Page:History of botany (Sachs; Garnsey).djvu/332

312

in which he announced this theory and set aside every objection that was made to it, combined with his great reputation at the time, at once procured for it the consideration of botanists generally; and the most important representatives of phytotomy, von Mohl himself at first not excepted, allowed that there was a certain amount of justification for it. It was a question in which theoretical considerations were not of primary importance; direct and varied observation of careful preparations with strong magnifying powers could alone form the basis for further investigation. Unger showed in this way that the processes at the growing point of the stem could scarcely be reconciled with Schleiden's theory, and in this view he was supported by the English botanist Henfrey; but Nägeli was the first who addressed himself with energy and sound reasoning to the important and difficult question, how cells are formed in reproductive and growing vegetative organs, and how far the processes are the same in the lower Cryptogams and in the Phanerogams. He set out by assuming that Schleiden's theory was in the main correct, but his long-continued investigations led him finally to the conviction that it must be entirely abandoned, and he proposed the outlines of the theory of cell-formation which is accepted at the present time. In this case, as before in questions of morphology, he applied himself first, and with great success, to the investigation of the lower Cryptogams, while Alexander Braun's observations on some very simple Algae contributed materially to the further development of the cell-theory, and especially to extending and correcting the idea of the cell; Hofmeister's researches also in embryology not only produced great results for morphology, but at the same time supplied a variety of facts which served to complete Nägeli's view. The further this was worked out, the more apparent it became that the external circumstances in the processes of cell-formation might be very various, and that von Mohl's earlier observations especially gave a correct representation of individual and typical cases; but more important