[51]

*Note for list Cleist-flowers

I have omitted Trifolium & Arachis from the list, because V. Mohl says (Bot. Zeit 1863, p. 312) these 2 cases shd be carefully distinguished from others, as they merely that the flower-stems merely sink under the earth, & it does not appear that their flowers are cleistogamic.

Moreover Correa de Mello says (Journal Linn. Soc. Bot. vol. XI. 1870, p. 254) carefully observed plants of Arachis in Brazil & could never find any cleistogamic such flowers. I have struck out Heterocarpæ, as in Bentham & Hooker, it is considered as a synonym of Galactia.

Plantago has been omitted because as far as I can discover at it produces only hermaphrodite & female flower-heads, but not cleistogamic flowers. (lead on) Krascheninikowia (vel Stellaria) has been omitted because it seems very doubtful from Maximowicz' description whether the lower flowers which have no petals or very small ones, & barren stamens or none are cleistogamic; the upper hermaphrodite flowers are said never to produce fruit, & therefore probably act as males, moreover in Stellaria graminea, as Babington remarks (British Botany 1851, p. 51) that in Stellaria graminea "shorter and longer petals accompany an imperfection of the stamens or germen.")

[in margin:] (Put in order if List all in one paragraph.)

Para (I have added to the list the following cases: from Dr. Torrey's account of Hottonia inflata (Bull. of Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 2. June 1871) it is manifest that this plant produces true cleistogamic flowers.

(With respect to Salvia see Dr. Ascherson in Bot. Zeit 1871, p. 555.)

(For Oxybaphus and Nyctaginia, Asa Gray in American Naturalist, Nov. 1873, p. 692.)

(For Pavonia, Bouché in 'Sitzungs-Bericht. Gesell. Natur. Freunde, Oct. 20, 1874, p. 90.)

(see beneath)

 

[The text of this draft corresponds to Forms of flowers, p. 313.]

[50v]

[Proof sheet of Orchids, p. 137, published, p. 338.]