DESCKIPTION OF SPECIES. PP. 93 



coal field, contains, on specimens in our possession, ellip- 

 tical depressions strikingly like the depressions seen on this 

 plant, and shown in PlateXXXIV, Fig. 3. In the specimen 

 from the Richmond coal the depressions are larger, and are 

 placed in one row on tlie mid-rib. Prof. Wm. B. Rogers, 

 however, in his description of this plant, says they often 

 occur in two rows, one on each side of the mid-rib.' This 

 form of fructification in Taeniopteris Newberriana, and 

 the facies of T. Lescuriana, show that these Taeniopterids 

 are probably the ancestors of the Macrotaeniopterids of the 

 Mesozoic. 



Our plant has a very considerable resemblance to T. co- 

 riacea, Goeppert, but is larger. It also resembles T. vlttata, 

 Brongt., in nervation and general form, but the mid-rib is 

 flatter and more delicate. In general form, nervation, and 

 in the position and arrangement of the sori, this plant is 

 strikingly like Oleandra nereiformis^ Presl., from the Isl- 

 and of Luzon, and this I'esemblance might call for the 

 placing of it in the genus Oleandridium, Sch. if this were 

 more distinctly defined. 



The segmentation of the fertile frond has a curious re- 

 semblance to the pinnules of Pterophyllum, a plant which 

 makes its appearance with well marked features in the 

 Trias. 



Taeniopteris Newherriana, Var. angusta. PI. XXXIV, 

 Fig. 8. 



We find with the normal broad form a narrower and 

 smaller frond, which is also seen in fructification. This, in 

 all points except size, is similar to the larger plant. It 

 may perhaps be placed as a variety under T. Newhtrriana. 



RiiACOPiiYLLUM, Schimp. 



Rhacophyllumfiliciforuie, Var.majus. PL XXXV, Fig. 1. 



The plant figured in Fig. 11, PI. XXXV, resembles the one 

 figured by Schimper, in Pal. Veg. Tab. XLVIII, Figs. 3- 

 6, so mucli in its general aspect, that we consider it as only 

 a variety of R. filiciforme. It is much larger than Schim- 



