322 
THE Z YGNEMACE/E. 
show apparent isolation but which, nevertheless, show clear 
co-ordination.” Further, “ the anatomical isolation which 
lias been ascribed to the vegetable cell is also shown to be but 
a partial truth, if, indeed, it be a truth at all.” 
Hillhouse, Hick, Gardiner, Massee (whose observations 
have been confirmed by Professor Bennett), Groves, and 
others have all arrived at the conclusion that these inter¬ 
cellular relations, by means of delicate connecting threads of 
protoplasm, do exist, but differ somewhat as to how they are 
effected, whether by open pits in the cell-wall or not. 
I need scarcely point out the important bearings of this 
discovery, for it will at once be evident how potent a factor 
it must prove in accounting for many curious facts that have 
hitherto puzzled the vegetable physiologist. As Gardiner 
has said: “ Observations now and lately recorded give us the 
power of a clearer insight into such phenomena as the down¬ 
ward movement of a sensitive leaf upon stimulation ; of the 
wonderful action of a germinating embryo on the endosperm 
cells, even to those which are most remote from it; of the 
action of a tendril towards its support, and of various other 
phenomena in connection with general cell-mechanism.” 
Mr. F. 0. Bower has also contributed an important paper 
“ On Plasmolysis and its bearing upon the relations between 
cell-wall and protoplasm.” The conclusion he arrives at 
seems to be at conflict with that reached by the other 
observers mentioned. His explanation for the presence of 
the delicate threads of protoplasm that are still left connecting 
the main mass (which has been contracted from the cell-walls 
by means of a solution of common salt used as a plasmolysing 
agent) with the cell-wall appears to be, that the peripheral 
part of the mass of protoplasm in the cell is here and there 
entangled, as a net-work, among the deposited microsomata, 
and may, therefore, on the contraction of the main 
mass, be drawn out at the points of entanglement into fine 
threads. Whether by this he simply means that there is 
a more intimate connection between the cell-wall and the 
protoplasm than has hitherto been suspected (in which case 
lie would be in accord with other investigators); or means 
to imply there is a continually intimate connection—even 
if not indissoluble bond of union—between the cell-wall 
and the protoplasm, I cannot say, but I should imagine 
not the latter : for such a conclusion would be so manifestly 
at variance with many well ascertained facts. For how, on 
that view, are we to account for the phenomenon of conju¬ 
gation, for the formation of oospheres, for all acts of 
rejuvenescence of the cell, and so forth? It is clear that 
