4 kempton: ancestry of maize 



In the description of Zea, the statement appears that varia- 

 tion in this genus is mostly quantitative in nature, a conclusion 

 hardly justified by the facts. The line of demarcation between 

 quantitative and qualitative variation is, of course, more or less 

 arbitrary, but there can be no question that Zea stands apart 

 from related genera in the number of discontinuous variations. 

 It is unfortunate that Weatherwax has not had the opportunity 

 to become acquainted with the instructive variations isolated by 

 experimental breeders. 



Another statement that must be challenged is that branches 

 of maize may arise "singly or two or more from one node" (p. 

 316). It is difficult to understand how this error survived a 

 second reading. Reference is made, however, to a text figure for 

 substantiation. This figure seems to have been drawn from a 

 normal plant and furnishes no evidence of this most unusual 

 type of branching. 



Equally surprising, from a morphologist, is the confusing of 

 husks or bracts with prophylla. On page 314 we learn, ". . . . 

 and the shortness of its axis enables the leaf sheaths to cover the 

 inflorescence and mature fruit. In some cases the laminae and 

 ligules of these prophylla are present (Fig. 6) but often they are 

 lacking (Fig. 7)." Again, in the legend under Fig. 7, page 

 315, "the prophylla have lost their laminae and ligules." 

 That prophylla sometimes possess laminae and ligules would 

 be an important observation, if true, but it seems clear that the 

 author has failed to distinguish between these most interesting 

 and highly specialized organs and the relatively unspecialized 

 bracts, or husks. This confusion by a professed morphologist 

 is the more astonishing in view of the unusual structure of 

 prophylla and their consequent interest from a morphological 

 standpoint. 



In drawing attention to the unsatisfactory treatment accorded 

 the female inflorescence of teosinte by previous investigators, 

 Weatherwax has, inadvertently no doubt, misquoted Collins, 

 and in justice a correction should be noted. We have, quoting 

 from Weatherwax: "Collins' description- (p. 525) of the spike 



2 Collins, G. N. The origin of maize. Journ. Wash. Acad. Sci. 2: 520-530. 

 1912. 



