278 PHYLLODY. 
M. A. Viaud-Grand-Marais’ records an interesting 
example of chloranthy, in which the sepals, petals, 
pistils, and ovules of Anagallis arvensis were all folia- 
ceous. Similar changes have not unfrequently been 
met with in*Dictamnus Fravinella. 
M. Germain de Saint Pierre has also recorded the 
following deviations in the flowers of Ruwmew arifolius 
and f. scutatus; m these specimens the calyx was 
normal, the petals large, foliaceous, shaped like the 
stem-leaves, the stamens were absent, the three carpels 
fused into a triangular leafy pod, as long again as the 
perianth, the stigmas normal or wanting, the ovule 
represented by a thick funicle, terminated by a folia- 
ceous appendage analogous to the primine.” 
In grasses it frequently happens that the flowers 
are replaced by leaf-buds; this condition is alluded to 
elsewhere under the head of viviparous grasses, but in 
this place may be mentioned a less degree of change, and 
which seems to have been a genuine case of chloranthy 
in Glyceria fi witans, the spikelet of which, as observed 
by Wigand,° consisted below of the or dinary unchanged 
elumes, but the remaining paleze as well as the lodicles 
and stamens were represented by ligulate leaves. The 
plant, it is stated, was affected by a parasitic fungus. 
On the other hand, General Munro, in his valuable 
monograph of the Bambusacee,' refers to an illustration 
in which “the lowest glumes generally, and the lowest 
palez occasionally, had the appearance of miniature 
leaves, with vagine, heules and cilia, enveloping, how- 
ever, perfect fertile spicule; as progress is made to- 
wards the top of the spike, the leule first, then the 
cilia, and finally, the leaf-like extension disappears, 
and the uppermost glumes assume the ordinary shape 
and form of those organs.” 
General remarks on chloranthy and frondescence—Moquin 
' * Bull. Soc. Bot. France,’ vol. viii, 1861, p. 695. 
2 Thid., vol. iii, 1856, p. A755, 
. ‘Flora,’ 1856, p. 712. 
Se Trans. Linn. Soc.,’ vol. xxvi, p. 37. 
