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