455 



Reading on p. 90 of the papcr the discussion of thc 

 aftinities of Aptiana radiala, the prospect does not indeed 

 seem very hopeful. Mrs. S topes points out that no brancli 

 of modem botany is in a more chaotic condition than 

 tliat dealing with the anatomy of Angiosperms, which 

 from a taxonomic point of view must certainly be ad- 

 mitted. 



She considers that it is entirely prématuré to attempt 

 any discussion of the possible affinities of thisfossil. „In 

 „evidence of this I may mention, that for more than a 

 „year I hâve been showing this fossil wood to many of 

 „the leading botanists of this country, Europe, and America, 

 „and that among the numerous opinions kindly ofïered, 

 ,.I hâve been told it resembled closely nearly every family 

 ,,ranging from the Gnetales on one hand to the Malvales 

 „on the other. This is not to be interpreted to mean that 

 „the woods of ail thèse families are alike, and that con- 

 „sequently classification of them is impossible, but it is 

 ,,due to the comparatively few samples that any one 

 „individual studies and to the great range of variations 

 „between the woods ofsocalled species ofso-called gênera." 



Mrs. S tope s concludes: „The gênera which I was able 

 ,,to examine, which showed most points of likeness to 

 „the fossil, were some species of Lonicera, of Vibunium, 

 „of Magnolia and of Liriodendron. On this however I lay 

 ..no stress and consider that for the présent more definite 

 ..statements regarding possible aflinities would be purcly 

 „theoretical and unprofitable." 



We hâve quite another opinion. After the reading of 

 Mrs. Stopes' paper, it occured at once tous, ih-àt Aptiana 

 could very well belong to the family of the Ternstroeniiaceae. 

 And knowing. that with the help of our method we could 

 hope to obtain certainty in this matter, we proceeded at 

 once to testing our hypothesis. 



