THE ANNALS AND MAGAZINE OF NATURAL HISTORY [SECOND SERIES.] No. 45. SEPTEMBER 1851. XV. — Observations on the Affinities of the Olacacese. By John Miers, Esq., F.R.S., F.L.S. The family of the Olacacece, first proposed by Mirbel, in 1813, under the name of Olacinece, was placed by him near the Auran-tiacece : Jussieu stationed it in proximity with the Sapotacece, while DeCandolle following the views of Mirbel arranged it close to Aurantiacece, a conclusion adopted by most succeeding botanists, and among these Endlicher and Meisner, who dis-posed it with Aurantiacece, Meliacece, Humiriacece, &c, in a class called Hesperides. Brongniart however followed the original views of Mr. Brown, in regard to the affinity of Olax with the Santalacece ; but upon less satisfactory grounds, he associated with these the Loranthacece, excluding at the same time Ximenia from the family. Dr. Lindley in his ' Nixus Plantarum ' and ' Natural System ' offered a new view, by placing it, under the designation of the Olacacece, in the same alliance with the Pittosporacece and Vitacece, for which position few and not very satisfactory reasons could be offered. Mr. Bentham, in an excellent memoir on the Olacinece (Linn. Trans, xviii. 676), proposed a new arrangement of the order into three distinct tribes, adding several new genera, together with his ingenious views in regard to its affinities, when he justly denied its relation with the Aurantiacece, although he admitted its approach to the Humiriacece, considering both these families to be approximate with the Styracece ; and lastly he allowed, that through Opilia and Cansjera, the Olacinece evidently osculate with the Santalacece. Finally, Dr. Lindley (Veg. Kingd. p. 43) repeated his former views, with some modifica-tions, placing it in his alliance of the Berbei-ales, together with Broseracece, Berberidacece, Vitacece, Pittosporacece, &c, an alliance which, as Dr. Asa Gray very justly remarks (Gen. PI. Un. St. i. p. 78), " is there placed on peculiar grounds by no means compatible with ordinary views of botanical affinity." In Ann. fy Mag. N. Hist. Scr. 2. Vol. viii. 11
BioStor
