143 



or corne oui of it. The carpels hâve consequently become 

 superior, a déviation which calls to mind the superior 

 ovary mentioned by M as ter s in an abnormal spécimen 

 of Rudbeckia spec. and of a monstrous Cichorium Intybus 

 described by Prof. A. Bétékoff ^). 



Instead of two carpels I found now and then 3 and 

 even 4 of them in a whorl (fig. 3c). 



In another flower, also with 4 carpels in a whorl, two of 

 them reached beyond the others on account of their having 

 grown together with the lengthened thalamus and their 

 being a little longer. One of thèse two split up into two 

 in such a way that the one lobe showed the peculiarities 

 of an ordinary stigma (fig. 4). 



It may, however, also happen that the carpels are al- 

 together lost, as shown in fig. 5. Hère is no distance 

 between the floret and the headlet, consequently it seems 

 very probable that the carpels hâve taken the qualities 

 of the bracts and hâve lost themselves between those. 



Once only 1 carpel was found, once on the contrary 5 

 of them. 



In — a long but fruitless — search of florets with a superior 

 ovary on the boundary of the normal and the proliferous 

 tubular florets I came across two carpels of deviating 

 shape, fig. 6a and b. In a a stigma-like appendage near 

 the base is to be seen, but in fc it is a division into three 

 parts that draws attention. 



Thus much on the carpels, next some remarks about the 

 stamens. Thèse are without an exception free, viz. in no 

 connection with one another (fig. 7). ^) And as to their 



1) M a s t e r s. Pflanzen-teratologie, p. 103. Also Transact. Linn. 

 Soc. Vol. XXIII, p. 365. 



2) Mémoires de la Société nationale des sciences nat. de Cherbourg. 

 T. XXI (1877). 



3) The same thing was observed by Bétékoff 1. c. 



