124 



The Naturalist. 



for some time, and which I have at length introduced into my 

 botanical lectures. For the formation of starch by what has hitherto 

 been called the process of assimilation," I propose the name Amylo- 

 syntJims^' ; and for the formation of nitrogenous organic compounds 

 from the carbohydrates and inorganic materials, the name " Proteo- 

 synthesis.^^ From these we get at once the adjectives amylosynthetic 

 and proteosynthetic, and, if necessary, the adverbs amylosyntJietically 

 and p'oteosyntlieiically. 



In explanation of these terms, I may say that I regard it as scarcely 

 practicable, in the present state of our knowledge of the physiology of 

 plants, to include under one name the numerous metabolic changes 

 which plants are able to effect, as appears to have been done by the 

 last generation of botanists. As a matter of fact, indeed, and as is 

 now well known, plants exhibit both a constructive and a destructive 

 activity, which it is important not to confound. Moreover these two 

 forms of activity manifest themselves in various ways, and the products 

 to which they give rise are different in different cases. The most 

 natural course, therefore, as it seems to me, is to single out such 

 specific instances as are most fr quent in their occurrence and most 

 firmly established, clearly and sharply distinguish them by suitable 

 designations, and grouping them so far as existing knowledge will 

 allow, leave their mutual relationship's to be determined by future 

 investigations. It is in the application of these views that I have 

 separated the formation of starch and of proteids from the other forms 

 of constructive metabolism, and have applied to them the epithets 

 suggested above. 



It may be objected with regard to the term " amylosynthesis," that the 

 carbohydrate formed under the conditions specified is not alv/ays starch, 

 and that where this happens, the designation is inappropriate. To this 

 it may be replied that we have as yet but a very imperfect knowledge of 

 the origin of the substances that occasionally take the place of starch 

 in the manner referred to. It may be that these substances are always 

 formed preliminary to the formation of starch, and that where they 

 replace the starch, it is due to an arrest of the process at a stage below 

 that at which starch is normally elaborated. Or, on the other hand, 

 it may be that even in these cases starch is actually formed in tjje 

 normal way in the first instance, but instead of being stored up in the 

 chlorophyll apparatus, it is at once converted into some other carbo- 

 hydrate. Whichever of these alternatives be the true one, I submit 

 that the term "amylosynthesis" may still be used without risk of 

 confusion, at any rate until we have a more complete knowledge on 



