Crested Porcupine. _Penn. Quad._
* * * * *
Classis. AVES. _Auct._
Ordo. RAPTORES. _Ill._
Fam. VULTURIDÆ. _Vigors. in Linn. Trans._
Genus. VULTUR. _Auct._
Species 1.—_Vultur fulvus_.
Vultur fulvus. _Briss._ I. 462, sp. 7.
Gyps vulgaris. _Sav. Ois. d’Egypte_.
Le Percnoptere. _Pl. Enl._ 426.
Vautour Griffon. _Temm. Manuel d’Orn._ p. 5.
Alpine Vulture. Var. B. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ I. p. 17.
This species was observed by Major Denham in the neighbourhood of all
the large towns through which he passed. It was attracted by the offal,
and refuse of every description, which the inhabitants were accustomed
to throw out for its use. For the services which these birds thus
performed, they met with protection in return from the natives, who did
not permit them to be destroyed.
Fam. FALCONIDÆ. _Leach._
Subfam. ACCIPITRINA. _V. in Linn. Trans._
Genus. ASTUR. _Auct._
Species 2.—_Astur musicus_.
Falco musicus. _Daud. Orn._ II. 116, sp. lxxxviii.
Le Faucon chanteur. _Le Vaill. Ois. d’Afr._ I. 117, pl. 27.
Chanting Falcon. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ I. p. 178.
This beautiful Hawk was met with occasionally in most parts of central
Africa, but not in any abundance. It was the only species of the family
which the officers of the expedition were enabled to preserve and bring
home.
Ordo. INSESSORES. _V. in Linn. Trans._
Tribus. FISSIROSTRES. _Cuv._
Fam. TODIDÆ. _V. in Linn. Trans._
Genus. EURYSTOMUS. _Vieill._
Species 3.—_Eurystomus Madagascariensis_.
Coracias Madagascariensis. _Gmel._ I. 379.
Le Rolle de Madagascar. _Pl. Enl._ 501.
Madagascar Roller. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ III. p. 79.
Fam. HALCYONIDÆ. _V. in Linn. Trans._
Genus. HALCYON. _Swains._
Species 4.—_Halcyon erythrogaster_.
Alcedo erythrogaster. _Temm._
Alcedo Senegalensis, var. γ. _Lath. Ind. Orn._ 249.
Martin Pecheur du Senegal. _Pl. Enl._ 356, fig. inf.
The birds of this species were met with in abundance in those
situations near rivers which form the usual resort of the species of
this family. They were more particularly observed in the tamarind trees.
Tribus. CONIROSTRES. _Cuv_
Fam. CORVIDÆ. _Leach._
Genus. CORACIAS. _Linn._
Species 5.—_Coracias Senegalensis_.
Coracias Senegalensis. _Gmel._ I. 379.
Rollier du Senegal. _Pl. Enl._ 326.
Swallow-tailed Indian Roller. _Edw._ t. 327.
Senegal Roller. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ III. p. 75.
These splendid Rollers were very abundant in the thick underwoods
throughout central Africa.
Tribus. SCANSORES. _Auct._
Fam. PSITTACIDÆ. _Leach._
Genus. PSITTACUS. _Auct._
Species 6.—_Psittacus erythacus_.
Psittacus erythacus. _Linn._ i. 144.
Perroquet cendrée de Guinée. _Pl. Enl._ 311.
Ash-coloured Parrot. _Alb._ i. t. 12.
Several specimens of this species were brought over alive to this
country, which are now honoured with a place in His Majesty’s
collection.
Genus. PALÆORNIS. _V. in Zool. Journ._
Species 7—_Palæornis torquatus_.
Palæornis torquatus. _V. in Zool. Journ._ vol. II. p. 50.
Psittaca torquata. _Briss._ IV. 323.
La perruche à collier. _Pl. Enl._ 551.
Perruche à collier rose. _Le Vaill. Hist. des Perr._ pl. 22, 23.
This species, whose chief _habitat_ is said to be in India, which is
the main resort of the group to which it belongs, appears to have a
very wide geographical distribution. It has been found on the coast
of Senegal, as well as by the officers of the present expedition in
central Africa. The specimen before us is very much mutilated, but
enough of the bird remains to enable us to identify the species.
Ordo. RASORES. _Ill._
Fam. TETRAONIDÆ. _Leach._
Genus. PTEROCLES. _Temm._
Species 8.—_Pterocles exustus_.
Pterocles exustus. _Temm. Pl. Col._ ♂ 354. ♀ 360.
These birds were found in great numbers in the neighbourhood of Bornou.
They frequented the low sand hills which were scantily covered with
shrubs. Like most of the family, they were found to be excellent eating.
Genus. FRANCOLINUS. _Steph._
Species 9.—_Francolinus Clappertoni_.
_Franc. supra brunneus fulvo-variegatus; subtus fulvo-albidus, maculis
longitudinalibus brunneis aspersus; strigâ superciliari subocularique,
gulâ, genisque albis, his brunneo-lineatis._
_Pileus_ brunneus, ad frontem nigrescens. Striga nigra interrupta
extendit a rictu ad genas. _Genarum_ plumæ, anteriores lineis
gracilibus, posteriores maculis ovalibus brunneis in medio notatæ.
_Colli, pectoris, abdominis_que plumæ in medio brunneæ marginibus
fulvo-albidis, rhachibus pallidis. _Dorsi_ superioris, _scapularium,
tectricum_que plumæ pallido-fulvo marginatæ partimque fasciatæ.
_Dorsi_ inferioris _uropygii_que plumæ pallidè brunneæ in medio
fusco-brunneo leviter notatæ. _Remiges_ exteriores pogonio externo ad
basin fulvo-fasciato, pogonio interno ad basin brunneo, versus apicem
rufo-fulvo; interiores utrinque fulvo-fasciatæ. _Ptila_ inferiora in
medio brunnea, fulvo ad margines notata. _Pteromata_ inferiora in medio
fusca, marginibus fulvis. _Femorum_ plumæ fulvæ in medio brunneæ.
_Rectrices_ brunneæ fasciis plurimis fulvis undulatæ. _Rostrum_ superné
nigrum, infra ad basin rubro tinctum. _Pedes_, ad frontem nigri, poné
rubescentes: _tarsis_ bicalcaratis, calcare superiore obtuso, inferiore
acuto. Longitudo _corporis_, 14 unc.; _alæ_ a carpo ad remigem 5tam,
7⅕; _caudæ_, 3⅘; _rostri_, 1¹⁄₂₈; _tarsi_, 2³⁄₁₀.
This species of _Francolin_, which appears to us to be hitherto
undescribed, was met with in tolerable abundance. It frequented sand
hills, covered with low shrubs; and was very difficult to be procured
in consequence of the great speed with which it ran. We have named the
species after Captain Clapperton, R. N. the intrepid and intelligent
companion of Major Denham.
Fam. STRUTHIONIDÆ. _V. in Linn. Trans._
Genus. STRUTHIO. _Auct._
Species 10.—_Struthio camelus_.
Struthio camelus. _Linn._ I. 265.
L’Autruche. _Pl. Enl._ 457. ♀
The Black Ostrich. _Brown’s Illust. of Zool._ pl. 16.
Major Denham succeeded in bringing alive to this country four of these
noble birds, which are at present in His Majesty’s menagerie at Windsor.
Genus. OTIS. _Linn._
Species 11.—_Otis Denhami_.
_O. fusco-brunneo et pallido-fulvo undulatim punctulata, capite
brunnescenti-nigro, superciliis genis gulâque albidis, collo rufo,
pectore cinereo; pteromatibus remigibus rectricibusque nigris, istis
albo-maculatis, his albo-fasciatis; corpore subtus rufescenti-albo._
_Capitis_ pileus parsque superior _nuchæ_ brunnescenti-nigri. _Regionis
auricularis_ plumæ elongatæ, decompositæ, cinerascenti-albæ. _Colli_
inferioris plumæ frontales elongatæ. _Dorsi, uropygii, scapularium,
ptilorum_que plumæ fusco-brunneæ, pallido-fusco undulatim punctulatæ.
_Pteromata_ nigra maculis albis grandibus irregulariter notata.
_Tectrices_ inferiores albæ ad marginem alarum fusco-variegatæ.
_Rectrices_ nigræ; duæ exteriores pogonio interno fasciis duabus
albis, externo tribus, notatæ; cæteræ tribus fasciis ejusdem coloris
utrinque notatæ, fasciâ sub-apicali nigro sparsâ: duæ mediæ ad apicem
fusco-brunneæ, pallido-fusco undulatim punctulatæ. _Irides_ flavæ.
_Rostrum_ corneum. _Pedes_ nigri. Longitudo _corporis_, 3 ped. 9 unc.;
_caudæ_, 1 pes, 4 unc.; _rostri_, ad frontem, 3¾ unc., ad rictum,
4½ unc.; _tarsi_, 7 unc.; _digiti_ medii, ungue incluso, 2¾ unc.;
exterioris, 1⁷⁄₀ unc.
African Bustard? _Lath. Gen. Hist._ Vol. VIII. p. 361.
We have hitherto seen no description that exactly accords with the
bird before us. The _African Bustard_ described by Dr. Latham, in the
second edition of his “Synopsis,” lately published under the title of
“A General History of Birds,” appears to be the most allied to it. But
the head of that bird is described as being bare; and such a marked
difference prevents us from referring our bird to that species, with
which it generally agrees in other points, without some note of doubt.
Our specimen is unfortunately very defective: in the quill feathers,
and fore parts of the neck, more particularly. These latter are
described by Major Denham as singularly beautiful, being elongated and
swelling out into a kind of ruff. We are happy to have the opportunity
of distinguishing this bird by the name of the enterprising traveller
to whose zeal we are indebted for the species itself, and many other
valuable acquisitions to science.
This species was met with, in the rainy season, near the larger towns,
but not in any great abundance. It frequented moist places, where the
herbage was pure and fresh. In such places it was taken in snares by
the natives, who used it for food. It was almost invariably met with
singly, Major Denham never having observed a pair together more than
once. It is singular, also, that it was always found in company with
_Gazelles_ whenever a _Bustard_ was observed, it was certain that the
_Gazelles_ were not far distant. Major Denham describes the eye of
this bird as large and brilliant. In like manner as is recorded of the
_Gazelle_, with which this bird seems to have so close a sympathy, the
Arabs are accustomed to compare the eyes of their most beautiful women
to those of the _Oubara_[86].
Ordo. GRALLATORES. _Ill._
Fam. GRUIDÆ. _V. in Linn. Trans._
Genus. BALEARICA. _Briss._
Species 12. _Balearica pavonina_.
Ardea pavonina. _Linn._ I. 233.
Balearica. _Briss._ v. 511.
Oiseau royal. ♀ _Id. Ib._ pl. 41.
L’oiseau royal. ♂ _Pl. Enl._ 265.
Crowned African Crane. _Edw._ t. 192.
Crowned Heron. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ IX. p. 26.
These birds were found in the neighbourhood of the smaller lakes. They
were generally observed in flocks of six or eight. A single pair was
sometimes met with, but a single bird scarcely ever.
Genus. PLATALEA. _Linn._
Species 13.—_Platalea leucorodia_.
Platalea leucorodia. _Linn._ I. 231.
La Spatule. _Pl. Enl._ 405.
Spatule blanche. _Temm. Manuel d’Orn._ p. 595.
White Spoonbill. _Penn. Brit. Zool. App._ t. 9.
These birds were found in the smaller lakes, and in grounds which were
overflowed. They were met with in tolerable plenty.
Fam. ARDEIDÆ. _Leach._
Genus. ARDEA. _Auct._
Species 14.—_Ardea Coromandelensis_.
Ardea Coromandelensis. Steph, in Sharts Gen. Zool. XI. p. 577.
Ardea russata. _Temm. Manuel d’Orn._ p. 506.
Ardea affinis? _Horsf. Linn. Trans._ Vol. XIII. p. 189.
Ardea comata. var. β. _Lath. Ind. Orn._ 687.
Crabier de la côté de Coromandel. _Pl. Enl._ 910.
This bird was shot in the neighbourhood of Alph, a town situated in the
middle of a swamp, described at page 233 of these travels. They were
seen in some abundance in that neighbourhood, and were noticed by Major
Denham as remarkable for their beauty and gracefulness.
Species 15.—_Ardea melanocephala_.
_Ard. cinerea; capite cristato, colli parte posteriore lateribusque,
regione interhumerali, remigibus, rectricibusque nigris, gulâ collique
parte anteriore albis._
_Colli_ inferioris plumæ elongatæ cinerascentes. _Dorsi_ pars anterior
inter humeros nigra, posterior saturatè cinerea. _Ptila_ pallidè
cinerea. _Tectrices_ inferiores albæ. _Rostrum_ nigrum, _mandibulâ_
inferiore flavescente, apicem versus nigro marginatâ. _Pedes_ nigri.
Longitudo _corporis_, 2 ped. 9 unc.; _alæ_, 15 unc.; _rostri_, 4;
_tarsi_, 6.
We feel much hesitation in characterizing the bird before us as a
distinct species. In a family like the present, where there is so
much variation both in age and sex in the same species, it is almost
impossible to decide upon the identity or distinction of species,
unless by actual observation of the birds themselves in their native
haunts, and in their different ages and states of plumage. On the
whole, however, it is perhaps the most eligible plan to keep those
species separate which show evident marks of distinction; leaving it to
more accurate observation to ascertain whether they may be identical
with described species, and differing merely by age, sex, or the
variations of plumage according to the different seasons of the year.
The bird before us might, at first sight, be supposed to be the common
_Ardea cinerea_, Linn. But that bird, as far as we have observed, never
possesses the entirely black head which distinguishes the specimen
before us; nor has it the black on the hind part of the neck, nor on
the back between the shoulders. The younger bird of our common species
has those parts cinereous which are black in the adult: and the crest
and lower feathers of the neck are never so much elongated as in the
old bird. The strength of the black markings in Major Denham’s species,
moreover, and the developement of the crest, neck, and scapular
feathers, prevent us from concluding it to be an immature bird. If we
allow it to be adult, it is decidedly distinct from the adult of _A.
cinerea_. We know no other allied species to which we might consider it
referable.
These birds were found in great abundance in all the lakes and marshes
throughout the route of our travellers. They were met with in company
with numberless other species of the family, specimens of which
our officers were prevented from preserving, or bringing home, in
consequence of the difficulties attending the expedition, to which we
have before alluded.
Genus. SCOPUS. _Briss._
Species 16.—_Scopus umbretta_.
Scopus umbretta. _Gmel._ I. 618.
L’Ombrette du Senegal. _Pl. Enl._ 796.
The Umbre. _Brown’s Illust. of Zool._ pl. 35.
Tufted Umbre. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ Vol. IX. p. 23.
Major Denham informs us, that this bird was very rarely seen. The few
he observed were met with in the _Mimosa_ trees.
Genus. IBIS. _Lacep._
Species 17—_Ibis Æthiopicus_.
Tantalus Æthiopicus. _Lath. Ind. Orn._ 706.
Ibis religiosa. _Cuv. Regne Anim._ I. 483.
Abou Hannez. _Bruce’s Trav. Append._ pl. p. 172.
This bird, which is of exceeding interest as being one of the two
species of _Ibis_ which were the objects of sacred worship among the
Egyptians, was met with by Major Denham on the west borders of the
Lake Tchad. He observed them in flocks, and in considerable numbers.
Hitherto they have been sparingly seen by travellers, and few specimens
have reached our collections.
Genus. CICONIA. _Briss._
Species 18.—_Ciconia Marabou_.
Ciconia Argala. _Temm. Pl. Col._ 301.
This bird was met with rather plentifully in the neighbourhood of large
towns, in company with the _Vultures_, to the manners of which we have
already referred, page 195. Like them, they were protected by the
natives, in consideration of the services they performed in clearing
away all the offensive substances which were thrown out to them from
the towns. In India, we find that the corresponding species, _Ardea
Argala_, Lath., is held in equal estimation for similar services. Major
Denham mentions his having frequently been a witness of their voracious
and omnivorous habits.
M. Temminck first figured and characterized this African species as
distinct from that of India. He has given it the name of _Argala_,
while for the Indian bird, which had already received that name from
Dr. Latham, he proposes the name of _Marabou_. We have ventured to
reverse the order of these names; and while we retain for the Indian
species the original name conferred on it by Dr. Latham, which, it is
to be recollected, is an Indian word, we have assigned the African
species the title of _Marabou_, which, it is equally to be observed, is
a word peculiar to Africa.
The specimen brought home by the present expedition appears to be a
young bird, and answers to the description given of the young of this
species by M. Temminck. The colours are nearly black in the bird before
us, which are grey in the adult bird figured by that gentleman. Major
Denham mentions his having noticed some birds nearly allied to this
species, which were larger, and different in colour, and which he
conceived to be distinct. They probably were the adult birds of this
species.
Ordo. NATATORES. _Ill._
Fam. ANATIDÆ. _Leach._
Subfam. ANSERINA. _V. in Zool. Journ._
Genus. PLECTROPTERUS. _Leach._
Species 19.—_Plectropterus Gambensis_.
Plectropterus Gambensis. _Steph. in Shaw’s Zool._ XII. Part 2. p. 7.
pl. 36.
Anas Gambensis. _Linn._ I. 195.
Spur-winged Goose. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ X. 241.
This bird was found in flocks of great numbers on all the lakes. The
flesh was very coarse, and of a fishy taste, and afforded very bad
eating.
Species 20.—_Plectropterus melanonotus_.
Plectropterus melanotos. _Steph. in Shaw’s Zool._ XII. Part 2. p. 8.
Anser melanonotus. _Forst. Zool. Ind._ p. 21. t. 11.
Anas melanonotus. _Lath. Ind. Orn._ 839.
Oye de la côté de Coromandel. _Pl. Enl._ 937.
Black-backed Goose. _Penn. Ind. Zool._ p. 12. t. 11.
This species, of which fine specimens of the male and female are
preserved in the collection, was met with on the lake Tchad. It was
not seen in any abundance, and was found in company with other species
of the family. The protuberance on the bill of the male is much more
enlarged and prominent than is represented in the “Planches Enluminées.”
Subfam. ANATINA. _V. in Zool. Journ._
Genus. ANAS. _Auct._
Species 21.—_Anas viduata_.
Anas viduata. _Linn._ I. 205.
Canard du Maragnan. _Pl. Enl._ 808.
Spanish Duck. _Penn. Gen. of Birds_, p. 65. t. 13.
This species was very common, both on Lake Tchad and on all the smaller
lakes. It was excellent eating. Mr. Pennant has described the species
as an inhabitant of America and Africa. Linnæus says only, that it is
found in the lakes of Carthagena; those, it is supposed, of New Spain.
Our bird accords very accurately with his description of the species,
and also with the figure quoted above from the “Planches Enluminées.”
We have every reason to conclude with Mr. Pennant, that the species
inhabits both the Old and New Continent. The bend of the wing exhibits
the rudiments of a spur.
Fam. PELECANIDÆ. _Leach_
Genus. ONOCROTALUS. _Briss._
Species 22.—_Onocrotalus Brissonii_.
Pelicanus Onocrotalus. _Linn._ I. 215.
Le Pelican. _Pl. Enl._ 87.
White Pelican. _Edw._ t. 92.
This well known species has been described to us by Major Denham as
very abundant on the borders of Lake Tchad. The genus _Onocrotalus_
was first instituted by M. Brisson; but, according to his custom,
he left the present species without any specific name. M. Cuvier,
in his “Regne Animal,” acknowledges the genus; but neither has he
specifically distinguished the bird. We feel much pleasure in now
assigning it a name, in memory of the first characterizer of the group;
an ornithologist, whose works cannot be studied without the highest
advantage, but whose labours have never as yet been sufficiently
appreciated.
Genus. PHALACROCORAX. _Briss._
Species 23.—_Phalacrocorax pygmæus_.
Pelecanus pygmæus. _Pall. Reise._ II. 712. t. G.
Dwarf Shag. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ X. 431.
Cormoran pygmée, jun. _Temm. Man. d’Orn._ p. 901.
This bird, which agrees very accurately with M. Temminck’s description
of the young of his _Cormoran pygmée_, was met with by Major Denham on
one of the smaller lakes in central Africa. He describes the species as
very rarely occurring.
Genus. PLOTUS. _Linn._
Species 24.—_Plotus melanogaster_.
Plotus melanogaster. _Gmel._ I. 580.
Anhinga melanogaster. _Forst. Zool. Ind._ p. 22. t. 12.
Anhinga de Cayenne. _Pl. Enl._ 959.
Black-bellied Anhinga. _Penn. Ind. Zool._ p. 13. t. 12.
Black-bellied Darter. _Lath. Gen. Hist._ X. 451.
This bird was seen but once or twice during the course of the
expedition. It was met with on one of the smaller lakes. It seems to
have a very extensive geographical distribution, being found in the New
World, in the islands of Java and Ceylon, and now in the interior of
Africa.
There are remnants of several other species of birds in the collection,
consisting chiefly of bills, legs, and wings. Among them we can trace
the apparent remains of the _Ciconia alba_, Briss.; _Ardea garzetta_,
Linn.; different species of the genus _Lamprotornis_, Temm.; with
various others, of which we regret that we cannot venture to give any
description. The foregoing twenty-four species are all that we can
undertake to determine upon with accuracy.
* * * * *
Classis. REPTILIA. _Auct._
Ordo. SAURIENS. _Cuv._
Tribus. LACERTIENS. _Cuv._
Genus. MONITOR. _Cuv._
Species 1.—_Monitor Niloticus_.
Lacerta Nilotica. _Linn._ I. 360.
Varanus Dracæna. _Merr. Syst. Amph._ p. 59.
Tupinambis Niloticus. _Daud. Rept._ III. 51.
Monitor du Nile, ou Ouaran. _Cuv. Reg. Anim._ II. 25.
Tribus. CAMELEONIENS. _Cuv._
Genus. CHAMÆLEO. _Lacép._
Species 2.—_Chamæleo vulgaris_.
Chamæleo vulgaris. _Daud. Rept._ IV. 181.
Chamæleo carinatus. _Merr. Syst. Amph._ p. 162.
Lacerta chamæleon. _Linn._ I. 364.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 82: Voyage, ii. 20.]
[Footnote 83: Desmarest states, (Ency. Meth. note), that he cannot
find any work of Lacépède in which the genus Fennecus is proposed.]
[Footnote 84: Perhaps M. Cuvier was led into this mistake by an
error of the pen or press, in M. Desmarest’s translation of Bruce’s
description of the animal. Bruce says, “from the snout to the anus,
he was about ten inches long;” the translation, “Ce Fennec avoit
six pouces de longueur, depuis le bout du nez jusqu’ à l’origine de
la queue.” The same mistake occurs in M. Geoffroy Saint Hilaire’s
quotation of Bruce; but this cannot be a misprint, for the length is
not expressed by the word _six_, but by the Arabic cypher _6_.]
[Footnote 85: Taken as the stuffed specimen stands.]
[Footnote 86: _Oubara_ seems to be a general name for the _Bustards_
in Africa. A smaller species than the present, of that country, has
received this name as a specific title from M. Gmelin.]
No. XXII.
BOTANICAL APPENDIX.
BY ROBERT BROWN, ESQ. F.R.SS. L. & E., F.L.S.
The Herbarium formed during the expedition, chiefly by the late
Dr. Oudney, contains specimens, more or less perfect, of about three
hundred species. Of these one hundred belong to the vicinity of
Tripoli; fifty were collected in the route from Tripoli to Mourzuk,
thirty-two in Fezzan, thirty-three on the journey from Mourzuk to
Kouka, seventy-seven in Bornou, and sixteen in Haussa or Soudan.
These materials are too inconsiderable to enable us to judge correctly
of the vegetable productions of any of the countries visited by
the mission, and especially of the more interesting regions, Bornou
and Soudan.
For the limited extent of the herbarium, the imperfect state of
many of the specimens, and the very scanty information to be found
respecting them, either in the herbarium itself, or in the Journal
of the collector, it is unfortunately not difficult to account.
Dr. Oudney was sufficiently versed in Botany, to have formed
collections much more extensive and instructive, had the advancement
of natural history been the principal purpose of his mission. His time
and attention, however, were chiefly occupied by the more important
objects of the expedition: as a botanist he had no assistant;
and the state of his health during his residence in Bornou must,
in a great degree, have rendered him unable to collect or observe
the natural productions of that country.
For the few specimens belonging to Soudan, we are indebted to Captain
Clapperton, who, after the death of Dr. Oudney, endeavoured to
preserve the more striking and useful plants which he met with. His
collection was originally more considerable; but before it reached
England, many of the specimens were entirely destroyed. It still
includes several of the medicinal plants of the natives; but these
being without either flowers or fruit, cannot be determined.
In the whole herbarium, the number of undescribed species hardly
equals twenty; and among these not one new genus is found.
The plants belonging to the vicinity of Tripoli were sent to me
by Dr. Oudney, before his departure for Fezzan. This part of the
collection, amounting to one hundred species, was merely divided into
those of the immediate neighbourhood of Tripoli, and those from the
mountains of Tarhona and Imsalata.
It exceeds in extent the herbarium formed by Mr. Ritchie near Tripoli,
and on the Gharian hills, which, however, though containing only
fifty-nine species, includes twenty-seven not in Dr. Oudney’s
herbarium.
The specimens in Mr. Ritchie’s collection are carefully preserved,
the particular places of growth in most cases given, and observations
added on the structure of a few; sufficient at least to prove, that
much information on the vegetation of the countries he visited might
have been expected from that ill-fated traveller.
In these two collections united, hardly more than five species are
contained not already published in the works that have appeared on
the botany of North Africa; particularly in the Flora Atlantica
of M. Desfontaines, in the Flore d’Egypte of M. Delile, and in
the Floræ Libycæ Specimen of Professor Viviani, formed from the
herbarium of the traveller Della Cella.
The plants collected in the Great Desert and its oases, between
Tripoli and the northern confines of Bornou, and which somewhat exceed
a hundred, are, with about eight or ten exceptions, also to be found
in the works now mentioned. And among those of Bornou and Soudan,
which fall short of one hundred, very few species occur not already
known as natives of other parts of Equinoctial Africa.
A complete catalogue of the herbarium, such as I have now described
it, even if the number and condition of the specimens admitted of its
being satisfactorily given, would be of but little importance, with
reference to the geography of plants. Catalogues of such collections,
if drawn up hastily, and from imperfect materials, as must here have
been the case, are indeed calculated rather to injure than advance
this department of the science, which is still in its infancy,
and whose progress entirely depends on the scrupulous accuracy of
its statements. To produce confidence in these statements, and in
the deductions founded on them, it should in every case distinctly
appear, that in establishing the identity of the species enumerated,
due attention has been paid to the original authorities on which
they depend, and, wherever it is possible, a comparison actually
made with authentic specimens.
In the account which I am now to give of the present collection,
I shall confine myself to a slight notice of the remarkable known
plants it contains, to characters or short descriptions of the more
interesting new species, and to some observations on such of the
plants as, though already published, have either been referred to
genera to which they appear to me not to belong, or whose characters
require essential alteration.
In proceeding on this plan, I shall adopt the order followed in
the botanical appendix to Captain Tuckey’s Expedition to the
River Congo. And as there will seldom be room for remarks on the
geographical distribution of the species I have to notice, I shall
chiefly endeavour to make my observations respecting them of some
interest to systematic botanists.
CRUCIFERÆ. Fifteen species belonging to this family exist in the
collection, one of which only appears to be undescribed, and of
this the specimens are so imperfect, that its genus cannot with
certainty be determined. Of those already published, however,
the generic characters of several require material alterations,
some of which suggest observations relative to the structure and
arrangement of the natural order.
SAVIGNYA ÆGYPTIACA, (_De Cand. Syst._ 2. _p._ 283,) is the first of
these. It was observed near Bonjem, by Dr. Oudney, whose specimens
slightly differ from those which I have received from M. Delile,
by whom this plant was discovered near the pyramid of Saqqârah, and
who has well figured and described it in his Flore d’Egypte, under
the name of Lunaria parviflora. By this name it is also published by
M. Desvaux. Professor Viviani, in giving an account of his Lunaria
libyca, a plant which I shall presently have occasion to notice
more particularly, has remarked[87], that Savignya of De Candolle
possesses no characters sufficient to distinguish it as a genus from
Lunaria; and still more recently, Professor Sprengel has referred our
plant to Farsetia[88]. The genus Savignya, however, will no doubt be
ultimately established, though not on the grounds on which it was
originally constituted; for the umbilical cords certainly adhere
to the partition, the silicule, which is never absolutely sessile,
is distinctly pedicellated in Dr. Oudney’s specimens, the valves
are not flat, and the cotyledons are decidedly conduplicate. In
describing the cotyledons of his plant as accumbent, M. De Candolle
has probably relied on the external characters of the seed, chiefly on
its great compression, its broad margin or wing, and on the whole of
the radicle being visible through the integuments. It would appear,
therefore, that the true character of the cotyledons of Savignya has
been overlooked, chiefly from its existing in the greatest possible
degree. To include this degree of folding, in which the margins are
closely approximated, and the radicle consequently entirely exposed,
a definition of conduplicate cotyledons somewhat different from that
proposed in the “Systema Naturale” becomes necessary. I may here
also observe, that the terms Pleurorhizæ and Notorhizæ, employed
by M. De Candolle, to express the two principal modifications of
cotyledons in Cruciferæ, appear to me so far objectionable, as they
may seem to imply that in the embryo of this family, the position
of the radicle is variable, and that of the cotyledons fixed. It is
at least deserving of notice, that the reverse of this is the fact;
though it is certainly not necessary to change these terms, which
are now generally received.
On the subject of Savignya, two questions naturally present
themselves. In the first place: Is this genus, solely on account of
its conduplicate cotyledons, to be removed from Alyssineæ, where
it has hitherto been placed, to Velleæ, its affinity with which
has never been suspected, and to whose genera it bears very little
external resemblance? Secondly: In dividing Cruciferæ into natural
sections, are we, with M. De Candolle, to expect in each of these
subdivisions an absolute uniformity in the state of the cotyledons? As
far as relates to the accumbent and flatly incumbent states, at
least, I have no hesitation in answering the latter question in
the negative; and I believe that in one case, namely Hutchinsia,
these modifications are not even of generic importance; for it will
hardly be proposed to separate H. alpina from petræa, solely on that
ground. I carried this opinion farther than I am at present disposed
to do, in the second edition of Mr. Aiton’s Hortus Kewensis, where
I united in the genus Cakile plants which I then knew to differ from
each other, in having accumbent and conduplicate cotyledons; and I
included Capsella bursa pastoris in the genus Thlaspi, although I was
aware, both from my own observations, and from Schkuhr’s excellent
figure[89], that its cotyledons were incumbent. I am at present,
however, inclined to adopt the subdivision of both these genera,
as proposed by several authors, and received by M. De Candolle;
but to this subdivision the author of the Systema Naturale must
have been determined on other grounds than those referred to; for
in these four genera, in which the three principal modifications of
cotyledons occur, he has taken their uniformity for granted.
As to the place of Savignya in the natural family, I believe, on
considering the whole of its structure and habit, that it ought
to be removed from Alyssineæ to a subdivision of the order that
may be called _Brassiceæ_, but which is much more extensive than
the tribe so named by M. De Candolle; including all the genera at
present known with conduplicate cotyledons, as well as some others,
in which these parts are differently modified.
There are two points in the structure of Savignya, that deserve
particular notice. I have described the æstivation of the calyx as
valvular; a mode not before remarked in this family, though existing
also in Ricotia. In the latter genus, however, the apices of the
sepals are perhaps slightly imbricate, which I cannot perceive them
to be in Savignya.
The radicle is described by M. De Candolle as superior, with relation
to the cotyledons. I am not sure that this is the best manner of
expressing the fact of its being horizontal, or exactly centrifugal,
the cotyledons having the same direction. This position of the seed
is acquired only after fecundation; for at an earlier period the
foramen of the testa, the point infallibly indicating the place of
the future radicle, is ascendant. From the horizontal position of
the radicle in this and some other genera, especially Farsetia, we
may readily pass to its direction in Biscutella, where I have termed
it descendant; a character which I introduced to distinguish that
genus from Cremolobus. But in Biscutella the embryo, with reference
to its usual direction in the family, is not really inverted, the
radicle being still placed above the umbilicus. On the contrary,
in _Cremolobeæ_, a natural tribe belonging to South America,
and consisting of Cremolobus and Menonvillea, though the embryo at
first sight seems to agree in direction with the order generally,
both radicle and cotyledons being ascendant, it is, in the same sense,
not only inverted, but the seed must also be considered as resupinate:
for the radicle is seated below the umbilicus, and also occupies the
inner side of the seed, or that next the placenta,—peculiarities
which, taken together, constitute the character of the tribe here
proposed. It appears to me singular that M. De Candolle, while
he describes the embryo of these two genera as having the usual
structure of the order, should consider that of Iberis, in which I
can find no peculiarity, as deviating from that structure[90].
LUNARIA LIBYCA of Viviani[91] is the second plant of Cruciferæ, on
which I have some observations to offer. This species was described
and figured, by the author here quoted, in 1824, from specimens
collected in 1817 by Della Cella. The specimens in the herbarium were
found near Tripoli, where the plant had also been observed in 1819 by
Mr. Ritchie, who referred it to Lunaria, and remarked that the calyx
was persistent. Professor Sprengel, in his Systema Vegetabilium,
considers it a species of Farsetia.
That this plant ought not to be associated either with the
original species of Lunaria, or with Savignya, as now constituted,
is sufficiently evident. And if it is to be included in Farsetia,
it can only be on the grounds of its having a sessile silicule, with
compressed valves, an indefinite number of seeds in each cell, and
accumbent cotyledons. But in these respects it accords equally with
Meniocus, a genus proposed by M. Desvaux, and with some hesitation
received by M. De Candolle, and with Schivereckia of Andrzejowski,
which he has also adopted. It does not, however, agree with either
of those genera in habit, and it is easily distinguished from both
by its simple filaments and other characters, which I shall notice
hereafter. Is this plant, then, sui generis? ought it to be united
with Alyssum, the character of that genus being modified to receive
it? or does not Alyssum require subdivision, and may not our plant
be referred to one of the genera so formed? A brief result of the
examination of these questions, so far as they are connected with the
subject under consideration, will be found annexed to the character
which is given of the genus formed by the union of Lunaria libyca
with Alyssum maritimum, a plant also in the collection, from the
neighbourhood of Tripoli.
_Alyssum maritimum_, which is described both as an Alyssum and as
a Clypeola by Linnæus, is the _Konig_ of Adanson, who founded his
generic distinction on the monospermous cells and supposed want of
glands of the receptacle; and M. Desvaux, admitting Adanson’s genus,
has named it Lobularia. In the second edition of Hortus Kewensis I
included this plant in Alyssum, which M. De Candolle has also done
in his great work.
For the genus here proposed I shall adopt Adanson’s name, altering
only the termination, and wishing it to be considered as commemorating
the important services rendered to botany by my friend Mr. Konig,
of the British Museum[92]. In comparing these two species of Koniga,
their agreement is very striking in habit, in leaves, in the closely
pressed bipartite pubescence, in the calyx, petals, stamina, and
stigma. They correspond also in some other points, less obvious
but equally important, which I shall separately notice. The first
of these is in having eight glands on the receptacle; a character
peculiar, I believe, to these plants, and which first suggested
the generic name Octadenia. The glands in Alyssum maritimum were
entirely overlooked by Adanson, are not noticed by M. Desvaux,
and M. De Candolle has described only the four that subtend the
longer stamina. These certainly are much more conspicuous than the
remaining four, which, however, occupy the place of the only glands
existing in several of the most nearly related genera.
The number and position of the glands in this genus give some support,
perhaps, to the hypothesis which I have formerly advanced, of the
divisions of an hypogynous disk being in most cases formed of abortive
filaments; an opinion more strikingly confirmed, however, in this
family of plants, by their form and texture in Alyssum calycinum,
and minimum.
The second point in which the two species of Koniga agree is in the
structure of the septum. On this, which I consider as a new source
of character in Cruciferæ, I shall offer some remarks in speaking
of Farsetia.
The third point of agreement is the adhesion of the funiculi
umbilicales to the septum. This adhesion, though really existing,
is not very obvious in the monospermous cells of Koniga maritima;
but in the supposed variety of this species from Teneriffe, in which
the cells are occasionally dispermous, it is manifest, and is very
remarkable in all states of Koniga libyca.
I first introduced this adhesion of the funiculi to the septum, as
a generic character, in distinguishing Petrocallis from Draba. It
has since been advantageously employed in the character of Lunaria
by M. de Candolle, who, however, supposes this structure of much
rarer occurrence in Cruciferæ than it really is. According to
my observations, it is neither unfrequent, nor always of generic
importance. Thus, I find it to exist in some species only of Arabis,
namely A. Turrita, pendula, and canadensis, and hence I did not
introduce it into my generic character of Parrya, though I have
noticed it in my description of the species.
The principal difference existing between these two species of Koniga
is that the cells of the ovarium and silicula of _K. maritima_
are monospermous, while those of _libyca_ are polyspermous, the
number being variable, apparently indefinite, but not exceeding
six. There are, however, other instances in this family, in which
the mere difference between definite and indefinite number of seeds
is of specific importance only, as in Draba and Meniocus, in each
of which a species exists with dispermous cells; and the objection
arising from the apparently still greater difference between unity
and indefinite number in the two species of Koniga is removed by a
supposed third species or variety of K. maritima, in which two seeds
are occasionally produced in each cell. It may even be observed,
that from unity to the indefinite number in this case, where the
ovula in the different cells are alternate, the transition is perhaps
more easy than from the binary to the indefinite, in cases where,
as in Alyssum properly so called, the ovula are placed opposite in
the different cells, and are in the same cell equidistant from its
apex; this symmetry, probably, admitting of addition only by fours.
The next genus of Cruciferæ to be noticed is FARSETIA, a fragment of
the original species of which is in the collection. There are also
several specimens of a plant, found in the desert, supposed to be
new, and which, though without flowers, and considerably different
in the form of its stigma, I am inclined, from the resemblance in
habit, in pubescence, in silicula, in seeds, and especially from
the exact similarity in the structure of the septum, to refer to
the same genus[93].
As the introduction of the structure of the dissepiment into the
generic characters of Cruciferæ is now proposed for the first time,
and as I believe that its texture and appearance should always
be attended to in constituting genera in this family of plants,
I shall here offer a few remarks respecting it.
According to the particular view which I briefly but distinctly
published in 1818, and which M. de Candolle first adopted in
1821, of the composition of the pistillum in Cruciferæ[94], the
dissepiment in this family is necessarily formed of two lamellæ,
derived from the parietes of the fruit. These lamellæ are in many
cases easily separable, and where their union is more intimate,
their existence is still evident from the want of correspondence,
and consequent decussation, of their areolæ. The lamellæ, which
are usually very thin and transparent, have their surface divided
into areolæ, in different genera of very different forms, some of
which may, with sufficient clearness, be described. In many cases no
other appearance exists; in some, however, the axis of the septum
resembles either a single nerve, or two distinct parallel nerves;
and from this axis, whether formed of one or two nerves, tubes
having the appearance and ramification of the veins of a leaf,
and which generally terminate within the margin, not unfrequently
proceed. This is remarkably the case in Farsetia, as I here propose
to limit that genus; the central vessels in both its species being
closely approximated, so as to form a single cord, extending from
the apex to the base of the septum, and the veins being numerous
and uncommonly distinct. Approaches more or less manifest to this
structure of Farsetia exist in several other genera, as in Parrya,
Savignya, and Koniga. But in this last mentioned genus the nerve,
which originates, as in all cases, at the apex, hardly extends,
even in the polyspermous species, beyond the middle of the septum,
and the veins, which are much less distinct, are descendent.
As far as my observations on this subject at present extend,
I expect, with great confidence, uniformity in the structure of
the septum of strictly natural genera, and in many cases, though
certainly not in all, I have found a resemblance in this respect
in more extensive groups. Thus Draba, Arabis, and Aubrietia, agree
in having amorphous areolæ, bounded by flexuose tubes or lines;
while Alyssum, Berteroa, and Fibigia, have narrow linear areolæ,
bounded by parallel or slightly arched lines. Capsella bursa differs
from Thlaspi and Æthionema, as Draba from Alyssum, and agrees with
Lepidium procumbens, _Linn._ improperly referred to Hutchinsia,
and which equally has incumbent cotyledons. Cochlearia differs in
like manner from Kernera. And numerous other examples of the same
agreement in nearly related plants, and of differences where the
usual sources of distinction are less available, might be noticed.
HESPERIS NITENS of Viviani is sparingly in the herbarium, both
in flower and fruit. The seeds, though not ripe, are sufficiently
advanced to show that the direction of the cotyledons is in this
stage accumbent; and, as I have found in Cruciferæ generally that
the ultimate agrees with the early state of cotyledons, I conclude
they are likewise accumbent in the ripe seed. The plant is also
abundantly different from Hesperis in other respects, and does
not appear to be referrible to any genus yet published. This new
genus[95] I have dedicated to the memory of Dr. Oudney, who found the
present species in many of the wadeys between Tripoli and Mourzuk,
and remarks that camels and mules eat it.
HESPERIS RAMOSISSIMA, which is also in the herbarium, was found in
Fezzan. This plant differs in aspect from most of the other species
of Hesperis, approaching in some points to Malcomia, in others to
Mathiola; and as its cotyledons are very obliquely incumbent, it
may form a section or subgenus, with a name, Hesperis (Plagiloba)
ramosissima, indicating that character.
CAPPARIDEÆ, of which eight species occur in the collection, is the
family next to be noticed. I consider this order as belonging to
the same natural class with Cruciferæ; and that this class includes
also Resedaceæ, Papaveraceæ, and Fumariaceæ.
M. de Candolle, in defining Capparideæ, appears to regard the ovarium
as having in all cases only two placentæ, and therefore formed of two
pistilla or carpella. But to this, which is certainly the more usual
number, there are many exceptions. These exceptions occur chiefly in
the genus Capparis, which, as it is at present constituted, includes
species differing from each other in having an ovarium with from two
to eight placentæ, and, consequently, composed of an equal number
of pistilla. Capparis spinosa is the most decided instance of the
increased number of placentæ, and this, as well as some other nearly
related species, are also remarkable in having septa subdividing
the placentæ, and uniting in the centre of the compound ovarium.
In the herbarium there are three species of the genus Cleome. Two
of these, C. pentaphylla and arabica, are in many respects well
known plants; the third I believe to be an undescribed species,
but nearly related to monophylla.
If the very natural group, formed by the Linnæan genus Cleome, is
not to be preserved entire, its subdivision must be carried much
farther, and established on other grounds, than has been done by
M. de Candolle, whose genera and sections appear to me to have been
equally founded on partial considerations. Thus, his _Polanisia_,
uniting all the Cleomes whose stamina exceed six, contains in its
first section, in addition to the species from which the genus was
formed, at least two sets of plants, having very little affinity
either with each other, or with the original species, whose only
congener is placed in a second section.
_Gynandropsis_ also consists of two groups not very intimately
connected: the first is composed of species belonging to South
America, and having the usual æstivation of the family: the
second, of which _C. pentaphylla_ may be taken as the type, is
chiefly African, and is readily distinguished by its very different
æstivation,—the great peculiarity of which consists in the petals
not covering the stamina at any period. To this mode of æstivation of
petals, which has never before been noticed, though it equally exists
in Crateva and in Resedaceæ, I shall apply the term _aperta_. It is
constantly conjoined, and, perhaps, necessarily connected with the
early opening of the calyx, whose segments are originally connivent
and slightly imbricate: for it may here be remarked, that in all the
modifications of what I have termed imbricate æstivation of petals,
they are, I believe, in the very early stage in like manner erect,
and the sexual organs equally exposed.
If the expediency of preserving the genus Cleome entire were
admitted, a question which I do not pretend at present to decide,
it would still be of the greatest importance to arrange its numerous
species according to their affinities, and carefully to distinguish
the subordinate groups that compose it. To such inferior groups,
whether termed subgenera or sections, names, in fact, have been of
late years very generally assigned, both by zoologists and botanists.
It has not yet been proposed, however, that these subgeneric names
should form an essential part of the name of the species; although,
by employing them in this manner, while the principal groups would be
kept in view, their subdivision would be carried to the same extent,
and the subordinate groups as well expressed as if they had been
actually separated into distinct genera.
The adoption of this method, which would not materially disturb names
already existing, would probably lead to a greater consistency in
the formation of genera, with reference to the natural orders of
which they are subdivisions. In this way also the co-operation of
two classes of naturalists, at present opposed to each other on the
question of the construction of genera, might to a certain extent be
expected, and greater uniformity in nomenclature consequently secured.
These advantages appear to me so important, that some expedient
for obtaining them will, I am persuaded, at no distant period,
be generally adopted.
In favour of the present plan it may be remarked, that it is analogous
to the method followed by the Romans in the construction of the
names of persons, by which not only the original family, but the
particular branch of that family to which the individual belonged
was expressed. Thus the generic name corresponds with the nomen
(Cornelius), the name of the section with the cognomen (Scipio),
and that of the species with the prænomen (Publius).
Without attempting at present to obviate the objections to which the
proposed innovation is no doubt liable, I shall proceed to apply it
to Cleome pentaphylla. According to my view the genus Cleome would
include Gynandropsis, a name which, as that of a section, may be
continued to those species of M. de Candolle’s genus belonging to
equinoctial America, and having the common æstivation of the family:
while _Gymnogonia_, derived from its remarkable æstivation, may be
employed for the section that includes C. pentaphylla, of which the
name might be given in the following manner:—
CLEOME (GYMNOGONIA) PENTAPHYLLA. This plant, the earliest
known species of Cleome, and that on which the genus was chiefly
constituted, was found in Bornou. The species is regarded by M. de
Candolle as a native of the West India islands, and he doubts whether
it may not also belong to Egypt and India. On the other hand I
consider it a native of Africa and India, and am not satisfied with
the evidence of its being also indigenous to the American islands,
where, though now very common, it has probably been introduced by
the negroes, who use it both as a potherb and in medicine. It is not
unlikely that M. de Candolle, in forming his opinion of the original
country of this plant, has been in part determined by finding several
species of his Gynandropsis decidedly and exclusively natives of
the new continent. But if I am correct in separating these species
from the section to which Cleome (Gymnogonia) pentaphylla belongs,
this argument, which I have formerly applied to analogous cases[96],
would be clearly in favour of the opinion I have here advanced; those
species of the section with which I am acquainted being undoubtedly
natives of Africa or of India.
CLEOME (SILIQUARIA) ARABICA, (_Linn. sp. pl. ed._ 2. _p._
939. _De. Cand. prodr._ 1. _p._ 240), a supposed variety of which was
found both in the neighbourhood of Tripoli and in Soudan, belongs
to another subdivision of the genus, equally natural, and readily
distinguishable. The species of this subdivision are included in M. De
Candolle’s second section of Cleome, but are there associated with
many other plants, to which they have very little affinity.
All the species of _Cleome Siliquaria_ are indigenous to North
Africa and Middle Asia, except _violacea_, which is a native of
Portugal. _Cleome deflexa_ of M. De Candolle (_prodr._ 1. _p._ 240.),
founded on specimens in Mr. Lambert’s herbarium, which were sent by
Don Joseph Pavon as belonging to Peru, seems to present a remarkable
exception to this geographical distribution of the section. But on
examining these specimens I find them absolutely identical with some
states of _violacea_. I think it probable, therefore, either that
they are erroneously stated to have come from Peru, or that this
species may have been there introduced from European seeds.
CADABA FARINOSA (_Forsk. Arab. p._ 68. _De Cand. prodr._ 1. _p._
244) is in the herbarium from Bornou. The specimen is pentandrous,
and in other respects agrees with all those which I have seen from
Senegal, and with Strœmia farinosa of my catalogue of Abyssinian
plants, collected by Mr. Salt, and published in his travels. M. De
Candolle, who had an opportunity of examining this Abyssinian plant,
refers it to his _C. dubia_, a species established on specimens
found in Senegal, and said to differ from _farinosa_, slightly in
the form of the leaves, and in being tetrandrous. Of the plant from
Abyssinia I have seen only two expanded flowers, one of which is
decidedly pentandrous, the other apparently tetrandrous. Mr. Salt,
however, from an examination of recent specimens, states it to be
pentandrous. It is probably, therefore, not different from C. farinosa
of Forskal, whose specimens M. De Candolle has not seen. And as
the form of leaves is variable in the specimens from Senegal, and
not elliptical, but between oval and oblong, in those of Abyssinia,
C. dubia is probably identical with, or a variety merely of farinosa,
as M. De Candolle himself seems to suspect.
CRATEVA ADANSONII (_De Cand. prodr._ 1. _p._ 243) is in the
collection from Bornou. This species is established by M. De
Candolle upon a specimen in M. de Jussieu’s herbarium, found in
Senegal by Adanson, and is supposed to differ from all the other
species in having its foliola equal at the base. I have examined
the specimen in M. de Jussieu’s herbarium, in which, however,
the leaves not being fully developed, I was unable to satisfy myself
respecting their form. But in a specimen, also from Senegal, which
I received from M. Desfontaines, the lateral foliola, though having
manifestly unequal sides, are but slightly unequal at the base,
and the inequality consists in a somewhat greater decurrence of the
lamina on the anterior or inner margin of the footstalk. As well as
can be determined, in very young leaves, this is also the case in
the specimen from Bornou; and it is manifestly so in my specimen of
_C. læta_, which appears to belong to the same species.
_Crateva læta_ was founded by M. De Candolle on a plant from Senegal,
communicated by M. Gay, from whom I also received a specimen in 1824,
with the remark, that it was not different from C. Adansonii. In
that specimen the flowers are male with an imperfect pistillum;
in the plant from Bornou they are hermaphrodite, with elongated
filaments; and in the specimen received from M. Desfontaines they
are also hermaphrodite, but the stamina, though apparently perfect,
are fewer in number and shorter than the stipes of the ovarium. I have
observed, however, the flowers to be in like manner polygamous in some
other species of Crateva, belonging both to India and America, a fact
which materially lessens the dependence to be placed on characters
taken from the number and length of the stamina in this genus.
Crateva Adansonii, it would appear, then, is the only known species
of the African continent, for C. fragrans does not belong to the
genus. And it will be difficult to distinguish this African Crateva
from a plant which seems to be the most general species of India;
except that in the latter, as in all the other species of the genus,
the inequality of the lateral foliola, which is also more marked,
consists in the greater decurrence of the lamina being on the
outer or posterior margin of the footstalk. This Indian species,
which may be named _C. Roxburghii_, is the Capparis trifoliata of
Dr. Roxburgh’s manuscripts, but not Niirvala of Hortus Malabaricus
(_vol._ 3. _p._ 49. _t._ 42), as he considers it. I have little
doubt of its being also the plant described as C. Tapia, by Vahl,
(_symb._ 3. _p._ 61.) his specific character well according with
it, and not applying, as far as relates to the petals, to any known
species of America. But as this character is adopted by Sir James
Smith (_in Rees’s Cyclop._), it may likewise be C. Tapia of the
Linnæan herbarium; a conjecture the more probable as Linnæus has
distinguished his Tapia by its ovate petals from gynandra, in which
they are said to be lanceolate (_Sp. pl. ed._ 2. _p._ 637). This
celebrated herbarium, however, is here of no authority, for Linnæus
was never in possession of sufficient materials to enable him to
understand either the structure and limits of the genus Crateva, or
the distinctions of its species; and the specific name in question,
under which he originally included all the species of the genus,
ought surely to be applied to an American plant, at least, and if
possible to that of Piso, with whom it originated. It is hardly to
be supposed that the plant intended by Piso can now with certainty
be determined; the only species from Brazil, however, with which I am
acquainted, well accords with his figure and short description. This
Brazilian species is readily distinguishable both from C. Adansonii
and Roxburghii, by the form of its petals, which, as in all the
other American species, are narrow-oblong or lanceolate; and from
C. gynandra by the shortness of its stipes genitalium, or torus.
Crateva Tapia so constituted, is, on the authority of a fragment
communicated by Professor Schrader, the _Cleome arborea_ of that
author, (_in Gœtt. Anzeig._ 1821, _p._ 707. _De Cand. Prodr._ 1. _p._
242.); nor is there any thing in the character of _C. acuminata_
of De Candolle (_Prodr._ 1. _p._ 243) which does not well apply to
our plant.
_C. Tapia_, as given by M. De Candolle (_op. cit._), is characterized
chiefly on the authority of Plumier’s figure, in the accuracy of
which, either as to the number or length of stamina, it is difficult
to believe, especially when we find it also representing the petals
inserted by pairs on the two upper sinuses of the calyx.
The genus Crateva agrees, as I have already stated, in the remarkable
æstivation of its flower with Cleome Gymnogonia, by which character,
along with that of its fruit, it is readily distinguished from every
other genus of the order. Although this character of its æstivation
has never before been remarked, yet all the species, referred to
Crateva by M. De Candolle, really belong to it, except _C. fragrans_,
which, with some other plants from the same continent, forms a very
distinct genus, that I shall name RITCHIEA, in memory of the African
traveller, whose botanical merits have been already noticed.
CAPPARIS SODADA _nob._ Sodada decidua, _Forsk. Arab. p._ 81. _Delile,
Flore d’Egypte, p._ 74. _tab._ 26. _De Cand. Prodr._ 1. _p._ 245.
The specimen in the herbarium is marked by Dr. Oudney as belonging to
a tree common on the boundaries of Bornou. It is probably the _Suag_,
mentioned in his journal, observed first at Aghedem, and said to
be “a tetrandrous plant having a small drupa, which is in great
request in Bornou and Soudan, for removing sterility in females:
it is sweetish and hot to the taste, approaching to Sisymbrium
Nasturtium;” and that “in passing the plant a heavy narcotic
smell is always perceived.”
I have here united Sodada with Capparis, not being able to find
differences sufficient to authorise its separation even from the
first section of that genus, as given by De Candolle.
Forskal describes his plant as octandrous, and M. De Candolle has
adopted this number in his generic character. M. Delile (_op. cit._),
however, admits that the stamina vary from eight to fifteen; and,
in the specimen which I received from M. Jomard, I have found from
fourteen to sixteen. But were the number of stamina even constantly
eight, this alone would not justify its separation from Capparis,
several octandrous species of which, belonging to the same section,
are already known.
Another species of Capparis, also from Bornou, exists in the
herbarium. It appears to be undescribed, and to belong to M. De
Candolle’s first section of the genus; but the specimen is too
imperfect to be satisfactorily determined.
Both these species have aculei stipulares, and it may here be remarked
that all the plants belonging either to Capparis, or to any of the
genera of the order whose fruit is a berry, in which these aculei
are found, are indigenous either to Asia, Africa, or Europe; while
all the aculeated Cleomes, with the exception of perhaps a single
African species, are natives of equinoxial America.
MÆRUA RIGIDA. This plant, of which flowering specimens were collected
at Aghedem, certainly belongs to Forskal’s genus Mærua, adopted
by Vahl and De Candolle; and I believe it to be a species distinct
from the three already published. It is very nearly related, however,
to a fourth species (M. Senegalensis _nob._), of which I received a
specimen from M. Desfontaines. M. De Candolle has placed the genus
Mærua at the end of Capparideæ, between which and Passifloreæ he
considers it intermediate. This view of its relation to these two
orders I cannot adopt. To me it appears truly a Capparidea, having
very little affinity with Passifloreæ, to which it seems to approach
in one point only, namely, the corona of the calyx. But of a similar
corona rudiments exist in several other African Capparideæ, and from
some of these the genus Mærua is with difficulty distinguished[97].
RESEDACEÆ. The herbarium contains two species of Reseda. The
specimens of one of these are too imperfect to be determined. The
other is probably undescribed, though very nearly related to
R. suffruticulosa, and undata of Linnæus. This supposed new
species (_Reseda propinqua_) was found near Tripoli by Mr. Ritchie,
and between Tripoli and Mourzuk by Dr. Oudney. It is remarkable in
having the ungues of all the petals simple; that is, neither dilated,
thickened, nor having any process or appendage at the point of union
with the trifid lamina, into which they gradually pass. We have
here therefore a species of Reseda with petals not different in any
respect from those of many other families of plants; and, although
this is an exception to their usual structure in the genus, I shall
endeavour to show that all the deviations existing, however complex
in appearance, are reducible to this more simple state of the organ.
RESEDACEÆ, consisting of _Reseda_, divisible into sections or
subgenera, and _Ochradenus_, which may perhaps be regarded as
only one of these subdivisions, I consider very nearly related
to Capparideæ, and as forming part of the same natural class. It
differs, in the variable number of the parts of its floral envelopes,
from the other orders of the class, in which the quaternary or binary
division is without exception; and it is especially remarkable in
having the ovarium open even in its earliest state. From Cruciferæ
and Capparideæ, the two families of the class to which they most
nearly approach, Resedaceæ also differ in the apparent relation of
the stigmata to the placentæ. The stigmata in this order terminate
the lobes of the pistillum, and as these lobes are open sterile
portions of the modified leaves, from the union of which in the
undivided part I suppose the compound ovarium to originate, they
necessarily alternate with the placentæ. I have generally found,
however, the upper part of each placenta covered by a fleshy or
fungous process, which is connected with the margins of the lobes,
and therefore with the stigmata, and is probably essential to the
fecundation of the ovula. The singular apparent transposition of the
placentæ in Sesamoides of Tournefort, so well described by M. Tristan
in his ingenious Memoir on the Affinities of Reseda[98], appears to
me necessarily connected with the extreme shortness of the undivided
base of the ovarium; for in supposing this base to be elongated, the
placentæ would become parietal, and the ovula, which are actually
resupinate, would assume the direction usual in the order.
M. De Jussieu, in his _Genera Plantarum_, has included Reseda
in Capparideæ, and to this determination I believe he still
adheres. M. Tristan, in the memoir referred to, is inclined to
separate it as a family intermediate between Passifloreæ and
Cistineæ, but more nearly approaching to the latter. M. De Candolle,
who first distinguished Reseda as an order under the name here
adopted, in 1819[99] placed it between Polygaleæ and Droseraceæ,
and consequently at no great distance from Capparideæ. He must,
since, however, have materially altered his opinion respecting it;
for the order Resedaceæ is not included in the first or second
part of his Prodromus, and I can find no observation respecting it
in these two volumes. It is probable, therefore, that he may either
intend to place it near Passifloreæ, as suggested by M. Tristan,
or, which is more likely, that he has adopted the hypothesis lately
advanced, and ingeniously supported, by Mr. Lindley, respecting its
structure and affinities[100].
According to this hypothesis, in Reseda the calyx of authors is an
involucrum, its petals neutral flowers, and the disk or nectary
becomes the calyx of a fertile floret in the centre: and, as a
deduction from this view of its structure, the genus has been placed
near Euphorbiaceæ.
The points in the structure of Reseda, which appear to have led
Mr. Lindley to this hypothesis, are the presence and appearance of
the hypogynous disk, the anomalous structure of the petals, and the
singular æstivation of the flower; but it is no slight confirmation
of the correctness of M. de Jussieu’s opinion, that all these
anomalies occur in a greater or less degree in Capparideæ, and
have been found united in no other family of plants. The remarkable
æstivation of Reseda equally exists in Crateva, and in more than one
subdivision of the genus Cleome; the hypogynous disk is developed in
as great a degree in several Capparideæ; and an approximation to
the same kind of irregularity in the petals occurs in two sections
of Cleome.
The analogical argument alone then might, perhaps, be regarded
as conclusive against the hypothesis. But the question, as far as
relates to the petals, and consequently to the supposed composition
of the flower, may be decided still more satisfactorily on other
grounds. Both M.M. Tristan and Lindley regard the upper divided
membranaceous part of the petal as an appendage to the lower, which
is generally fleshy. On the other hand, I consider the anomaly to
consist in the thickening, dilatation, and inner process of the
lower portion, and that all these deviations from ordinary structure
are changes which take place after the original formation of the
petal. To establish these points, and consequently to prove that
the parts in question are simple petals, and neither made up of
two cohering envelopes, as M. Tristan supposes, nor of a calyx and
abortive stamina, according to M. Lindley’s hypothesis, I shall
describe their gradual development, as I have observed it in the
common Mignonette; a plant in which all the anomalies that have led
to this hypothesis exist in a very great degree.
The flower-bud of Reseda odorata, when it first becomes visible, has
the divisions of its calyx slightly imbricate and entirely enclosing
the other parts. In this stage the unguis of each of the two upper
petals is extremely short, not broader than the base of the lamina,
and is perfectly simple; there being no rudiment of the inner process
so remarkable in the fully expanded flower. The lamina at the same
period may be termed palmato-pinnatifid, its divisions are all in
the same plane, the terminating or middle segment is whitish or
opake, and several times longer than the lateral segments, which
are semitransparent.
Of the remaining four petals, the two middle are dimidiato-pinnatifid,
their lateral segments existing only on the upper side; and the two
lower are undivided, being reduced to the middle segment or simple
lamina. All the petals are erect, and do not cover the stamina in
the slightest degree, either in this or in any other stage. The disk
is hardly visible. The Antheræ are longer than their filaments,
of a pale-green colour; those on the upper or posterior side of the
flower being manifestly larger, and slightly tinged with brown. The
Pistillum is very minute and open at the top. In the next stage,
the calyx is no longer imbricate, but open: the petals have their
segments in nearly the same relative proportions; the interior margin
of the unguis is just visible; but the transition from unguis to
lamina is still imperceptible; the apex of the former not being
broader than the base of the latter. It is unnecessary to follow
the development through the more advanced stages of the flower, the
facts already stated being, in my opinion, absolutely conclusive as
to the real nature of the parts in question: and I may remark, that
similar observations on certain genera of Caryophylleæ, especially
Dianthus, Lychnis and Silene, clearly establish the analogy between
their petals and those of Reseda.
I am aware that it has lately been proposed to include _Datisca_
in Resedaceæ, to which it is nearly similar in the structure of
its ovarium, as M. de Jussieu has long since remarked. But this
is the only point of resemblance between them; for the calyx of
Datisca is certainly adherent, and in most of its other characters
it differs widely both from Reseda, and from every other genus yet
published. Among the numerous discoveries made by Dr. Horsfield
in Java, there is a genus, (TETRAMELES _nob._) however, manifestly
related to Datisca, and remarkable in the regular quaternary division
of every part of its diœcious flowers. These two genera form an
order very different from every other yet established, and which
may be named DATISCEÆ.
CARYOPHYLLEÆ. Five species only of this family were collected near
Tripoli, none of which are new.
Of ZYGOPHYLLEÆ, six species exist in Dr. Oudney’s herbarium,
namely, Tribulus terrestris, found in Bornou; Fagonia cretica, from
Tripoli to Benioleed; Fagonia arabica, at Aghedem; Fagonia Oudneyi
_nob._ with Zygophyllum simplex in Fezzan; and Zygophyllum album
every where in the desert.
This family, so distinct in habit from Diosmeæ or Rutaceæ, with
which it was formerly united, is not easily characterized by any
very obvious or constant peculiarities in its parts of fructification.
The distinguishing characters in its vegetation or habit are the
leaves being constantly opposite with lateral or intermediate
stipulæ, being generally compound, and always destitute of the
pellucid glands, which universally exist in true Diosmeæ, though
not in all Rutaceæ properly so called.
M. Adrien de Jussieu, in his late very excellent Memoir on the
great order or class Rutaceæ, in distinguishing Zygophylleæ from
the other subdivisions of that class in which he has included it,
depends chiefly on the endocarp, or inner lamina of the pericarp, not
separating from the outer lamina or united epicarp and sarcocarp, and
on the texture of the albumen. His first section of Zygophylleæ,
however, is characterised by the want of albumen; and in his
second section I find exceptions to the remaining character,
especially in Fagonia Mysorensis, in which the two laminæ of the
ripe capsule separate as completely as in Diosmeæ. Another plant,
in my opinion referrible to the same order, and which, in memory of a
very meritorious African traveller, I have named _Seetzenia africana_,
has in its ripe capsule the epicarp, or united epicarp and sarcocarp,
confined to the dorsal carina of each cell, the endocarp being the
only membrane existing on the sides, which are exposed long before the
bursting of the fruit. The plant in question has indeed many other
peculiarities, some of which may, perhaps, be considered sufficient
to authorise its separation from the order to which I have referred
it; for the æstivation of its calyx is valvular, it has no petals,
its five styles are distinct to the base, and the cells of its ovarium
appear to me to be monospermous. It completely retains, however, the
characters of vegetation on which I chiefly depend in distinguishing
Zygophylleæ; and I have no doubt of its being Zygophyllum lanatum of
Willdenow[101], by whom it is stated to be a native of Sierra Leone;
I suppose, however, on insufficient authority, for the specimens
in the Banksian Herbarium, from which I have made my observations,
were found in South Africa, near Olifant’s River, by Francis Masson.
In all the species of Fagonia, and in the two species of Zygophyllum
in Dr. Oudney’s collection, a character in the fructification still
remains, which is not found in Diosmeæ or Rutaceæ, and which, were
it general in Zygophylleæ, would satisfactorily distinguish this
order from all the families it has usually been compared with. This
character consists in the direction of the embryo with relation to the
insertion of the funiculus, its radicle being seated at the opposite
extremity of the seed, or to express, in the unimpregnated ovarium,
the infallible indication of this position, the direction of the inner
membrane and nucleus of the ovulum corresponds with that of its testa.
But this character, in general very uniform in natural families,
and which, equally existing in Cistineæ, so well defines the limits
of that order, as I have long since remarked[102], would seem to be
of less importance in Zygophylleæ.
M. Adrien de Jussieu, who, in his memoir already cited, admits
its existence in Fagonia, and in both our species of Zygophyllum,
considers it as an exception to the general structure of the
latter genus, in the definition of which he retains the character
of “radicula hilo proxima.” I believe, however, that in all
the species of Zygophyllum, except Fabago, which possesses, also,
other distinguishing characters, this opposition of the radicle to
the external hilum will be found; for in addition to the two species
contained in the herbarium, in both of which it is very manifest,
I have observed it in Z. coccineum, and in all the species of South
Africa that I have had an opportunity of examining. In some of these
species, indeed, it is much less obvious, partly from the greater
breadth of the funiculus, and also from its being closely applied,
or even slightly adhering, to the testa of the seed. But hence it
is possible to reconcile the structure of these species with that
of Fabago itself, in which the raphe seems to me to be external:
and if this be really the case, Fabago differs from those Zygophylla
of South Africa alluded to, merely in the more intimate union of the
funiculus with the surface of the testa. Whether this observation
might be extended to the other genera of the order, I have not yet
attempted to ascertain.
BALANITES ÆGYPTIACA, though not belonging to Zygophylleæ, may be
here mentioned. The specimen is from Bornou, but like all the other
plants of that country, has no particular place of growth indicated,
nor is there any observation respecting it. For a very full and
interesting history of this plant, I may refer to M. Delile’s
Flore d’Egypte (_p._ 77. _tab._ 28).
Of CISTINEÆ, three species were observed between Tripoli and Mourzuk.
The GERANIACEÆ of the collection consist of four species of
_Erodium_, all of which were found on the same journey.
Of MALVACEÆ, considered as a class, there are twelve species in
the herbarium. Only two of these are particularly deserving of
notice. The first, _Adansonia digitata_, found in Soudan, where the
tree is called Kouka, is described by Captain Clapperton; the second,
_Melhania Denhamii_, a new and remarkable species of the genus,
differing from all the others in having its bracteæ regularly
verticillated, and, at the same time, longer and much broader than
the divisions of the calyx.
A single species of VITIS is in the collection, from Bornou.
NEURADA PROSTRATA, generally referred to Rosaceæ, was found in
Wady Ghrurbi.
TAMARISCINEÆ. A species of Tamarix, apparently not different from
T. gallica, is the _Attil_, common in Fezzan, where, according to
Dr. Oudney, it is the only shady tree.
LORANTHEÆ. A species of Loranthus, parasitical on the Acacia
nilotica, was observed very commonly from Fezzan to Bornou.
LEGUMINOSÆ. Of this class the herbarium contains thirty-three
species, among which there are hardly more than two undescribed,
and these belonging to a well-established genus.
Of the order or tribe MIMOSEÆ only three species occur, namely,
Acacia nilotica, Mimosa Habbas, and _Inga biglobosa_, or a species
very nearly related to it. Of this last named plant, I judge merely
from ripe fruits adhering to the singular club-shaped receptacle,
or axis of the spike. The specimens were collected in Soudan, and
belong to a tree of considerable importance to the inhabitants of
that country, by whom it is called _Doura_. According to Captain
Clapperton, “The seeds are roasted as we roast coffee, then bruised,
and allowed to ferment in water; when they begin to become putrid,
they are well washed and pounded; the powder made into cakes, somewhat
in the fashion of our chocolate; they form an excellent sauce for all
kinds of food. The farinaceous matter surrounding the seeds is made
into a pleasant drink, and they also make it into a sweetmeat.”
The Doura of Captain Clapperton is probably not specifically
different from the Nitta mentioned by Park, in his First Journey;
nor from Inga biglobosa of the Flore d’Oware of M. de Beauvois,
according to whom it is the Nety of Senegal; and he also well remarks,
that Inga biglobosa, described by Jacquin as a native of Martinico,
has probably been introduced into that island by the Negroes, as he
himself found it to have been in St. Domingo.
Inga Senegalensis of M. De Candolle (_Prodr._ 2. p. 442) may also
belong to the same species.
It is possible, however, that some of the plants here mentioned,
though very nearly related to each other, and having all the same
remarkable club-shaped spike, may be specifically distinct; for
it appears from specimens collected at Sierra Leone by Professor
Afzelius, that two plants having this form of spike are known in
that colony; and two species, with similar inflorescence, probably
distinct from those of Africa, are described in the manuscript
Flora Indica of Dr. Roxburgh. All these plants possess characters
fully sufficient to distinguish them from Inga, to which they have
hitherto been referred. The new genus which they form, one of the most
striking and beautiful in equinoxial Africa, I have named PARKIA[103],
as a tribute of respect to the memory of the celebrated traveller,
by whom the fruit of this genus was observed in his first journey,
and who, among other services rendered to botany, ascertained that
the plant producing Gum Kino is a species of Pterocarpus[104]. I
have formerly endeavoured to distinguish Mimoseæ from Cæsalpineæ,
by the valvular æstivation of both its floral envelopes, and by
the hypogynous insertion of its stamina. Instances of perigynous
insertion of stamina have since been noticed by MM. Kunth and Auguste
de St. Hilaire; but no exception has been yet pointed out to the
valvular æstivation of their calyx and corolla. Parkia, however,
differs from other Mimoseæ not only in its æstivation, which
is imbricate, but in the very manifest irregularity of its calyx,
and in the inequality of its petals, which, though less obvious,
is still observable.
_Erythrophleum_, another genus indigenous to equinoxial Africa, which
I have elsewhere[105] had occasion to notice, and then referred to
Cæsalpineæ, more properly belongs to Mimoseæ, although its stamina
are perigynous. In this genus, both calyx and corolla are perfectly
regular, and their æstivation, if not strictly valvular, is at least
not manifestly imbricate, though the flower-buds are neither acute
nor angular. In Erythrophleum and Parkia, therefore, exceptions to
all the assumed characters of Mimoseæ are found, and there is some
approach in both genera to the habit of Cæsalpineæ. It is still
possible, however, to distinguish, and it will certainly be expedient
to preserve, these two tribes or orders. Abandoning divisions strictly
natural, and so extensive as the tribes in question, merely because
we may not be able to define them with precision, while it would
imply, what is far from being the case, that our analysis of their
structure is complete, would, at the same time, be fatal to many
natural families of plants at present admitted, and among others
to the universally received class to which these tribes belong. No
clear character, at least, is pointed out in the late elaborate work
of M. De Candolle[106], by which Leguminosæ may be distinguished
from Terebintaceæ and Rosaceæ, the orders supposed to be the most
nearly related to it. It is possible, however, that such characters,
though hitherto overlooked, may really exist; and I shall endeavour
to show that Leguminosæ, independent of the important but minute
differences in the original structure and developement of its ovulum,
may still be distinguished at least from Rosaceæ.
In the character of Polygaleæ, which I published in 1814[107],
I marked the relation of the parts of the floral envelopes to the
axis of the spike, or to the subtending bractea. I introduced this
circumstance chiefly to contrast Polygaleæ with Leguminosæ, and
to prove, as I conceived, that Securidaca, which had generally been
referred to the latter family, really belonged to the former.
M. de Jussieu, who soon after published a character of Polygaleæ,
entirely omitted this consideration, and continued to refer Securidaca
to Leguminosæ. M. De Candolle, however, in the first volume of his
Prodromus, has adopted both the character and limits of Polygaleæ,
which I had proposed, though apparently not altogether satisfied
with the description he himself has given of the divisions of the
calyx and corolla.
The disposition of the parts of the floral envelopes, with
reference to the axis of the spike, in Polygaleæ, namely, the
fifth segment of the calyx being posterior or superior and the
fifth petal anterior or inferior, is the usual relation in families
the division of whose flower is quinary. This relation is in some
cases inverted; one example of which I have formerly pointed out in
Lobeliaceæ[108], as I proposed to limit it, and a similar inversion
exists in Leguminosæ. But this class also deviates from the more
general arrangement of the parts of the flower with regard to each
other. That arrangement consists, as I have long since remarked[109],
in the regular alternation of the divisions of the proximate organs
of the complete flower. To this arrangement, indeed, many exceptions
are well known; and M. De Candolle has given a table of all the
possible deviations, but without stating how many of these have
actually been observed[110].
In Leguminosæ the deviation from the assumed regular arrangement
consists in the single pistillum being placed opposite to the lower
or anterior segment of the calyx.
In these two characters, namely, the relation of the calyx and corolla
both to the simple pistillum and to the axis of the spike or to the
bractea, Leguminosæ differ from Rosaceæ, in which the more usual
arrangements are found.
But in those Rosaceæ, in which the pistillum is solitary and placed
within the anterior petal, its relation to the axis of the spike is
the same as that of Leguminosæ, in which it is within the anterior
division of the calyx. And in all families, whether dicotyledonous
or monocotyledonous, this, I believe, is uniformly the position of
the simple solitary pistillum with regard to the spike or bractea.
The frequent reduction of Pistilla, in plants having the other
parts of the flower complete in number, must have been generally
remarked. But the order in which these abstractions of pistilla take
place, or the relations of the reduced series to the other parts
of the flower, have, as far as I know, never yet been particularly
attended to. It will probably appear singular, that the observation
of these relations in the reduced series of pistilla should have
suggested the opinion, that in a complete flower, whose parts are
definite, the number of stamina and also of pistilla is equal to that
of the divisions of the calyx and corolla united in Dicotyledones,
and of both series of the perianthium in Monocotyledones.
This assumed complete number of stamina is actually the prevailing
number in Monocotyledones; and though in Dicotyledones less frequent
than what may be termed the symmetrical number, or that in which all
the series are equal, is still found in decandrous and octandrous
genera, and in the greater part of Leguminosæ. The tendency to the
production of the complete number, where the symmetrical really
exists, is manifested in genera belonging or related to those
pentandrous families in which the stamina are opposite to the
divisions of the corolla, as by Samolus related to Primulaceæ,
and by Bæobotrys, having an analogous relation to Myrsineæ; for
in both these genera, five additional imperfect stamina are found
alternating with the fertile, and consequently occupying the place of
the only stamina existing in most pentandrous families. Indications
of this number may also be said to exist in the divisions of the
hypogynous disk of many pentandrous orders.
With respect to the Pistilla, the complete number is equally
rare in both the primary divisions of phænogamous plants. In
Monocotyledones, the symmetrical number is very general, while it
is much less frequent in Dicotyledones, in which there is commonly
a still farther reduction.
Where the number of Pistilla in Dicotyledones is reduced to two, in a
flower in which both calyx and corolla are present and their division
quinary, one of these pistilla is placed within a division of the
calyx, the other opposite to a petal or segment of the corolla. In
other words, the addition to the solitary pistillum, (which is
constantly anterior or exterior), is posterior or interior. This is
the general position of the component parts of a bilocular ovarium,
or an ovarium having two parietal placentæ; and in flowers whose
division is quinary, I can recollect no other exceptions to it,
than in some genera of Dilleniaceæ.
It is particularly deserving of notice, that the common position of
the cells of the bilocular pericarpium with relation to the axis of
the spike was well known to Cæsalpinus, who expressly distinguished
_Cruciferæ_ from all other bilocular families by their peculiarity
in this respect, the loculi in that family being placed right and
left, instead of being anterior and posterior[111].
On the subject of the position of the Pistilla in the other degrees
of reduction from the symmetrical number, I shall not at present
enter. But in reference to Leguminosæ, I may remark, that it
would be of importance to ascertain the position of the Pistilla
in the pentagynous Mimosea, stated to have been found in Brazil by
M. Auguste de St. Hilaire[112]. Are these Pistilla placed opposite
to the divisions of the calyx, as might probably be inferred from the
position of the solitary Legumen in this class? Or are we to expect to
find them opposite to the petals, which is the more usual relation,
and their actual place in Cnestis, though the single ovarium of
Connarus, a genus belonging to the same family, is seated within
the anterior division of the calyx?
In the very few Leguminosæ in which the division of the flower is
quaternary, namely, in certain species of Mimosa, the ovarium is
still placed within one of the divisions of the calyx.
As to _Moringa_, which was originally referred to this class from
a mistaken notion of its absolutely belonging to Guilandina, it
is surely sufficiently different from all Leguminosæ, not only
in its compound unilocular ovarium with three parietal placentæ,
but also in its simple unilocular antheræ; and it appears to me to
be an insulated genus, or family (_Moringeæ_), whose place in the
natural series has not yet been determined.
CÆSALPINEÆ. Of this tribe, four species only occur in the
collection. One of these is _Bauhinia rufescens_ of Lamarck
(_Illustr._ 329, f. 2.); another is _Cassia_ (_Senna_) _obovata_,
which, according to Dr. Oudney, grows wild in small quantities in
Wady Ghrurbi.
PAPILIONACEÆ. Twenty-six species of this tribe are contained in the
herbarium, none of which form new genera, and the only two species
that appear to be unpublished belong to Indigofera.
_Alhagi Maurorum_, or _Agoul_, is abundant in Fezzan, where it forms
excellent food for camels.
COMPOSITÆ. Of this class, thirty-six species exist in the
collection. The far greater part of these were found in the vicinity
of Tripoli and in the Desert. All of them appear to belong to
established genera, and very few species are undescribed.
RUBIACEÆ. The herbarium contains only six species of this family,
five of which, belonging to Spermacoce and Hedyotis, were found in
Bornou and Soudan; the sixth, a species of Galium, near Tripoli.
Of ASCLEPIADEÆ only three plants occur. One of these is a new species
of Oxystelma, exactly resembling in its flowers O. esculentum of
India, from which it differs in the form of its leaves, and in that
of its fruit[113]. A species of Dœmia was found in the Desert;
but the specimens are too imperfect to be ascertained.
Of _Apocineæ_, strictly so called, there is no plant whatever in
the collection; and of Gentianeæ, a single species only of Erythræa.
SESAMEÆ. An imperfect specimen of _Sesamum pterospermum_, of the
catalogue of Mr. Salt’s Abyssinian plants[114], is in the collection
from Bornou.
SAPOTEÆ. The only plant of this family in the herbarium is the
_Micadania_, or Butter Tree of Soudan, particularly noticed by
Captain Clapperton. The specimen, however, is very imperfect,
consisting of detached leaves, an incomplete fruit, and a single
ripe seed. On comparing these leaves with the specimen of Park’s
Shea Tree[115], in the Banksian Herbarium, I have little doubt
that they both belong to one and the same species. Whether this
plant is really a Bassia, is not equally certain; and the seed at
least agrees better with Vitellaria paradoxa of the younger Gærtner,
(_Carpol. tab._ 205.) than with that of Bassia, figured by his father,
(_de Fruct. et Sem. Pl. tab._ 104.)
That the woody shell in the nuts of all Sapoteæ is really formed
of the testa or outer membrane of the seed, as I have elsewhere
stated[116], and not of a portion of the substance of the pericarpium,
according to the late M. Richard and the younger Gærtner, is
proved not only by the aperture or micropyle being still visible on
its surface, as M. Turpin has already shown in one case, (_Ann. du
Mus. d’Hist. Nat._ 7, _tab._ 11, f. 3.); but also by the course and
termination of the raphe, as exhibited in the younger Gærtner’s
figures of Calvaria and Sideroxylum, (_Carpol. tabb._ 200, 201,
et 202.) and by the origin and ramification of the internal vessels.
SCROPHULARINÆ. Only six species of this family occur, none of which
are unpublished.
OROBANCHE COMPACTA of Viviani was observed between Fezzan and Bornou.
Of CONVOLVULACEÆ there are five species, four of which belong
to Bornou; the fifth is an aquatic Ipomœa, found creeping on the
borders of a small lake near Tintuma. Possibly this plant may be
Ipomœa aquatica of Forskal, and consequently Convolvulus repens
of Vahl, (_symb._ 1, p. 17.) It is not, however, the plant so
called by Linnæus, which proves, as I have elsewhere stated,
(_Prodr. Fl. Nov. Holl._ 1, p. 483.) to be Calystegia sepium;
nor does it belong to either of his synonymes. Our plant differs
also from Vahl’s description of his Convolvulus repens, in having
constantly single-flowered peduncles, and leaves whose posterior lobes
are rather acute than obtuse, and are quite entire. It is probably,
therefore, distinct; and I have named it Ipomœa Clappertoni[117].
Among the few _Labiatæ_, there is a species of Lavandula, possibly
distinct from but very nearly related to L. multifida. It was found
on the mountains of Tarhona.
Of BORAGINEÆ, the herbarium includes eleven species, the greater
part of which were collected near Tripoli, and all of them belong
to well established genera.
PRIMULACEÆ. Of this family two species of Anagallis occur in the
collection, and of these A. cærulea was observed both near Tripoli
and in Bornou.
SAMOLUS VALERANDI was also found near Tripoli, in Wady Sardalis in
Fezzan, and in Bornou.
Of Dicotyledonous, or even of all phænogamous plants, _S. valerandi_
is perhaps the most widely diffused. It is a very general plant
in Europe, has been found in several parts of North Africa, in
Dr. Oudney’s herbarium it is from Bornou, I have myself observed
it at the Cape of Good Hope and in New South Wales, and it is also
indigenous to North America.
The geographical distribution of the genus Samolus is equally
remarkable. At present eight species are known, of which S. Valerandi
is the only one indigenous to Europe, or which, indeed, has been found
in the northern hemisphere, except the nearly related _S. ebracteatus_
of Cuba. All the other species belong to the southern hemisphere,
where _S. Valerandi_ has also a very extensive range.
Of PLUMBAGINEÆ, there are three species of _Statice Taxanthema_;
for the latter name may be preserved as belonging to a section,
though hardly as that of a genus, so far at least as depends on
inflorescence, which in both subdivisions of Statice is essentially
similar; that of _Statice Armeria_ being only more condensed. Of
the three species in the herbarium, one appears to be unpublished.
Among the plants of the _Apetalous orders_ in the collection, there
are very few remarkable, and hardly any new species.
_Gymnocarpus decandrum_ was observed by Dr. Oudney very commonly in
gravelly deserts, on the route from Tripoli to Fezzan; and _Cornulaca
monacantha_ of M. Delile is said to be widely extended from Tripoli
to Bornou, and to be excellent food for camels.
MONOCOTYLEDONES. The number of species belonging to this primary
division contained in the herbarium is altogether seventy. But
Gramineæ and Cyperaceæ being excluded, thirteen only remain, namely,
three species of Juncus, a single Commelina, three Melanthaceæ,
three Asphodeleæ, one species of Iris, and two Aroideæ, of which
Pistia Stratiotes is one.
Of these thirteen plants, two appear to be unpublished, both of
them belonging to Melanthaceae. The first, a congener of Melanthium
punctatum, which is also in the collection, was found in Fezzan.
The second is a species of _Colchicum_, very different from any
hitherto described; and which yet, by Mr. Ritchie, who first observed
it, is said to be common in the desert near Tripoli, where it was
also found by Dr. Oudney.
This species, which I have named _Colchicum Ritchii_, is easily
distinguished from all its congeners by having two cristæ or
membranous processes which are generally fimbriated, at the base
of each segment of the perianthium, parallel to each other, and to
the intermediate filament. But this character, though excellent as a
specific difference, is neither of generic importance, nor sufficient
to authorise the formation of a separate section[118].
Bulbocodium and Merendera, however, which, following Mr. Ker[119],
I consider as belonging to Colchicum, appear to me decidedly to form
subgenera or sections; and in this opinion I am confirmed by having
found a fourth section of the same genus. This fourth subgenus is
established on HYPOXIS FASCICULARIS, a plant which has been seen by
very few botanists, and which Linnæus introduced into his Species
Plantarum, and referred to Hypoxis, solely on the authority of
the figure published in Dr. Russell’s History of Aleppo. In the
Banksian Herbarium I have examined part of the original specimen of
this species, found by Dr. Alexander Russell, and figured by Ehret
in the work referred to, as well as more perfect specimens collected
by Dr. Patrick Russell; and am satisfied that its ovarium is not
in any degree adherent to the tube of the perianthium. I find,
also, that Hypoxis fascicularis differs from Colchicum merely in
having a simple unilocular ovarium with a single parietal placenta
and an undivided style, instead of the compound trilocular ovarium
with distinct or partially united styles, common to all the other
sections of that genus.
A reduction, as in this case, to the solitary simple pistillum[120],
though existing in all Gramineæ and in certain genera of several
other families of Monocotyledones, is yet comparatively rare in that
primary division of phænogamous plants, and in the great class
Liliaceæ, the present species of Colchicum offers, I believe,
the only known example. Yet this remarkable character is here so
little influential, if I may so speak, that Hypoxis fascicularis
very closely resembles some states of Colchicum Ritchii, and in the
Banksian herbarium has actually been confounded with another species
of the first or trigynous section of the genus.
To the first section, which includes _Colchicum Ritchii_, the
subgeneric name _Hermodactylum_ may, perhaps, be applied; while that
established on Hypoxis fascicularis may be called _Monocaryum_.
The position of the pistillum in _Colchicum_ (_Monocaryum_)
_fasciculare_ is not easily determined. I believe it to be placed
within the anterior segment of the outer series of the perianthium,
but, from the great length of the tube, it is difficult to ascertain
such a point in dried specimens. This, however, is the position in
which I should expect it, both in reference to the usual relation
of the solitary simple pistillum to the axis of the spike, or to the
subtending bractea in all phænogamous plants; and also with regard
to the constant relation of the parts of the compound pistillum to
the divisions of the perianthium in Monocotyledones: for it is worthy
of remark, that a difference in this relation may be said to exist in
the two primary divisions of phænogamous plants—the pistilla when
distinct, or their component parts when united, being in Dicotyledones
usually placed opposite to the petals, when these are of equal number;
while in Monocotyledones the cells of the trilocular ovarium are,
I believe, uniformly opposite to the divisions of the outer series
of the perianthium.
CYPERACEÆ. Of twelve species of this family existing in the
herbarium, six are referrible to Cyperus, three to Fimbristylis,
and three to Scirpus. Among these there is no remarkable, nor, I
believe, any undescribed species. Of C. Papyrus, which, according
to Captain Clapperton, grows in the Shary, there is no specimen in
the collection.
GRAMINEÆ. Of this extensive family, with which Dr. Oudney was more
conversant than with any other, and to which, therefore, during the
expedition, he probably paid greater attention, the herbarium contains
forty-five species: and in dividing the order into two great tribes,
as I have formerly proposed[121], thirty of these species belong
to _Poaceæ_, and fifteen to _Paniceæ_. This relative proportion
of these two tribes is considerably different from what might have
been expected, in the climates in which the collection was formed:
it seems, however, to be connected with the nature of the surface,
for in the Great Desert the reduction of Paniceæ is still more
remarkable; this tribe being to Poaceæ, in that region, in the
proportion of only five to eighteen.
Dr. Oudney remarks with respect to the grasses of the desert, that
he observed no species with creeping roots; for a species of Arundo
related to Phragmites, which he notices as the only exception,
is not properly a desert plant.
Among the very few Gramineæ deserving particular notice, the first
is AVENA FORSKALII of Vahl. The specimens in the herbarium which
were collected in the desert of Tintuma in some respects differ
from all the others that I have seen of this variable species. In
the Banksian herbarium there is an authentic specimen from Forskal;
I have received from M. Delile specimens both of his _A. Forskalii_
and _arundinacea_, described and figured in his Flore d’Egypte;
and am also in possession of others in somewhat different states,
collected in Egypt by M. Nectoux and Dr. Sieber. From a comparison
of all these specimens, I am led to believe, that A. Forskalii and
arundinacea are not specifically distinct; and it is at least evident,
that _arundinacea_ more nearly approaches to the plant of Forskal
than that to which M. Delile has applied the name _Forskalii_.
This grass, which does not belong to Avena, is referrible
to Danthonia, from the structure of the outer valve of its
perianthium. But Danthonia requires subdivision into several sections,
of which, perhaps, our plant may be considered as forming one.
The character of the section established on _Danthonia Forskalii_
would chiefly consist in the very remarkable obliquity of the
joints of the locusta, which is, indeed, so great, that after
their separation each flower seems to have at the base an almost
vertically descendent spur; and as the inferior extremity of the
upper joint is produced beyond the lower, a short calcar actually
exists before separation, and this calcar is equally manifest in the
terminal rudiment of the locusta. The present, therefore, is a case
of more remarkably oblique articulation in grasses than even that
existing in _Holcus acicularis_ (Andropogon acicularis, _Retz_) which
led to the formation of _Centrophorum_; a genus still admitted by
Professor Sprengel[122], and respecting the structure of which a very
singular explanation has been lately offered by M. Raspail[123]. In
one respect, the two cases differ. In _Danthonia_ (_Centropodia_)
_Forskalii_, the articulations being in the axis of the locusta or
spicula, each flower appears to have this spur-like process; while
in _Holcus_ (_Rhaphis_) _acicularis_, the joint being in the peduncle
or branch of the racemus, the spur is common to three locustæ.
Dr. Fischer, in whose herbarium the specimen was observed which
led to the formation of Centrophorum, will probably recollect the
communication made to him on the subject of that plant, of which
Dr. Trinius himself has since corrected the characters. He retains
it, however, as a distinct genus, for which he has adopted the name
Rhaphis, given to it by Loureiro, by whom it was originally proposed,
on other, but not more satisfactory grounds.
TRIRAPHIS PUMILIO is the second plant of this family to be noticed. It
is undescribed, and belongs to a genus of which the only two published
species were found in the intratropical part of New Holland[124]. In
several points of structure the African plant is very different
from _T. pungens_, the first of these species; in some respects
it approaches to _mollis_, the second species, especially in the
inequality of its setæ or aristæ, but it differs from both in habit,
and in having only one perfect flower in each locusta[125].
Of PENNISETUM DICHOTOMUM, (_Delile, Flore d’Egypte_, p. 15, tab. 8,
f. 1.), which, in several different states, is in the collection,
it is remarked by Dr. Oudney, that “it is a great annoyance to
man and beast, from the prickly calyx (involucrum);” and by Major
Denham, that from Aghedem to Woodie “it covered the surface of
the country, and annoyed the travellers to misery;” he observes,
also, that the seed is called _Kasheia_, and is eaten.
PANICUM TURGIDUM, (_Forsk. Arab._ p. 18; _Delile, Flore d’Egypte_,
p. 19, tab. 19, f. 2.), is also one of the most common grasses from
Tripoli to Bornou.
Of ACOTYLEDONES, the only plant in the collection is _Acrostichum
velleum_, found on the Tarhona mountains. Mr. Ritchie’s herbarium
contains, also, a single plant of the same family, namely _Grammitis
Ceterach_.
The foregoing observations have extended much beyond the limits
which the number and importance of the plants they relate to may
seem to require. I still regret, however, that I cannot add a few
remarks on such species as, although not in the herbarium, were
observed, either indigenous or cultivated, in the countries visited
by the mission, and for information respecting which I am indebted
to Major Denham and Captain Clapperton. But it being determined no
longer to delay the publication of the very interesting Narrative,
to which the observations already made will form an Appendix, I am
unable at present to enter on this part of my subject.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 87: _Floræ Libycæ Specim._ p. 35.]
[Footnote 88: _Syst. Vegetab._ 2. p. 871.]
[Footnote 89: _Handb. tab._ 180.]
[Footnote 90:
SAVIGNYA.
Savignya. _De Cand. Syst._ 2. p. 283. Lunariæ
sp. _Delile. Desvaux. Viviani._
CHAR. GEN. _Calyx_ basi æqualis; æstivatione valvata. _Silicula_
oblonga, septo conformi, valvis convexiusculis. _Semina_ biseriata
imbricata marginata. _Cotyledones_ conduplicatæ.
Herba _annua, glabra_ (_quandoque pube rara simplici_). Folia
_crassiuscula, inferiora obovata in petiolum attenuata grosse dentata,
media sæpe incisa, superiora linearia_. Racemi _oppositifolii,
ebracteati_. Flores _parvi erecti, petalis violaceis venis
saturatioribus_. Siliculæ _racemosæ, divaricatæ, inferiores
sæpius deflexæ_.
_Calyx_ erectus, æstivatione valvata, ipsis apicibus vix
imbricatis. _Petala_ unguiculata, laminis obovatis sub æstivatione
mutuo imbricatis. _Stamina_ distincta, edentula, singulum par
longiorum _glandula_ subquadrata extus stipatum; breviora, quantum
e speciminibus observare licuit, eglandulosa. _Ovarium_ brevissime
pedicellatum, ovulis adscendentibus nec horizontalibus. _Stylus_
brevis. _Stigma_ capitatum vix bilobum. _Silicula_ breviter
manifeste tamen stipitata, oblonga nunc oblongo-elliptica. _Valvulæ_
uninerviæ reticulato-venosæ. _Dissepimentum_ e lamellis duabus
separabilibus uninerviis venis anastomozantibus obsoletis: areolis
subtransversim angustato-linearibus, parietibus (tubulis) rectis
subparallelis. _Funiculi_ horizontales, dimidio inferiore septo
arcte adnato superiore libero.]
[Footnote 91: _Flor. Lib. Specim. p._ 34. _tab._ 16. _f._ 1.]
[Footnote 92:
KONIGA.
Konig. _Adans. fam._ 2. p. 420. Lobularia. _Desvaux in
Journ. de Botan. appl._ 3. p. 172. Alyssi sp. _Hort. Kew. ed._
2. vol. 4. p. 95. _De Cand. Syst. Nat._ 2. p. 318. Lunariæ
sp. _Viv. Libyc._ p. 34. Farsetiæ sp. _Spreng. Syst. Veg._ 2. p. 871.
CHAR. GEN. _Calyx_ patens. _Petala_ integerrima. _Glandulæ_
hypogynæ 8! _Filamenta_ omnia edentula. _Silicula_ subovata,
valvis planiusculis, loculis 1-polyspermis, funiculis basi septo
(venoso, nervo deliquescenti,) adnatis. _Semina_ (sæpissime)
marginata. _Cotyledones_ accumbentes.
Herbæ (_annuæ v. perennes_) _pube bipartita appressa
incanæ_. Folia _integerrima sublinearia_. Racemi _terminales,
nunc basi foliati_. Flores _albi_.
_Calyx_ basi subæqualis. _Petalorum_ laminæ dilatatæ. _Antheræ_
ovatæ. _Glandularum_ quatuor per paria filamenta longiora
lateraliter adstantes; reliquæ quatuor abbreviatæ geminatim
filamenta breviora stipantes. _Dissepimentum_, præter _areolas_
ultimas (laminæ duplicis) transversim lineares parietibus
(tubulis) rectis subparallelis, _venis_ crebre anastomozantibus a
_nervo_ descendenti e duobus arcte approximatis formato supra basin
evanescenti in monospermis obsoleto ortis descendentibus. _Funiculi_
in dispermis polyspermisque in diversis loculis alterni.
OBS. Koniga ad Alyssinearum tribum _De Cand._ pertinens, hinc Alysso
auctorum inde Farsetiæ accedit. Sed Alyssum, uti in Hort. Kew. et
De Cand. Syst. Nat. constitutum sit, certe divisionem eget.
ALYSSUM _nob._ facile distinguendum sequentibus notis. Silicula
subrotunda, disco convexo, limbo compresso, apice retuso, loculis
dispermis, funiculis basi septo adnatis et post lapsum seminum
persistentibus, supra liberis et cum iisdem deciduis, in diversis
loculis oppositis, in eodem a styli basi equidistantibus: Petalis
emarginatis: Filamentis omnibus nonnullisve appendiculatis in
speciebus omnibus præter A. calycinum in quo filamenta filiformia
simplicia sunt et glandularum loco setulæ quatuor filamenta nana
æmulantes exstant.
Ad Alyssum sic constitutum et herbas plerumque annuas pube stellari
foliisque integerrimis complectens pertinent A. campestre et calycinum
_Linn._ strigosum _Russell._ minimum _Willd._ et strictum _ejusd._
a quo densiflorum _Desfont._ vix differt; fulvescens _Smith_,
umbellatum _Desv._ rostratum _Stev._ micropetalum _Fisch._ hirsutum
_Bieb._ aliasque species ineditas.]
[Footnote 93:
FARSETIA.
Farsetia. _Turra Farsetia_, p. 5. Farsetiæ sp. _Hort. Kew._
ed. 2. vol. 4. p. 69. _De Cand. Syst._ 2. p. 286.
CHAR. GEN. _Calyx_ clausus, basi vix bisaccatus. _Filamenta_
omnia edentula. _Antheræ_ lineares. _Silicula_ ovalis v. oblonga,
sessilis, valvis planiusculis, loculis polyspermis (raro 1-2-spermis),
funiculis liberis. _Dissepimentum_ uninerve, venosum. _Semina_
marginata. _Cotyledones_ accumbentes.
Herbæ _suffruticosæ ramosæ, pube bipartita appressa incanæ_. Folia
_integerrima_. Racemi _subspicati_.
OBS. Dissepimentum in omnibus exemplaribus utriusque speciei a nobis
visis completum, sed in F. ægyptiaca quandoque basi fenestratum,
fide D. Desfontaines. (_Flor. Atlant._ 2. _tab._ 160.)
F. ægyptiaca species unica certa est, nam F. stylosa, cujus flores
ignoti, ob stigmatis lobos patentes non absque hæsitatione ad hoc
genus retuli.
FARSETIA? _stylosa_, ramosissima, siliculis oblongis polyspermis
passimque brevè ovalibus 1-2-spermis, stylo diametrum transversum
siliculæ subæquante, stigmatis lobis patentibus.
_Obs._ Exemplaria omnia foliis destituta, sed illorum cicatrices ni
fallor obviæ.]