310 Annals of the Carnegie Museum. 



comparing the leaves of Platanus primccva of the Dakota Group with 

 those of Platanus Haydenii of the Laramie, those of Platanus Guil- 

 lelmcc of the Miocene, those of Platanus appendiculata of the Aurif- 

 erous gravel deposits of the old Pliocene of California, and those of 

 the living Platanus occidcntalis, one sees the original type so clearly 

 and distinctly preserved, that, overlooking the great differences of age, 

 it would be difficult to separate these leaves into different species." 



36. Platanus primasva Lesquereux. 



Platanits primccva Lesquereux, Cretaceous Flora, Report of the Geological 

 Survey of the Territories, VI, 1874. p. 69, PI. 7, fig. 2, and PI. 26, fig. 2; 

 Geological and Natural History Svirvey of Minn., Ill, Pt. I, p. 14, 1885— 

 1892; Flora of the Dakota Group, U. S. Geological Survey, Monograph 

 XVII, 1892, p. 72, PI. 8, figs. 7-8b, and PI. 10, fig. i. 



Ward, The Paleontological History of the Genus Platanus, Proceedings U. 

 S. National Museum, XI, 1888, p. 39. PI. 17-22. 



Description : Our specimen is about 13 cm. long by about 15 cm. 

 wide between the two lateral lobes. The leaf resembles Platanus 

 primccva more closely than the other species. It differs, however, in 

 that the base is more cuneate than truncate, resembling in this respect 

 more nearly Platanus primccva var. grandidenta. The terminal lobe 

 shows very little, if any, dentation. The leaf resembles in general 

 outline a young leaf of our modern Platanus. The leaf does not look 

 exactly like any figure of Platanus with which I have compared it, 

 but since our modern Platanus leaves vary so nuich, I do not think a 

 separate species or variety should be made for this specimen. 



Occurrence : Ellsworth County, Kansas, Dakota Sandstone (Cre- 

 taceous). Baron de Bayet Collection. Accession No. 2348. Carnegie 

 Museum, Pittsburgh. Pa. {N'o.. 48). 



37. Platanus cissitifolia Gress, sp. nov. (Plate X\', figs. 3 and 4.) 



A specimen which came from the U. S. National Museum bore a 

 label " Cissites obtusus Lesq., Lancaster County, Va.," this being the 

 only specimen in the collection not from the Dakota Group of the 

 Western United States. The matrix carrying the impression resem- 

 bles that of the other fossils so closely in composition that I am in- 

 clined to think that there has been a mistake in naming the locality 

 from which it has come. The impression of the leaf in this fossil 



