Origin and Development of the Compositce. <99 
The first systematist to mention the characters of the styles 
and stamens as described by Malpighi and Grew was Vaillantus 
(70). Boerhaave in his first Index (7) did not give the distinguishing 
characteristics of his sub-divisions but did so in his Index alter (7). 
The syngenesious anthers and bifid stigma were now established 
as characteristic features of the family. Pontedera (56), dis¬ 
tinguishes Valeriana by the stamens not being in a tube and also 
distinguishes other syngenesious forms, such as Asclepias and 
Cucurbitaceae by their non-capitulate form, while Linntf (43) uses 
the character as the primary one in his Syngenesia of the Sexual 
System. No further details of structure are given by subsequent 
authors (6, 25, 35, 59) up to the beginning of the Cassinian period. 
Cassinian Period. 
Cassini (13) described the styles and stamens in great detail 
and used these details in his classification. Don subsequently used 
the basal appendages of the stamens in his classification of the 
Cichorieae (20) and also records (21) abnormalities in several 
species of Zinnia with 4-10 stamens, 3-10 stigmas and 2-5 
embryos. The styles and stamens were also used by Link (42), 
but his work is really of the pre-Cassinian type. Lessing (41) 
described the general staminal characters in great detail but used 
chiefly the stylar characters in his Synopsis, where he neglects the 
distinctive features of the stamens except in three tribes. De 
Candolle (17) used stylar characters for the tribes, but staminal 
characters for some of his sub-tribes, which were practically those 
of Cassini. The structure of the style was studied in great detail 
by Hildebrand (32) and by Chamberlain (14). The rudimentary 
stamens noted by the former in abnormal specimens were noted 
also by Cassini (13), Masters (48) and others. 
Bentham (4,5) realised the importance of the details of both 
styles and stamens and used both for tribal and generic characters. 
Le Maout and Decaisne (40), Asa Gray (28) and other systematists 
agreed with Bentham and Cassini, while Baillon (2), using styles 
chiefly for his tribes, divided several of them into “ sous-s^ries ” on 
the anthers. The importance of the anther appendages in the 
biological efficiency of the pollen-presentation mechanism was 
emphasised by the present writer (61). 
The development (9) and the vascular supply (30, 63, 67) of 
the styles and of the stamens (63, 67) and the structure of the 
pollen grain (3, 62, 71) have been described by various authors. 
Martin (47) considered that the tissue of the contiguous anthers 
