(Johnston, 1949), its presence in this sample suggests a 
wider distribution in the past. 
Sample II, Mazantic, is very closely related to that 
from Simojovel (I) in lithology. Approximately 66% of 
the grains are recognizable as I/izophora. Although poor 
preservation of the sample made division of the grains 
into the two major Rhizophora categories difficult and 
somewhat uncertain, a large proportion of the grains 
could be assigned to the Rhizophora spp. group. BR. 
Mangle-ty pe was present only in very low percentages; 
the same is true for fungal spores. From the general 
similarity of the two sediments, it is suggested that the 
samples from Simojovel and Mazantic represent a simi- 
lar habitat. 
Samples III and IV, from Pabuchil and Huitiupan, 
although somewhat different lithologically, appear to be 
comparable palynologically. In both, nearly half of the 
pollen (45%) encountered is of the Rhizophora type. Of 
this, acomparatively large percentage (20%) is definitely 
R. Mangle-type. The category Rhizophora affinity un- 
certain here includes a number of grains referable proba- 
bly to R. Mangle-type, seen in polar view. Such grains 
were placed in this category, since it is often difficult to 
distinguish modern Rk. Mangle in this orientation from 
other species. In both samples, fungal spores are abun- 
dant with respect to the total pollen. Other microfossils 
include pollen very closely resembling that of Hngel- 
hardtia (Plate XLII, fig. 3), a very low percentage of pol- 
len of the Pelliciera-type, and a few Hystrichosphaerids 
in the Huitiupan sample. The two are similar in the per- 
centages of unidentified tricolporate and monocolpate 
pollen; marine shells occur in both samples. ‘These 
samples represent probably similar habitats. By van der 
Hammen’s criteria, the relatively high fungal spore con- 
tent suggests that the site was very near the coastline, 
[ B14 ] 
