92 BOTANICAL GAZETTE [aveust 
II. Podocarpineae and Araucarineae 
The more important contrasts between the araucarian and podo- — 
carp lines are in the structure of the stamen and ovulate strobilus, 4 
and in the method of fertilization. The araucarian stamen is a — 
comparatively primitive type and is somewhat suggestive of Ginkgo 
It is one-sided and bears three to thirty pendent pollen sacs; whil 
all the genera of the Podocarpineae, as before mentioned, have the 
microsporangia definitely reduced to two. 
The ovulate cone in Araucarineae is a compact structure with — 
many scales, ripening dry; while the podocarp line is characterized 
by the reduction in the number and size of cone scales and the tendency 
to fleshy development. Saxegothaea, the form which stands nearest 
the araucarians, shows the least amount of reduction in both size — 
and number of scales; Microcachrys is next; while in other forms 
the cone is represented by the single, apparently terminal, ovule and 
few rudimentary scales. The podocarp ovules have the arillus, oF 
epimatium, which is absent in araucarians. The cone scale Of 
Araucaria, on the other hand, bears the so-called ligule, represented 
in Agathis by only a slight projection from the surface. The ovules 
of Saxegothaea are united with the scale only at the base, while in ; 
Araucaria they are described as imbedded in the tissues of the scale 
In Agathis, however, the ovules are free and the seeds winged. 
The female gametophyte is too little known in either group for 
any adequate comparison. That of the Araucarineae, however; i 
apparently much more primitive than that of the known podocarps- 2 
of a neck so massive as not to have been recognized. The position 
the ovule of Araucarineae in the tissues of the scale is another subje 
which needs interpretation. ; 
Fertilization in Araucarineae (THOMPSON 19) is angiosperm-like, 
in that the pollen does not reach the ovule, the tubes growing ovet the 
surface of the scales to reach the micropyle. 
