Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-10T01:49:35.288Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Fine Structure of the Spermatozoids of Vaucheria Sescuplicaria and on the Later Stages in Spermatogenesis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 May 2009

Ø Moestrup
Ø Moestrup
Affiliation:
Botany Department, University of Leeds, England
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In 1801 Vaucher discovered the oogonia of Vaucheria—or Ectosperma as he called it—but he described the antheridia in a very incomplete way without seeing the spermatozoids (Vaucher, 1801, 1803). These were first observed some fifty years later by Pringsheim (1855), who also saw fertilization, one of the first observations on fertilization to be made in the lower plants.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom , Volume 50 , Issue 2 , May 1970 , pp. 513 - 523
Copyright
Copyright © Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 1970

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bouck, G. B., 1969. Extracellular microtubules. The origin, structure, and attachment of flagellar hairs in Fucus and Ascophyllum antherozoids. J. Cell Biol., Vol. 40, pp. 446–60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carothers, Z. B. & Kreitner, G. L., 1967. Studies of spermatogenesis in the Hepaticae. I. Ultrastructure of the Vierergruppe in Marchantia. J. Cell Biol., Vol. 33, pp. 43–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carothers, Z. B. & Kreitner, G. L., 1968. Studies of spermatogenesis in the Hepaticae. II. Blepharoblast structure in the spermatid of Marchantia. J. Cell Biol., Vol. 36, pp. 603–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, T., 1962. Alger. In Botanik (Systematisk Botanik), ed. Böcher, T. W., M., Lange & T., Sørensen. Bd. 2, 178 pp. Copenhagen: Munksgaard (edn 2, 1966).Google Scholar
Couch, J. N., 1932. Gametogenesis in Vaucheria. Bot.Gaz., Vol. 94, pp. 272–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dangeard, P., 1939. Le genre Vaucheria, spécialement dans la région du sud-ouest de la France. Botaniste, T. 29, pp. 183–264.Google Scholar
De Bary, A., 1856. Ueber den geschlechtlichen Zeugungsprozess bei den Algen. Ber. naturf. Ges. Freiburg, Bd. 13, pp. 215–30.Google Scholar
Gatenby, J. Brontë & Dalton, A. J., 1959. Spermiogenesis in Lumbricus herculeus. An electron microscope study. J. biophys. biochem. Cytol., Vol. 6, pp. 45–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenwood, A. D., 1959. Observations on the structure of the zoospores of Vaucheria. II. J. exp. Bot., Vol. 110, pp. 55–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross, C., 1937. The cytology of Vaucheria. Bull. Torrey bot. Club, Vol. 64, pp. 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heidinger, W., 1908. Die Entwicklung der Sexualorgane bei Vaucheria. Ber.dt. bot. Ges., Bd. 26, pp. 313–63.Google Scholar
Hoffman, L. R. & Manton, I., 1963. Observations on the fine structure of Oedogonium. II. The spermatozoid of O. cardiacum. Am. J. Bot., Vol. 50, pp. 455–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koch, W. J., 1951. A study of the motile cells of Vaucheria. J. Elisha Mitchell scient. Soc., Vol. 67, pp. 123–31.Google Scholar
Manton, I., 1957 a. Observations with the electron microscope on the internal structure of the zoospore of a brown alga. J. exp. Bot., Vol. 8, pp. 294–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manton, I., 1957b. Observations with the electron microscope on the cell structure of the antheridium and spermatozoid of Sphagnum. J. exp. Bot., Vol. 8, pp. 382–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manton, I., 1959a. Observations on the microanatomy of the spermatozoid of the bracken fern (Pteridium aquilinum). J. biophys. biochem. Cytol., Vol. 6, pp. 413–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Manton, I., 1959b. Observations on the internal structure of the spermatozoid of Dictyota. J. exp. Bot., Vol. 10, pp. 448–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manton, I., 1964. A contribution towards understanding of ‘The primitive Fucoid’. New Phytol., Vol. 63, pp. 244–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manton, I. & Clarke, B., 1951. An electron microscope study of the spermatozoid of Fucus serratus. Ann. Bot., Vol. 15, pp. 461–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manton, I. & Clarke, B., 1952. An electron microscope study of the spermatozoid of Sphagnum. J. exp. Bot., Vol. 3, pp. 265–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manton, I. & Clarke, B., 1956. Observations with the electron microscope on the internal structure of the spermatozoid of Fucus. J. exp. Bot., Vol. 7, pp. 416–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manton, I., Clarke, B. & Greenwood, A. D., 1953. Further observations with the electron microscope on spermatozoids in the brown algae. J. exp. Bot., Vol. 4, pp. 319–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manton, I. & Friedmann, I., 1960. Gametes, fertilization, and zygote development in Prasiola stipitata. Nova Hedwigia, Bd. 1, pp. 443–62.Google Scholar
Manton, I. & Von Stosch, H. A., 1966. Observations on the fine structure of the male gamete of the centric diatom Lithodesmium undulatum. Jl R. microsc. Soc., Vol. 85, pp. 119–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Massalski, A. & Leedale, G. F., 1969. Cytology and ultrastructure of the Xanthophyceae. I. Comparative morphology of the zoospores of Bumilleria sicula Borzi and Tribonema vulgare Pascher. Br. phycol. J., Vol. 4, pp. 159–80.Google Scholar
Oltmanns, F., 1895. Ueber die Entwicklung der Sexualorgane bei Vaucheria. Flora, Jena, Bd. 80, pp. 388–420.Google Scholar
Pickett-Heaps, J. D., 1968. Ultrastructure and differentiation in Chara (fibrosa). IV. Spermatogenesis. Aust. J. biol. Sci., Vol. 21, pp. 655–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pringsheim, N., 1855. Ueber die Befruchtung und Keimung der Algen und das Wesen des Zeugungsactes. Mber. K. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. Berl., 1855, pp. 133–65.Google Scholar
Reynolds, S., 1963. The use of lead citrate at high pH as an electron-opaque stain in electron microscopy. J. Cell Biol., Vol. 17, pp. 208–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rieth, A., 1954. Beobachtungen zur Entwicklungsgeschichte einer Vaucheria der Sektion Woroninia. Flora, Jena, Bd. 142, pp. 156–82.Google Scholar
Rieth, A., 1956. Zur Kenntnis halophiler Vaucherien. Flora, Jena, Bd. 153, pp. 127–60.Google Scholar
Solms-Laubach, H., 1867. Ueber Vaucheria dichotoma DC. Bot.-Ztg, Bd. 25, pp. 361–6.Google Scholar
Strasburger, E., 1889. Handbook of Practical Botany. 2nd edn, pp. 250–4. London: Swan Sonnenschein and Co.Google Scholar
Turner, F. R., 1968. An ultrastructural study of plant spermatogenesis. Spermatogenesis in Nitella. J. Cell Biol., Vol. 37, pp. 370–93.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vaucher, P., 1801. Mémoire sur les graines des conferves. J. de physique, de chimie, d'histoire naturelle et des arts, T. 52, pp. 344–59.Google Scholar
Vaucher, P., 1803. Histoire des conferves d'eau douce. 285 pp. Genève: Paschoud.Google Scholar
Von Stosch, H. A., 1954. Die oogamie von Biddulphia mobiliensis und die bisher bekannten auxosporenbildungen bei den Centrales. Rapp. Comm. 8ième Congr. int. Bot., Sect. 17, pp. 58–68. Paris: Pierre André.Google Scholar
Walz, J., 1866–1867. Beitrag zur Morphologie und Systematik der Gattung Vaucheria DC. Jb. wiss. Bot., Bd. 5, pp. 127–60.Google Scholar
Woronin, M., 1869. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Vaucherien. Bot. Ztg, Bd. 27, pp. 137et seq.Google Scholar