1033 
Affinities of Sutcliffa . 
in other details, similar to that described by Farmer and Hill , 1 so that 
further description is unnecessary. In the preparation of this model great 
assistance was given me by Mr. T. G. Hill, who not only suggested the 
method, but helped me during the progress of the work ; I should also like 
to express my appreciation of his unstinted help in connexion with some of 
the diagrams which illustrate this paper. 
II. General Structure. 
The specimen appears to consist of a protostele associated with 4 meri- 
steles \ 2 3 in all of which considerable secondary thickening has taken place ; 
a few small leaf-trace strands are also present. Extrafascicular strands of 
wood and bast surround the protostele and c meristeles *, and the whole 
of the vascular tissues are invested by a discontinuous sheath of secondary 
Text-fig. 2. Outline tracing of the vascular strands of Section O. Dotted areas represent the 
primary wood, shaded areas the extrafascicular strands, the broken line the limit of the tissues, 
and the triple broken lines the arcs of secondary cortex ; phloem is omitted. M = protostele; a, 
and 7 = c meristeles ’ ; U . — leaf-traces ; p = secondary cortex ; e = extrafascicular strands. 
cortex. The basal portion of the stem is represented by Section O, the 
apical section being LVIII ; the structure is, on the whole, best seen in the 
lowest sections of the series. 
Practically nothing but the vascular system is represented, and it 
appears probable that in places this is not present in its entirety (at X, 
Text- fig. 2, it is almost certain that some strands are missing). 
In the lower sections a somewhat discontinuous zone of periderm-like 
tissue occurs at a short distance outside the vascular strands. The entire 
absence of cortex (except in small isolated patches) and the lack of any 
1 Farmer, J. B., and Hill, T. G. : On the Arrangement and Structure of the Vascular Strands 
in Angiopteris evecta and some other Marattiaceae. Ann. of Bot., vol. xvi, 1902, p. 375. 
2 The term c meristele ’ is used in order that the descriptive parts of the present paper may 
conform to the terminology employed by Scott in his description of Sutcliffia insignis , so that 
comparison may be facilitated. No morphological significance is attached to the term by the 
present writer. 
3 y 
