Page:Miscellaneousbot01brow.djvu/350

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.
332
PLANTS or CENTRAL AUSTRALIA

tcati. Calyx : limbo supero qiiinqiiepartito ; laciniis lineari- lanceatis, aequalibus, pubescentibiis. Corolla : tubo hinc ad basin usque fisso ; limbo unilabiato, 5-partito ; laciniis lanceolatis, aeqnalibus, marginibus angustis induplicatis, extus uti tubus pubescentibus, intus glabris trinerviis, nervo medio venoso. Stamina : filamenta distincta, anguste linearia, glabra, axi incrassata; antherse liberse, lineares, imberbes, basi affixae, loculis longitudinaliter dehiscentibus. Ovarium biloculare ? loculis monospermis, ovulis erectis. Stylus cylindraceus, glaber. Stigmatis indusium margine 84] ciliatum et extus pilis copiosis longis strictis acutis albis tectum V. cinctum.

19. Eremophila (Cunninghamii) arborescens, foliis al- ternis linearibus mucronulo recurvo, sepalis fructus ungui- culatis eglandulosis, corolla extus glabra.

Eremophila? arborescens, Cunningli. MSS. 1817.

Eremodendron Cunninghami, De Cand. prodr. xi; p. 713. Delessert ic. select, vol. v, p. 43, tab. 100 (ubi error in num. ovulorum).

Loc. "In the sandy bushes of the low western interior, not beyond lat. 29° S." D. Start.

Obs. The genus Eremophila was founded on very unsatisfactory materials, namely, on two species, E. oppositi-folia and alternifolia, which I found growing in the same sandy desert at the head of Spencer's Gulf in 1802, the only combining character being the scariose calyx, which I inferred must have been enlarged after flowering. This, however, proves not to be the case in E. alternifolia, which Mrs. Grey has found in flower towards the head of St. Vincent's Gulf; and from analogy with other species since discovered, it probably takes place only in a slight degree in E. oppositifolia, whose expanded flowers have not yet been seen.

In 1817 Mr. Cunningham, in Oxley's first expedition, discovered a third and very remarkable species in flower and unripe fruit, which he referred, with a doubt, to Eremophila, and which M. Alphonse De Candolle has recently separated, but as it seems to me on very insufficient grounds