352 BOTANICAL GAZETTE [NOVEMBER 



The pedigrees 08125 and 08132 are those of hermaphrodites 

 C and D among the cultures of 1909, which were reported upon 

 last year. If the " model pedigree" illustrated in the diagram 

 (fig. 14) be compared with that under case I (fig. i), the two will be 

 seen to correspond perfectly. In fact, the hermaphrodites A and B 

 included under case I were full sibs of hermaphrodites C and D 

 whose progenies are repeated here. These 4 hermaphrodites 

 which were found in the cultures of 1908 were indistinguishable 



<f 



184 133 



FIG. 14. Model pedigree for case XIII 



from one another in their external characters, and the fact that 

 they belonged in two different categories was only demonstrated 

 by the breeding tests. 



No additional instances have been found in which a hermaph- 

 rodite indistinguishable from the usual type of "genetic hermaph- 

 rodites" has proved to be simply a somatic variation of the male. 

 However, 2 peculiar variant individuals found in one family of the 

 1909 cultures exhibited an analogous behavior, and consequently 

 their progenies have been added to those of C and D under this 

 case. The 2 individuals used as pollen parents of the families 

 0995 and 0996 had several lobes of the calyx prolonged and 

 modified to the form and structure of stigmas, and one of the 

 flowers had in the center a small unicarpellary ovary with an 

 apparently functional stigma. Both of these plants had func- 



