264 BAIERA. 



less blunt point. The breadth and number of the segments vary- 

 considerably in different leaves. 



The plant to which Bunbury gave the name Baiera gracilis had 

 previously been named by Bean Schizopteris gracilis, but the 

 latter term was never published, and is quoted, therefore, as 

 a manuscript name. Bunbuiy compares his species with Cyclopteris 

 Huttoni, Stemb. (= Ginkgo), and sees no reason for removing these 

 two species from the ferns ; he quotes Acrostichum peltatum as 

 a recent fern of similar habit. The leaves of Baiera gracilis differ 

 but little from some of those usually referred to Ginkgo Huttoni, 

 Baiera longifolia or B. Phillipsi, and Solenitcs furcatus ; all exhibit 

 the same general form, and are characterized by forked segments ; 

 in B. gracilis the segments are linear and narrower than in 

 G. Huttoni, but broader than in the plant we have named 

 B. Lindleyana. 



Some of the Siberian leaves figured by Heer as Ginkgo lepida 1 

 are indistinguishable from Baiera gracilis ; Heer's Greenland 

 species, Baiera incurvata 2 and B. Czekanows/ciana, 3 may also be 

 compared with B. gracilis. A fragment described by Fontaine 

 from the Potomac beds as Baiera foliosa 4 bears a resemblance to 

 Bunbury' s species, and a specimen figured by Schenk from China 

 as B. angustiloba 5 is also not unlike the English type. 



Some specimens of Bunbury's species appear to be identical with 

 the Rhsetic species Baiera (or Jeanpaulia) Muensteriana (Presl). 6 

 This probable identity, or at least striking resemblance, is 

 illustrated by specimen 39,209 (PI. IX. Fig. 3), which may be 

 referred to as B. gracilis, forma Muensteriana. 



The form of leaf represented by Baiera gracilis, Bunb., is one 

 which was very widely distributed in Mesozoic times ; in addition 

 to the species already mentioned as possibly identical with this 

 type, several others might be quoted, but in most cases the data 

 are insufficient to enable us to do more than call attention to 

 resemblances without necessarily implying specific identity. It is 



1 Heer (80), vol. vi. (2), pi. v. fig. 3. 

 - Heer (80), vol. vi. (3), pi. xiii. fig. 6. 



3 Heer (80), vol. vi. (2), pi. ii. figs. 1-3. 



4 Fontaine (89), pi. xciv. fig. 13. 



5 Schenk (83), pi. liii. fig. 1. 



6 Schenk (67), pi. ix. 



\ 



