^{page 657 note *} Leipzig, 1875, p. 7.

^{page 658 note *} Higher Cryptogamia, p. 209.

^{page 658 note †} First English edition, p. 161.

^{page 658 note ‡} Friedrichs-Realschule Jahresbericht, Berlin, 1874Google Scholar.

^{page 659 note *} P. 41, Taf. vii.

^{page 659 note †} P. 14.

^{page 659 note ‡} Pl. i.

^{page 659 note §} Lang, Address to Sec. K, Brit. Assn., 1915, p. 8.

^{page 659 note ∥} 2te Auflage, 1913, p. 337; see also Engl. ed., part ii, pp. 313–321.

^{page 660 note *} Organography, Engl. ed., ii, p. 317, fig. 20.

^{page 660 note †} E. W. Sinnott, Ann. of Bot., 1911, p. 167; and other writers.

^{page 660 note ‡} Flora, 1889, p. 28; Vergleichende Entwickelungsgeschichte, p. 254; Organographie, 2te Auflage, p. 378.

^{page 661 note *} “Die Beziehungen zwischen dem echt-gabeligen und dem fiederigen Wedel-Aufbau der Farne,” Ber. d. d. Bot., Ges. xiii, 1895, p. 244;Google Scholar also Lehrbuch der Pflanzen-Palaeontologie, Berlin, 1899, p. 110,Google Scholar etc.

^{page 661 note †} Lehrbuch, p. 110, etc.

^{page 662 note *} Scott, Studies in Fossil Botany, p. 230, fig. 95, of Sigillaria sulcata.

^{page 663 note *} Compare Lignier, , “Equisétales et Sphénophyllales: leur origine Filicinéenne commune,” Bull, de la Soc. Linn. de Normandie, 50 série, 7 ^e vol., Caen, 1903Google Scholar.

^{page 663 note †} See Land Flora, fig. 199; or Zeiller, Palæobotanique, fig. 112.

^{page 664 note *} See Feistmantel's drawing reproduced in Engler and Prantl, i, 4, fig. 345.

^{page 664 note †} Nathorst, , K. Svensk Vetenskaps-Akad. Hand., xxxvi, No. 3Google Scholar.

^{page 664 note ‡} Scott, , Studies in Fossil Botany, i, pp. 114–123Google Scholar.

^{page 665 note *} Lehrbuch, p. 176.

^{page 667 note *} Phil. Trans., part ii, 1884, p. 575.

^{page 668 note *} See Phil. Trans., 1884, p. 577.

^{page 668 note †} See the writings of Moore, Lowe, Lubrssen, etc.

^{page 671 note *} Compare Phil. Trans., part ii, 1884, p. 577, plate xxxvii, fig. 8.

^{page 671 note †} There have been misunderstandings in the use of terms applied to branch-systems. The use of the terms here adopted is that of Hofmeister (Allgemeine Morphologie, p. 435) as applied to sympodial developments of monopodial branchings. The term “scorpioid” in this sense was introduced by Bravais, while Schimper designated this type of sympodium a Cicinnus. The terminology founded for monopodial systems may be adopted for designating the similar developments in dichotomous systems.

^{page 671 note ‡} Schizaeacem, 1881.

^{page 672 note *} Schizaeaceen, p. 8.

^{page 672 note †} Pl. i, figs. 12–14.

^{page 674 note *} These facts compare with what is seen in Schizæa rupestris, in which, as noted by Goebel (Organography, Engl. ed., ii, p. 478), its sterile leaf is unbranched. The branching, such as is seen in the sterile leaves of S. digitata and elegans, appears here only in the fertile region.

^{page 674 note †} Vergl. Entwickelungsges., p. 254.

^{page 675 note *} L.c, p. 254.

^{page 675 note †} Pringsh. Jahrbuch, iv, p. 249.

^{page 675 note ‡} L.c, pl. xiv, fig. 2.

^{page 676 note *} Allison, , New Phyt., vol. x, pl. iiiGoogle Scholar.

^{page 676 note †} Organography, Engl. ed., ii, p. 479.

^{page 676 note ‡} L.e., p. 204.

^{page 676 note §} Davie, , Trans. Roy. Soc. Edin., vol. 1, pt. ii, No. 11, p. 354Google Scholar.

^{page 676 note ∥} The use of this term is that adopted by Hofmeister, after Bravais (Allg. Morph., p. 435), as applied to monopodial branchings, and transferred to dichotomies also. An inversion of the use of the terms “helicoid” and “scorpioid” appeared both in the Textbook of Sachs, Engl. ed., 1875, p. 157, and in that of Van Tieghem, p. 38. But they are used in their original sense in the Textbook of Strasburger.

^{page 676 note ¶} Eusp. Ferns, fig. 125, p. 148.

^{page 676 note **} L.c., fig. 122, p. 147.

^{page 676 note ‡} L.c., fig. 122, p. 147; also Farmer, , Ann. of Bot., vi, pl. xvGoogle Scholar.

^{page 677 note *} L.c., fig. 123, p. 147; also Buit. Ann., 2nd series, vol. vii, pl. viii.

^{page 678 note *} Campbell, , Buit. Ann., t. xiii, pl. viii,Google Scholar fig. 36.

^{page 678 note †} Bower, Phil. Trans., part ii, 1884, p. 479.

^{page 678 note ‡} L.c, figs. 16, 17.

^{page 679 note *} Ann. of Bot., vol. xvi, pl. ii, fig. 61; and by Campbell, Eusp Ferns, fig?. 10, 45, 78.

^{page 680 page *} “Gametophyte of Botrychium virginianum” Trans. Canadian Inst., 1896–1897, vol. v, pt. 2, pl. i,Google Scholar figs. 9, 10. t Eusp. Ferns, fig. 7.

^{page 681 note *} Rob. krypt. Flora, iii, p. 558, fig. 176.

^{page 681 note †} Organography, Engl. ed., ii, p. 478, fig. 316.

^{page 682 note *} See Prantl, Beiträge zur Systematik der Ophioglossaceen, 1884, Taf. 7, 8.

^{page 682 note †} Eusp. Ferns, p. 12, fig. 2.

^{page 683 note *} Organography, Engl. ed., ii, p. 318.

^{page 683 note †} Ann. Jard. Bot. Bu.it., 2 série, vol. viii, p. 93, pls. ix, x.

^{page 685 note *} L.c, pl. x, figs. 55–57.

^{page 685 note †} Natürl. Pflanzenfam., i, 4, p. 343.

^{page 685 note ‡} Ann. of Bot., 1905, p. 447.

^{page 686 note *} L.c., fig. 2.

^{page 686 note †} Natürl. Pflanzenfam., i, 4, p. 343, fig. 180, B.

^{page 686 note ‡} New Phyt., viii, p. 299.

^{page 687 note *} Compare Seward, , Phil. Trans., B, vol. 194, pl. xlviiiGoogle Scholar.

^{page 688 note *} Seward, l.c., pl. xlviii.

^{page 689 note *} Compare Seward, , Fossil Plants, vol. ii, p. 293,Google Scholar fig. 228.

^{page 689 note †} See Christ, Geographie der Fame, fig. 5.

^{page 689 note ‡} Ann. of Bot., 1915, p. 495.

^{page 690 note *} Hymenophyllaceen, Leipzig, 1875Google Scholar.

^{page 690 note †} L.c., p. 7, pl. ii.

^{page 690 note ‡} P. 14.

^{page 692 note *} Entw. d. Farnkraüter, Berlin, 1848Google Scholar.

^{page 692 note †} Sachs' Textbook, fig. 258.

^{page 694 note *} Carnegie Inst., No. 94, pls. xxiv, xxv.

^{page 694 note †} Parkeriaceen, pl. xxii, figs. 4–8.

^{page 697 note *} Ann. of Bot., vol. xxviii, pp. 405–411.

^{page 697 note †} Verhandl. d. Schw. Naturf. Ges., 89, p. 178.

^{page 698 note *} Trans. Roy. Soc. Edin., 1916.

^{page 699 note *} Textbook, 2nd Engl. ed., p. 153; and Lectures on the Physiology of Plants, Lecture I.

^{page 700 note *} Thompson, Trans. Roy. Soc. Edin., 1916.

^{page 700 note †} Compare Lignier, , “Equisétales et Sphénophyllales,” Bull. Soc. Linn, de Normandie, 5 série, vol. vii, p. 93, 1903Google Scholar.

^{page 700 note ‡} See paragraph on p. 659 as to the use of this term.

^{page 701 note *} Land Flora, p. 618, etc.

^{page 701 note †} Lehrbuch, p. 176.

^{page 701 note ‡} It may be a question whether all cases of complex venation in any leaf-expansion represent the result of webbing of laciniæ originally distinct. It is possible that a branching of veins may be initiated de novo in a leaf-expansion. We know that some such new developments have produced the reticulate state. It would therefore be rash to deny that something similar may in some cases account for the origin of additional veins in an entire blade. We may conclude that in primitive types with open venation which are “webbed” the venation may be a near index of a primitive laciniation. But in derivative types, and especially where the venation is reticulate, as in Angiosperms, this may have so obliterated the original scheme of construction that what is actually seen can no longer be trusted as indicating it further than in quite general features.

^{page 701 note §} Ber. d. d. Bot. Ges., xiii, p. 245.

^{page 702 note *} Campbell, Eusp. Ferns, fig. 122.

^{page 702 note †} See Land Flora, p. 627, and refs.

^{page 703 note *} Phil. Trans., pt. ii, 1884, tigs. 15–17.

^{page 703 note †} Ibid., pt. ii, 1884, figs. 24–44.

^{page 703 note ‡} Goebel, , Organography, Engl. ed., ii, p. 386Google Scholar.

^{page 704 note *} See Phil. Trans., pt. ii, 1884, pls. xxxviii–xl.

^{page 704 note †} Goebel states pointedly that “the structures which were frequently considered to be stipules in the Ophioglossaceæ are not of that nature” (Organography, Engl. ed., ii, p. 365). He gives no reason for this statement, though he admits the use of the term for the similar growths of the Marattiaceæ.

^{page 706 note *} Land Flora, chap, xlii, p. 670.

^{page 706 note †} Bot. Gaz., 1914, pp. 509–514.

^{page 707 note *} L.c, pp. 23–24.

^{page 707 note †} P. 1.

^{page 707 note ‡} Ann. of Bol., 1915, p. 562.

^{page 707 note §} Deutsche Bot. Monatsschrift, xv, 1897Google Scholar.