The Sexual Phases of Myzostonia. 
293 
Montgomery ('95) has made use of dichogamy in solving this 
same qiiestion. Referring to protandry and protogyny, at pag. 531 
he says: ))Now we bave found that in each phase, the products of 
the one sex develop earlier than the products of the other sex; 
accordingly, judging from the well known biogenetic law, that the 
ontogeny repeats (to some extent at least) the phylogeny, we may 
logically conclude that the Hermaphroditism of theMetazoa, which 
present one or another of these phases of sexual development, has 
been secondarily acquired.« And further on (pag. 531), he becomes 
more explicit: ))There now arises the questioni in which sex has the 
hermaphroditic state been superimposed? In the case of protandric 
hermaphrodites, since bere the male stage appears first in the onto- 
geny, one must suppose that it has been imposed on the male — 
that ova bave appeared in the testicle, and the individuai has thus 
become hermaphroditic. Similarly, in ali cases of Successive Herma- 
phroditism ^ with perhaps the exception of Microstoimim lineare^ we 
may consider that bere too the Hermaphroditism has been imposed 
on male individuals. In proterogynic forms on the contrary, the 
Hermaphroditism has probably been imposed on the female, since 
bere the female stage appears ontogenetically first.« 
This is the first attempt to apply the j)biogenetic law« to the 
question at issue, and as such it may not be without interest in these 
days when some morphologists apply it to everything indiscriminately, 
and others are becoming more and more cautious in its application. 
But whatever may be the value of this law in other cases, I believe 
that it had best bave been left unapplied in the present instance. 
Montgomery overlooks the fact that the animals he is considering 
are ali along hermaphrodite from the first bifurcation of the originai 
sexual Anlage in embryouic life to the time of disappearance of the 
last spermatozoa — and that hence dichogamy is merely a difference 
phrodite (Marshall '93, pag. 15; Macfarlane '93, pag. 273 et al.) when they 
mean that these cells contain morphological elements derived from both parents. 
Thus they virtually gay that the soma of a imisexiial organism is hermaphrodite, 
a statement which illustrates inadmissible looseness in the use of the term. 
Sex being the faculty of producing eggs or spermatozoa, the ovum or Sperma- 
tozoon as such cannot be said to have sex. 
1 Montgomery's distinction of three forms of hermaphroditism — succes- 
sive, protandric and protogynic — is somewhat misleading. The occurrence 
of both ova and sperm.atozoa in the same gonad or in different gonads in the 
same individuai does not affect the main question, since both ova and sperma- 
tozoa have in either case a separate origin from undifferentiated sexual cells. 
20* 
