BANUNCULACEJ^. 71 



internal in the ascending ovule. However, no Dilleniad has yet been 

 observed in which the ovule, if solitary, is not ascending." 



The BcumnculacccB are also closely allied to Berberidacem, through 

 Podopkylhm and Jeffersonia. This last being also related to Papa- 

 veracece by Scuu/idnaria, the Rannnciilacea come very near the Papa- 

 veracecB, of which the organization of the pistil is alone different. 

 But we have shown' that, in spite of this difference, which is not 

 really great, we ought not logically to put Papaveracece and Ramin- 

 cidacea in distinct orders, while we do not separate Monodora from the 

 Anonacea, or Berberidopsis from Lardizabalacece. We have also said* 

 that the AUsmaccce approach the Panuncidacea in every way, for 

 certain species of Alisma differ from some of the aquatic Ranun- 

 cidacece in only one respect — the number of cotyledons in the embryo. 

 In our opinion, the conjunction of these two types, due to A.danson's 

 sagacity, " is most consonant with natural methods." 



Finally, the Rosacece, chiefly through PotcntUla, come far nearer 

 the Ranunculacece than is usually admitted. The insertion, a cha- 

 racter the value of which has been exaggerated, no longer separates 

 the two groups so clearly, since some of the Ranuiicidacece have been 

 demonstrated to be perigynous.^ The absence of albumen in the 

 Rosacem appears, on the contrary, to be a constant difierentiating 

 character up till the present date. 



In fine, the relations of the Rcmimcidacea are multiple ; and if we 

 tried to represent them by arranging the different families allied to 

 this on a sort of map, we should have to put the Ranunculacece in 

 the centre, so that its frontiers would touch the Ddleniacece by Aero- 

 trema, the Berberidacca by Podojdij/llum, the MagnoliacecB hy Myosurus, 

 the IllidecB by Knowltonia, the Rosacea by Pmonia and Crossosoma, 

 the PapaveracecR by Glaucidium, and Alismacea by the aquatic 

 Rammcidi. 



We have to some extent indicated the geographical distribution^ 



* Adansonia, iv. 39. soma, whose place it is true is somewhat con- 



2 See p. 61. A. L. be JussiEtr (oj7. cit., testible, is very clearly perigynous. 



235), also recalled these relations. •* See generally for all concerning geographi- 



•* It is quite certain that the perigyny of the cal distribution de Candolle's Qeographie Sot. 



Pajonies is not well marked ; else it would have Rais. (1855) ; and for European species, espe- 



been recognised long ago. But the concavity cially those ^ of the central plateau of France, 



of the receptable is not more marked in several see Lecoq, lit. sur la Geog. Bat., iv. 402-525 



Rosacea. (See Adansonia, iii. 46.) Crosso- (1855). 



