TE Se ee eS ee) eT 
Nae 
1914] MANEVAL—MAGNOLIACEAE 25 
ship with the Bennettitales remains. But even if the former is 
true, it would seem hazardous to hold that angiosperms are more 
_ Closely related to the Bennettitean stock than to any other gymno- 
spermous stock. COoULTER and CHAMBERLAIN (7) say that “the 
Cycadofilicales are so fernlike in every feature except their seeds, 
that their derivation from some ancient fern stock (called pro- 
visionally Primofilices) is as certain as phylogenetic connections 
can be. The origin of the Cordaitales therefore presents two 
alternatives: either they arose independently from the same 
ancient fern stock, or they were differentiated from the Cycado- 
filicales very early.’”’ The same two alternatives present them- 
selves, it seems, in the case of angiosperms. Which view we accept 
is of little consequence since probably neither can be proven. 
Either view would make the connection between angiosperms and 
the Bennettitales, as we know them, a most distant one. 
Let us now turn to our original question concerning the primi- 
tiveness of the Magnoliaceae among existing angiosperms. While 
the following list of characters of the Magnoliaceae is incomplete, 
it doubtless includes most of the more important ones that may 
be considered primitive: (1) the ordinary 8-nucleate type of 
embryo sac; (2) dicotyledony; (3) undifferentiated perianth; 
(4) amphisporangiate flower; (5) entomophily; (6) elongated 
conical floral axis; (7) actinomorphy; (8) indefinite number of 
free floral organs arranged spirally; (9) hypogyny; (10) apocarpy; 
(11) woody stems; (12) occasional absence of tracheae in the 
vascular bundles. 
It is quite generally agreed that the last 7 of these characters 
are relatively primitive wherever found among angiosperms, or 
if not that they are of minor importance as evidence of phylogeny. 
The first two characters, since they are common to nearly all 
dicotyledons, are valueless as criteria for determining primitiveness. 
There are left three characters which may be either primitive or 
derived, namely, undifferentiated perianth, amphisporangiate 
flowers, entomophily. These three characters have no doubt 
developed together and are closely bound up with the evolution 
of angiosperms. If not, then naked, monosporangiate, anemophi- 
lous flowers must indicate primitiveness where found in existing 
