Hollick: Status of Ophioglossum Alleni L. 200 



Recently Professor Cockerell* called attention to the fact that, 

 in connection with certain specimens of the species, there 

 could be detected a peculiar protuberance or body, apparently 

 attached to the midrib, near the middle, in regard to one of 

 which he remarked (loc. cit. pp. 211-212): 



It looks like a small berry, with the contents extruded. . . Probably! lie 

 riddle would never have been solved but for the discovery of a younger 

 specimen . . . This . . . shows that we have to do neither with a 

 leaf, frond nor pod, but with a cladode. Attached to the midrib is an indis- 

 tinct mass, presumably a thin bract, upon which can be seen a dark object 



which seems to agree very closely with the flower of Ruscus 

 The genus Ruscus [has] . . . lanceolate to ovate sharply pointed cladodes 

 At first sight the venation seems quite different from that of I he 

 fossil, hm if we imagine the Ruscus cladode br< adened and abbreviated until the 

 principal veins are nearly or quite transverse instead of longitudinal, the cor- 

 respondence is exact.] 



Based upon this course of reasoning a new genus was evolved, 

 and Lesquereux' multi-generic species became Brachyruscus 

 Alleni (Lesquereux) Cockerell (loc. cit. p. 212) — the sixth 

 binomial under which it was described and discus: ed. Inciden- 

 tally it may also be noted that this last change of name definitely 

 transferred the species from the Pteridophyta to the Spermato- 

 phyta and changed it from a frond, a leaf, or a fruit to a cladode. 

 The question whether or not this last change of name should 

 be accepted as the final word in regard to its probable taxonomic 

 and morphologic status did not, however, appear to be answered 

 conclusively or satisfactorily, based as it was on a frank appeal 

 to the imagination to supply the necessary evidence. Also 

 the naively worded footnote on page 212 appeared to be more 

 or less of the nature of a challenge. In any event the statements 

 and conclusions set forth in the paper certainly called for a 

 critical examination of all of the available facts and their faithful 

 presentation, without any attempt to connect them with any 

 preconceived theory and without any appeal to the imagination 

 to supply any features in the specimens that might be poorly 

 preserved or lacking. 



During a recent visit to the United States National Museum 

 I was enabled to examine some fifty specimens of the species in 



* A new genus of fossil Liliaceae. Bull. Torrey Club 49: 211-213. /. 7. 

 1922. 



t The italicising is mine. 



