Concerning the Duality of the Mitochondria and the Validity of the Osmiophilic Platelets in Plants

The results of this study show that there are no distinctions in morphology, structure, chemistry, function, staining behavior, or behavior during mitosis among the mitochondria in plants whereby one can separate them into categories of organelles among which there is no genetic relation. The two specific theories of the duality of the mitochondria in plants promulgated by Guilliermond and Bowen, respectively, are shown to be invalid. The results of this study and the literature on the subject suggest that the functions of mitochondria are multiple, variable or perhaps eclectic in nature, subject to the genetic and metabolic requirements of the organism. The osmiophilic platelets are not cell organs sui generis, but artefacts of a deformed mitochondriome produced by capricious technics. The heretofore mutually exclusive acid and basic fixation images have been combined to achieve complete fixation. Suggestions for the correction and simplification of the terminology used in reference to mitochondria in plants are made as follows: (1) the term mitochondria (mitos, thread-chondrion, small grain) coined by Benda in 1897, should be retained on grounds of etymology, priority and common usage; (2) the term mitosome should be used logically in reference to the elongated or thread-like mitochondria, and the term chondriosome should be used in reference to the granular mitochondria; (3) the term mitochondriome should be used in a collective sense in reference to all the mitochondria of a cell or tissue. Since none of the mitochondrial technics found in the literature gave adequate or consistent results, it is suggested that the emphasis for future mitochondrial investigations be shifted from morphological descriptions based upon inadequate technics to the subject of technic itself.