Origin and Development of the Composites. 173 
He regards the Leptocotylees as primitive and the Brachycotylees 
as derived along two lines of evolution from the Tubuliflorae. 
Lee, 1914. 
After an investigation of the seedling anatomy of about 50 
species of Compositae belonging to most of the tribes Lee (54) 
concluded that the classification in this family could receive no 
assistance from seedling anatomy. As he found all the types of 
anaton^y which occur in the family in closely related species, and 
even in different specimens of the same species it is obvious that 
he was right in his conclusion that seedling anatomy is of no value 
in dealing with questions of affinity within the Compositae. This is 
one more example of the failure of anatomy to give phylogenetic 
characters in the Compositae, and agrees with the facts given by 
Vuillemin and Hildebrandt, although not with the latter’s con¬ 
clusions. 
Bessey, 1897, 1915. 
In his presidential address to the Botanical Society of 
America in 1897 (10) Bessey placed the Asterales at the summit of 
the Rubialian line of evolution. The four families included in the 
Asterales were supposed to be derived from one another thus:— 
Valerianaceae—> Dipsaceae—Calyceraceae—> Compositae. The 
same author in 1915 (11) enunciated various dicta for determining 
Table V. 
Bessey's phyletic lines fov the tribes of the Compositce. 
Pam .231-Hel)ahthace/l 
- 28 Q - AmbrosUcc/e 
" 289- Helen Uce/e 
•' 290 - Arc tot/daci 
- -29/-Caleb dulace/e 
" 292 ~~l N ULAC E/E 
" 293~Astemcex 
u 294' Verhohmce/e 
u 295- EuPATORiAQE/t 
- 296~ Arnneni dace/e 
“ 297 -SEHEaoniDAQE/l 
" 298-Ca no u ace/e 
“ 299- MuTisMcr/E 
H 300~L ACTUCAC££ 
