=149. Plasticity and fixity.= As the product of accumulated responses, each species is characterized by a certain ability or inability to react to stimuli. Many facts seem to indicate that the degree of stability is connected with the length of time during which the species is acted upon by the same stimuli. It seems probable that plants which have reacted to sunlight for hundreds of years will respond less readily to shade than those which have grown in the sun for a much shorter period. This hypothesis is not susceptible of proof in nature because it is ordinarily impossible to distinguish species upon the basis of the time during which they have occupied one habitat. Evidence and ultimate proof, perhaps, can be obtained only by field and control experiments, in which the time of occupation of any habitat is definitely known. Even in this case, however, it is clear that antecedent habitats will have left effects which can neither be traced nor ignored. Additional support is given this view by the fact that extreme types, both ecological and taxonomic, are the most stable. Intense xerophytes and hydrophytes are much more fixed than mesophytes, though the intensity of the stimulus has doubtless as great an influence as its duration. Composites, labiates, grasses, orchids, etc., are less plastic than ranals, rosals, etc., but there are many exceptions to the apparent rule that fixity increases with taxonomic complexity. At present it seems quite impossible to suggest an explanation of the rule. Recent experiments indicate that there may be ancestral fixity of function, as well as of structure. It has been found, for example, that the flowers of certain species always react normally to the stimuli which produce opening and closing, while others make extremely erratic response. If further work confirms this result and extends it to other functions, the necessity of arriving at a better understanding of fixity will be greatly emphasized. It is impossible to make progress in the study of adaptation without recognizing the fundamental importance of ancestral fixity as a factor. E. S. Clements[9] has shown that a number of species undergo pronounced changes in habitat without showing appreciable modification. Consequently, it is incorrect to assume that each habitat puts a structural impress upon every plant that enters it. For this reason, the writer feels that the current explanation of xerophytic bog plants, etc., is probably wrong, and that the discrepancy between the nature of the habitat and the structure of the plant is to be explained by the persistence of a fixed ancestral type. The anomaly is scarcely greater than in cases that have proved capable of being explained.