Notes. 
383 
The stamens surround a club-shaped dilatation of the axis which 
occupies the centre of the flower-head. It is solid and undivided 
below, but above gives off* a number of deltoid processes which 
doubtless represent bracts or paleae. In no case is there any trace 
of styles, ovary, or ovule, except in the ray-floret. 
How all these changes are brought about can only be certainly 
determined by following the course of evolution. The appearances 
lead to the inferences that there have been alternate accessions and 
arrests of growth, or even that the force of development was dis- 
proportionately great in one part, while it was, at the same time, 
small in another. By some such means the concrescence of 
numerous corollas into one composite tube, the detachment or lack 
of union of the stamens, and the lengthening and dilatation of the 
axis may have occurred. 
I have never observed anything like this malformation in Compositae. 
The nearest approximation to it that occurs to me is that very common 
malformation in the Foxglove, Digitalis purpurea , in which the 
corollas at the upper part of the raceme are blended into one terminal 
cup. In these cases the axis is generally prolonged and thickened, and 
the result is often the formation of a flower so like in form to that of some 
Campanula , that I occasionally receive specimens with the information 
that they are the result of cross-fertilisation between a Campanula and 
a Digitalis ! A similar case in Myosotis, but even more complicated, 
is described by myself in the Gardeners’ Chronicle, August 8 , 1891, 
p. 159, with a figure, and is the subject of comment by Professor 
G. Henslow in the Journal of the Royal Horticultural Society, vol. 15, 
August, 1893, p. xxvii, 
MAXWELL T. MASTERS, London. 
CHANGES IN THE RESERVE MATERIALS OF WHEAT 
ON KEEPING. — A sample of wheat which had been stacked for 
nearly thirty years, at Wingham near Canterbury, and recently thrashed, 
was given to me by the senior Bursar of St. John’s College last March. 
I made a complete analysis of this sample, the result of which seems 
to me interesting from a physiological standpoint, and is given in full 
compared with an analysis by exactly similar methods of a new sample 
grown last year on the same ground. 
It is obvious that the two cases compared are not exactly parallel : 
