. 
1905] CHAMBERLAIN—ALTERNATION OF GENERATIONS 143 
ation, which is spoken of as the sexual generation, while the sporo- 
phyte constitutes the asexual generation. They have ceased to speak 
of male trees and female trees, or male flowers and female flowers, 
and have ceased to regard the stamens and carpels as sexual organs.3 
Notions as to what constitutes a male individual or a female indi- 
vidual among animals, or as to what constitutes a male organ or 
female organ, are firmly established. If the method which the 
rigid botanical morphologist applies to plants should be applied to 
animals, the result would be interesting, for there would be no male 
or female individuals, nor would there be any male or female organs. 
All sexuality would be confined to the microscopic egg with its three 
polar bodies, and to the spermatocyte with its four sperms. The 
gametophytes of bryophytes, pteridophytes, and most gymnosperms 
bear well-developed archegonia, which are correctly designated sex 
organs, but by a gradual reduction the archegonium in the angiosperms 
becomes reduced to its essential structure, the egg. It is only through 
respect to its ancestry that this egg may be termed an organ. The 
antheridium is only less reduced. In animals there remain only 
these essential elements, which by similar courtesy may be called 
organs. 
I prefer to apply the terminology as it is applied by zoologists, 
and consequently should regard dioecious sporophytes as male and 
female individuals. In the gametophytic generation the dioecious 
condition is universal in heterosporous plants. Stamens and car- 
pels, which contain the male and female gametophytes, may be 
termed male and female organs as properly as may the reproductive 
organs of animals. It is strictly correct to speak of male and female 
gametophytes in plants; but in my opinion to designate the sporo- 
phyte as an asexual generation is a mistake. The sporophyte is 
male or female as truly as is the gametophyte; and, like the indi- 
vidual in animals, it is characterized by male or female reproductive 
organs which produce the male or female gametophytes. 
I do not claim any acquaintance with zoological literature further 
than a reading of the latest edition of W1tson’s “The cell in develop- 
ment and inheritance.’ Were there any theories as to alternation 
ny oe discussion of monoecism and hermaphroditism would neither rein- 
en the argument these subjects are omitted altogether. 
