing with his estimate of these “absurd
tales,” translates a much later pronouncement by him[14]: “All these
allegations belong to inept Schwendenerism and scarcely deserve even
to be reviewed or castigated so puerile are they—the offspring of
inexperience and of a light imagination. No true science there.”
Crombie[15] himself in a first paper on this subject declared that “the
new theory would necessitate their degradation from the position they
have so long held as an independent class.” He scornfully rejected the
whole subject as “a Romance of Lichenology, or the unnatural union
between a captive Algal damsel and a tyrant Fungal master.” The nearest
approach to any concession on the algal question occurs in a translation
by Crombie[16] of one of Nylander’s papers. It is stated there that a
saxicolous alga (_Gongrosira_ Kütz.) had been found bearing the apothecia
of _Lecidea herbidula_ n. sp. Nylander adds: “This algological genus is
one which readily passes into lichens.” At a later date, Crombie[17]
was even more comprehensively contemptuous and wrote: “whether viewed
anatomically or biologically, analytically or synthetically, it is
instead of being true science, only the Romance of Lichenology.” These
views were shared by many continental lichenologists and were indeed, as
already stated, justified to a considerable extent: it was impossible
to regard such a large and distinctive class of plants as merely fungi
parasitic on the lower algae.
Controversy about lichens never dies down, and that view of their
parasitic nature has been freshly promulgated among others by the
American lichenologist Bruce Fink[18]. The genetic origin of the gonidia
has also been restated by Elfving[19]: the various theories and views are
discussed fully in the chapter on the lichen plant.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account