196 Pang ens in the Nucleus and Cytoplasm 



to it. To my mind this is a much too far-reaching de- 

 duction, and without justification. The fusion of the 

 nuclei during fertilization is evidence only that all the 

 hereditary characters must be represented in the nucleus, 

 but this fact does not decide that they cannot be present, 

 in addition, in the cytoplasm. 



The organs of the fertilized egg-cell are still the same 

 as those of the unfertilized ; the young plant has inherited 

 from the mother its chromatophores and vacuoles as such. 

 In the long succession of cell-divisions which are started 

 by the fertilized egg-cell, those organs, multiplying 

 steadily by division, are transmitted each time to the 

 daughter-cells. They have, so to speak, their independ- 

 ent pedigree in addition to that of the nucleus. There 

 is, therefore, an additional heredity outside the nucleus. 



The smallest morphological particles, out of which 

 the chromatophores are built up, must evidently possess 

 the power of multiplying independently, otherwise neither 

 the growth nor the repeated divisions of these structures 

 could be explained. In this respect these particles are 

 obviously similar to the pangens of the nucleus. The 

 power of producing chlorophyll must be present in a 

 latent state in certain pangens of the nucleus; it is also 

 inactive in the smallest particles of the chromatophores, 

 in the higher plants, as long as the respective members 

 are in darkness, and becomes active only on exposure to 

 light. 



We shall therefore either have to assume chlorophyll- 

 pangens in the nucleus, and special chlorophyll-forming 

 particles in the chromatophores, or identify the two, and 

 imagine that those hypothetical units are inactive in the 

 nucleus, and become active only when they pass on to 

 the chromatophores. The second assumption is obviously 



