CAPRIFICATION OF THE FIG. 19% 
of much interest and value. His experiments have shown us that 
caprification does not hasten the maturity of the common fig, and 
that it is not the sting itself of the wasp which influences the set- 
ting of the fruit of the edible fig. They also show that many figs 
which are regularly caprificated by the fig growers require no cap- 
rification, and that, as far as these figs are concerned, caprification 
eould be abandoned. This point is confirmed by the circumstance 
that these same figs mature in countries where no caprifigs are grown. 
It is not easy to see how any other conclusions of importance can 
be drawn from the experiments of Gasparrini. It must always be 
regretted that he never thought of the possibility of there being any 
other race of figs than that one which he happened to have under his 
eye. How different, for instance, would his conclusions have been if 
he had had.the true Smyrna figs to experiment on! 
In our own times no one has given as much study to the fig ques- 
tion as Prof. H. Count Solms-Laubach. His researches were pub- 
lished in 1882, and contain a perfect mine of knowledge, partly 
compiled, partly his own investigations. While scientifically investi- 
gating his subject and studying the figs and the fig insects in Italy, 
Java, and France, it appears that he had no opportunity to make 
direct experiments in caprification, but founded his opinions princi- 
pally on the experiments of Gasparrini. He sifts the knowledge of 
others with rare ability and patience, and adds numerous and inter- 
esting observations of his own. His researches are of the utmost 
importance. As a botanist he rejects, as insufficiently proven, Gas- 
parrini’s theory of parthenogenesis, and, showing that Brazilian figs 
produce no fertile seed, concludes that caprification is necessary for 
that purpose. 
During his investigations in Java he discovered that most figs 
growing there consisted of female trees as well as of male trees, and 
he found that the male tree possessed a flower especially adapted to 
foster the Blastophaga, a kind of degenerated or differentiated female 
flower, which he calls the ‘‘gall flower.” This gall flower has prob- 
ably lost its power to produce seed. Returning home and investigat- 
ing the caprifig, he found that even this fig contained this gall flower, 
almost exclusive of any real female flower. He further shows how 
different species of figs are inhabited by different species of Blasto- 
phaga. He also unconditionally adheres to the theory of the eaprifig 
and the fig being of the same species. Later on he adopts the theory 
of Fr. Miller, that the edible fig is the female plant and the caprifig 
the male plant. But he was entirely unaware of the existence of a race 
of figs constructed differently from the common edible figs which he 
had investigated, and he shared the opinion of Gasparrini that all 
figs were affected by caprification in the same manner, though he 
recognized the absolute necessity of pollination and ecaprification in 
order that fertile seeds may be produced. But if caprification is not 
needed any more, it was once a necessity, ages ago, when the fig was 
