vegetative features, 
THE ORIGIN OF ANGIOSPERMS. 33 
points of close resemblance to certain Monocotyledons, 
but to build a relationship upon such slight evidence appears to us hardly 
worthy serious consideration. In fact Campbell himself says * : “There 18, 
however an immense interval between the flower of the simplest angiosperm 
and the porophylls of 7soetes, and it would be rash to assume a relationship 
unless moi ~ evidence can be produced on the side of the angiosperms to 
warrant this. 
It is generan “held that when we first meet with fossil Angiosperms in the 
Mesozoic rocks, th. Yeaf-impressions closely resemble those of existing genera. 
Whence they sprar 
Saporta and M: 
Іг Évolution du R 
for a hypothetical 
Monocotyledons ar 
such fossils as Wili 
gestions we think 
their disposal. I 
supports them. 
A brief reference 
Angiosperms and 
particular group h: 
features in commor 
establish a clear rel 
Lotsy 1, from ar 
The ¢ 
independently of 
Pteridophytes, and, 
Lignier §, more 
fructifications, also 
a complex infloresc: 
conclusions. 
show any affinity b 
Hence he conelud 
Gymnosperms and 
Miss Benson |, 
memoirs, has ende: 
line with that of 
the internodes in t 
further, so that the 
resembling the re 
complicated, and | 
* (190 
| Lots 
|| Bens 
LINN. JOURN.—B¢ 
| has hitherto remained a complete mystery. 
don f, some twenty years ago, in their work entitled 
gne végétal, brought into use the term Proangiosperms 
group of extinct plants which gave rise to the modern 
. Dicotyledons. They went even further, and included 
Imsona among the members of this group. These sug- 
yere particularly happy, considering the material then at 
the main palzobotanical science at the present time 
must be made to the supposed connection between the 
he Gnetacee. Of all the existing Gymnosperms, this 
| long been considered to show the largest number of 
with the true Flowering Plants. Attempts, however, to 
tionship have not met with much success. 
embryological study of Gnetum, came to the following 
oup appears to be of very ancient origin, it probably arose 
је other Gymnosperms direct from the heterosporous 
noreover, has not given rise to any single Angiosperm. 
ecently, from a general examination of the Gnetacean 
ecides against any direct relationship. He says that such 
ice as that possessed by the Gnetaceze cannot be held to 
ween this group and the simplest Angiospermous flower. 
‚ that the Gnetacez are not intermediate between the 
ngiosperms. 
п the other hand, since the publication of these two 
roured to bring the floral morphology of this group into 
пе Angiosperm. She suggests that the suppression of 
e inflorescence of Gnetum may have been carried still 
whole is reduced to a conical torus, that is to а structure 
»ptacle of a flower like Liriodendron. This seems а 
rdly justifiable hypothesis, for there is no evidence to 
| р. 254. t Saporta & Marion (1885). 
(1899). $ Lignier (19052). 
а (19045. 
IANY, VOL. XXXVIII. D 
