424 Mr. J. Miers on Ephedra. 
although analogous to the Conifere, to which Ephedra more 
especially osculates. 
We may perceive, from this history, how confused are the 
opinions of botanists in regard to the structure and to the posi- 
tion and affinities of this small order. This confusion has arisen ~ 
from the assumption that the ovule in the Gnetacee is naked ; 
but I can perceive nothing in the structure of Ephedra to sup- 
port this assumption, as the organization of its carpel seems to 
me quite in accordance with the usual structure of perfect dico- 
tyledonous plants, under some peculiar modifications which are 
hkewise found in families of a very high degree of development. 
Blume correctly considered the pistillum as an “ ovarium,” con- 
taining a nucleus surrounded by the two usual integuments 
(“‘ spermoderms”), and the fruit as a “‘ baccate drupe,” consisting 
of a coriaceous “ pericarp,” containing an albuminous seed in- 
vested by two regular integuments. This same female organ 
was, however, regarded by Richard as an entire flower, the 
ovarium and pericarp of Blume being, in his estimation, an 
“ involucellum,” the outer integument its “ calyx,” and the inner 
integument its “ pistil” with an “ exserted style,” the enclosed 
nucleus and subsequent albuminous mass being considered to 
be naked, and deficient of any proper integument. Meyer like- 
wise denominated the ovary and pericarp an “ involucellum,” 
forgetting that this supposed involucel is at first contained within — 
a petaloid perigonium in Gnetum’ as well as in Ephedra; and 
though he admitted the existence of the two integuments within 
his “involucellum,”’ he still considered the nucleus and its sub- 
sequent albuminous mass as being “naked.” Griffiths, on the 
other hand, regarded the pistillum as a naked ovule, covered 
by three integuments, thus considering the real carpel as the 
primine and testa, the outer proper integument of the seed as 
the secundine, and the inner coating with its tubillus as an 
accessory integument of adventitious growth. Such are the 
various self-evident contradictions to which botanists have been 
obliged to have recourse in order to. support their favourite 
doctrine of the existence of a naked oyule:in Gnetacee. 
Ephedra is distinguished from Gnetum by the absence of 
properly developed leaves and by a different form of inflorescence. 
They are both sparsely spread over both hemispheres, the former 
generally in temperate latitudes, or within the tropics only at 
great elevations ; the latter genus is only found in torrid regions. 
Ephedra consists of shrubs of small height, ramifying from the 
root into numerous divided branchlets resembling those of Ca- 
suarina or Equisetum; these are woody, terete, striated, and 
divided by articulated nodes, each node being surrounded by a 
short vaginant sheath cleft more or less deeply into two opposite 
a r 
te FT Te mS ee 
