Tas. 4781. 
DESFONTAINIA spinosa. 
Holly-leaved Desfontainia. 
Nat. Ord. SOLANEIS AFFINE ?—PENTANDRIA Monoeynia. 
Gen. Char. Calyx 5-partitus, persistens, laciniis lanceolatis erectis. Corolla 
tubulosa, subimmersa, subcartilaginea, tubo calycem duplo superante, nervoso ; 
nervis per medias limbi patentis equaliter 5-partiti lacinias ovatas estivatione 
imbricatas decurrentibus. Stamina 5, fauci corolle inserta, ejusdem laciniis al- 
terna, inclusa. Filamenta brevia, complanata. <Anthere lanceolate, acute, basi 
-affixee, biloculares, longitudinaliter dehiscentes. Ovarium ovali-globosum, quin- 
queloculare, placentis carnosis in loculorum angulis interioribus ; ovw/is nume- 
rosis subquadriserialibus pendentibus. Bacca globosa, calyce persistente munita. 
Semina plurima, parva, ovato-oblonga, nitida, angulata, testa coriacea hine raphe 
prominula callosa umbilicum basilarem chalazee apice dilatatee jungente percursa. 
Embryo in basi albuminis dense carnosi_copiosi prope umbilicum minimum sub- 
globosum, cotyledonibus brevissimis.—Frutices Peruviani (et Chilenses). Folia 
opposita, dentato-spinosa, petiolata, coriacea, amara, petiolis cum ramo articulatis. 
Flores azillares et terminales, solitarii, pedunculati; pedunculis bibracteolatis. 
Corolla coccinea, limbo luteo.—Dun. (in part.) 
DESFONTAINIA spinosa. 
Dgsrontainra spinosa. Ruiz et Pav. Fl. Peruv. v. 2. p- 47. t. 186. Hook. Ic. 
Pl. v.1. t. 33. Hook. fil. Fl. Antaret. v. 2. p. 332. Dunal in De Cand. 
Prodr. v, 13. p. 675. 
DesronTaINtA splendens. H. B. Pl. Aiquinoct. v. 1. p. 157. ¢. 45. Dunal, 
l.c., p. 676. 
Desrontarnta Hookeri. Dunal, J. c., p. 676. 
DesFoNTAINIA acutangula. Dunal, l.c., p. 676. 
This splendid accession to our garden culture has been long 
known in our Herbaria, but its place in the Natural System 1s_ 
still a puzzle. We had hoped to have found the subject dis- — 
cussed in some of the many learned essays on Solanee by our — 2 
valued friend Mr. Miers; but he writes word to us, “ I have not — 
taken up Desfontainia, because I always considered it quite fo- 
‘reign to Solanacee, especially on account of its opposite leaves, — 
the sstivation of its corolla, and structure of its ovarilum; nor 
does it accord better with any genus of Aéropacee. 
MAY Ist, 1854. 
