32 BOTANICAL GAZETTE [JANUARY 
Notwithstanding the opinions (8, 23) expressed by other authors 
as to the specialization of the proembryo of the araucarians, 1 am 
inclined to think that too much stress has been placed on the 
appearance it presents after elongation has begun. At that time 
the very definite cap, the suspensors, and the inclosed embryo 
group give it an appearance of specialization that is not representa- 
tive of its method of development. As I have pointed out in a 
preceding paragraph, this very definite structure arises from a 
group of free nuclei that do nothing in a definite and regular fashion. 
The number of nuclei is indefinite, the arrangement is that of an 
irregular mass, the order of wall formation varies, in short nothing 
is definite or fixed except that the upper and lower nuclei of the 
mass will elongate and result in the production of a proembryo 
in which the position and function of the various cells appear to 
have been planned with the greatest care. . The course of develop- 
ment is, in fact, far less regular and definite than that of the Abie- 
tineae, though the result is far more striking. 
The formation of a secondary suspensor region from the base of 
the mass of cells developed from the embryo group is a feature that 
has not been recorded for other conifers, so far as I have been able 
to discover from the literature available. The nearest approach 
to it is in Torreya taxifolia (6), another taxad, where there is said 
to be a wave of elongation beginning with the second tier and 
involving the successive tiers downward until finally cells formed 
from the embryo groups are involved. It is not unlikely that this 
feature may be found less rare than the records at present indicate, 
for our knowledge of the later development of the embryo is still 
very meager in conifers generally. 
Conclusions 
1. The structure and development of the pollen tube, processes 
of fertilization, and the structure and development of the embryo 
are such that it seems extremely improbable that they could have 
been derived from the analogous structures as represented in mod- 
ern Abietineae. 
_ 2. The structure of the seed and pollination apparatus of the 
araucarians could be readily derived from the type of seeds or 
ovules represented by such lycopods as Miadesmia. 
