ai2 MEMOIR on tHe. PLANTS ‘cAriep 
I have fomething.more to add concerning that part 
which I have denominated. the Star, and which fome na- 
turalift have fuppofed to be the female, whilft others have - 
imagined it to be the male, part. 
The fmall glandular parts included under the foliola of. 
the branches, certainly. poffefs the faculty of. reproduati- 
on; and I have very frequently obtained a few individu- 
als from them. Still, I cannot admit that they are the 
only feed of the mofles, and much lefs that they are an- . 
there containing the prolifick liquoz.. 
We are, indeed, acquainted with fome plants which, be-~ 
fides. their hermaphrodite flowers, have on the fame or - 
another ftalk, femi-fexual flowers,. either male or. female: 
why, therefore, may not the fame thing take place in the . 
mofles?—-why may not the Polytrichum, the Mnium, _ 
and the Splachnum be polygamous plants, like the Parieta- 
ria, Acer, and feveral of the.Mimo/e,_or like the Dzo/pyros, 
the Ginfeng, &c? . 
We alfo know fome plants,.as the Lzlzum bulbiferum, 
the leaves of which are furnifhed with {mall bulbous 
glands, which being put into the ground fhoot up into 
individuals. of their {pecies, without altering in the leaft, 
the frudiification of the flowers of the fame plant. Why, 
then, may not the moffes have the fame. faculty of repro- 
ducing themfelves? » ; 
Whether we confider the ftar of the moffes: as a true 
flower, or.as containing bulbs, like thofe of the Lilium 
bulbiferum, which is more probable and natural, it can- 
not affect the fact which I have eftablifhed refpecting the 
reunion of both fexes..in the urn, Why fhould-we look 
‘upon that part as being either the male or female organ, 
fince the greater number of mofles have no ftarred branch? 
how then, could thofe fyitematiits conceive or explain the 
re-production in the Po/cum (Fig. 14.), which confifts 
Only 
