The work of TREVIRANUS[76], to which the judges at Göttingen awarded
the second place, is much less comprehensive than those of his
competitors; the style is inferior to Link’s, and may even be called
clumsy. But the much better figures show at once that Treviranus was
the more accurate observer, and his work, in spite of the inferiority
of its style, is of far higher value on account of the attention paid
in it to the history of development; Treviranus laid greater stress on
this method than either Link or Rudolphi, and it led him to form views
on some of the fundamental questions of phytotomy, in which we see the
germs of theories afterwards perfected by von Mohl. His account of the
formation of cell-tissue is mainly that of Sprengel, and therefore an
unfortunate one; but nevertheless his observations on the composition
of wood and the nature of vessels were as good and correct as could
be expected from the condition of the microscope at the time. He made
one discovery of considerable value, that of the intercellular spaces
in parenchyma, but he lessened its merit by filling these passages
with sap, and even describing its movement. Woody fibres are due, he
thinks, to strong longitudinal extension of vesicles. He supported
Bernhardi’s view of the nature of vessels, that the separable spiral
threads of spiral vessels are not wound round a membranous tube but
are surrounded by one. He maintains against Bernhardi the distinctness
of punctated vessels or porous woody tubes from false tracheae or
scalariform vessels, while he gave a more correct description of the
latter as they occur in Ferns. He rejected Mirbel’s view that the pits
in dotted vessels are depressions surrounded by a raised glandular
edge, and explained them as grains or little spheres. Against this
mistake we may set off the very important step which he made in
advance, when he not only conjectured that the pitted vessels of the
wood are formed from cells previously divided off from one another,
but proved by observation that the members composing such vessels are
at first actually separated by oblique cross-walls, which afterwards
disappear. But this correct observation was impaired by the mistaken
idea, which Treviranus shared with his predecessors, that the wood
is the result of transformation of the bast, and consequently that
the vessels of the wood are bast-fibres, which elongate considerably
after they are arranged in a direct chain one after the other; the
unevennesses caused by the oblique junctions of the tissue gradually
disappear, the boundaries of each member of a vessel being still for
some time indicated by oblique transverse markings. The dividing
walls originally existing at these points disappear by widening of
the cavities, so that the different parts come to form a continuous
canal. To illustrate the disappearance of a parting wall between two
adjoining cells Treviranus aptly points, somewhat to our surprise, to
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account