AND PECULIAR FORM OF THE EMBRYO IN THE CLUSIACER. 247 
neck of the inner integument, as well as with the somewhat lateral aperture in the outer 
shell, and the termination of the cord already described; on making a longitudinal section 
of the nucleus, this cleft is more distinctly seen, and at the bottom of this commissure is 
observed a small prominent point, and also in the axis extending from this spot to the 
small tubercular point at the base is seen a continuous line, more or less narrow, some- 
what curved, and of a more opake and whiter colour than the body of the nucleus: the 
principal mass is of a semi-crystalline hue. | 
This internal thickened line is what Geertner considered to be the embryo of the seed, 
and the fleshy surrounding mass to be copious albumen. Choisy, Cambessèdes, and most 
other botanists, have considered the main body of the nucleus to be two large cotyledons 
agglutinated into one solid mass, the line of their junction being indicated by the curved 
line just mentioned, while they held the nipple-shaped protuberance to be the radicle. 
In the description above given, I have been careful to avoid the use of technical names in 
. designating the several parts, until the whole evidence has been stated; but the inferences 
I have drawn from these facts, which I will here endeavour to substantiate, are, that the 
seed is enveloped by an entire arillus, with a raphe extending from the hilum, or basal 
point of its attachment to the arillus and placenta, to the process or cup-shaped ring 
surrounding the aperture situated near the geometrical apex of the ‘testa, and through 
which the nourishing vessels of the raphe pass, to unite with the inner integument: the 
small cicatrix at the opposite extremity of the testa, near the hilum, must be considered 
as the micropyle. Most botanists will perhaps call this extremity the base of the seed, and 
correctly so, although others have considered the geometrical apex as the true base, because 
it was once the base of the ovule before it became reversed in its position by its anatropal 
development: the use of this term, unless accompanied by an explanation of the sense in 
which it is applied, leads constantly to error and confusion*. The existence of the internal 
chalaza in the contracted and thickened summit of the inner integument, and its connexion 
* Great mystification is often created by the misapplication of the several terms umbilicus, hilum, apex or base of 
the seed, which are used in a contrary sense by different botanists ; and even Richard, who may be regarded as a koding 
authority on this point, is not free from similar confusion. St. Hilaire, in his Monograph on the Brazilian Piolacen 
(Mém. du Mus. xi. 446), accurately describes the structure of the seed in Viola to be carunculate at the point y its pla- 
centary attachment, which he calls the “ umbilicus,” and the corresponding point of the testa, ithe “ hilum, - which 
the inferior radicle is directed, while the areolar “ ehalaza ” is seen at the opposite Lure de or “apez.” Prof. 
Kunth, on the contrary (Nov. Gen. et Spec. v. 368), describes the seed in Viola as being carunculate at the apex by 
which it is attached to the placenta, with a basal chalaza at the opposite extremity : the embryo is seid to be inverted, 
with its superior radicle directed to the hilum. Here we observe that two of the highest authorities apply the same 
terms in a directly opposite sense ; the one truly, as regards the point of the placentary n the - con- 
sidering that point as its base, whatever be its position in respect to the axis of the fruit : the other -uses the same 
terms relatively to the direction which the seed may bear in regard to its position the axis of the pericarp, which 
in the instance of Viola, being suspended from the placenta, gives a reversed attitude to all its several parts : if this 
loose glossology were admitted, how could we define the base and apex of the seeds, where they sometimes happen to 
be erect, horizontal, and pendent in the same cell ? i uie i 
Cambessèdes has fallen into an error of a similar nature in reversmg the position of the seed in his representation 
of Clusia Criuva (Flor. Bras. pl. 65. figs. 8, 9 & 10), where the stipitate support is miscalled and delineated as an 
apical arillus, and his radicle (the true cotyledons) are seen at the base, instead of the apex of the seed. 
