62 ARTICLES IN JOURNALS. 



(c) that the discovery of the Malayan Cypripedium Sanderianum 

 brings the relationship of the two groups morphologically nearer 

 than its previously -known allies. As regards the first of these 

 points, see the 'Gardeners' Chronicle' of July 7th, 1888, where a 

 plant is described as Cypripedium. nitidissimum and as Selenipedium 

 nitidissimum, a repetition of a most unfortunate practice of giving 

 two names, one for gardens, the other for science. On the second 

 point it may be urged that hybrids between distinct genera are 

 already in existence. The third point we fear is illusory. Cypri- 

 pedium Sanderianum is a typical Cypripedium. with a 1-celled ovary; 

 true, its petals are remarkably attenuated, like those of Selenipedium 

 caudatum, one of those curious analogies, of which numerous 

 examples could be cited, where a species of one genus bears a closer 

 external resemblance to one of another genus than to others of its 

 own. But in this case, if the staminode, lip, and upper sepal be 

 compared, the resemblance vanishes, or. is not more marked than 

 the resemblance between Cypripedium philippinense and Selenipedium 

 lonyifolium, or between C. Parishii and S. Boissierianum. The 

 crucial point is this, that SelenipediiDii has the 3-celled ovary of the 

 ApostasiciB, while Cypripedium agrees with all other orchids in 

 having a 1-celled ovary — a difference of greater importance than 

 that which separates many admitted genera of orchids. A glance 

 at the two excellent maps furnished in the work strongly emphasises 

 this point. We can only add, in conclusion, that, beyond its value 

 to cultivators, it is a highly-creditable production as a botanical 

 w^ork, and supplies a want that has long been felt, owing to the 

 widely-scattered literature of the subject. The woodcuts, nearly 

 forty in number, are excellent and faithful portraits. 



E. A. KOLFE. 



Articles in Journals. 



Annals of Botany (dated Nov., pub. Jan.). — D. H. Campbell, 

 ' Development of Pilularia' (3 plates). — G. Murray & L. A. Boodle, 

 'Structural and systematic account of Struvea' (1 plate). — S. 

 Schonland, ' Morphology of Visciim album' (1 plate). — T. Johnson, 

 ^ Spharococeus corona pifolius' (1 plate). — H. N. Kidley, 'Foliar 

 organs of Utricularia bryopJdla, sp. n.' (1 plate). — M. M. Hartog, 

 * Floral Organogeny and Anatomy of Brownea and Saraca.' — H. M. 

 Ward, 'A lily-disease' (5 plates). — W. G. Farlow, ' Apospory in 

 Pteris aquilina.' — S. H. Vines, ' Tubercles on roots of Leyiiminosce.' 

 — J. B. Farmer, ' Development of endocarp in Sambucus nigra.' 



Bot. Centralblatt (No. 1). — F. G. Kohl, ' Wachstum und 

 Eiweissgehalt vegctabili seller zellhante' (1 plate). — J. J. Kieffer, 

 ' Neue Mittheilungen liber lothringische Milbengallen.'— (No. 2). 

 A. Hansgirg, ' Noch einmal liber Bacillus muralis und uber einige 

 neue Formen von Grotten-Schizophyten.' — C. 0. Harz, ' Ueber 

 den Dysodil.' — (No. 3). M. Kronfeld, ' Bemerkungen liber Coni- 

 feren.' — J. Amenm, ' Leptotrickum ylaucescens.' — C. 0. Harz, 'Ueber 

 eine zweckmiissige konser virungsmethode getrockneter Pflanzen.' 

 — Id., ' Die Sporen der Hymenomyceten auf Papier zu fixiren.' — 

 (No. 4). O.Burchard, ' Bryologische Eeiseskizzen aus Nordland.' 



Botanical Gazette (Dec). — W. K. Dudley, * Strassburg and its 



