Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

Morphological Interpretation of Floral Anatomy

Abstract

IN the recent issue of the New Phytologist1, Mrs. Agnes Arber, in a paper dealing with the above subject, raises certain points which are of fundamental importance to all plant morphologists. She discusses the use of anatomical evidence in phylo-genetic morphology and comes to conclusions which are directly opposed to one of the well-established doctrines of modern comparative morphology. To the question, “Are we to consider it proven that the vascular bundles are more conservative than the external form, so that vestigial organs may be represented by their bundles, when all external trace of these organs has disappeared”, her answer is that “we have no alternative but to discard the doctrine of the conservatism of the vascular bundles”. Proceeding further, she says, “there seems to be no escape from the conclusion that there is a complete absence of positive evidence for the vestigial survival of vascular tissue after the organ which it supplied has ceased to exist”. She admits that the general nature of the vascular scheme may have a certain systematic value and may serve to some extent as an indicator of trends in race history, but in her opinion there appears to be no basis, say, for the statement of Bower2 that “anatomical characters and of the vascular system are apt to tardily follow evolutionary progress and thereafter to persist as vestigia” (italics mine).

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

from$1.95

to$39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Arber, A., “Floral Anatomy and its Morphological Interpretation”, New Phyt., 32, 231; 1933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Bower, F. O., “The Ferns (Filicales)”, vol. 1, Cambridge, 1923.

  3. Fisher, M. J., “The Morphology and Anatomy of the Flowers of Salicacesæ, I and II”, Amer. J. Bot., 15, 307, 372; 1928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Chute, H. M., “The Morphology and Anatomy of the Achene”, Amer. J. Bot., 17, 703; 1930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bechtel, A. R., “The Floral Anatomy of the Urticales”, Amer. J. Bot., 8, 386; 1921.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

JOSHI, A. Morphological Interpretation of Floral Anatomy. Nature 132, 822–823 (1933). https://doi.org/10.1038/132822b0

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/132822b0

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing