20 DR.J. D. HOOKER ON THE STRUCTURE AND 
Richard (Mém. du Muséum, viii. p. 429), and latterly Lindley (Veg. Kingd. p. 85), have | 
assumed the seed to be embryonate in all Balanophoree; arguing from that of Cymo- « 
moriwm, which both well understood; and I at one time adopted the same opinion, | 
being much influenced by the fact that in certain plants with densely fleshy albumens, | 
formed of large coherent cells, the embryo scarcely exceeds one such cell in bulk, and — 
often eludes a very careful search; as that of Mystropetalon escaped Harvey, Griffith, and 
others. Yielding, however, to the mass of evidence in favour of the absence of any visible — 
embryo within the seed of Balanophora and of all the Distyli, I am now inclined to agree M 
with Griffith (Linn. Trans. xx. p. 93) in considering, the embryo as a homogeneous mass, — 
or “ indivisus albuminiformis.” : | 
Endlicher (Meletemata, p. 9; and Gen. PI. p. 73) describes the seed as a nucleus, * nucleo | 
e tela cellulosa, massa sporacea farcta, conglobato,” and adds that the testa is coriaceous, - 
hard or subosseous, evidently mistaking the endocarp for a testa. Blume (En. PI. Jav.i. 
p. 87) seems to have taken a similar view of the contents of the seed. J unghuhn, an inge- 
nious and acute observer, says (Act. Acad. xviii. Suppl. p. 205), * Semina nulla adsunt; — 
quod (supra) ovaria salutavi, vix nisi analoga sunt germinum plantarum perfectarum que 
nunquam maturescunt, sed more fungorum putredine pereunt." "Trattinick also (Linnea, | 
iii. p. 194) says, under Sarcophyte, “that these plants are not developed from seeds, but | 
are specifie degenerations of the plants on which they grow." l 
Gœppert (Nov. Act. l. c. p. 257) considers that Balanophore grow from seeds, and | 
_ describes these as “nuda exembryonata;” and Nees von Esenbeck (Nov. Act. J. c. p. 225) 
calls them acotyledones of a high class. | 
Liebmann (Proceedings of Assembly of Scandinavian Naturalists at Christiania) says 1 
of the seed of Langsdorffia hypogea, that it is intermediate in character between a crypto- — 
gamic spore and a naked seed. 1 
Martius (Nov. Gen. et Sp. iii. p. 186) regards the seed as an embryo, and states that he — 
has seen small fibres given off from its basilar end, like rootlets; an observation not I 
hitherto confirmed. 3 
I have reserved to the last the discussion of M. Weddell's views, because they differ 4 
from those of other authors, and are based upon å comparison of an extensive range of . 
organs, which cannot be considered separately; they are published in a paper read before — 
the Société Philomatique of Paris, and more at length in the * Annales des Sciences Natu- _ 
relles* (ser. 3. xiv. p. 166): they especially refer to the relationship between Balano- 
phoreæ and Rafflesiacee, and may be thus summed up :— 
1. "The so-called fruit of Balanophoreæ is constructed on the same plan as the seed — 
of Rafflesiacee ; the so-called styles, which are almost always observable on that organ A 
before its maturity, are appendages of one of the essential parts of the ovule. The fruit of - 
Balanophoree must hence be regarded as a naked seed.” 
but all belonging to one axis. In Griffith’s admirable paper on Ambrosinia (Linn. Trans. xx.), an extremely ano- : 
malous embryo is reduced to the ordinary type b 
1 y a careful study of development and germination, and it is shown 
that though its parts are undistinguishable at first sight, each has its functions defined. It is remarkable that Griffith 
has not alluded to the strong resemblance between the embryo of Ambrosinia and the bulbils formed on the deformed 
inflorescence of several species of its near ally, Remusatia. 
