98 ON ANACHARIS. 
and mode of fertilization has seemed to many, if not 
quite sufficient to place the plants in different g 
attending the propagation of the plant is met by the power which 
node of the stem possesses of producing a new plant if detached from 
would lead him to that conclusion in the absence of the proper 
- l have not seen the male flowers of my Anacharis Alsinas- 
trum (of which apparently only the female plant is in Europe), 4 
as those 
. 
Gray does not tell us if they sessile, 
seems quite distinet by the subglobose spathe of its sessile 
not state anything on that point, 
, Mr. Syme gives as his opinion, that “ there are no characters 
cient importance to separate the genera Hydrilla, Elodea, am 
charis,” but in that opinion I cannot concur. Dr. Hooker states 
the staminodes of the female flowers of Anacharis are sometimes 
theriferous. I have examined very many flowers in the hope of fin ful 
anthers, but without success, and 'others have been equally unsu 
Hooker ìs apparently copying Syme, who derived (?) the statemen! Du 
A. Gray, in book it seems to result from his considering 
canadensis, ichx,, as certainly the same plant, and if the same 
certainly correctly referred to the same genus as Æ. guyanensis, t.e. 
of suffi- 
