wy 
ye 
& 
ON A NEW SPECIES OF CONIFER, PINITES RUFFORDI. 417 
A New Species of Conifer, Pinites Ruffordi, fron the English 
Wealden Formation. By A. C. Sewkrp, M.A., F.G.S. 
(Communicated by Prof. Reynotps Green, D.Sc., F.R.S., 
F.L.S.) 
[Read 21st November, 1895. ] 
AmonG fossil plants there are perhaps none which are more 
unsatisfactory, from the point of view of generic and specific 
determination, than the structureless casts or impressions of 
coniferous twigs. On the other hand, the frequent occurrence 
of well-preserved wood in Paleozoic, Mesozoic, and Cainozoic 
strata, has led to detailed comparative investigations on the 
histological structure of fossil and recent Conifere, and it has 
been found possible to make use of certain anatomical characters 
as fairly trustworthy guides in generic identification. 
The genus Pinites, first used by Witham, Goppert, and other 
early writers, has been adopted by many palzobotanists as a 
convenient designation for fossil stems, foliage, and cones, 
exhibiting such characters as agree fairly closely with those 
of recent Pines. Used in its wider sense, Pinites serves as 
& representative genus for fossil Abcetinew. The question of 
nomenclature is often one of some difficulty in dealing with 
fragments of fossil plants. ‘The same term has been employed 
by various writers in a different sense, and no little confusion 
has been caused by this inconvenient, though not altogether 
unnecessary practice. In Brongniart’s ‘ Prodrome,’* we find 
the terms Pinus and Abies applied to fossil conifers which are 
regarded as closely allied to existing species of these genera ; 
but in a later work + by the same author, Goppert’s example 
is followed, and the generic term Pinites is used in a wide 
sense, including other genera of the Abvetinew in addition to 
Pinus. 
Endlicher, in his ‘Synopsis Coniferarum,’ { confines the generic 
name Pinites to cones and leaves,and makes use of the genus Peuce 
for specimens of fossil wood ; Brongniart accepts this application 
of the two genera. Gippert§ prefers to extend the meaning 
* ‘Prodrome Hist. Vég. Foss.,’ p. 107. 
+ ‘Tableau,’ p. 67. 
t Pp. 283 and 291. 
§ ‘Monograph. Foss. Conif.,’ p. 211. 
LINN. JOURN.—BOTANY, VOL. XXXII. 
