147 



mind, indeed, the double calyx desctibed by Ch. Fer- 

 m n d ■), which, however, owing to the impression that 

 it makes, scarcely admits of the proposed comparison 

 with the calyculus of the Pontentilleae, 



b) that the innersides of the half réceptacles are we^er 

 covered with drupels, 



c) that the cleft in several cases affects also the peduncle, 

 cl) that in the majority of the cases one of two sepals 



are rent at the base together with the calyx-tube, 



e) that the cleft divides the calyx either into equal or 

 into unequal parts. 



From b, c and d we must gather that hère is a case of 

 subséquent splitting of the growing réceptacle but not of 

 original dichotomy. 



I draw spécial attention to this conclusion, because 

 Godron who seems to be the only one who has described 

 this déviation, has got a différent impression from it, as 

 appears from his words, which I quote 



„Cette anomalie n'est pas rare sur les Framboisiers 

 de mon jardin. La division a lieu dans la direction du plan 

 médian de la fleur, elle va jusqu'à la base du réceptacle 

 conique, mais les surfaces par lesquelles les parties sépa- 

 rées se regardent, sont complètement dépourvues de car- 

 pelles" »). 



Also the circumstance of his classing the anomaly with 

 «partitions des axes végétaux" together with indubitable 

 cases of bifurcation of the meristeme élucidâtes his opinion 

 on this point. 



For the rest the cases observed by Godron differ from 

 mine by the less deep division of the réceptacle „ jusqu'à 

 la base" and its direction „dans la direction du plan médian 

 de la fleur". 



1) P e n z i g, Pflanzen-teratologie I, p. 425. 



2) D. A. G d r o n, Mém. de la Soc. des se. nat. de Cherbourg, 

 2e Série, Vol. VIII, p. 324. 



