i [ 299 ] XXIII. Eemarka on Gnetum. £1/ the late William Griffith, Esq., F.L.S., Madras Medical Service. Commmiicated by A. Henfrey, Esq., F.JI.S., F.L.S., Professor of Botany, King's College. Read April 21st, 1859. Prefatory Note by Prof. Henfrey. 1 HE following paper is the original from which were derived the particulars communi-cated l>y Dr. Lindley, in the article Gnetacem, in his • Vegetable Kingdom ;' and it is now brought forward under the following circumstances. My curiosity was excited by Mr. Griffith's account, quoted by Dr. Lindley, of the exist-ence of a long convoluted suspensor in the o\Tile of Gnetidtn. It appeared to me that this indicated an additional affinity between the OnetacecB and the Coniferce and Cycadacece, and that this would be stUl more striking if it were accompanied by the phenomena of polyembryony, such as are met with in the undoubted Gymnosperms. On examination of some specimens, I fovmd that the lower end of the long convoluted suspensor does diidde into a number of distinct processes, as in Conifers, and that the embryo is developed at the end of one of these. I now became anxious to examine some flowers in an early stage of development with a view to ascertain if Gnetum produced corjniscida ; which I thought might have been overlooked by Mr. Griffith, his Memoir having been written before the publication of Mi". Brown's celebrated Memou* on the Plurality of Embryos ia the Coniferce. Thi-ough the kindness of Dr. Hooker, I obtained from the Kew Museum a supply of specimens of Gnetum in various stages of growth. From the same friend I learnt that the original Memoir of Mr. Griffith was in the hands of the Secretary of the Society, and, with the consent of Dr. Lindley, Mr. Bennett placed the paper in my hands. The study of this paper, under the light of my own observations, has led me to attach great im-portance to it, and I have recommended its publication before communicating the results of my investigations, on accoimt of the author's having forestalled me in the greater part of the facts important in the history of development of this genus, and rendered it muie-cessary for me to do more than supplement his observations in a few points, before enter-ing upon the general conclusions I have drawn from his and my o\vn studies. I hope shortly to offer a paper on this subject for the consideration of the Linnean Society, and shall merely say at present, that my investigations lead me to look very favom-ably upon the opinion expressed by Prof. J. G. Agardh, in his new ' Theoria Syste-matis Plantarum,' that the Gnetacece are related even more closely to the Loranthacea than to the Coniferce. London, January 7, 1859. 2 r2
BioStor
