600 STUDIES IN FOSSIL BOTANY 



is, of course, extremely reduced. 1 The analogy with 

 the main stem is the strongest point in this interpre- 

 tation, but it appears to be open to three serious 

 objections : ( I ) there is no structural evidence that 

 the seed-pedicel is a bud, or an axial structure of any 

 kind ; 2 (2) neither is there any evidence that the 

 pedicels are axillary to certain of the interseminal 

 scales ; (3) there is no known structure among the 

 Cycadophyta or Pteridospermeae from which such an 

 organ as the supposed unifoliar female flower could 

 have been derived by reduction. In an earlier work s 

 Professor Lignier supported his interpretation by a com- 

 parison with certain fructifications of Cordaiteae, in some 

 of which, as already mentioned, the seeds were borne at 

 the ends of long peduncles. The analogy, however, is 

 of little value, for the two families are so far apart that 

 their common origin was probably too remote to have 

 led to any community of floral characters. On the whole, 

 the axial theory of the seed-pedicels, though supported 

 with much ingenuity, appears, so far as our present 

 knowledge shows, to lack an adequate structural or 

 comparative basis. 



On the alternative hypothesis, all the organs con- 

 stituting the gynaecium are of the nature of leaves, 

 and borne, in accordance with the observed facts, 

 directly on the axis. Dr. Wieland regards as most 

 tenable " the theory that the seed-pedicel and the 



1 O. Lignier, "Le fruit des Bennettitees et l'ascendance des Angio- 

 spermes," Bicll. Soc. Bot. de France, ser. iv. I. viii. 190S. 



- Unless it be found in the somewhat deeper insertion of the interseminal 

 scales, as compared with the pedicels — a very dubious indication. See 

 Wieland, I.e. p. 118. 



3 Structure et ajjinitcs du Bennettites Morierei, 1894, pp. 68 and 72. 



