MR. JOHN MIERS ON A NEW GENUS OF THE BURMANNIACE X. 473 
mass of the nucleus does not appear to approach in any way to the nature of albumen, 
it is divided by the slightest pressure into irregular nodules, some more coherent and 
darker than others, as they seem more matured, all composed of minute oil-cells, more 
orless disintegrated and reducible to simple cells intermixed with black atoms: it 
therefore becomes a question whether the reproductive power of these seeds resides in 
these cells or in these atoms. The latter view seems more probable, from their resem- 
blance to the sporidia of Acrogens. But as the latter generate plants of a very low order 
of development, being deficient of flowers, wanting calyx, corolla, stamens, ovaries, and 
seeds, while the former produce plants endowed with perfect flowers, such atoms should 
bear the more appropriate name of blastidia, bearing the same relation to protoblasts 
that sporidia do to spores. 
The evidence here adduced concerning Myostoma, as well as that advanced on previous 
occasions respecting other genera of the Burmanniacee, added to the valuable informa- 
tion which I have quoted regarding the Balanophoree, Rafflesiaceæ, &c., all combine to 
show that all these families, including the Triuridacee, constitute a special alliance, and 
that the Rhizogens, as a class, stand preeminently distinct from all others, on account of 
the peculiar organization of their seeds, the unusual mode of their germination, and 
perhaps not less abnormal manner of the fertilization of their ovules. Under this view 
the Burmanniacee would stand at the head of this class, because of their hermaphrodite 
and more perfect flowers, and the more complete development of all their parts; they 
Would stand next to Cytinacee on the one hand, and touching Orchidaceæ on the other. 
But whether the latter family belongs to the same class has yet to be determined; in 
external appearance, their seeds offer much resemblance to those of the Burmanniaceæ, 
having a similar lax outer integument, enclosing a nucleus, the nature of which, as far 
as I can judge, seems yet involved in much obscurity*. 
Griffiths concluded that Thismia should be placed in a position between Burmanniaceæ 
and Taccacee ; but it appears to me to have little relationship with the latter family. 
Endlicher arranged the Burmanniacee after Taccacee, between Hydrocharideæ and 
Iridacee. In the systematie plan of Dr. Lindley, this family stands between Marantacee 
and Orchidacee. Formerly I pointed out the analogies existing on the ‚one hand to 
Triuridacee, and on the other to Orchidacee. Prof. Agardh so far -—— placing the 
Thismiee next to Orchidaceæ ; but he separates them from Burmanmacee, and disputes 
a between them and Taccacew. The views of this author, however, set at 
“lance the opinions of all other botanists in regard to the gene 
manniacee ; fo he places in one alliance Saurureæ, Begoniaceæ, Melam Penia- 
Piragmee, Gesneraceæ, Orobanchee, Burmanniace®, Thismiee, Orchidacee, ge Cyti- 
"ursi separating and associating in another, distant alliance Balanophoree, Hy 
4 Taffesiacec, which he couples with Tuccacee, Aracee, Aristotelieæ, Lardizabatee, 
ral affinities of the Bur- 
x ; : bout the period 
e" best accounts of the earliest development of the ovule in Orchidee, the D te yt which + dd 
""Pregnation, and of its progressive growth, are those of Mr. Brown and Pro essor dicate the nature of the 
Y referred; but, notwithstanding the copiousness of their details, neither of Br anu doute ol ths 
y acting force which gives vitality to the nascent embryo, and both fail in showing the en sansa 
+ an therefore justified in making the above remark, as we have y —— S 
