The Botanical Review

, Volume 23, Issue 1, pp 1–46 | Cite as

The inferior ovary. II

  • Gertrude E. Douglas

Summary

Within the last 12 years knowledge concerning the inferior ovary has been extended, but controversy has not terminated. As the result of anatomical studies, appendicular inferior ovaries have been reported in various genera of the following families: Agavaceae, Araliaceae, Begoniaceae, Bromeliaceae, Caprifoliaceae, Celastraceae, Compositae, Cornaceae, Ericaceae, Orchidaceae and Rubiaceae, and inJuglans of the Juglandaceae. The receptacular cup type, with ascending and recurrent budles in the wall, present inDarbya seems to be characteristic of the Santalaceae as a whole, of the Loranthaceae, ofCarya andAnnamocarya of the Juglandaceae, and of the Cactaceae. True inferior ovaries, in which the outer structures are fused with the ovary, should be distinguished from perigynous cups, as are found inRosa andCalycanthus. Recently the value of using the anatomical method in solving the problem of the structure of the inferior ovary has been questioned because of facts which have come out of modern studies in histogenesis and morphogenesis. It should be emphasized, however, that these facts are concerned with ontogeny. Plant morphologists have found that vascular anatomy, when used in comparative studies, has been a most valuable tool in the reconstruction of plant phylogenies, and they see no valid reason why it is not conclusive in the determination of the nature of the inferior ovary wall.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Abbas, E.-H. 1952. Vergleichen-morphologische Untersuchungen am Gynoeceum der Unterfamilien Melanthioideae und Asphodeloideae der Liliaceae. Arbeit. Inst Bot. Univ. Zürich. Ser. A. No. 4.Google Scholar
  2. Arber, Agnes. 1950. The natural philosophy of plant form.Google Scholar
  3. Arnal, C. 1948. Étude sur les pistils à ovaire infère. I.Sambucus niger. Bull. Soc. Bot. France95(1/2): 60–66.Google Scholar
  4. — etJ. Loiseau. 1946. L’epéron de la fleur deTropaeolum majus L. Compt. Rend. Acad. Sci. [Paris]223: 361.Google Scholar
  5. Baehni, C., etC. E. B. Bonner. 1948. La yascularisation des fleurs chez les Lopezieae (Onagraceae). Candollea11: 305–321.Google Scholar
  6. ——. 1949. La vascularization du tube floral chez les Onagracées. Candollea12: 346–359.Google Scholar
  7. Bailey, I. W., andB. G. L. Swamy. 1951. The conduplicate carpel of dicotyledons and its initial trends of specialization. Amer. Tour. Bot.38: 373–379.Google Scholar
  8. Ball, Ernest. 1949. The shoot apex and normal plant ofLupinus albus L., bases for experimental morphology. Amer. Jour. Bot.36: 440–454.Google Scholar
  9. —. 1950. Isolation, removal and attempted transplants of the central portions of the shoot apex ofLupinus albus L. Amer. Jour. Bot.37: 117–136.Google Scholar
  10. Baum, Hermine. 1948a. Über die postgenital Verwachsung in Karpellen. Österr. Bot. Zeits.95: 86–94.Google Scholar
  11. —. 1948b. Die Verbreitung der postgenital Verwachsung im Gynözeum und ihre Bedeutung für die typologische Betrachtung des coenokarpen Gynözeums. Österr. Bot. Zeits.95: 124–128.Google Scholar
  12. —. 1948c. Postgenitale Verwachsung in und zwischen Karpell- und Staubblattkreisen. S.-B. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Math.-Nat. K1. Sitzber. Abt. I157: 17–38.Google Scholar
  13. —. 1949. Sur Frage des schrittweisen Überganges von apokarpen zum coenokarpen Gynözeum. Österr. Bot. Zeits.95: 470–474.Google Scholar
  14. —. 1950. Septalspalten im Gynözeum vonKoelreuteria paniculata. Österr. Bot. Zeits.97: 208–215.Google Scholar
  15. Benson, M. S., andE. J. Welsford. 1909. The morphology of the ovule and female flower ofJugions regia and a few allied genera. Ann. Bot.23: 623–633.Google Scholar
  16. Berkeley, Edmund. 1953. Morphological studies in the Celastraceae. Jour. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc.69: 185–208.Google Scholar
  17. Black, Caroline E. 1916. The nature of the inflorescence and fruit ofPyrus Malus. N. Y. Bot. Gard., Mem.6: 519–547.Google Scholar
  18. Blaser, H. W., andJ. Einset. 1948. Leaf development in six periclinal chromosomal chimeras of apple varieties. Amer. Jour. Bot.35: 473–483.Google Scholar
  19. ——. 1950. Flower structure in periclinal chimeras of apple. Amer. Jour. Bot.37: 297–304.Google Scholar
  20. Blaser, Jeanne LeC. 1954. The morphology of the flower and inflorescence ofMitchella repens. Amer. Jour. Bot.41: 533–539.Google Scholar
  21. Boke, N. H. 1947. Shoot apex and floral initiation inVinca rosea. Amer. Jour Bot.34: 433–439.Google Scholar
  22. —. 1948. Development of the perianth inVinca rosea L. Amer. Jour. Bot.35: 413–423.Google Scholar
  23. Bonne, Gabrielle. 1928. Recherches sur le pédicelle et la fleur des Rosacées.Google Scholar
  24. Bonner, C. E. B. 1948. The floral vascular supply inEpilobium and related genera. Candollea11: 277–303.Google Scholar
  25. Boring, E. G. 1954. Psychological factors in the scientific process. Amer. Sci.42: 639–645.Google Scholar
  26. Brooks, Reid M. 1940. Comparative histogenesis of vegetative and floral apices inAmygdalus communis, with special reference to the carpel. Hilgardia13: 249–299.Google Scholar
  27. Buchet, S. 1928. La concrescence congenitale n’est pas une vue de l’esprit. Bull. Soc. Bot. France75: 733–740.Google Scholar
  28. Bugnon, P. 1926. Valeur morphologique de l’ovaire infère chez lesBegonia. Bull. Soc. Linn. Normandie, VII.9: 7–25.Google Scholar
  29. —. 1928a. Les bases anatomiques de la théorie de la concrescence congenitale. Bull. Soc. Bot. France75: 25–33.Google Scholar
  30. —. 1928b. La concrescence congenitale n’est par encore devenue un fait indiscutable. Bull. Soc. Bot. France75: 740–750.Google Scholar
  31. — etF. Bugnon. 1953. La paroi de l’ovaire infère des “Begonia” est-elle de nature axile ou appendiculaire ? Bull. Sci. Bourgogne14: 119–127.Google Scholar
  32. Chou, Yü-Liang. 1952. Floral morphology of three species ofGaultheria. Bot. Gaz.114: 198–221.Google Scholar
  33. Copeland, H. F. 1943. A study, anatomical and taxonomic, of the genera of the Rhododendroideae. Amer. Mid. Nat.30: 533–625.Google Scholar
  34. —. 1947. Observations on the structure and classification of the Pyroleae. Madroño9: 65–102.Google Scholar
  35. Coulter, J. M., C. R. Barnes andH. C. Cowles. 1910. A text-book of botany. I. Morphology.Google Scholar
  36. Cross, G. L., andT. J. Johnson. 1941. Structural features of the shoot apices of diploid and colchicine-induced tetraploid strains ofVinca rosea L. Bull Torrey Bot. Club.68: 618–635.Google Scholar
  37. Dermen, Haig. 1953. The pattern of tetraploidy in the flower and fruit of a cytochimeral apple. Jour Hered.44: 31–39.Google Scholar
  38. Douglas, Gertrude E. 1944. The inferior ovary. Bot. Rev.10: 125–186.Google Scholar
  39. Eames, A. J. 1931. The vascular anatomy of the flower with refutation of the theory of carpel polymorphism. Amer. Jour. Bot.18: 147–188.Google Scholar
  40. —. 1953. Floral anatomy as an aid in generic limitation. Chron. Bot.14: 126–132.Google Scholar
  41. - andL. H. MacDaniels. 1947. An introduction to plant anatomy. 2nd ed.Google Scholar
  42. — andC. L. Wilson. 1928. Carpel morphology of the Cruciferae. Amer. Jour. Bot.15: 251–271.Google Scholar
  43. Egler, F. E. 1951. The terminology of floral types. Chron. Bot.12(4/6): 169–173.Google Scholar
  44. Engard, C. J. 1944. Organogenesis inRubus. Univ. Hawaii, Res. Pub. 21.Google Scholar
  45. Esau, Katherine. 1943. Origin and development of primary vascular tissue in seed plants. Bot. Rev.9: 125–206.Google Scholar
  46. -. 1950. Developmental aspects of primary vascularization. Proc. VII Int. Bot. Congr: 395.Google Scholar
  47. -. 1953. Plant anatomy.Google Scholar
  48. Fagerlind, F. 1948. Beiträge zur Kenntnis der Gynaeceummorphologie und Phylogenie der Santales-familien. Svensk. Bot. Tidskr.42: 195–229.Google Scholar
  49. Foster, A. S. 1936. Leaf differentiation in agiosperms. Bot. Rev.2: 349–372.Google Scholar
  50. -. 1949. Practical plant anatomy. 2nd ed.Google Scholar
  51. Gauthier, Roger. 1950. The nature of the inferior ovary in the genusBegonia. Contr. Inst. Bot. Univ. Montreal. No. 66. 1–93.Google Scholar
  52. Gifford, E. M., Jr. 1950. The structure and development of the shoot apex in certain woody Ranales. Amer. Jour. Bot.37: 595–611.Google Scholar
  53. —. 1954. The shoot apex in angiosperms. Bot. Rev.20: 477–529.Google Scholar
  54. Grégoire, V. 1938. La morphogénèse et l’autonomie morphologique de l’appareil floral. I. Le carpelle. Cellule47: 287–452.Google Scholar
  55. Gunckel, J. E., andR. H. Wetmore. 1946. Studies of development in long shoots and short shoots ofGinkgo biloba. II. Phyllotaxies and the origin of the primary vascular system: primary phloem and primary xylem. Amer. Jour. Bot.33: 532–543.Google Scholar
  56. Hsü, J. 1944. Structure and growth of the shoot apex ofSinocalamus beecheyana McClure. Amer. Jour. Bot.31: 404–411.Google Scholar
  57. Jackson, Gemma. 1934. The morphology of the flowers ofRosa and certain closely related genera. Amer. Jour. Bot.21: 453–466.Google Scholar
  58. Kasapligil, B. 1951. Morphological and ontogenetic studies ofUmbellularia californica Nutt. andLaurus nobilis L. Univ. Calif., Pub. Bot25: 115–240.Google Scholar
  59. Kaussman, Bernhard. 1951. Morphologische und anatomische Studien anSchizocapsa plantaginea Hance. Planta39: 91–104.Google Scholar
  60. Koch, Minna F. 1930. Studies in the anatomy and morphology of the Compositae flower. I. The corolla. Amer. Jour. Bot.17: 938–952.Google Scholar
  61. Kraus, E. J. 1913. The pollination of the pomaceous fruits. Gross morphology of the apple. Oregon Agr. Coll. Exp. Sta., Res. Bull. 1, part1: 1–12.Google Scholar
  62. — andG. S. Ralston. 1916. The pollination of the pomaceous fruits. III. Gross vascular anatomy of the apple. Oregon Agr. Coll. Exp. Sta., Bull.138: 1–12.Google Scholar
  63. Leden, R. B. 1954. The vegetative shoot apex ofZea Mays. Amer. Jour. Bot.41: 11–17.Google Scholar
  64. Leinfellner, Walter. 1941. Über den unterständigen Fruchtknoten und einige Bemerkungen über den Bauplan des verwachsenblättrigen Gynoeceums an sich. Bot Archiv42: 1–43.Google Scholar
  65. —. 1951. Die Nachahmung der durch kongenitale Verwachsung enstandenen Formen des Gynözeums durch postgenitale Verschmelzungsvorgänge. Österr. Bot. Zeits.98: 403–411.Google Scholar
  66. —. 1954. Die Kelchblätter und unterständigen Fruchtknoten und Achsenbechern. österr. Bot. Zeits.101: 315–327.Google Scholar
  67. Leroy, J.-F. 1951. Morphologie végétale—Contra la theorie généralisée des carpelles sporophylles. I. Une structure singuliere d’axe invaginé et de placentation caulinaire chezAnnamocarya A. Chev. (Juglandaceae). Comp. Rend. Acad. Sci. [Paris]232: 432–434.Google Scholar
  68. —. 1955. Étude sur les Juglandaceae. Mém. Mus. Nat. Hist. Nat. No. ser. Bot. Paris7: 1–246.Google Scholar
  69. MacDaniels, L. H. 1940. The morphology of the apple and other pome fruits. Cornell Univ. Agr. Exp. Sta., Mem. 230.Google Scholar
  70. Manning, W. E. 1926. The morphology of the flowers of the Juglandaceae. Diss., Cornell Univ.Google Scholar
  71. —. 1940. The morphology of the flowers of the Juglandaceae. II. The pistillate flowers and fruit. Amer. Jour. Bot.27: 839–852.Google Scholar
  72. McCoy, R. W. 1940. Floral organization inFrasera caroliniensis. Amer. Jour. Bot.27: 600–609.Google Scholar
  73. Miller, Helena A., andR. H. Wetmore. 1945. Studies in the developmental anatomy ofPhlox Drummondii Hook. III. The apices of the mature plant. Amer. Jour. Bot.33: 1–10.Google Scholar
  74. Millington andGunckel. 1950. Structure and development of the vegetative shoot tip ofLiriodendron tulipifera L. Amer. Jour. Bot.37: 326–335.Google Scholar
  75. Mort, E. 1950. Vergleichende morphologische Untersuchungen am Gynoeceum der Saxifragaceen. Ber. Schweiz. Bot. Ges.60: 516–590.Google Scholar
  76. Morley, Thomas. 1953. The genusMouriri (Melastomaceae). Univ. Cal. Pub. Bot.26: 223–312.Google Scholar
  77. Nast, Charlotte G. 1935. Morphological development of the fruit ofJuglons regia. Hilgardia9: 345–362.Google Scholar
  78. —. 1944. The comparative morphology of the Winteraceae. VI. Vascular anatomy of the flowering shoot. Jour. Arn. Arb.25: 454–466.Google Scholar
  79. Okimoto, Marion C. 1948. Anatomy and histology of the pineapple inflorescence and fruit. Bot. Gaz.110: 217–231.Google Scholar
  80. Olson, E. S. 1953. Early floral development inGaura coccinea Pursh. Proc. So. Dak. Acad. Sci.32: 41–43.Google Scholar
  81. Ozenda, P. 1949. Recherches sur les Dicotylédones apocarpiques. Contribution à l’étude des Angiospermes dites primitives. Thesis. École Normale Sup. Publ. Ser. Biol. Fasc. II.Google Scholar
  82. Palser, Barbara F. 1951. Studies of floral morphology in the Ericales. I. Organography and vascular anatomy in the Andromedeae. Bot. Gaz.112: 447–485.Google Scholar
  83. —. 1954. Studies of floral morphology in the Ericales. III. Organography and vascular anatomy in several species of the Arbuteae. Phytomorphology4: 335–354.Google Scholar
  84. Parkin, J. 1955. A plea for simpler gynoecium. Phytomorphology5: 46–57.Google Scholar
  85. Philipson, W. R. 1949. The ontogeny of the shoot apex in dicotyledons. Biol. Rev. Cambridge Phil. Soc.24: 21–50.Google Scholar
  86. Popham, R. A., andA. P. Chan. 1950. Zonation in the vegetative stem tip ofChrysanthemum morifolium Bailey. Amer. Jour. Bot.37: 476–484.Google Scholar
  87. Puri, V. 1951. The role of floral anatomy in the solution of morphological problems. Bot. Rev.17: 471–553.Google Scholar
  88. —. 1952a. Floral anatomy and inferior ovary. Phytomorphology2: 122–129.Google Scholar
  89. —. 1952b. Placentation in angiosperms. Bot. Rev.18: 603–651.Google Scholar
  90. Rao, L. N. 1942. Studies in the Santalaceae. Ann. Bot. N.S.6: 151–175.Google Scholar
  91. Rao, V. S. 1949. The morphology of the calyx tube and origin of perigyny in the Turneraceae. Jour. Indian Bot. Soc.28: 198–201.Google Scholar
  92. Sass, J. E. 1944. The initiation and development of foliar and floral organs in the tulip. Iowa State Coll. Jour. Sci.18: 447–456.Google Scholar
  93. Satina, Sophie. 1944. Periclinal chimeras inDatura in relation to development and structure (a) of the style and stigma (b) of the calyx and corolla. Amer. Jour. Bot.31: 493–502.Google Scholar
  94. — andA. F. Blakeslee. 1941. Periclinal chimeras inDatura stramonium in relation to development of leaf and flower. Amer. Jour. Bot.28: 862–867.Google Scholar
  95. ——. 1943. Periclinal chimeras inDatura in relation to the development of the carpel. Amer. Jour. Bot.30: 453–462.Google Scholar
  96. Saunders, Edith R. 1925. On carpel polymorphism. I. Ann. Bot.39: 123–167.Google Scholar
  97. —. 1927. On carpel polymorphism. II. Ann. Bot.41: 569–627.Google Scholar
  98. —. 1931. Illustrations of carpel polymorphism. VII. Begoniaceae. New Phyt.30: 97–101.Google Scholar
  99. Schaeppi, H., undF. Steindl. 1942. Blütenmorphologische und embryologische Untersuchungen an Loranthoideen. Vjschr. nat. Ges. Zürich87: 301–372.Google Scholar
  100. - und -. 1945. Blütenmorphologische und embryologische Untersuchungen an einigen Viscoideen. Vjschr. nat. Ges. Zürich90: Beiheft Nr. 1.Google Scholar
  101. ——. 1950. Vergleichend-morphologische Untersuchungen am Gynoeceum des Rosoideen. Ber. Schweiz. Bot. Ges.60: 15–50.Google Scholar
  102. Scott, D. F. 1932. Discussion on Dr. Hamshaw Thomas’ paper, “The old morphology and the new”. Proc. Linn. Soc. London. Session145, 145: p. 39.Google Scholar
  103. Sharma, D. N. 1949. Vascular anatomy of the flower of some species of the Cactaceae. Unpub. thesis, Agra Univ.Google Scholar
  104. Sharman, B. C. 1945. Leaf and bud initiation in the Gramineae. Bot. Gaz.106: 269–289.Google Scholar
  105. Shuhart, D. C. 1932. Morphology and anatomy of the fruit ofHicoria pecan. Bot. Gaz.93: 1–20.Google Scholar
  106. Sifton, H. B. 1944. Developmental morphology of vascular plants. New Phytol43: 87–129.Google Scholar
  107. Singh, D. 1954. Floral morphology and embryology ofHedera nepalensis K. Koch. Agra Univ., Jour. Res. Sci. Agra3: 289–299.Google Scholar
  108. Smith, F. H. andElizabeth, C. 1942a. Anatomy of the inferior ovary ofDarbya. Amer. Jour. Bot.29: 464–471.Google Scholar
  109. - and -. 1942b. Floral anatomy of the Santalaceae and some related forms. Oregon State Monographs, Studies in Bot. No. 5.Google Scholar
  110. Smith, G. H. 1928. Vascular anatomy of ranalian flowers. II. Bot. Gaz.85: 152–177.Google Scholar
  111. Snow, Edna. 1945. Floral morphology ofChrysothamnus nauscosus speciosus. Bot. Gaz.106: 451–462.Google Scholar
  112. Stebbins, G. L. 1940. The Cichorieae. Mem. Torrey Bot. Club19: 5–76.Google Scholar
  113. Swamy, B. G. L. 1948. Vascular anatomy of orchid flowers. Bot. Mus. Leafl. Harvard Univ.13(4): 61–91.Google Scholar
  114. Tepfer, S. S. 1953. Floral anatomy and ontogeny inAquilegia formosa var.truncata andRanunculus repens. Univ. Cal. Pub. Bot25(7): 513–648.Google Scholar
  115. Tiagi, Y. D. 1955. Studies in floral morphology. II. Vascular anatomy of the flower in certain species of the Cactaceae. Jour. Indian Bot. Soc.34: 408–428.Google Scholar
  116. Tukey, H. B., andJ. O. Young. 1942. Gross morphology and histology of developing fruit of the apple. Bot. Gaz.104: 3–25.Google Scholar
  117. van Tieghem, P. 1871. Recherches sur la structure du pistil et sur l’anatomie comparée de la fleur. Mém. des savants étrangers à l’Institut de France21: 1–261.Google Scholar
  118. Wardlaw, C. W. 1950. The comparative investigation of apices of vascular plants by experimental methods. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London. Ser. B. Biol. Sci.234: 583–609.Google Scholar
  119. —. 1953. Comparative observations on the shoot apices of vascular plants. New Phytol.52: 195–210.Google Scholar
  120. Wetmore, R. H., andC. W. Wardlaw. 1951. Experimental morphogenesis in vascular plants. Ann. Rev. Plant. Physiol.2: 269–292.Google Scholar
  121. Wilkinson, Antoinette M. 1944. Floral anatomy of some species ofCornus. Bull. Torrey Bot. Club71: 276–301.Google Scholar
  122. —. 1948a. Floral anatomy and morphology of some species of the tribe Lonicereae of the Caprifoliaceae. Amer. Jour. Bot.35: 261–271.Google Scholar
  123. —. 1948b. Floral anatomy and morphology of some species of the tribes Linnaeae and Sambuceae of the Caprifoliaceae. Amer. Jour. Bot.35: 365–371.Google Scholar
  124. —. 1948c. Floral anatomy and morphology of some species of the genusViburnum of the Caprifoliaceae. Amer. Jour. Bot.35: 455–465.Google Scholar
  125. —. 1949. Floral anatomy and morphology ofTriosteum and of the Caprifoliaceae in general. Amer. Jour. Bot.36: 481–489.Google Scholar
  126. Wilson, C. L., andT. Just. 1939. The morphology of the flower. Bot. Rev.5: 97–131.Google Scholar
  127. Wunderlich, Rosalie. 1950. Die Agavaceae Hutchinson’s im Lichte ihrer Embryologie, ihres Gynözeum-, Steubblatt- und Blattbaues. Öesterr. Bot. Zeits.97: 437–502.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The New York Botanical Garden 1957

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gertrude E. Douglas
    • 1
  1. 1.Feura BushN. Y.

Personalised recommendations