2 PEOF. R. J. HAEVEY-GIBSON ON THE MOEPHOLOGY 



one is led to conclude tliat by " fleshy epicarp " he means to indicate this disc ; but 

 seeing that it arises below the ovary and is quite independent of it (fig. 21), and further, 

 never reaches more than a quarter of the distance up the exterior of the fruit, it is 

 impossible to accept such an interpretation of its nature. If a differentiation into 

 distinct layers in the fruit-wall is to be recognised at all, then the three layers indicated 

 above must stand for epi- meso- and endocarp respectively, and the succulent " torus " 

 mast be regarded as an accessory development from the peduncle above the point of 

 origin of the bracts, analogous to that seen on a much larger scale in such fruits as 



Anacardium. 



None of the female flowers in my material was young enough to enable me to 

 confirm or refute Engler's statement that there are three ovules in the ovary, each 

 reduced to an embryo-sac. There is certainly no confirmatory evidence to be obtained 

 from an examination either of the voiino; or mature fruits. 



t o 



The fruit is connected with the axis of inflorescence by an attenuated stalk composed 

 centrally of small deeply stainable parenchyma, through which runs the vascular cord 

 supplying the pericarp and style. These vascular elements are surrounded by several 

 patches of " mystrin" cells. From this axis arises a massive swollen ring of large, thin- 

 walled parenchyma with little or no contents in the cells, forming the torus. It is 

 covered externally by a single strongly cutinised layer of flattened cells whose contents 

 stain deeply. The fleshy disc adheres to the fruit when ripe, separation occurring at its 

 junction with the axis of inflorescence. 



The embryo was first made oat by Hooker in M. Thomii, who figures it as a minute 

 pear-shaped body imbedded in endosperm at the apex of the fruit, just below the point 

 of origin of the style. My sections confirm this position, but show an obconical embryo 

 composed of uniform undiff'erentiated parenchyma lying in a minute cavity in the 

 relatively large-celled endosperm (fig. 21). None of my sections show any indications of 

 a placenta or funicle, nor does the seed possess anything in the way of a testa. 



Identificatiok. 



As I have pointed out in the preceding pages, the plants on which the above 

 observations were made do not appear to conform strictly with Harvey's diagnosis of 

 either of the two species named by him. In some respects they resemble M. Thomii, in 

 otiier respects they suggest M. Tolemanm, while in yet others they agree with neither 

 of these species. Sir David Prain informs me that specimens had been sent to Kew by 

 Mr. Bolus and labelled M. Thomii^ but that all of them on examination agreed with 

 Harvey's drawings of M. Folemanni. 



The following tabular statement shows the points of agreement and difference 

 between Harvey's descriptions and figures as compared with the characters shown by 

 the material on which the present paper is based. 



