152 



LOWER EOCENE FLORAS OF SOI^THEASTEKN NOKTll AMERICA. 



folia l>y Banisteria jvglandoides Wiitek't, iind 

 Biuniiia americana by Piscidia protogra 

 Watelct. 



The European flora most similar to that of 

 the Wilcox appears to he that of ^Uum Bay 

 and the Isle of Sheppey. although this com- 

 parison rests on the long list of names (nearly 

 all nomina nuda) representing Ettingshausen's 

 preluninar}' studies of these floras which were 

 never brought to completion. These lists were 

 republished by me in Professional Paper 84. 



The Alum Bay flora includes about 275 

 species in 116 genera and 63 families and com- 

 prises 3 thaUophytes, 2 ferns, 5 gymnosperms, 6 

 monocotyledons, and 97 dicotyledons. It is 

 thus less extensive than the Wilcox. Never- 

 theless the Wilcox flora contains the following 

 39 genera in common with that of Alum Bay 

 (Isle of Wight) : 



The following 36 Wilco.x families are repre- 

 sented at Alum Bay: 



Rnacea. 



Palmje. 



Juglandaceee. 



Myricacffi. 



Fagacete. 



Moracese. 



Proteaceae. 



Aristolochiaceae. 



Nyctaginacea;. 



Magnoliaceae. 



Anonacea;. 



Lauracese. 



Mimosaceae. 



CiEsalpiniacese. 



Papilionaceae. 



Meliacese. 



Malpighiacese. 



Eupliorbiacese. 



Anacardiacese. 



Ilicacete. 



Celastracese. 



Sapiadacese. 



Rhamnacea?. 



Filiacea\ 



Sterculiacea?. 



Bombacaceee. 



Ternstroemiacea>. 



MyrtaceiB. 



Melastomatacea>. 



.\raliacese. 



(!ornacese. 



Sapotacese. 



Ebenaoese. 



Oleaceae. 



Apocynacea;. 



Verbenaceje. 



Not only are these families represented in 

 both floras, but the general facies and that of 

 each family are much the same. Thus there are 

 42 species of LeguminostB at Alum Bay, and 

 the lU'xt most abundant families are the Mora- 

 cciB, Lauraceae, Sapindaceae, Myi'taceffi, and 

 Celastracese, just as m the Wilcox area. Fur- 

 thermore, on both sides of the Atlantic these 

 floras show identical climatic conditions and 

 both include a large number of genera and 

 families that contain allied specieswhich appear 

 for the fii-st time. Many of these forms are mdi- 

 cated in the table of distribution, and tlu-ough- 

 out the systematic description comparisons are 

 constantly made with Ypresian species. 



Comparisons are not as easily made with the 

 Sheppey flora, smce it consists entirely of fruits 

 and seeds. Notwithstandhig these dilliculties 

 it may be noted that 3 Wilcox species, the 

 most positively identified as weU as the most 

 significant of which is Nipadites burtini um- 

 honatus, are identical with Sheppey forms and 

 stiU others are closely allied to Sheppey forms. 

 In addition the folio whig 21 Wilcox genera are 

 represented in the Sheppey flora: Cyperites, 

 Canna, Sabalites, Dryophyllum, Juglans, Eu- 

 phorbiophyllum, Proteoides, Laurus, Nyssa, 

 Apocynophyllum, Solanites, Sapotacites, Dio- 

 spyros, Magnolia, Sapindus, Cupanites, Eugenia, 

 Myrcia, Leguminosites, Mimosites, and Car- 

 polithus. 



Thus between the Wilcox flora and the com- 

 bmed flora of Sheppey and Alum Bay the 

 closest sort of a parallel exists. 



In view of the foregoing discussion I have no 

 hesitation m making the most positive state- 

 ment that the Wilcox flora is largely of Ypre- 

 sian age. This is rendered conclusive by the 

 exact agreement between the flora of the over- 

 lying Claiborne group and that of the Lutetian 

 of Europe as brought out in my unpublished 

 studies of the Claiborne; flora. 



