TRUNCI. 169 



V. 2607. Two specimens. The leaf bases present for the most 

 part a different appearance to those in the other specimens ; they 

 are closer together and not separated by the deep grooves shown 

 in Fig. 9 (V. 26105). Some of the bases, however, project exactly 

 as in the preceding example, and there can be little doubt as to 

 their specific identity. There is a distinct disparity in the size 

 of the petiole bases. Sussex. Beckles Coll, 



V. 2610. Waterworn stem with leaf bases as in V. 2610 b. 



There is only one ring of wood, but this is no doubt merely 

 a matter of age, and shows that the stem was younger than that 

 of 47029 (Yatesia Morrisii}. 



V. 2610 a. Smaller example. 



V. 2610 c. Two impressions of the worn surface of a stem, or 

 possibly a large cone. Cf. V. 26106 (Fig. 9). Sussex. 



Beckles Coll. 



V. 2612. An impression of the outer surface of a stem, or less 

 probably of a cone. Cf. V. 2607, also V. 2749 a (Bucklandia 

 anomala, Stokes and Webb). 1 Sussex. Beckles Coll. 



Trunci (Cycadacese). 



Cf. "Dracaena Benstedtii" Kb' nig. 

 [PI. XII. Figs. 4 and o.] 



In a paper on Mesozoic Angiosperms, contributed to the 

 Geological Magazine in 1886 by Starkie Gardner, we find the 

 following statement: "The stems of Endogenites erosa, so common 

 in the Wealden and ^eocomian, are now known to be cycadeous, 

 and it is probable that the Drac&na-like stems from Tilgate Forest 

 and elsewhere, so often referred to by Mantell, are referable to 

 the same group." 2 Endogenites erosa is now recognized as a fern 

 (Vol. I. p. 148) ; but the Draccena-like stems are in all probability, 

 as Gardner suggests, cycadean. Unfortunately no reasons are 

 given for this opinion. In the Second Report of the Committee 

 on British Tertiary and Secondary Beds, Gardner writes: 3 "We 



1 p. 129. 



2 Gardner (A. 1), p. 201. 



3 Gardner (A. 2), p. 243. 



