Mr. Brown, on the Proteacee of Jussieu. > 51 
Nua v. Samara monosperma, squamis (quandoque cohzren- 
tibus) strobili inclusa. . To | 
Hapirus. Frutices, raró Arbores, sepe sericeo-tomentosi. Folia 
integerrima. Capitula terminalia, solitaria ; bracteis imbricatis fo- 
liisve verticillatis et subcoloratis plerumque cincta. 
Oss. The separation of sexes in the genus Protea of authors, ob- 
scurely suspected by Linnzeus himself in his Protea parviflora, 
and afterwards more expressly by Lamarck in P. pinifolia, was 
first ascertained in Aulax and the present genus (as Mr. Dryan- 
der informs me) by our countryman Masson, during his last re- 
sidence at the Cape of Good Hope, and is beautifully illustrat- 
ed by that eminent botanical painter Mr. Francis Bauer, in his 
unpublished drawings preserved in the Banksian collection. 
Numerous observations on the same subject have also more 
recently been made by Dr. Roxburgh and Mr. Niven, who have 
bestowed much pains in ascertaining its limits, of which, as 
far as regards the, African part of the family, Mr. Salisbury has 
given an accurate account in his Essay already quoted. The Dis- 
sertation of Thunberg, who was wholly unacquainted with this 
separation of sexes in these plants, is necessarily imperfect, 
and he has, in several cases, described the different sexes as di- 
stinct species; and thus also Bergius has founded his genus 
Aulaz on the male of a species, whose female he had previously 
published as a. Lewcadendron. On the other hand, Jussieu, 
deceived by the resemblance in inflorescence, between Bra- 
bejum and the spiked species of Protea, has erroneously 
suspected these to be monoicous, while he has totally over- 
looked the truly, dioicous nature of the present genus. 
n2 i + Nux 
