[MATTHEW] FLORA OF THE LITTLE RIVER GROUP NO. III 12 
Cardiocarpon ovale, Dn. (The general structure is that of Cardio- 
carpon, but the form is not typical). 
C.—Crampii, Hartt, has not the form of a true Cardiocarpon. 
C.—obliquum, Dn., is probably of another genus. 
Trigonocarpon racemosum, Dn. 
T.—perantiquum, Dn. (The author of these species considered 
them to be fruits of Sigillariz or Conifers). 
Antholithes Devonicus, Dn. 
A.—floridus, Dn. (Attention may be called to the resemblance of 
these objects to the male inflorescence of Cordaites. 

PSEUDOBAIERA. 
New material of the species Pseudobaiera McIntoshi, has been ob- 
tained that more fully exhibit the features of the plant than those upon 
which the description was based, and an account of these is given with 
the original description which is as follows:—' 
‘ PSEUDOBAIERA, n. gen. 
“This genus is represented by certain thick, smooth leaves, which 
in appearance and structure combine the characters of Filicales and 
Ginkgoales. The leathery leaves, having strap-like lobes, ending in 
mucronate points recall Baiera, while the general port of the plant is that 
of a fern. 
“The frond is tripinnate and seems related to Sphenopteridium, 
or to Eremopteris, and Triphyllopteris. It is regularly alternately 
pinnate, the pinnules deeply cleft into strap-like lobes, which lobes 
also are alternately pinnate, and decurrent on the midrib. Venation 
obscure owing to the thickness, and smooth surface of the pinnules. 
“In the fertile pinnules the lobes are replaced by obovate sporangia 
or seed vessels, alternately pinnate, as in the barren frond, and be- 
coming smaller toward the end of the pinnule. 
“The plant representing this genus has a general resemblance to 
Cyclopteris dissecta, Güpp (Sphenopteridium)? as well as to ÆEremop- 
teris Schimper; but both of these forms are bifurcate in the rachis, and 
we do not know that this is, they also have more numerous veins and 
a more flabellate pinnule. It differs from Sphenopteris in the thick 
broad, flat pinnules, and the absence of a prominent nerve in the lobes, 
from Hymenophyllites also by the absence of alation on the rachis 
and its subdivisions. 

? Bull. Nat. Hist. Society of N. Bruns’k, Vol. V, p. 393, 1906. 
2? Zittel’s Paleontology, Vol. III, (Plant) p. 108. 
