6 BOTANICAL GAZETTE [yuLY 
The resemblance of the male gametophyte to that of Cordaitales 
is no more than a parallel carried over by both from the pterido- 
phytes. In short, there are not very many resemblances between 
Araucaria and Cordaites, and even these are no more than an 
expression of a common heritage from the pteridophytic ancestors 
of both. From all this S—Ewarp and Forp conclude that the 
Araucarineae are too unlike Cordaitales in too many respects to 
make the supposition of actual relationship probable. This con- 
clusion leads logically up to the presentation of what they believe 
to be evidences of real affinity with the Lycopodiales. 
3. The significant resemblances of araucarians and lycopods 
appear to these authors to be numerous and important. They 
recognize, however, that the application of JEFFREY’s (27, 28, 29) 
well known and widely accepted division of the vascular plants 
into two great divisions, the Lycopsida and Pteropsida, on the 
ground of the presence in the latter of leaf gaps and their absence 
in the former, would constitute a serious objection to a derivation 
of any conifers from a lycopsid ancestry. They prefer rather to 
question the validity of his generalization, and express the opinion 
that the characters on which it is founded “‘have been estimated 
at too high a value as indices of affinity.” 
Having thus cleared the ground by attempting to show that the 
Araucarineae are primitive, that it is unlikely that they have been 
derived from the Cordaitales, and that their possession of leaf gaps 
does not preclude a lycopsid ancestry, they reach the really critical 
portion of the argument. Direct comparisons are instituted with 
a number of living and fossil lycopods. 
In the main body of the paper they baad shown to their own 
satisfaction that the araucarian cone is simple in structure and so 
‘poles asunder” from that of the Abietineae or Cordaitales. This 
suggests the direct comparison with the ovulate cone of Lepido- 
carpon. In opposition to the ae of the discoverer (51), they are 
of the opinion that it may ‘‘constitute a (possible) connecting 
link between the Araucariae and lycopods” and approvingly cite 
Scott’s (53) admission that it furnishes an excellent argument 
for their view. The organization of the cone, the simple sporo- 
phylls, the single median ovule, and the ligule appear to present 
