1850.] Linnean Society. 75 



obovata, sessilia, l-locularia ; ovulo solitario erecto. Stylus lateralis, 

 fere basilaris, pilis longis clavatis plumosus. Stigma obconicutn, trun- 

 catum, piloso-plumosum. Carpidia plurima, baccata, radiatim aggre- 

 gata, obovata, stylo persistenti basilar! notata, monosperma. • Peri- 

 carpium siccum, subcoriaceum. Semen ovale; testa colorata nucleoque 

 omnino Sciaphilee. — Herba Amazonica, in uUginosis umbrosis indigena, 

 hyalina ; rliizomate substolonifero, radiculas hinc inde emittente ; caule 

 simpUci erecto ; foliis pancis, hracteiformibus, alternis, ovatis, acutis, 

 venis destitutis, celluloso-rugosis ; floribus spicatis, superioribus S , infe- 

 rioribus^; pedunculis \-Jloris, basibracteatis. 



SoRiDiL'M Spruceanum, Miers. 



Hab. prope Para Brasilise, ad Caripi, in sylvis umbrosis. 



Having concluded the description of these remarkable plants, 

 which he gives in much detail, Mr. Miers proceeds to observe on 

 their affinities. They evidently belong to one common group with 

 Triuris, which the author originally suggested would form the type 

 of a distinct order (Triuriacece), subsequently adopted by Dr, Gard- 

 ner, under the name of Triuracece. He first dismisses without hesi- 

 tation the hypothesis that they have any relationship to Menisper- 

 macece or Smilacece, as suggested by Dr. Gardner with reference to 

 Heocuris ; or to any section of Urticece, to which Sciaphila was re- 

 ferred by Dr. Blume, and in which he was followed by Endlicher 

 and Gardner. He commences his investigation by calling particular 

 attention to their habit as plants destitute of real leaves ; composed 

 of little more than cellular tissue ; void of green colour, of fibres and 

 of ducts ; and furnished with a seed not merely acotyledonous, but 

 without distinct embryo. He refers to Mr. Brown's memoirs on 

 Rafflesia, and to Mr. Griffith's on the plants referred to RMzanthece, 

 for instances of inembryonal seeds ; and observes that we have no 

 satisfactory evidence of the existence of an embrj^o, in the ordinary 

 sense of the term, in Burmanniacece. He notices also the imperfect 

 condition of the embryo in Cuscuta, in Orobanchea and in Monotropa ; 

 and the striking discrepancy between the well- developed cotyle- 

 donous embryo of the leaf-bearing Cactece and the solid and undi- 

 vided embryo of the leafless genera of that family. Admitting then, 

 in TriuriacecE, Burmanniacece, Balanophorece, &c., the existence of an 

 organ endowed with the function, but wanting the usual structure, 

 of the embryo, he proposes for this organ the name oi protoblastus, 

 with the view of distinguishing between a protoblasteous and a coty- 

 ledonous embryo. Modifications of the protoblasteous structure may 

 occur ; and the author refers to Ceratophyllum and to several genera 

 of Aroide<E (especially Cryptocoryne) as furnishing instances of ano- 



