Sachs first clearly pointed out the important difference between the action of light in modifying the periodic movements of leaves, and in causing them to bend towards its source. The latter, or heliotropic movements are determined by the direction of the light, whilst periodic movements are affected by changes in its intensity and not by its direction. The periodicity of the circumnutating movement often continues for some time in darkness, as we have seen in the last chapter; whilst heliotropic bending ceases very quickly when the light fails. Nevertheless, plants which have ceased through long-continued darkness to move periodically, if re-exposed to the light are still, according to Sachs, heliotropic.

Apheliotropism, or, as usually designated, negative heliotropism, implies that a plant, when unequally illuminated on the two sides, bends from the light, instead of, as in the last sub-class of cases, towards it; but apheliotropism is comparatively rare, at least in a well-marked degree. There is a third and large subclass of cases, namely, those of “Transversal-Heliotropismus” of Frank, which we will here call diaheliotropism. Parts of plants, under this influence, place themselves more or less transversely to the direction whence the light proceeds, and are thus fully illuminated. There is a fourth sub-class, as far as the final cause of the movement is concerned; for the leaves of some plants when exposed to an intense and injurious amount of light direct themselves, by rising or sinking or twisting, so as to be less intensely illuminated.