504 CYCADOPHYTA [CH. 



Carruthers 1 suggested Cycadeostrobus as a more suitable name on 

 the ground that it is less limited in its implication of affinity ; but, 

 as Fliche points out, Endlicher's generic name has been widely 

 adopted in a comprehensive sense as standing for Cycadean 

 megastrobili, excluding the supposed Cycas-like megasporophylls, 

 included under Cycadospadix. 



Many of the specimens described as species of Zamiostrobus 

 are of little or no value as records of Cycadean plants, e.g. Zamio- 

 strobus orientalis Heer 2 from the Jurassic beds of Amurland. 

 A Lower Cretaceous (Albian) species described by Fliche 3 as 

 Zamiostrobus Loppineti, though not entirely satisfactory, is more 

 likely to belong to the Cycadales. The type-specimen is an ellip- 

 tical strobilus, 5-5 cm. x 3-2 cm., consisting of an axis bearing 

 at right-angles numerous small, contiguous, peltate megasporo- 

 phylls each with two small seeds on the lower surface. The figures 

 given by Fliche are, however, not convincing. An examination of 

 specimens in the British Museum, from Wealden and Jurassic rocks, 

 described by Carruthers as species of Cycadeostrobus, convinced me 

 that several are undoubtedly Araucarian cones 4 . Solms-Laubach 5 

 called attention to the Araucarian appearance of Cycadeo- 

 strobus Brunonis, a cone from an unknown locality, and this 

 with other species, e.g. C. elegans, C. sphaericus, C. truncatus, etc., 

 may safely be referred to Araucarites. The specimen figured by 

 Lindley and Hutton 6 as Zamia crassa from the Inferior Oolite of 

 Towcester (Northamptonshire) affords no satisfactory evidence 

 of Cycadean affinity. The Lower Cretaceous Bohemian specimens 

 described by Corda 7 and Velenovsky 8 as Microzamia gibba should 

 not be included in a genus implying Cycadean affinity: though 

 Velenovsky states that the megasporophylls bear a pair of seeds 

 his illustrations do not afford any satisfactory evidence of this 

 Cycadean character. Similarly the fossil regarded by Carruthers 9 



1 Carruthers (67 3 ) p. 104. 



2 Heer (77) n. p. 47, PI. xm. fig. 10. 



3 Fliche (96) p. 27, PL i. fig. 3. 



4 Seward (95) A. pp. 113 et seq.; (96) A. p. 215; (04) B. pp. 138, 150. 



5 Solms-Laubach (91) A. p. 92. 



6 Lindley and Hutton (35) A. PI. 136. 



7 Corda in Reuss (46) B. PL XLVI. 



8 Velenovsky (85) B. p. 6, Pis. in. v. 



9 Carruthers (70) PL LIV. fig. 6. 



