(379 ) 
As to the nature of the inferior ovary in the Cucurbitaceae, 
Naudin® (1855) expressed the view that it was always wholly 
or in part invaginated in the tissue of the peduncle, and that 
the calyx is generally free from adherence to it. In support 
of this position he cites cases where the calyx-lobes return to 
foliar conditions with distinct laminae and petioles. 
This view of the nature of the inferior ovary was not new 
with Naudin. Schleiden” (1846) after investigations on /eosa, 
Leucojum, Godetia, Epipactis and some other plants, con- 
cluded that the ovaries were formed entirely of the floral 
axis; furthermore that the carpels were only the upper part 
of the ovary and that their tips run up to form the style and 
stigma. According to his view the conception of the inferior 
ovary as a fusion of the carpels with calyx and corolla was an 
assumption unnecessary if not untenable. He points out that 
in the development of the flower in Canna extgua and other 
plants the invagination at the apex of the axis, which is the 
beginning of the formation of the ovary, takes place before 
there is any trace of the appearance of the perianth, and 
further that in many cases the calyx and corolla are entirely 
separate and stand free from the ovary. And so the ovary, 
pistil and stigma represent modifications of no particular 
organs but are sometimes of axial, sometimes of foliar 
character. 
Goebel,” however, in 1886, studied the development of 
Pyrus Malus and shows that the carpellary leaves are laid 
down in the young flower, but that the subsequent intercalary 
growth of the zone on which they are inserted produces an 
ovary ‘‘ lined inside by the insertions of the carpels.” This 
zone in a perigynous flower is but slightly widened. The 
ovary of Pyrus Schleiden did not regard as truly inferior but 
as representing a fusion of carpels and floral axis. Goebel, 
however, regards it as the product of the growth of the bases 
of the carpels and the zone upon which they are inserted. 
All investigations upon the development of inferior ovaries, 
he concludes, must reckon with the question as to how much 
of the area of the base of the flower is occupied by the incipi- 
