Summary
(1) Some of the developments which have made for a fuller understanding of the shoot apex in pteridophytes are discussed, particular attention being paid to morphogenetic processes, (2) Of the several interpretations of growth and cellular arrangement at the apex which have been advanced, that of Naegeli, in which the importance of the apical cell is emphasized, appears to be most applicable to the livingpteridophytes; Sachs's geometrical‐mechanical views emphasize another aspect of organization at the shoot apex, while his comprehensive outlook on the nature of the meristematic region as a whole deserves careful attention. (3) In the pteridophytes, with some exceptions, there is no obligate relation between apical segmentation and organogenesis and histogenesis, i.e., segmentation does not determine organogeny. (4) The value of the facts of apical segmentation in phylogenetic studies is discussed. (5) The history of causal morphology is briefly outlined. If the phyletic history of plants were before us in full, the problems of causal morphology would still remain. These includethe external and internal factors which determine morphogenetic processes and specific structural organization. (6) The development of leaf primordia in ferns and in dicotyledons is compared: the data show that a knowledge of the fern leaf may be regarded as essential to any general theory of leaf development. Such a theory must include a consideration of spatial, metabolic and mechanical factors. (7) The view is developed that shoot buds in ferns occupy an interfoliar position at the time of their inception, the position which they eventually occupy on the shoot or leaf base being determined by the distribution of growth. Bud development thus requires a study of the integrated growth activities at the apex. (8) An account is given of the initial and subsequent differentiation and development of vascular tissue at the shoot apex; spatial, metabolic and mechanical factors which may be implicated are discussed. The view‐is held that the structural arrangements observed should be interpreted in terms of growth and not of adult functional activities. (9) Views based on comparative studies which relate to the fundamental nature of the shoot are of two kinds, i.e. axial and phytonic, a constructional unit being taken for granted‐in each case. It is anticipated that investigations of the growing point from the standpoint'of causality may eventually lead to new concepts regarding the shoot type of organization. An indication is given of some of the factors which may lend themselves to further investigation.