The Taxoidece. 
93 
the two preparations represented in PI. 8, figs. 17 and 18 of the 
paper referred to ; I now think that the nuclei there figured were 
wrongly identified. The two nuclei which I interpreted as the 
second male nucleus and a vegetative nucleus I now regard as 
respectively the functional male nucleus and the smaller second 
male nucleus, while the nucleus which I labelled “ $ 1 .” I now 
believe to he merely a vegetative nucleus. I particularly regret 
this mistake as I had in my possession at the time of writing the 
paper a preparation and sketch made by Mrs. Tansley in the 
previous year, in which the entry of the sperm into the archegonium 
was shewn, and the smaller size of the second male nucleus was 
distinctly indicated. This drawing Mrs. Tansley has kindly given 
me permission to reproduce (Fig. 1). 
(b.) Taxus baccata. L. 
The development of the reproductive organs of Taxus baccata 
has already been investigated with considerable completeness by 
several workers (Belajeff, 4 ; Strasburger, 6 and 18 ; Jager, 7), but 
since microtome methods have not been applied to the more 
interesting stages I thought it might be worth while to re-examine 
the ovules. My thanks are due to the Director of the Royal 
Gardens, Kew, for allowing me to collect material during the 
summers of 1905 and 1906. I used chiefly Juel’s fixative (2 grs. 
zinc chloride, 2 c.c. glacial acetic acid, 100 c.c. 45-50% alchohol) 
which seems particularly well adapted for Gymnosperm ovules, 
followed by Flemming’s triple stain. My results on the whole have 
simply confirmed previous work. Apparently the presence of more 
than one embryo sac is fairly common in Taxus ovules; cases are 
described by Hofmeister(l), Jager (7) and Thomson (21), and I have 
met with one such example in my 1905 material. The ovules which 
I examined were abundantly penetrated by pollen-tubes, whose great 
swollen ends often pressed the prothallus quite out of shape, 
and sometimes grew right down its flank. As might have 
been expected, the dates of the various stages of the ovular 
development given by Jager for material grown in the neigh¬ 
bourhood of Zurich do not apply accurately to that collected in 
England. The division of the body cell, and fertilisation, which 
Jager describes as occurring at the end of May or beginning of 
June did not take place in my 1906 ovules until June 18th. The 
actual division of the body cell seems never to have been figured, 
so 1 have shown it in Figs. 2a, b, c, d. These figures bring out the 
