184 BERRY: MESOZOIC FLORA OF THE COASTAL PLAIN 
This remarkable genus was erected by Hollick and Jeffrey * 
for the reception of a single species discovered recently in the 
Upper Raritan deposits near Kreischerville, Staten Island, and the 
writers content themselves with a very good account of this 
species and refrain from framing a generic diagnosis. This laud- 
able conservatism is abundantly justified by the writer’s discovery 
of two additional species that cannot be generically separated from 
the Staten Island species and furnish a number of additional 
characters which serve to isolate this genus. 
These remains are all entirely fern-like in superficial appear- 
ance, uniformly coriaceous in texture, and by the details of their 
external characters and internal structure are indubitable gymno- 
sperms of the order Pinales. Their positive reference to the 
Araucarineae by Hollick and Jeffrey will, however, undoubtedly 
be questioned by many students. The North Carolina remains 
are not common and are confined to a single locality on the Tar 
River. The lateral leaves along the edges of phylloclad-like twigs 
are markedly opposite, while the scale leaves on its flat surfaces 
are much more reduced than in Androvettia statenensis and cannot 
be made out at all except in microscopical preparations of the 
epidermis, in which they are seen to be reduced to mere points of 
termination of certain leaf-traces. The lateral twigs are strictly 
opposite as is the course of the vascular bundles, which consist of 
a regular alternation of opposite simple bundles and dichotomously 
forked bundles. The remains from Georgia, previously mentioned, 
vary from Axndrovettia statenensis inthe other direction and scarcely 
merit the term phylloclad-like ; the leaves, both marginal and sur- 
ficial, are opposite and well developed, very regular, with a vascular 
arrangement like that of the Carolina form. They are distichous 
and opposite on a naked stem, which is thus more fern-like in 
appearance than either of the other two species. Since the anatomy 
of these forms has not yet been studied, the reader is referred to 
the memoir cited above, where the histology of the Staten Island 
form is discussed. 
Regarding the systematic position of this genus, as already 
remarked, its relationship with the Araucarian group of conifers 
is questionable. It seems clearly distinct from Phyllocladus and 
* Mem. N. Y, Bot. Gard. 3: 22, Igog. 
