[ 59 ] 
II. On the Ovulum of Santalum album. By WILLI dam Esq., 
Assistant Surgeon in the Madras Medical Service. Communicated by 
RicHarp Horsman SoLLy, Esg., FRS. & L.S. 5 
Read April 5th, 1936. 
THE following observations were made at the Botanic Garden, Calcutta, in 
the early part of July, 1835. | 
The ovarium as well as the fruit of this genus corresponds with the struc- 
ture laid down by Mr. Brown as one of the principal distinguishing marks of 
Santalaceæ, of which order I presume this genus is the type. 
I allude to the central free placenta, bearing towards its apex a definite 
number of pendulous ovula. Yet Roxburgh has mistaken the structure en- 
tirely, and has evidently described the placenta together with the ovula, which 
he did not see, for the ovulum. This author, in his Flora Indica, vol. i. p. 443, 
describes the ovulum as “Germ. semi-superum, one-celled, containing one 
conical seed attached to the bottom of the cell.” This mistake is perpetuated 
in the Botanical Magazine, new series, t. 3235, in which Roxburgh’s descrip- 
tion is quoted, and said to be faithful. The error of Jussieu with regard to 
the ovulum of Santalaceæ, first pointed out by Mr. Brown in his Prodromus 
Flore Nove Hollandiæ, and subsequently in the Appendix to Captain keys 
Expedition to Congo, p. 453, might have partly originated from an — 
tion of Santalum, in which the ovula from their situation and direction may 
very easily be overlooked. 
The placenta in this species is conical, rather obtuse in the young flowers, 
but prolonged considerably in those that are matured. Its apex corresponds 
at this period to the termination of the canal, occupying the centre of the 
style, but not opening between the stigmata in the fully developed m 
The ovula are attached near the base, and not towards the apex, as in " 
other genera of this family. Mr. Brown's statement in Captain Flinders's 
12 
