63 
Female ‘ Flower’ in Coniferae. 
(in the axil), Psilotum and Tmesipteris (at the end of a short 
branch, and thus axial), all of which plants belong to the same 
circle of affinities to which Conifers are most nearly allied. 
The ovule is not a bud or leaf-segment, but a structure sui 
generis . A terminal ovule occurs in Polygonum : terminal 
and axillary ovules in Piperaceae, Balanophoreae, &c. Where 
an ovule arises from a leaf, the latter is a carpel. Seeing that 
in Taxodineae the leaves which function as ovule-bearing 
carpels are homologous with those in Cupressineae which have 
ovules in their axil, it follows that the latter are also carpels. 
The envelope of the nucellus in Tctxus and Torreya is an 
integument, as shown by the position of the arillus in other 
genera in which ovules are borne on a leaf. The Araucarieae, 
the oldest Coniferous type, are nearly allied to Cycads. In 
agreement with the palaeontological sequence, the ovule in 
Cupressineae and certain Taxineae (the most recent types of 
Conifers) becomes axillary, until in Taxus and Torreya it 
becomes an independent flower, borne on a leafy stalk arising 
from the axil of a leaf. 
Cycads, Coniferae, and Gnetaceae are all gymnospermous. 
In the latter the outermost covering of the female flower is to 
be considered an ovary, not quite closed and without stigmas. 
In Juniper us the carpels are closed, but there are no stigmas, 
and the pollen reaches the ovule directly, so that the latter is 
therefore gymnospermous. 
The Sachs-Eichler theory of this difficult subject no doubt 
appeals to many owing to its great simplicity, deriving as it 
does the solution of the problem directly from the structures 
as they are presented to us to-day ; its tranquillity of contem¬ 
plation disturbed neither by the idea of a possible adaptive 
modification of these structures from others once totally 
different in appearance, nor by the alteration which they 
undergo in cases of the abnormal metamorphosis of parts: 
indeed, towards the latter Eichler is actively hostile, for he 
says—and this summarizes his general attitude in the matter— 
‘ I cannot forbear showing how forcibly the present case once 
more warns us that monstrosities cannot be brought to bear 
