THE PROBLEMThe problem which the author proposes to investigate is a threefold one: (1) To ascertain the germination and further development of embryos separated from endosperms and also from scutella; (2) To find a proper medium for the germination of embryos which will furnish a substitute for the removed endosperms and scutella; and (3) To ascertain the effect in heredity, if any, of this traumatism.EITSTORICAT Bonnet (2), as quoted by Stingl (12), is credited with being the first to study the germination of embryos detached from the cotyledons in his work with Phaseolus multwflorus.Sachs (8), working also with Phaseolus multiflorus and with Zea Mays, pointed out that embryos when separated from their endosperms germinate poorly.He stated also in his Physiology of Plants (page 373) that the embryo during germination has a parasitic relation towards its endosperm, digesting and sucking up the latter through its absorption organ, the scutellum.Gris (6) germinated embryos of Mirabilis jalapa, Zea Mays, and many other plants in moist sponges.He observed that the first stage of germination was based on the nutritive material found in the embryo itself, and only after the roots of maize attained a length of 3 cm.was he able to observe the appearance of sugar in the endosperm; he believed the scutellum to be only an absorption organ of the embryo.Van Tieghem (13), working with seeds of Helianthus annuus, Mirabilis jalapa, and Zea Mays to ascertain (1) the dependence of the various parts of different organs of the embryo, and (2) the dependence of the embryo upon the endosperm; found that the plumule, radicle, and cotyledon, when separated and in a proper medium, but not the scutellum of the maize seed, are capable of independent growth and even of regeneration."Further, he 1 This article was read by title at the thirteenth annual meeting of the Botanical Society of America at Baltimore, Md., December [26][27][28] 1918.Owing to various circumstances the writer has been unable, up to the present time, to continue his investigations on this subject, but he has decided to publish these meager observations hoping that they may be of interest to others whose work is in the same or similar lines.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Demetrius Ion Andronescu (1919) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: