The Nature and Origin of Stipules. 15 



the branches of Verbena aphylla Gill & Hook. (Hooker, Bot. 

 Misc. 1: 116. 1830) and of the Piperaceae ( C. DeCandolle, Mdm. 

 sur les Piper. 18-19, 1866), and the first two leaves of the axillary 

 buds of many Solanaceae. 



The appendages sometimes accompanjdng the leaf in some Con- 

 volvulacete, as Ipomea slipulacea Sweet., have been considered as 

 stipules (Jacquin. PI. Hort. Schoenbr. Descr. et Ic. 2: 39. 1797). 



Many have regarded stipules as leaflets, as for example in 

 Viberniim (Baillon, Adans. 1: 372. 1860), and the lower leaflets 

 in many plants have been taken for stipules, as in Cobcea scandens 

 Cav. (Blume. Rumphia 3 : 142. 1837), and Lotus tetraphyllus 

 Murr. (Linufeus, Trinius, E. Meyer, Fischer.) 



In 1844 Wydler declared that stipules belong to the sheath and 

 cites examples of transition between the two kinds of organs in 

 the Rosacea, Pol3^gonace8e, Leguminosae, etc. Stipules, in con- 

 nection with the sheath have been ascribed to Ranunculus, Iso- 

 pyrum and Thalictrum by Lloyd (Fl.de I'Ouest de Fr. Ed. 2, 

 1868), to Galtha by Wydler, Kiitzing (Grundz. der phil. Bot. 684, 

 1851-52) and Hooker. They have been recognized in the scales 

 of the stems of the Aroids. 



The so-called " decurrences " of leaves do not differ anatomically 

 from stipules and are to be considered as identical with them, as 

 for example in Grotalaria. 



The tendril of the Cucurbitaceae has been regarded as a stipule 

 by Seringe (Mem. Soc. Hist. Nat. Genev. 3 : 1-31. 1825), De Can- 

 dolle (Organ. Yeg. 1: 336. 1827), Kirschleger (Flora, 28 : 615. 

 1845), Stoks (Ann. Nat. Hist. 1846), Payer (Elem. de Bot. 53. 

 1857-58), Parlatore, etc. Those of Smilax have been so consid- 

 ered by Cauvet(Ball. Soc. Bot. Fr. 12: 241. 1865), but are looked 

 on by Clos as " simple prolongations of the fibro-vascular bundles 

 of the petiole without morphological signification." 



The spines of the orange are considered as stipules by Du Petit- 

 Thouars (Cours de Phytol. 47. 1820). Clos regards them as 

 branches and those of Amaranthus spinosus L. as leaves, though 

 they are considered stipular by Lamarck (Encyc. Meth. 2: 118. 

 1786). Bibes shows stipular spines in some species. The spines 

 of Xanthium spinosum L. mentioned by Sachs as occupying the 

 place of stipules, Clos regards as representing pistillate flowers. 

 He looks with disfavor on the doctrine that the glands at the 

 base of the leaves in Resedaceae, Cruciferae, Epilobium, Lyth- 



