1908] CURRENT LITERATURE 315 
rence of one or more multinucleate cells at the base of certain young aecidia is 
considered, and the conclusion is reached ‘‘that they are sporophytic structures, 
and that they result from the stimulated growth which follows the sexual cell 
fusions.” This is opposed to the idea (CHRISTMAN) that the “fusion cell” 
functions at once as a “basal cell’’ at the bottom of each row of spores.—J. M. C. 
Gnetales and Angiosperms.—Last year ARBER and PARKIN announced’ 
their “strobilus theory of angiospermous descent;” and now they have applied 
it to the interpretation of the relationships of Gnetales.ts There is much to 
commend their general view, without conceding all the details cited; in fact the 
reviewer has long since reached the same conclusions as to the character of the - 
strobilus of Gnetales, and has remarked upon its similarity to such inflorescences 
as those of the Amentiferae. The authors do not regard the Gnetales as a 
modern group, although at present unknown as fossils. The three survivors of 
this ancient group have “pro-anthostrobili,”*® evident in the staminate “flower” 
of Tumboa and reduced in the other “flowers” of the group by the suppression 
of one set of sporangia. To the authors the strobilus of this group is:the so-cal 
“flower;” and the strobilus of current terminology is an aggregate of strobili. 
Based upon this strobilus situation, the authors regard Gnetales as a phylum of 
= having a common ancestry with angiosperms in the hypothetical 
hemiangiosperms,” and in many respects following parallel lines of develop- 
ment.—J. M. C. 
Origin of angiosperms.—LicNIER"” has discussed the recent paper by ARBER 
and Parkin,?® in which the origin of the angiosperm flower (of the Ranales type) 
Is traced to the bisporangiate strobilus of Bennettitales. From this view L1GNrER 
dissents, as he regards the strobilus.in question as representing an inflorescence 
tather than a flower. To him the intraseminal scales are not sterile carpels or 
Sterile lobes of carpels, but bracts in whose axils the ovuliferous stalks appear. 
This strobilus, therefore, is a compound one, as are the ovulate strobili of many 
of the Coniferales and both strobili of the Gnetales. LrGNreR agrees to the idea 
that the Ranales type of flower is the most primitive, but he would derive it from 
Sieur 
“# Review in Bor. GazETrE 44:389. 1907. 
_‘S Arper, E. A. NEWELL, AND PaRKIN, JOHN, Studies in the evolution of the 
angiosperms. The relationship of the angiosperms to the Gnetales. Annals of 
5- 1908. 
__ An “anthostrobilus” is an axis bearing microsporophylls and megasporophyils, 
with the latter above the former. A “pro-anthostrobilus” is the variety in which the 
Pollen reaches the ovules (gymnosperm), the strobilus of Bennettitales being an cx 
aes while a “eu-anthostrobilus” is the variety in which the pollen is received by 
Megasporophyll (angiosperm). 
*1 Licnter, O., Le fruit des Bennettitées et l’ascendance des Angiospermes. 
Soc. Bot. France IV. 8: I-17. 1908. 
8 Bor, GAZETTE 44:389. 1907. 
