244 BOTANICAL GAZETTE | OCTOBER 
ooplasm proper. Klebahn (1899) describes in Sphaeroplea a 
case where the reduction from the multinucleate to the uninu- 
cleate condition does not occur until after fertilization, even if 
then, there being several nuclei in the oosphere only one of. 
which is fertilized. The nuclei which receive no sperms are 
recognized in later stages by their smaller chromatin content, 
. but their fate on germination was not followed. Golenkin (1900) ° 
agrees with Klebahn in finding a multinucleate egg, one nucleus 
of which functions; but Golenkin says that the nuclei then all 
fuse into one. Such a condition offers serious difficulties of 
interpretation in the light of the present theories regarding the 
cell. Since uninucleate oospheres were present among the mul- 
tinucleate ones, it is possible that the condition observed by 
Golenkin was pathologic, a view which is strengthened by the 
fact that he was unable to germinate the spores after two years’ 
trial. 
In Saprolegniaceae Trow (1895, p. 630, and 1808, p. 166) 
notes a clumping or possibly pairing of the nuclei as they degen- 
erate. I have also noted this phenomenon in the foregoing pages. 
Yet this is in no way to be confounded with the process of gen- 
eral fusion as described by Hartog (1891, p. 25) and Golenkin 
(1900), since these writers derive a functional nucleus from the 
ultimate result of successive fusions, while in the case observed 
by Trow, and in that seen by the writer, the nuclei thus appear- 
ing to fuse are really in the process of degeneration. 
Inasmuch as it has been possible in all cases to follow the 
parallel development of the oospheres, it can hardly be doubted 
that in A. Tragopogonis and A. candida, as in Achlya, the Fuca- 
ceae, etc., the supernumerary nuclei represent potential pro- 
nuclei, and that each nucleus in the oosphere or A. Tragopogonts 
and A. candida is homologous with one of the nuclei in the 
oosphere of A. Blt or A. Portulacae. 
The coenocentrum has to some extent been sucess in 
connection with the description of A. Tragopogonts and A. can- 
dida. It yet remains to compare the structure in the different 
species. In A. Portulacae it is least developed, consisting simply 
