68 HENRY S. CONARD 



Aspermae may be divided into two, three, or four orders. In 

 view of the antiquity of the Osmundaceae, their evolutionary 

 history, and the manner of development of root tip and sporan- 

 gium, this group would seem to have as good a right to ordinal 

 rank as the Ophioglossales or Marattiales. We would favor 

 therefore dividing Aspermae into four orders, or leaving it as a 

 single order Filicales. The small aberrant group of hetersporous 

 forms may not be natural or monophyletic ; it may remain, 

 however, pending a conclusion. 



Among Gymnosperms a similar confusion of terms has arisen. 

 If it be accepted, as it seems to be, that every plant, beside 

 belonging to a certain species and genus, must be assigned to a 

 certain family and order we will have a basis for action. For 

 example, the single living species of ginkgo tree is named Ginkgo 

 biloba, of the family Ginkgoaceae and order Ginkgoales — a mon- 

 otypic order. What becomes of the old Coniferae? Naturally 

 they become the order Coniferales. If this order is believed 

 to contain but one family, that family may be called Coniferae, 

 being a special case, in company with Cruciferae, Leguminosae 

 and Compositae. If there are two or more families in the 

 group, they would be the Pinaceae and Taxaceae of Lindley, 

 with a possible Araucariaceae. But these as well as their 

 further subdivisions have been variously named by leading 

 American authorities. Penhallow names Taxoideae as an order 

 of the class Coniferales; Coniferae as a second order, with 

 Cupressineae, Abietineae, Pinoideae, etc., as families. Such 

 terminology is impossible for the taxonomist, and confusing to 

 the general student. Coulter and Chamberlain recognize two 

 families in the order Coniferales: Pinaceae and Taxaceae. The 

 former is divided into tribes Abietineae, Taxodineae, etc. Jef- 

 frey speaks of the Coniferales as a unit group, with tribes Abieti- 

 neae, Cupressineae, Araucariineae, Taxineae, etc. He further 

 divides Abietineae into Pineae and Abieteae. Obviously these 

 eminent authorities have followed Eichler's treatment in the 

 Naturlichen Pflanzenfamilien of 1889 instead of conforming to 

 the International Rules of Nomenclature. It is therefore with 

 considerable difficulty that one digs out from their works the 



