I have referred to the remarkable observation of Fitting that though the application of stimulus on the upper side of the tendril of _Passiflora_ did not induce any response, yet it inhibited the normal response of the under side. The results of experiments which I have described will, however, afford a satisfactory explanation of this curious inhibition. It has been explained, that the curvature of the tendril is due to the joint effects of diminished turgor and contraction at the directly stimulated side, and an enhancement of turgor and expansion on the opposite side. In the diagram seen in figure 106, the left is the more excitable side, and contraction will induce concavity of the stimulated side. But if the opposite or less excitable side of the tendril be stimulated at the same time, then the transmitted effect of indirect stimulus will induce enhancement of turgor and expansion on the left side, and thus neutralise the previous effect of direct stimulus. An inhibition of response will thus result from the stimulation of the opposite side. [Illustration: FIG. 106.--Diagrammatic representation of effects of Indirect and Direct unilateral stimulation of the tendril. Indirect stimulation, I, induces movement away from stimulated side (negative curvature) represented by continuous arrow. Direct stimulation, D, induces movement towards stimulus (positive curvature) indicated by dotted arrow.] A difficulty arises here from the fact that the upper side of the tendril (the right side in Fig. 106) is supposed to be inexcitable and non-contractile. Hence there may be a misgiving that the stimulation of the non-motile side may not induce the effect of indirect stimulus (an increase of turgor and expansion) at the opposite side, which is to inhibit the response. But I have shown that even a non-contractile organ under stimulus generates both the impulses, positive and negative. This is seen illustrated in figure 100, where the rigid stem of _Mimosa_ was subjected to unilateral stimulation; the effect of indirect stimulus was found to induce an enhancement of turgor at the diametrically opposite side, and thus caused an erectile movement of the motile leaf. Electric investigations which I have carried out also corroborate the results given above. Here also stimulation of a non-motile organ at any point, induces at a diametrically opposite point, a positive electric variation indicative of enhanced turgor. It will thus be seen that inhibition is possible even in the absence of contraction of the upper side of the tendril; hence the contraction of the directly stimulated side is neutralised by the effect of indirect stimulation of the distal side. RESPONSE OF LESS EXCITABLE SIDE OF THE TENDRIL.