168 



EDWARD C. JEFFREY ON 



frequently by subsequent writers. The development of the archegonium in E. limosum 

 and E. arvense is practically identical with that of E. hiemale, which has been described 

 above, and they have the same peculiar longitudinally divided cervical canal-cell. PI. 26, 

 fig. 5 represents a nearly ripe archegonium of E. arvense. In the two last mentioned 

 species the neck is very much longer than in E. hiemale and consists of three or four tiers 

 of cells. The uniform occurrence of longitudinal division in the cervical canal-cell of these 

 three species is interesting and probably indicates that this feature will be found to be 

 common to the group. Campbell (Mosses and ferns, p. 427), however, figures a trans- 

 verse division for E. telmateia. Sadebeck (Engler u. Prantl, Nat. pflanzenfam., teil 1, 

 abteil 4, p. 2) has recently published a figure of the archegonium of E. arvense which 

 does not at all agree with Fig. 5, but as he does not represent in it the divisions of the pro- 

 thallial cells parallel to the surface of the egg, and the cuneate insertion of the neck of the 

 archegonium which have been noticed by practically all other observers, beginning with 

 Hofmeister, his representation must be regarded as somewhat diagrammatic. 



The first division of the egg is transverse, the basal wall being generally somewhat 

 oblique. The inclination of the basal septum is sometimes towards the apex and some- 

 times towards the base of the prothallus, more frequently, however, towards the former. 

 It has not been possible to absolutely settle the order of the next two divisions, but it is 

 probable that the median wall is formed first. The transverse wall often does not extend 

 at first entirely across the embryo, especially in the hypobasal half. The apical cell is 

 early formed in the epibasal portion, and in the hypobasal half, an apparent apical cell is 

 also differentiated. These features are shown in PI. 26, fig. 6, which is almost identical 

 with Hofmeister's (op. cit., PI. 39, fig. 2) illustration of a similar stage. The develop- 

 ment of an apparent apical cell in the lower half of the embryo, and a tacit homologizing 

 of that region with the corresponding region, as regards the substratum of the leptospor- 

 angiate embryos, with which he was familiar, led him into the error of regarding it as the 

 embryonic primary axis. As its regular segmentations soon cease, and it is thrust aside by 

 the growth of the upper portion of the embryo, he regarded the primary axis of Equisetum 

 as abortive. The real primary stem-apex in the upper part of the embryo of PI. 1, fig. 6, 

 he regarded as that of a secondary shoot, an error which has been recognized by Sadebeck 

 (Pringsheim's Jahrbiicher, bd. 11, p. 581), and subsequent observers. Sadebeck (op. cit.) 

 informs us that in the case of E. arvense and E. pahtstre, the development of which he 

 has studied, the epibasal cell gives rise immediately to the primitive shoot-axis, from which 

 the first whorl of leaves is derived exactly as are the subsequent ones. This statement I 

 am not able to confirm exactly, for in E. hiemale, which I have particularly studied, the 

 rudiment of the first root appears very early, next the apical cell,- and on the side of it 

 which faces the apex of the prothallus. PI. 26, fig. 7, shows an embryo at this stage, the 



