M brief in writing this essay is to provide a state-of-the-art review about research into the organisation and function of the lampbrush chromosomes that are found in the growing oocytes of amphibians, The task is likely to be pleasurable, since lampbrushology is a field of research that offers wide horizons and innumerable challenges. Within this field, the questions remain clear and the challenges manageable. As from the very beginning all we have to do is sort out our reasoning, take advantage of what Nature has to offer, steady our hands, and get on with the job.My starting point is a paper written in 1975 (Macgregor, 1977) in which I attempted to summarise the history of lampbrush studies and focused on two major questions. The first concerned the functional significance of a lampbrush loop. The second question concerned the nature of a lampbrush chromomere and its associated loops in molecular terms. At the time, the answers were difficult to find. In the matter of function I concluded that there was widespread transcription of many DNA sequences on the lateral loops of lampbrush chromosomes. The primary transcript was large. Only a small part of it was retained, and apart from clearly repetitive sequences such as the ribosomal, 5S, and histone genes, the retained material was transcribed from single copies. This explanation fitted with most of the available evidence in 1975. rt did not tell us anything about regulation of transcription, and it did not explain the fact that a set of lampbrush chromosomes may have as many as 5000 chromomeres, all of which bear ioops that are transcriptionally active at the same time. In particular, I concluded that Callan's spinning out and retraction hypothesis (Callan and Lloyd, 1960;Gall and Callan, 1962;Snow and Callan, 1969) in which he sought to explain the shape of an average lampbrush loop, its relationship with its chromomere and its extension and retraction during oogenesis, was open to question and further experimentation. Essentially, the problem of movement of the DNA loop axis and its associated RNP product, or movement of the RNP transcript over the stationary loop axis was unresolved. As we shall see later, the clear solution of this particular problem represents one of the major steps forward of the past 5 years.With regard to chromomeres, the scarcity of hard data imposed rather strict limits on speculation. I suggested in 1975 that chromomeric material was essentially heterochromatic in the same general sense that a chromocentre is heterochromatic, and that it owed its compactness to a commonness in the sequences of its DNA. I represented an average chromomere as a gathering together of a stretch of DNA that was rich in a particular repetitive 3