4 J 4 ^^^ ^^^ OGA MS. 



like those of Sequoia and Sciadopitys, are inserted near the apex and hangs down 

 free\ 



The Ovules, as we have already seen, are in the Podocarpese anatropous and 

 furnished with two integuments ; in the rest of Coniferae they are orthotropous 

 and possess only one integument ; in the Cupressinese and Taxinese they are erect, 

 in the Abietineae inverted, with the micropyle towards the base of the scale, to which 

 the ovules are usually attached on one side. In these cases there is no funiculus, 

 and the ovule consists only of the small-celled nucleus and one integument, which 

 usually projects above it and forms a comparatively wide and long micropylar 

 canal, through which the pollen-grains reach the apex of the nucleus, which is 

 sometimes depressed (see Figs. 317, 318, 319, 322). Lateral outgrowths of the 

 integument not unfrequently cause the ovule, and afterwards the seed, to appear 

 winged on both sides, as in Calliiris quadrivalvis (Fig. 322), Frenela, &c. The 

 wing-like appendage of the seed of Pinus and Abies, on the other hand, is the result 

 of the detaching of a plate of tissue from the seminiferous scale, which remains 

 attached to the ripe seed. 



The Embryo-sac is formed by the considerable enlargement of a cell of the 

 nucleus lying nearly in its axis, and usually at some depth and at a considerable 

 distance from its apex. In the Abiedneae and Juniperus it arises beneath the point 

 at which the integument separates from the nucleus ; the embryo-sac is in these 

 genera usually the result of the transformation of one cell only; while in Taxus, 

 according to Hofmeister, several sacs are always formed ; several cells which lie 

 one over another in a short axial row increase in size, and become isolated and 

 filled with protoplasm ; only one of these, however, usually continues to grow in 



in respect to the axis of the female bud ; but it is also sometimes of the second (Taxus) and may 

 even be of the third order (Torreya). The carpel itself is either entirely distinct from the parent 

 bract (the Pinece, Taxinece) or the two leaves are united together by their ventral surfaces and 

 are only separate towards their summit {CupressinecE, Sequoiece, Araucariece). This difference merely 

 depends upon a different localisation of the intercalary growth of the two leaves ; it is a difference 

 the same in kind as that which separates a dialypetalous corolla from a gamopetalous one. 

 Whether free or united with the bract, the carpellary leaf bears its ovules sometimes towards its 

 base {CupressinecE), sometimes towards its middle (Piyiece), sometimes towards its summit {Arau- 

 cariece) ; each represents a lobe, more or less developed, of the dorsal face of the carpel. 



In the TaxinecB the ovules terminate the carpellary leaf; they result in this case from the trans- 

 formation of its whole entire limb, whether each half of the limb forms an ovule (Salisburia, Cepha- 

 lotaxus), or whether the entire limb has only produced a single one (Podocarpus, Phyllocladus, 

 Taxus, Torreya, &c.). In this case it is evidently only the petiole of the ovuliferous leaf which 

 represents the carpel ; if the petiole is long (Salisburia) the carpel is obviously developed ; but if 

 it remains very short (Cephalotaxus, Podocarpus, Phyllocladus, Taxus, Torreya, &c.) the carpel is 

 almost absent — in other words, the carpellary leaf is reduced to a sessile limb completely converted 

 into a single ovule (Podocarpus, Taxus, &c.) or into two ovules (Cephalotaxus). The number of the 

 ovules which each carpellary leaf bears, as well as the number of carpellary leaves themselves, that 

 is to say, of the female flowers which enter into the composition of the inflorescence, both vary, and 

 may even be simultaneously reduced to unity, which is the ordinary case in Taxus. — Ed.] 



* [For a review of the literature of the question whether the ovules of Coniferce are really naked 

 or whether there is a true ovary, see Eichler, ' Sind die Coniferen gymnosperm oder nicht, in ' Flora' 

 for 1873, translated in Trans. Bot. Soc. Edin. 1873, pp- 535-541. Dr. Eichler here, in opposition to 

 the contrary view of Strasburger, sums up the whole argument strongly in favour of the opinion that 

 the Conifers are really gymnospermous. — Ed.] 



