Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T17:32:58.441Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

I.—A Study of the Vascular Supply to the Carpels in the Follicle-bearing Ranunculaceæ

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 July 2012

Mabel S. Fraser
Mabel S. Fraser
Affiliation:
Research Scholar, University College, Nottingham.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In 1790 Goethe (Eng. Trans., 1863) published his doctrine of metamorphosis. Before that only two authors had expressed any fundamental ideas with regard to the flower. Wolff in his Theoria Generationis (1759) said that the plant consisted of nothing but stem and leaf, the root being a modification of the former; parts of the flower were appendages, and the production of floral leaves was due to degeneration of the sap, the richest portion being used up at a lower level by the vigorous first-formed foliage leaves.

Linné (1760) expressed the same idea as Wolff, partly basing his evidence on teratological specimens, in which the various floral organs were sometimes found to be replaced by leaves. He further considered the flower to be a modified shoot, five years' growth being compressed into a single year. Believing that the different floral whorls were developed the one from the other, and observing that they encircled each other, he attributed the various floral envelopes to different tissues of the stem—e.g. the bark gave rise to the calyx, and the carpels arose from the pith.

Type
Research Article
Information
Earth and Environmental Science Transactions of The Royal Society of Edinburgh , Volume 59 , Issue 1 , March 1937 , pp. 1 - 55
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Society of Edinburgh 1937

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References to Literature

Baillon, H., 1871. Natural History of Plants, vol. i, pp. 1–78.Google Scholar
Bower, F. O., 1908. Origin of a Land Flora.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brouland, M., 1935. “Recherches sur L'anatomie des Renonculacées,” Le Botaniste, vol. xxvii, pp. 1–278.Google Scholar
Brown, R., 1866. “On the Relative Position of the Divisions of the Stigma,” Misc. Bot. Works of Robert Brown, vol.i, Roy. Soc, pp. 553–563.Google Scholar
Chute, H. M., 1930. “The Morphology and Anatomy of the Achene,” Amer. Journ. Bot., vol. xvii, pp. 703–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eames, A. J., 1931. “The Vascular Anatomy of the Flower with Refutation of the Theory of Carpel Polymorphism,” Amer. Journ. Bot., vol. xviii, pp. 147–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eichler, A. W., 1875. Blüthendiagramme, vol. i, Leipzig.Google Scholar
Goethe, J. W. Von, 1863. “Essay on the Metamorphosis of Plants,” Eng. Trans., Cox, Seeman's Journ. Bot., pp. 327–345; pp. 360–374.Google Scholar
Grégoire, V., 1931. “La Valeur Morphologique des Carpelles dans les Angiosperme,” Bull. Acad. Roy. Belgique, Cl. Sci., ser. 5, vol. xvii.Google Scholar
La Cour, L., 1931. “Improvements in Everday Technique in Plant Cytology,” Journ. Roy. Micr. Soc., vol. li, pp. 119–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linné, Carl von, Prolepsis Plantarum, Upsdiæ.Google Scholar
Newman, I. V., 1936. “Ontogeny of the Angiospermic Carpel,” Nature, vol. cxxxvii, pp. 70–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Payer, J. B., 1857. Traité d'organogénie comparée de la Fleur.Google Scholar
Saunders, E. R., 1923 a. “A Revisionary Character in the Stock (Mattiola incana), and its significance in regard to the Structure and Evolution in the Gynœcium in the Rhœdales, the Orchidaceæ, and other Families,” Ann. Bot., vol. xxxvii, pp. 451–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, E. R., 1923 b. “Illustrations of Carpel Polymorphism I,” New Phyt., vol. xxvii, pp. 47–60.Google Scholar
Saunders, E. R., 1925. “On Carpel Polymorphism I,” Ann. Bot., vol. xxxix, pp. 123–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, E. R., 1927. “On Carpel Polymorphism II,” Ann. Bot., vol. xli, pp. 569–627.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, E. R., 1928 a. “Illustrations of Carpel Polymorphism II,” New Phyt., vol. xxvii, pp. 175–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, E. R., 1928 b. “Illustrations of Carpel Polymorphism III,” New Phyt., vol. xxvii, pp. 197–213.Google Scholar
Saunders, E. R., 1929 a. “On Carpel Polymorphism III,” Ann. Bot., vol. xliii, pp. 459–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, E. R., 1929 b. “Illustrations of Carpel Polymorphism IV,” New Phyt., vol. xxviii, pp. 225–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, E. R., 1930 a. “Illustrations of Carpel Polymorphism V,” New Phyt., vol. xxix, pp. 44–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, E. R., 1930 b. “Illustrations of Carpel Polymorphism VI,” New Phyt., vol. xxix, pp. 81–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, E. R., 1931 a. “On Carpel Polymorphism IV,” Ann. Bot., vol. xlv, pp. 91–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, E. R., 1931 b. “Illustrations of Carpel Polymorphism VI,” New Phyt., vol. xxx, pp. 80–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, E. R., 1932 a. “On Carpel Polymorphism V,” Ann. Bot, vol. xlvi, pp. 239–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, E. R., 1932 b. “On some Recent Contributions and Criticisms dealing with Morphology in Angiosperme,” New Phyt., vol. xxxi, pp. 174–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, E. R., 1934 a. “On Carpel Polymorphism VI,” Ann. Bot., vol. xlviii, pp. 643–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saunders, E. R., 1934 b. “Comments on ‘Floral Anatomy and its Morphological Interpretation,’” New Phyt., vol. xxxiii, p. 164.Google Scholar
Smith, G. H., 1924. “Vascular Anatomy of the Ranalian Flowers,” Bot. Gaz., vol. lxxxii, pp. 1–28.Google Scholar
Thomas, H. H., 1931. “The Early Evolution of the Angiosperme,” Ann. Bot., vol. xlv, pp. 647–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, H. H., 1934. “The Nature and Origin of the Stigma. A Contribution towards a New Morphological Interpretation of the Angiosperm Flower,” New Phyt., vol. xxxiii, pp. 173–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, J. M., 1934. “Comments on the Recent Statements regarding the Nature and Origin of the Angiospermic Stigma,” New Phyt., vol. xxxiii, pp. 306–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, J. M., 1934. “Studies in Advancing Sterility. The State of Flowering known as Angiospermy, with special reference to Placentation and to the Origin and Nature of Follicles and Achenes,” Pub. Hartley Lab. Bot., no. 12.Google Scholar
Tieghem, P. van, 1875. “Recherches sur la Structure du Pistet et sur l'anatomie comparée de la Fleur,” Mem. Acad. Sci., Paris, vol. xxi.Google Scholar
Warming, E., and Potter, M. C., 1920. Systematic Botany.Google Scholar
Wolff, K. F., 1759. Theoria generationis, Halae.Google Scholar