FLOWER OF GNETUM 
109 
9. In G. Gnemon the successive nodal meristems are not developed in 
acropetal order. In early stages those near the middle of the axis are 
usually in advance of those nearer the base and apex. 
10. The common occurrence of a terminal female flower, described by 
Strasburger, is confirmed. It confirms the conclusion drawn from the form 
of the otherwise barren tip, the non-acropetal order of succession of the 
nodes, and the basipetal development of the lateral male flowers, that the 
growth of the main axis is limited. 
11. Since the barren tip of the axis may be replaced by a female flower, 
they are regarded as homologous. 
12. A suggestion that the primitive inflorescence consisted of an axis 
bearing a cupule, a ring of male flowers, and a terminal female flower — or a 
group of which one was terminal — is renewed and supported. 
13. Evidence for regarding the female flower as homologous with 
a uninodal inflorescence, and its lowest envelope with the cupule, is 
stated. 
14. The male flowers are not regarded as being axillary to the cupule. 
15. The envelope of the male flower arises as an oblique collar, its upper 
edge being always in advance in development. 
16. Usually (in G. Gnemon) the edge of the envelope does not shew two 
lobes in the antero-posterior plane which might be expected if it represented 
two concrescent leaves. When such lobes do appear in later stages they are 
probably due to mechanical causes. 
17. The vascular supply to the envelope frequently leaves the trunk 
which supplies the antherophore while still within the tissues of the main 
axis. 
18. The evidence that the envelope arises from the secondary (floral) 
axis and not direct from the main axis, is inconclusive 
19. In view of these facts it is concluded that the evidence in support 
of the current view that the male flower is a reduced “ anthostrobilus is 
insufficient. 
