212 FOSSIL IM.ANTS IK'OM ITAAS FONTAINi:. 



<i| t lie ( (HH'l)(';ii ill"; Iwi.us w ;is never Sfeii, ;iii(l tlie .^i ;i<l;i( ions of t lio 

 ;il»noiin;il leaves next t<» llie eones into normal ones eonhl never be 

 traced on lliesanie Iwiu. !'>nl on eoni|»aiin_i; a nnnil»er of these twii^s 

 it can lu> seen llial ilieic is a eoni|)I(vt.(^ transition from the most ahnor 

 nial forms to the inninal ones. The leaves on most of I he tw i.us lu'xl 

 to the eones are so mneli like xcry mneh sln»rlene(l internod«'s of Ft( n- 

 (lopsis rariioi.s that lor a \()\\'j; time 1 tlioiiuhl that t he eones belonged to 

 that species. Tliis snpposition was conlirmed by the fact that this 

 I'''reiielopsis lias, in a iininber of cases, nodes on the stems that ar(^ 

 much shoiicned. Tlu' likeness lit f'renelopsis is increased by- the pres- 

 ence of the lines (»!' stomata, which mncli resemble those of that plant, 

 and by the lextnre (tf the ei>idermis, Avhieh is similar to that of 

 Freiielopsis. 



Tlie \t\u('tal)le matter of the twi^s of this plant is i^cnerally in the 

 comlition of a powder, inclosed in a shell composed of epidermal tissue. 

 On breakin.u I he stone t he w hoh> of t he material cnimbles away, and 

 the exterior shell, show ini;' the shape of the lea\('s, is especially i)r(>ne 

 to be destroyed. On this acconnt it is veiy ditlicnlt to ])re!^ervc speei 

 iiu'iis with lea\'es. N\ here the thin free tii>sof the leaves overlap on 

 the thickened bases of those next above, pressnrc often i»rodnecs the 

 imprint of a line, s(> that some hint is thus j;iven of the shape of 

 the leaves. The imprints thus Ibrmcd, lioAvevcr, (lo not pve their true 

 slia])0s, as tlu^ overlap])iu,i»' ends arc not shown. IM. xxxix, Fig'. '2, 

 j^ives the shapes ])rodueed by these lines, and it will serve also to indi- 

 cate the stoutness of the twigs, the one represented here being a penul- 

 timate one. 



The leaves were proportionally- very large, and of the gencMal Ibrin 

 of those of J^rachy]»l>yllnm, but they do not ])0ssess the thick enamel- 

 like epidermis of that plant. They have their l)asal portions thickened, 

 and show very distinct rows of stomata. In these features they are 

 allied to ragiophylliim (Pa<-liyphylluin) nion^ closely than to any other 

 ])reviously described conifer, and on this account 1 have, wtth nnu'h 

 doubt, placed the jda II I in that genus, indicating its doubtful ])osition 

 by the specflle nam(> given it. It is ([iiile ])robable that the plant is the 

 tyi)e of a new giMius, nearly allied to Araucaria, and uniting in itself 

 with features of Araucaria, soiiii' of those of JJrachyidiylliim and Pa 

 giopIi\llnm. The type seems todilVer from Pagiophyllum chietly in tin 

 form of the leaves. 7 *o ///(>/*//////»»/ ( l*H(lij/i>li>illinii) c/r/j^/c/o//, as described 

 by Saporta,* agrees in its lea\es on some of the larger twigs with this, 

 but other forms of this s|)»'cicsf have (piite ditVerent leaves. 



Indeed, the genus I'achyphyllnm, renanuMl by lleer Pagiophyllum, 

 allhongh it can hardly be coiisid(M-ed as sharply <lelined, has, as the 

 more coinmon form of leaf, one ipiite dilVerent from any shown in the 



^ l';ili()iitol()i;io !■ r;iii(;;iisc, I'lautes jiU!isyi(pic8, Tduio HI, IM. lUi, I'lj;-. 1, 

 t Ibid., ri. i.iv, Figs. 1-3, 



