1922] JURICA—UMBELLIFERAE 293 
(32, 33), Kocu (42), Dr CaNpotte (17), etc., assigned to other 
families. A somewhat extensive discussion of the history of the 
classification of Umbelliferae may be found in the work of GENEAU 
DE LAMARLIERE (27). For American workers, COULTER and RosE 
(13) listed a condensed bibliography of all the works containing 
new names or new descriptions of Umbelliferae found within the 
North American range, from LinnaEvs’ Species Plantarum (1753) 
to that of ConGDON (1900). 
The first morphological work of note upon the Umbelliferae 
was that of TrrrmaNnn (65), whose figures showed the germination 
of some species with great exactness. Influenced by the research 
work of their age, or at times by the somewhat peculiar nature of 
the plant at hand, a further study of the germination of a large 
number of genera and species was made by DE CANDOLLE (17), 
TREVIRANUS (69, 71), BERNHARDI (4), KIRSCHLEGER (40), IRmIscH 
(36, 37), VAN TrEGHEM (76), GENEAU DE LAMARLIERE (24, 25, 26, 
27), Domin (18), DRrupE (20), Hoim (35), and Mésrus (49). 
Although Dr Canpo.te (16) had already described the stem of 
Ferula, whose medullary bundles could easily lead one to mistake it 
for amonocotyledon stem, it was left for HoFFMANN (34) to present us 
with the first extensive anatomical work upon the Umbelliferae. 
His study of the roots of the plants of this family contains many 
interesting details, but it is to be regretted that he failed to dis- 
tinguish the root from the rhizome, and at times even confounded 
it with the lower part of the aerial stem. Moreover, he paid no 
attention to order and very little to development. 
Further anatomical studies were made by JocHMANN (38), 
REICHARDT (58), DUCHARTRE (21), BEHUNECK (3) FAURE (22), 
GERARD (28), TREcUL (68), CourcHET (14), Hotm (35), KLauscH 
(41), GENEAU DE LAMARLIERE (27), NOENEN (55), and NESTEL (54). 
The work of Mésrus (49), however, deserves special attention, 
for the parallel-veined leaves of numbers of species of Eryngium, 
together with the general aspect of their gross morphology, lead 
many taxonomists to suspect an analogy in their anatomy to that 
of some of the monocotyledons. Accordingly, we have species like 
Eryngium yuccifolium Michx., E. bromeliaefolium Delar., E. 
pandanifolium Chan., E. lusulaefolium Chan., E. junceum Chan., 
