Limalbb.] GILLIES1 \< l 



becomes of the outer segments, which had 



it would be difficult to trace any analog) betwi Lructure of tJ 



genera in which a third Berii a is added to the usual ternarj division ■ \\ 



But Done ol the pcculiaritii b adverted to are op| - l to ill 



depauperated or reduced bracts. With to the centra] body fi h ih<- 



stamens proceed, 1 1 1 i -^ body, which might I"- convi uii ntly d 



x>li.it l.inii.i-.iii botanists call a nectarium, consists of :i H< -h\ -hpp 



without two auricles at the base, and within which the cup "I Btami i 



relation it beal jards insertion, to the parts which ha 



very obscure ; it is always opposite the solitary external bracts ; but whether 



rior with respect to the common axis of infloret 



l„ , .| ascertained. The n asons which have been offered for thi 



ling this body, make it obvious that it must i 

 It manifestly bears an intimate relation to the Btai 

 same direction and degree as they are. In this view, then, 



considered perfect bracts, the subulate interior pr issea abortivi . and die I 



central labelloid body the perianth. However paradoxical this descripl 



ppear, it will probably be found more deserving of attention it compared with 

 Miersia. In Miersia the bracts are six in number, of which two are inl 

 exterior, a still more valid r< >un against their being segments of a perianth. I 

 lat.- | i issume a more regular form, and a more constant mode ol ins< 



still bear no very apparent relation to the bracts, and the fleshy labelloid centi 

 repn seated by an urceolate Bix-toothed cup, within the orifice of which six f< rt 

 mens are included. In Miersia, therefore, the perianth, which was in Gillie* 

 to a certain degree of imperfection, in which the stamens also participated, 

 usual regular form of many Monocotyledons, no uregularity occurring in th< 

 \- there can be no doubt of the affinity between Gillh sia and Miersia, and as th< i 

 also 1"- littl.- doubt that the central body of the latter genus is a perianth, it will follow, 

 that as the supernumerary appendages of that genus are externa) with respect to die 

 perianth, ami are therefore neither perianth nor stamens, bo also will the anal 

 appendagi - ol Gilliesifl not be perianth. And the central body havu g 

 to be perianth, all the part.- which surround it will nee. ssarily be bracts, or modifii 

 <if them. 



"The natural affinity of these two genera is obscure. Their black, britl 

 large axile embryo, tunicated bulbs, spathaceous inflorescence, an 1 _■■ n< ral ■■ 

 place them near Lilyworts,with some genera of which, especially Muscari and l'u 

 Miersia al least in the structure of perianth ; but there is no genus among th< 



Lilies t'> which the fructification of Gilliesiads can 1 therwise compared. If dw 



flowered species of Schoenns, in which a single naked flower is surroui 

 imbricated scales, be admitted as a form of inflorescence analogous to that undi i 

 aideration, it may perhaps be allowable to carry this comparu 

 suggest an identity of origin and function between the depauperated 

 and the hypogynous at toe of Scirpus and other Sedgi s." 



Hut although such plants may be analogous in structure to the <!' 

 to CordTeafs, to which they were also compared in the work above ■, 

 can exist, that they form B most curious part of the Lilial Alliai 



Chilian bulbs, of do known size. 



i.i'.m.i; \ 

 Qilliesia, Undi. 



Ni hbj RS. ' ikn. -. Sp. 5. 



POSRIOM. GlLUKSIACKJE. L 



(.'. . a. 



