Mr. J. Miers on the Menispcrmaceae. 255 



albamen ruminated by numerous fissures, and enclosing an em- 

 bryo much resembling that of Tiliacora. 



Prof. Grisebach endeavoured to show, in 1858 (Journ. Proc. 

 Linn. Soc. iii. 108), that Abuta, Batschia, and Anelasma con- 

 stitute a single genus [Abuta), of which he then gave a new 

 generic character in order to embrace the whole ; he there con- 

 firmed the facts I had stated showing their close relation to 

 Tiliacora ; but at the same time, following the example of the 

 authors of the * Flora Indica,' he referred both Abuta and Tilia- 

 cora to the tribe Coceulea of those botanists. In doing this he 

 quite forgot the very important diflFerence between the two oppo- 

 site conditions of a deeply ruminated and a simple albumen, 

 which are respectively found in the two tribes thus confounded 

 together ; also the very diflferent forms of their embryo, and more 

 especially the distinction that, in the one case, the cotyledons 

 are accumbent, in the other incumbent — circumstances which 

 render the one group essentially incompatible with the other. 



In 1861 Mr. Ikntham piiblished his "Notes on Menisper- 

 macea " (Journ. Proc. Linn. Soc. v. Suppl. p. 45), when he adopted 

 the example of Prof. Grisebach in amalgamating Batschia and 

 Anelasma with Abuta, and in a sweeping manner annulled most 

 of the species I had indicated, reducing each of the genera thus 

 fused together to little better than the condition of a single 

 species. 



Messrs. Bentham and Hooker, in theur ' Genera Plantarum,* 

 regardless of the peculiar structure of the seeds, persist, as before 

 stated, in placing Tiliacora and Abuta (including Batschia and 

 Anelasma) in the same tribe, and in juxtaposition with Cocculus. 

 Finally, MM. Triana and Planchon agree with Dr. Grisebach 

 in associating into one all the three genera in question. 



The difficulty of reversing the decisions of these united au- 

 thorities is necessarily great, but perhaps not insurmountable. 

 I will therefore Tenture, in a few words, to show the diflferences 

 existing between Abuta and Anelasma. There exists among the 

 individuals forming these groups a very different habit, a notably 

 distinct appearance in their leaves, and a dissimilar character in 

 their inflorescence — features so striking as to render it almost 

 impossible, with a mere glance at the plants, to mistake one 

 genus for the other. In Abuta the midrib of the leaves beneath, 

 as well as the lateral ramitications, have externally strong, pro- 

 minent, pinnate nervurcs, which are absent in Anelasma ; the 

 leaves are all densely toracntose beneath, with a few exceptions, 

 where they become glabrous with age ; but even in that case 

 the distinction is maintained by the branches, petioles, and ra- 

 cemes, which arc thickly tomentosc, while in Anelasma the same 

 parts are quite glabrous. In Abuta the inner sepals are exter- 



