1904 | HIOLFERTY: ARCHEGONIUM OF MNIUM 107 
account of the early stages of the archegonium, but did not 
commit himself in reference to the origin of the axial row. 
Leitgeb (5), in examining a few plants of Sphagnum, found 
a single archegonium in each, directly arising in each case from 
the apical cell, the first division being transverse. 
Kihn (8) investigated Andreaea, and discovered similarity 
in the very earliest stages of archegonia and antheridia, but out- 
lined the further development of the two organs very much as 
they are ordinarily understood today. 
In 1872 Janczewski’s paper (9) appeared, and his conclusions 
that concern this paper are as follows: The first divisions of 
the archegonium initial are exactly the same as those of the 
antheridium, and at this stage the two organs are not distin- 
guishable. The cover cell does not remain inactive, but pro- 
duces adventitious segments (not exceeding six) and canal 
initials. The inner cell (the first cell cut from the lower end of 
the terminal cell) divides to form the central cell and the primary 
canal initial, and the central cell produces the egg and ventral 
canal cell. The canal cells have different origins; the lower 
arising through transverse divisions of the primary canal initials, 
the remainder through the divisions of the adventitious cells. 
y (12) in an extensive review of researches on the arche- 
gonium supports the views of Janczewski. 
In 1895 Campbell (13) gives a detailed account of the 
development of the archegonium in Funaria hygrometrica, agreeing 
very nearly with that of Kiihn for Andreaea. The cover cell 
acts as an apical cell, cutting off four rows of segments, three 
from the lateral faces to form neck cells and one from the base 
to form the axial canal row. The lateral segments divide by 
vertical walls, making six peripheral cells which later divide by 
transverse walls; but the canal cells, so far as could be deter- 
mined, do not divide after they are first formed. 
In 1897 Gayet (15) published observations on the develop- 
ment of archegonia in twenty-two genera of mosses and liver- 
Worts. His conclusions differ at two critical points from those 
of other observers, namely the origin of the axial row and the 
Similarity of archegonial development in liverworts and mosses. 
