Fossil Floras of Cape Colony. 93 



leaves as probably those of a member of the Ginkgoales. We have, 

 however, no evidence beyond such as is afforded by the not very 

 close resemblance of the leaves to those of Ginkgo that can be 

 accepted as in any way deciding the position of Schimper's genus. '■- 



The genus Ginkgophyllum \yas adopted by Eenault and Saporta t 

 for leaves which cannot be distinguished from Psygmophylhim, but I 

 see no reason for substituting the more committal term for Schimper's 

 older designation. Feistmantel's Eurypliyllum lohittianum X from 

 the Karharbari Coal-field may be compared with Psygmophyllum as 

 regards the tapered base of the leaves and their arrangement on 

 the stem, but the Ginkgo-like form of the bilobed lamina affords a 

 distinctive feature of the latter genus. 



Psygmophyllum kidstoni, sp. nov. 

 Plate XII., fig. 1. 



Vegetative shoots woody, bearing spirally disposed leaves. Leaves 

 wedge-shaped, reaching a length of 13 cm., usually divided by a deep 

 median sinus into two narrow wedge-shaped lobes, truncate distally 

 and tapering gradually to the proximal end of the lamina. Leaves 

 sessile, attached to the axis by a narrow base. The lamina is 

 traversed by numerous spreading and occasionally forked veins 

 following a course parallel to the edge of the leaf. 



Organs of reproduction unknown. 



Leaves of the Psygmophyllum type have hitherto been recorded 

 from the following regions and geological horizons : — 



Psygmopliylliuti flahdlatum (L. and H.),i; Coal-Measures of New- 

 castle-upon-Tyne, England. 



Psygmophiilliim ivilliamsoni, Nath,|| Culm beds of Spitzbergen. 



Ginkgophyllum flahcllatum (L. and H.), Eenault, Cours. Bot. Foss. 

 1881, p. 65, pi. vii., fig. 5. 



Psygmophyllum expansum (Brongn.),*i Permian of Eussia. 



Psygmophylluvi grasscti (Sap.),"'"'' Permian of Lodeve. 



Ginkgopiiyllum minus, Sandb.ft Coal-Measures or Permain of the 

 Black Forest. 



* Seward and Gowan (00), p. 136. 

 t Eenault (81), p. 65; Saporta (84), p. 230. 



+ Feistmantel (79), pi. xxi. § Lindley and Hutton (32), pi. xxviii., xxix. 



II Nathorst (94), pi. ii., figs. 1, 2. 



^ Murchison (45), vol. ii., p. 9, pi. E. See also d'Eichwald (55), pi. xiii., fig. 17, 

 and Schmalhausen (87), p. 18, pi. iii., iv. 



** Saporta (84), p. 228, pi. clii., fig. 2. ft Sandberger (90), p. 101. 



