2 SPERMATOGENESIS AND FECUNDATION OF ZAMIA. 
Balajeff also, in his recent researches on J/ars//ia, concludes that the 
blepharoplast must, from its position and relation to the achromatic 
spindle, be considered a centrosome. He safs: 
In this manner the stainable corpuscles possess all the peculiarities characteristic of 
the centrosomes, not only asa result of their position at the wel of the spindle, 
but also through their relation to the achromatic threads. 
Practically the same conclusion in regard to the homologies of the 
blepharoplast is reached also by Chamberlain, who states it thus: 
It seems probable that a thorough investigation of karyokinesis and the formation 
of cilia in the lower plants may support the theory that the blepharoplast 1 1s a cen- 
trosome (20, p. 434). 
E. B. Wilson also regards the ae oplast as the homologue of a 
centrosome or centrosphere. He says: 
The later studies of Shaw (102) and Belajeff (14, p. 199) on the blepharoplasts in 
Onoclea and Marsilia leave no doubt that these bodies are to be identified with centro- 
somes (130, p. 175). 
The writer in his studies has not been blind to the fact that the 
bodies in question resembled the centrosomes or centrospheres which 
have been described by some authors, both in external : appearance and 
function. Our idea of the centrosome as a permanent Sue generis 
organ of the cell, having as its prime function the governing and con- 
aol of cell division, has become so modified in the Wer few years 
that it is hardly possible to define what constitutes a centrosome. It 
seemed to the writer that it was high time that organs resembling a 
centrosome which could be proven to have very definite and distinct 
functions from the centrosome as ordinarily understood should be 
given distinct names, whether or not they can ultimately be traced 
back and found to be homologous organs. We do not call the sup- 
porting tendril of the Virginia creeper a leaf, nor the leaf a tendril, 
yet they are clearly homologous organs. It was from this standpoint 
that the writer was willing to brave the odium of introducing another 
new term to our already crowded vocabulary. The blepharoplast, it 
is true, may ultimately be proved to be the homologue of a centrosome, 
and the writer forcibly called attention to this possibility at the Ithaca 
meeting of the American Society for Plant Morphology and Physi- 
ology, held in December, 1898. Even if this were true, however, 
which the writer is still inclined to doubt, it would nevertheless be 
necessary to have a distinguishing term, as the organ has now assumed 
a specialized function different from the original. The writer’s view 
that the blepharoplast is probably a distinct organ from the centro- 
some has received the support of Shaw (102), Mottier (89), Strasburger 
1 Auf diese Weise besitzen die fiirbbaren Korperchen nicht nur in Folge ihrer Lage 
an den Polen der Kernspindel, sondern auch durch ihre Beziehungen zu den achro- 
matischen Fiiden alle Eigenthtimlichkeiten, welche den Centrosomen charakteris- 
tisch sind, sie mtissen daher als solehe betrachtet werden (14, p. 202). 
