256 Browne . — The Anatomy of the 
the two strands. Five of the annular bundles run unbranched to the points 
of insertion of an equal number of sporangia, while the sixth (the third of 
the reconstruction) forks and each branch terminates at the point of inser- 
tion of a sporangium. The annulus below Cone A only bore six sporangia. 
Cone D showed six annular bundles ; two unbranched, each ending at 
the point of insertion of a sporangium, were connected with the axial 
bundles. Of the four free bundles three forked in the upper part of the 
annulus, and each of the seven strands thus formed ran to the point of 
insertion of a sporangium, of which in this cone the annulus bore nine. 
The sections of the annular region of Cone B were injured in mounting, 
and the details of the annular bundles and their relation to those of the 
axis could not be satisfactorily followed. There were at least six and 
probably not more than eight annular vascular strands, most of them 
apparently free bundles. In the reconstruction of the stele of this cone 
(Text-fig. 6), the number and position of the annular strands must only be 
considered to be approximately indicated. 
In 1867 Milde described and figured the cone of E. xylochaeUim, Mett., 
a species allied to E. giganteum. After stating that the cone consists of 
eleven whorls he proceeds : ‘ The lowest whorl, an annulus of very definite 
form (Fig. 29), is always cup-shaped with eight erect lobes ; its component 
parts are not separate, but fused with one another as occurs in the sheath. 1 
Each lobe bears on its inner surface and at its base a single sporangium 5 
(Milde, p. 383). Unfortunately this author neither describes nor figures the 
cone of E. giganteum. The sporangiferous annulus naturally strengthens 
the relationship of the two species ; but if my specimens* and Milde’s are 
typical the species show numerous differences of detail. My cones were 
half as large again as his ; the annulus seemed to consist of rather more 
(nine to eleven) lobes and the sporangia were more variable in number, being 
sometimes, at least, much more numerous. These differences may be partly 
due to the greater size of the cones of E. giganteum : but the difference 
in the attachment of the sporangia seems to be of more importance. 
Milde speaks of the sporangia as being inserted singly at the base of the 
lobes of the annulus, while in E. giganteum they are inserted on the incurved 
upper edge of the annulus, and do not necessarily stand in any definite 
numerical relation to its lobes. 
VII. Discussion concerning the Primitive Form of 
the Annulus. 
Though in E. giganteum the annulus contains a certain number of 
vascular strands extending inwards from the sporangia towards the axial 
stele, and though some of these strands may become connected with the 
axial bundles, yet it is just this species in which the node-like character of 
1 i, e. leaf-sheath. ' ' 
