4 KANSAS UNIVERSITY QUARTERLY. 



Taeniopteris newberriana F. and I. C. W, Plate I, Figs, 1-5, 13, 7 (?), 



Plate IV, Figs. 2, 4 



Taeniopteris tiezvberriana Fontaine and I. C. White, Permian, or Upper 

 Carboniferous Flora of West Virginia and Southwest Pennsylvania, p. 91, 

 plate 34, figures 1-8, 1880. 

 Numerous specimens in the collection are so close to Taeniopteris 

 newberriana that their reference to that species, at least for the 

 present, seems advisable. There are numerous individuals, but 

 all more or less fragmentary. Owing to the thin texture of the 

 frond the line of cleverage in the matrix is not sufficiently marked 

 to expose it completely as in the last species. In this character of 

 a very thin frond our specimens differ very markedly from the types 

 of the species, which are described by the authors as rather thick 

 and coriaceous. The fact that the matrix is different in the two 

 cases, ours being preserved in limestone, while theirs were in 

 shale, may account in part for this, and possibly for other seeming 

 differences. The nerves are figured by the authors as leaving the 

 rachis at right angles, but in the description they sa}' that the 

 lateral nerves leave "the midrib at a right angle, or with a very 

 slight arch immediately at the insertion." In our specimens the 

 veins near the apex of the frond leave the midrib at right angle, 

 those near the middle with a slight arch immediately at the inser- 

 tion, and those near the base with a more decided arch at the 

 insertion. In the figures of the types the veins are represented as 

 coming out at right angles from the rachis throughout the entire 

 length of the frond, the base as well as the apex. No specimens 

 have been found in the Kansas formation with the peculiar seg- 

 mentation characterizing many of the Virginia specimens. These 

 two characters — difference in the origin of the veins, and absence 

 of the segmented frond, may prove to be specific differences 

 separating our species from Fontaine and White's. The present 

 reference is intended as suggestive rather than final. In other 

 respects Fontaine and White's description of the venation, "lateral 

 nerves very fine, closely placed and immersed in the parenchyma 

 of the frond," entirely agrees with our species, as does also their 

 description of the size and shape of the frond, "frond, simplej 

 elongate, narrowly eliptical, tapering slowly to the apex and base." 

 The largest frond of our specimens are 17 to 23 mm. wide, probabl)' 

 not less than 20 cm. long; the Virginia specimens are iT/j^ cm. 

 wide, and have an estimated length of 20 cm. 



Fontaine and White compare the species to T. coriacea. It 

 differs from specimens of that species from the same locality, in a 

 larger and much thinner frond, finer and more numerous veins, 



