Moquin has given an explanation of the St. Valery Apples, wherein the petals are sepaloid, the stamens absent, and where there is a double row of carpels, by supposing these peculiarities to be due to "a prolification combined with penetration and fusion of two or more flowers," but it is surely more reasonable to conceive a second row of carpels placed above the first by the prolongation of the central part of the axis. Supposing this view to be correct, the inner calyx-like whorl might be considered either as a repetition of the calycine whorl, or it might be inferred that the corolla was present in the guise of a second calyx. Moquin-Tandon suggests another explanation--namely, that though the stamens are absent in these curious flowers, at least in their ordinary shape, they are represented by the lower row of carpels, which become, in process of development, fused with the upper or true carpels. If this were so, surely some intermediate conditions between stamen and carpel would occasionally be present; but such does not appear to be the case.[133] In some of the instances of so-called proliferous pears the carpels would seem to be entirely absent, and the dilated portion of the axis to be alone repeated. Thus, the axis dilates to form the lower fruit without any true carpels being produced, but at its summit a whorl of leaves (sepals) is formed; above these another swelling of the axis takes place also without the formation of carpels, and this, it may be, is terminated in its turn by a branch producing leaves. In these cases there is no true prolification, but simply an extension of the axis. That the outer portion (so-called calyx-tube) of these fruits is really an axile product there can now be little doubt; and, as if to show their axile nature, they occasionally produce leaves from their sides, as before mentioned. Moquin, in the tenth volume of the 'Bulletin of the Botanical Society of France,' p. 73, says that when the case is one of prolification the lower fruit is larger and is formed of a fleshy mass; moreover, the line of demarcation between the fruits is more distinct, and there are traces of the seed-bearing cavity in the interior, and of calycine lobes at the top. On the other hand, if the case be one of hypertrophy merely, the lowermost fruit is the smallest, and there is no trace of seed-bearing cavity nor of sepals. See also under Hypertrophy. Some other malformations usually referred to prolification of the fruit seem due to branching of the inflorescence, as in _Plantago_, wheat, maize; or to a simple extension of the axis beyond its ordinary limit, as in some cones of firs, &c. It is obvious that the true fruits in these cases are in no wise affected. From these considerations it would appear better to abandon the use of the expression prolification of the fruit, as unnecessary where it is really applicable, and as delusive in the numerous other cases where it is employed.