3. Pod corn differs from other monstrous forms such 
as teopod and corn grass in always exhibiting one charac- 
teristic which wild corn must have had: kernels enclosed 
and protected by glumes. 
4. When pod corn is combined with some of the genes 
of certain varieties of popcorn it exhibits a number of 
characters of a wild grass: a freely-branching growth 
habit, small pointed seeds, glumes enclosing the seeds 
and a means of seed dispersal. 
5. The fact that pod corn may be the product of plant 
hormone action does not rule it out as the ancestral form. 
Changes in plant hormone systems are to be expected 
during evolution under domestication. 
6. Although modern monstrous pod corn could not 
exist in the wild, some of the forms produced by cross- 
ing popcorn and pod corn are probably capable of doing 
so in a suitable environment. 
7. The conclusion that the half-tunicate form of pod 
corn could not be the ancestral type because it involves 
only the glumes is a result of confusing this characteris- 
tic with another, the papyrescent. 
8. The fact that pointed, imbricated kernels have a 
higher frequency in prehistoric corn than in modern corn 
suggests that they represent a primitive character once 
associated with the podded condition. 
9. Prehistoric cobs suspected of representing various 
types of pod corn can be matched by combining the al- 
leles of the Zu locus with various modifying and inhibit- 
ing genes. 
[ 352 ] 
