453 
in the Saprolegnieae. 
done its work, like the male organ of a Metazoan T . ‘ I have 
satisfied myself, however,’ he writes, ‘ of the presence of two 
nuclei in the egg at all times in this stage, one peripheral and 
the other central, and the peripheral one always close to the 
point of attachment on a fertilization-tube ’ (p. 159)- Professor 
Trow showed his exquisite drawings at the Botanical Section 
at Bristol ; they conveyed clearly to me that this ‘ peripheral 
nucleus’ was in no way different to other collections of 
granules — microsomes— lying more or less peripherally in the 
egg, and his plates are equally convincing : such pseudo- 
nuclei he has figured in his Fig. 45 (upper oospore) above the 
entrance of the dotted line. In Fig. 46, the lowest oospore 
contains two of these in the angle between the two dotted 
lines to the south of that noted as the c male nucleus ’ ; and 
in the right-hand oospore at the north-west of the ‘male 
nucleus,’ and separated from it by two vacuoles, is another 
of these. On the other hand, in Fig. 44 the left-hand egg 
seems to show two nearly central true nuclei, of which he has 
only recognized one. The explanation I am inclined to give 
is that the stain he used, gentian-violet and eosin, does not 
sufficiently differentiate nuclei and microsomes, and can give 
no certain results. 
I wrote in ’95 (p. 698-700) : ‘ The apogamy of Saprolegnieae 
does not imply a complete absence of processes comparable 
with fertilization. The essence of ordinary fertilization con- 
sists in the union of two cells, cytoplasm to cytoplasm, nucleus 
to nucleus (and in most cases, archoplasm to archoplasm — 
referring of course to the views of Fol and Guignard, which 
have since been somewhat shaken). In this way is formed 
a new complex cytoplasm, nucleus, &c., which, as such, have 
never been associated before. In Saprolegnieae the nucleus 
of the oospore is formed by the fusion of many nuclei, which 
possibly wandered from different parts of the plant, and which 
1 This is a revival of Pringsheim’s erroneous observations and conclusions ; 
De Bary I think compared the passage of the gametoplasm, leaving no trace of 
exit from the fertilizing tube or entrance into the oospore in the cell-walls of 
either, to the passage of spiritual mediums like the renowned Mrs. Guppy through 
brick-walls and closed doors and windows. 
JI h 
