I have had one piece of advice in the preparation of the presidential address: make it short. Colleagues such as mine help keep events in perspective. I am a plant pathologist-not a mycologist who happens to be stationed in a plant pathology department, not an applied mycologist, but a professional, certifiable plant pathologist. A few mycologists are beginning to recognize that plant pathology is not applied mycology; fewer appreciate that it never was. True, the foundations for modern plant pathology were laid by de Bary in the years 1853 to 1886. In the same era Koch laid the foundations for modern medicine. Bacteriology has made important contributions to medicine, and its association with medicine has been the basis for its progress. Yet, there is no suggestion that medicine is, or ever was, applied bacteriology. If there were no viruses, no bacteria, no algae, no protozoa, no nematodes, no arthropods, no genetic abnormalities, no environmental deficiencies, no smogif all plant diseases were caused by fungi, plant pathology still would be a distinct science. Although pathologists and mycologists often range the same fields, they occupy different niches. The pathologist's
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
E. S. Luttrell (1974) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: