Manchester Memoirs, Vol. Hi. (1908), No. 3. 9 



Discussion of the Relationship of the Cone 



TO Bothrodcudron AND OTHER LVCOPODS. 



The genus Bothrodcndron was founded by Lindley 

 and Hutton in their" Fossil Flora " (L. and H. '33). They 

 did not define it satisfactorily, and it was regarded as a 

 condition of preservation of various other genera of 

 Lepidodendraceae by most palaeobotanists, until Zeiller 

 ('86) shewed that well preserved specimens existed 

 having definite leaf scars, shewing the prints of the 

 vascular bundle and the two parichnos strands. 



The genus belongs to the Lepidodendracese, and 

 may be roughly described as being a Lepidodcndrou in 

 which the projection of the leaf basis is nil. Nalhorst has 

 shewn that Cychstignia Kiltorccnsc from the upper old 

 red sandstone is really a Bothrodcudron, the genus also 

 occurs in the lower carboniferous rocks of Scotland, and 

 is hence one of great antiquit)^ 



It has recently been shewn by Mr. Lomax that 

 Williamson's Lepidodcndrou uuDiduui is a BotJirodcndrou, 

 but the surface of the stem on which the identification is 

 founded does not, in my opinion, warrant specific deter- 

 mination. The only fructification yet referred to Bothro- 

 dendrou is a cone described by Kidston ('89), which was 

 attached to a twig of Bothrodcudron niinutifoliinn Boulay. 

 Owing to the kindness of Mr. Kidston, I have been able 

 to examine in Manchester three examples of this cone, 

 one of which is still attached to an undoubted Bothro- 

 dcudron twig. These specimens are derived from the 

 Middle Coal Measures of Barnsley, Yorkshire. 



I was unable to clearly make out the structure of 

 these impressions, but believe that it was similar to the 

 cone described above, in the fact that the horizontal limb 

 of the sporophyll is short compared to the diameter of 



