472 Mr. Brown on an undescr'ibed Fossil Fruit. 



In conclusion I have to state, that very recently (since the drawings were 

 completed, and as well as the specimens seen by such of my friends as were 

 interested in fossil botany) Dr. Joseph Hooker has detected in the sporangia 

 of a species referred to Lepidostrohus sporules, and those also united in 

 threes. There are still, however, characters which appear to me sufficient 

 to distinguish that genus from the fossil here described. 



To the brief account here given of Triplosporite it is necessary to add a few 

 remarks on some nearly-related fossils, chiefly Lepidostrobi, whose structure 

 is now more completely known than it was when that account was submitted 

 to the Society. 



On the affinities of Lepidostrohus to existing structures, respecting which 

 various opinions have been held, it is unnecessary here to advert to any other 

 than that of M. Brongniart, which is now very generally adopted, namely, that 

 Lepidostrohus is the fructification of Lepidodendron, and that the existing 

 family most nearly i-elated to Lepidodendron is Lycopodiacece. The same view 

 is in great part adopted in my paper. But I hesitated in absolutely referring 

 Triplosporite to Lepidostrohus, from the very imperfect knowledge then 

 possessed of the structure of that genus. The specimens of Lepidostrohus 

 examined by M. Brongniart were so incomplete, that they suggested to him an 

 erroneous view of the relation of the supposed sporangium to its supporting 

 bractea, and of the contents of the sporangium itself they afforded him no 

 information whatever. 



In concluding my account of Triplosporite, I noticed the then very recent 

 discovery of spores in an admitted species of Lepidostrohus by Dr. Joseph 

 Hooker, who, aware of the interest I took in everything relating to Triplo- 

 sporite, the sections and drawings of which he had seen, communicated to me 

 a section of the specimen in which spores had been observed, but which in 

 other respects was so much altered by decomposition, that it afforded no 

 satisfactory evidence of the mutual relation of the parts of the strobilus. The 

 appearances however were such, that I hazarded the opinion of its being gene- 

 rically different from Triplosporite, an opinion strengthened by M. Brongniart's 

 account of the origin of the sporangium. 



