216 MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN 



h 



uch as may be gathered 



RECAPITULATION . 



The evidence assembled in the preceding paragraphs 

 seems to point clearly to certain easily stated conclusions. 

 Not only do the apically dehiscent forms show a high de- 

 gree of similarity inter se but the several forms are very 

 frequently aberrant in respect to the totality of their 

 characters in the systematic groups to which they belong. 

 In other words, apical dehiscence of the three types here 

 considered occurs only in flowers of a certain structural 

 habit. The objection which might be raised that I have 

 included in these three groups only such forms as are 

 similar in the totality of their characters is disarmed by 

 the fact that these three classes are sharply distinguished 

 from the first four types recognized and that anomalous 

 forms are very few. The fidelity to type of the apically 



habit 



genera and 



of the same 



systematic group speak strongly in favor of a correlation 

 between the floral parts and the form and mode of dehis- 

 cence of the anther. The exact significance to be assigned 

 to the broad term correlation must be defined in each case 

 if ambiguity is to be avoided. Interdependence of parts 

 may be real or apparent, due to internal or external forces. 

 In this paper, I have sought to avoid all theoretical con- 

 siderations and I shall not discuss the nature of the corre- 

 lation observed in these forms. I have used the term in 

 the broadest sense, indicating any reciprocal relationship of 

 parts ; the ground for the assumption of such a relation- 

 ship is found in the constancy with which the characteris- 

 tics in question are found associated in the apically 

 dehiscent forms. 



