CONTRIBUTIONS TO BOTANY. 
137 
globoso, carnoso, piperis magnitudine. — Cayenne et Brasilia 
Septentrionalis, v. s. ; prope Panure, Rio Uaupes (Spruce, 
No. 2624). 
One of the most conspicuous features in this plant is the ele- 
gant disposition of the veins in its leaves, greatly resembling in 
this respect the leaves of Poraqueiba Surinamensis*, belonging to 
the Icacinaceee. The internodes are about J inch apart ; the 
leaves are 4-5 inches long, 1-2 inches broad, on a petiole 4 lines 
in length ; the stipules are 4 lines long, ^ line wide ; the peduncle 
is 3-4 lines, the pedicels 6 lines long ; the calyx is | line long ; 
the petals are 4 lines long (including the infleeted apex of 1 line) ; 
the drupe is 2 lines in diameter f- 
2. Goupia tomentosa, loc.cit. — Arbuscula, precedenti sub- 
similis, cortice foliisque valde amaris; foliis utrinque hirsutis. 
— Guiana et Ins. Cayenne. 
On Ephedra. 
Before I publish my observations on the Anacardiacece, I wish 
to offer some remarks on Ephedra, for this reason, that the mode 
in which the ovule is fecundated in the Gnetaceoe affords a pro- 
bable clue to the solution of an enigma in the former family 
which is otherwise difficult of explanation. My memoranda and 
drawings from living plants of Ephedra were made more than 
thirty-five years ago, at which period I found several species 
growing in Chile, in the Cordillera of the Andes and in the 
neighbourhood of Mendoza, the structure of which excited my 
particular attention ; but, being then a mere tyro in botanical 
investigations, it never occurred to me to notice the development 
and growth of its ovary. I have lately repeated my analyses of 
these plants (now in a dried state), guided by a better knowledge 
of tbeir organization ; but, before I detail the results obtained, 
I will first quote the opinions of botanists in regard to the struc- 
ture and affinities of the family, and will then give the reasons 
upon which my own views are founded. 
The family of the Gnetacea, first established by Blume in 
1834, until very recently consisted only of tbe genera Gnetum 
and Ephedra, which are so extremely different in habit that pre- 
vious botanists had no idea of their close proximity. 
♦ ‘ Contributions,’ vol. i. pi. 10. 
t This species, with full analytical details, is represented in Plate 74. 
VOL. II. 
T 
