218 NATURAL HISTORY OF PLANTS. 
and caducous, leaving an annular cicatrice upon the branch. The 
characters which serve to distinguish most of the genera from each 
other are drawn from the greater or less depth of the receptacle, its 
adherence with the base of the ovary, from the total independence of 
the latter, and especially from the characters of the sepals, their præ- 
floration a little before anthesis, and the number of those leaves which 
grow into wings after anthesis.’ As to the most important features of 
organization, drawn from the mode of placentation and the number 
and direction of the ovules in each cell, they have been used by us to 
distinguish in the family the three following series :— 
I. DRYoBALANOPSEÆ.—Ovary plurilocular ; two ovules in each 
cell, descending with exterior and superior micropyle.—(10 genera.) 
IT. ANCISTROCLADEÆ.—Ovary unilocular; partly inferior with 
single ovule subbasilar ascending with inferior micropyle.—(1 genus.) 
IIT. LopniREÆ—Ovary unilocular, almost entirely superior, with 
a basilar placenta and numerous ovules, ascending with inferior 
micropyle.—(1 genus.) 

This group consists principally of fine trees, the wood of which 
is hard, durable, and much esteemed for building purposes in 
tropical Asia. All their organs, moreover, generally contain a 
balsamic resinous juice which may appear under the form of an oily 
liquid, or under that of solid concrete crystalline masses. In this 
particular the most celebrated species is the Camphor tree of Borneo 
and Sumatra, that is to say, Dryobalanops aromatica Gmrtn.” (figs. 211— 
214). When the trunk is very old it is cut down, and then split 
longitudinally to obtain the camphor accumulated in the interior 
fissures of the wood, under the form of small crystals of a yellowish 
white. This is the solid camphor or Borneo camphor, known in 
Sumatra under the name of Aassar Baras, and which in our country 
? BENTHAM & Hooker (loc. cit., 190) phore Win. TEN RHYNE, in Breyn. Prodr. 
have arranged two distinctive lists of genera 
according to these characters. 
? See p. 204, note 2. Enpu., Enchirid., 526. 
—Mér. & De, Dict, Mat. Méd., ii. 46, 690.— 
Linpu., Veg. Kingd., 294; Fl. Med., 146.— 
GuiB., Drog. Simpl., éd. 6, iii. 635, fig. 471.— 
PEREIRA, Elem, Mat. Med., ed. 4, ii. p. ii. 552. 
—Rosentu., Syn. Pl. Diaphor., 735.—Hook. r., 
in Trans. Linn. Soc. xxii, 160,—Abor Cam- 
(1683); Grimm, Obs., in Mise. Cur, Siv. Eph. 
Nat. Cur. (1683), 371, t. fig. 33.—Abor cam- 
phorifera VALENT., Ind. Litt., 488 (1716); Hist. 
Simpl. Reform., lib. 2, sect. 6, 250.—RuMPH., 
Herb. Amboin., \xxxii. 67 (1775) —C. M111., 
in Phil. Trans., \xviii., p. i. 161, 170, 188. 
—Laurus foliis ovalibus acuminatis lineatis, 
Jlorib. magn, tulip. Hourr., Nat. Hist., ii. 
2, 318. 
