1915] BURLINGAME—ARAUCARIANS 9 
that of conifers in general; they may have derived certain resem- 
blances from a common ancestry but are not on that account closely 
related; (b) the roots of the podocarps are not ‘particularly 
reminiscent”’ of those of Cordaitales; (c) the primitive type of 
leaf among the araucarian-podocarp alliance was small and narrow 
and provided with a single midvein and unlike the broad parallel 
veined leaves of the Cordaitales; (d) the structure of the micro- 
sporophyll of the podocarps “‘no more favors this view [cordaitean 
origin] than the three preceding pieces of evidence.” It is scarcely 
necessary to mention that most of these objections would be 
equally valid as arguments against a relationship between 
podocarps and araucarians, a relationship which he champions 
vigorously, nevertheless. It seems rather unfortunate that 
so many of the facts known about gymnosperms may be used 
almost equally well to prove a variety of quite antagonistic 
views. 
Under the direct argument, he places first the similarity of the 
ovulate cone of the simpler and more primitive podocarps and of 
the araucarians to the lycopod cone. They are, he thinks, alike 
in their general structure, being in both cases composed of simple 
sporophylls with a gradual transition to the Jeaves. In both each 
simple sporophyll bears a single median megasporangium. In 
both the sporangial organ is at first erect in the axil of the scale. In 
certain of the podocarps he sees a tendency to the development of 
a double structure of the cone scale analogous to that of the 
Abietineae. 
Secondly, ‘the microsporophylls are also easily comparable 
with those of the lycopods.”’ The presence of more than one 
sporangium in the conifers “is not a serious” difficulty, since 
septation is well known in the sporangia of lycopods. Moreover, 
“the shifting of the sporangia to the under side presents little 
difficulty to the view under consideration,” since it “has certainly 
taken place in other cases.’”” The other cases cited are the possi- 
bility of its having occurred among the ferns, and the fact that 
“among the Equisetales in Palaeostachya the sporangiophores are 
found on the upper side of the sporophyll, while in Cingularia the 
Sporangia are below the sporophylls” (italics mine). In any case, 
