Nancy Harrison vulpia at sonic.net
Mon Oct 20 18:27:10 EST 1997

>ross and Nancy,  
>Please don't take my answer as authoritative, but here goes:  Richard
>Bateman reviewed the history of definitions of the term heterospory in a
>recent paper (1994, Biological Reviews 69:345-417).  He defined heterospory
>SENSU STRICTO as viable spore size bimodality.  In doing this, he attempted
>to remove the theoretical baggage of seed evolution from merely having
>different sized spores.  Additionally, he defined many other terms, some of
>which I have not heard before.  Thus, according to him, heterosporous 
>need not have sexes apportioned to different gametophytes.  On the other
>hand, some authors state that sexual separation is the only important point
>(Bold et al. for example).  Personally, I would go with Bateman's 
>Douglas P. Jensen, Assistant Professor of Biology

Doug: This is very interesting .. I will look up that article.
We are in general sticking with the "two sizes" interpretation,
but it does leave a lot to be desired: that "excess baggage"
you speak of. Thanks so much!

More information about the Plant-ed mailing list