aed 
ey aA 
34 LIVERPOOL BIOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 
language. Oosperm, which however Mr. Myles is prepared 
to adopt, is a far preferable term, and is, as he points out, 
advocated by Balfour and Haddon on the zoological side. 
Mr. Myles then gives in brief tabular form his own system 
of terminology, which I here reproduce :— 
1. Sexual generation ... = oophyte or  oophore. 
Female. Male. 
2. Sexual apparatus ... oogone spermogone 
(containing (containing 
oospheres) spermatozoa). 
3. Sexual product ...... oon. 
Since the publication of that review I have received a 
letter from Mr. Myles, in which he gives an alternative 
system of terms, which to my mind is much preferable. 
It is as follows :— 
Sexual generation ...... gametophyte. 
oophyte spermophyte. 
Sexual apparatus......... oogone spermogone 
(containing (containing 
oon) sperm). 
oosperm. 
I have no great objection to gametophyte, though why 
oogone and spermogone (which I feel sure would not find 
favour with zoologists) are preferable terms to ovarium 
and spermarium, I fail to see. Mr. Myles points out 
that oogone gets over the difficulty of possible confusion 
between ovary and ovarium. This risk I am willing to 
run, for the term ‘‘ovary”’ in the botanical sense is slowly 
but surely dropping out of use and being replaced by 
megasporangium. ‘‘Oon’’ I confess I do not like, one 
objection being that as used by Van Tieghem it means 
‘“oosperm.”’ A word so ambiguous I think ought not to 
find a place in any terminology. On other points Mr. 
Myles and I are agreed. 
