351 



and its very close roset lias larger leaxes witli a fairly broad l)ase 

 and which exhibit several deep deiitala, while in E. violaceo-petio- 

 lata all three characteristics are imich more pronounced. Also the 

 flower differs in foi'm in the three subspecies. 



The cytological examination in the first place brought to light 

 that the nuclei are extremely small; in joung cells in rest they are 

 but 2| — 3| (I. 





(f'T^n. 







n 



-'--4% 



1 * M^" .- 



;»v. 



'"^m£i^ 



3 ^■ 



Fig. 1-4. 1 Vegetative equatorial-plate before liie division oi Erophila cochleoides. 

 2 Idem of E. confertifolia. 3 Vegetative prophase of E. violacea-petiolata ; 

 4 Segmentation of tlie chromosomes in a vegetative cell of £ f !io/ac«o-|jetjototo 

 M. = nucleolus (in all the figures). Magnification 1-2-3: 2200X; id. 4:flOOX. 



Vegetative cell-divisions were studied in stem-tips, of which a 

 cross-section is usually found in the sections through the entire 

 inflorescence. No abnoL'malities are seen in the vegetative divisions 

 of E. cochleoides and of E. confertifolia. E. cochleoides possesses 12 

 (Fig. 1), E. confertifoliit 24 chromosomes (Fig. 2). They lie lypi- 

 cally in pairs, a feature which recurs in all the divisions and in 



