NO. 2151. FOSSIL PLANTS FROM FLORISSANT— KNOWLTON. 267 



Family MORACEAE. 



FICUS FLORISSANTIA, new species. 



Ficus haydenii Lesquereux. Kirchner, Trans. St. Louis Acad. Sci., vol. 8, 

 1898, p. 179, pi. 12, fig. 3. 



Type.— Csit. No. 33,677, U.S.N.M. 



After an examination of the originals of both these forms I am con- 

 vuiced that the Florissant leaf referred by Kirchner to Lesquereux's 

 Ficus Jiaydenii is not the same as the Black Buttes leaf. The former 

 differs in being more heart-shaped at base and markedly in the 

 secondary nervation. In F. haydenii the secondaries are all alternate 

 and emerge at about the same angle, while in F. Jlorissantia the three 

 lower pairs are crowded at the base and at very different angles. 

 The second pair is nearly at right angle to the midrib, and the first 

 and third pairs are below, and about equally above, a right angle 

 respectivel3^ The upper pairs of secondaries are about the same in 

 both species, though they appear to arch more strongly in F. Jloris- 

 santia. It therefore seems best to consider them as distinct. 



Family PROTEACEAE. 



LOMATIA INTERRUPTA Lesquereux. 



Plate 25, fig. 5. 



Lomatia interrupta Lesquereux, Rept. U. S. Geol. Surv. Terr., vol. 8 (Cret. and 

 Tert. Fl.), 1883, p. 167, pi. 43, figs. 18, 19. 



The Hambach collection includes a single absolutely perfect leaf 

 of this species (U.S.N.M. 33,703), which is here figured as it supple- 

 ments to some extent the type-specimens. 



LOMATITES HAKEAEFOLIA (Lesquereux) Cockerell. 



Plate 26, figs. 1, 2. 

 Lomatites haheaefolia (Lesquereux) Cockerell, Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., 



vol. 24, 1908, p. 89. 

 Lomatia hakeaefolia Lesquereux, Rept. U. S. Geol. Surv. Terr., vol. 8 (Cret. 



and Tert. FL), 1883, p. 166, pi. 32, fig. 19. 

 Carduus florissantensis Cockerell, Bull. Torr. Bot. Club, vol. 33, 1906, p. 311, 



fig. (in text) 6. 



The specimen here figured, which comes from the Hambach collec- 

 tion, is undoubtedly identical with the Carduus florissantensis of 

 Cockerell, and further, it does not seem to be separable from Lomatia 

 hakeaefolia of Lesquereux. The latter, known only from the single 

 example figured, has plainly the same configuration at the base and 

 only differs in not having the upper lobes large. The long slender 

 terminal lobe is the same in all the specimens. 



It is possible that Quercus halaninorum CockereU^ should also be 

 referred here. The upper portion is the same, but the basal portion is 

 more sharply wedge-shaped. 



I Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., vol. 24, 1908, p. 86, pi. 8, fig. 21. 



