XLVl] CUPRESSINOCLADUS 307 



Another Tertiary representative of the recent genus Cupressus 

 is that described from the Oligocene amber beds of East Prussia 

 as Cupressus sempervirens L. succinea Goepp. and Menge 1 . This 

 species is founded on fragments of sterile shoots with a well pre- 

 served male flower showing very clearly the form of the sporophylls. 



CUPRESSINOCLADUS. Gen. nov. 



The following examples of Cupressineous shoots that do not 

 afford satisfactory evidence of relationship to any particular 

 recent genus are given in illustration of the desirability of employ- 

 ing such a non-committal generic term as Cupressinocladus. 



(i) Species previously referred to Libocedrus. 



The Cretaceous specimens from the Atane beds of West Green- 

 land described by Heer 2 as Libocedrus cretacea are unaccompanied 

 by any cones and may equally well be compared with species of 

 Thuya : specimens from the Amboy clays, believed to be identical 

 with Heer's, are assigned to the latter genus by Newberry 3 . 



Cupressinocladus salicornoides (Unger). 



A sterile piece of branch figured by Lindley 4 from Provence as 

 Thuya is probably identical with Unger's species recorded by 

 Saporta 5 from the same locality. The type-specimens on which 

 Unger founded the species Thuites salicornoides (fig. 752) are from 

 Eocene beds in Croatia 6 ; they do not bear any mature cones and 

 cannot be assigned with confidence to any recent -genus. The 

 flattened shoots bear appressed leaves in decussate pairs and the 

 decurrent lamina may reach a length of 1-5 cm. By later authors 

 this species, recorded from Styria 7 , Bohemia 8 , Switzerland 9 , the 

 Oligocene beds of East Prussia 10 , Italy 11 , the Miocene of France 

 and from other localities 12 , is spoken of as Libocedrus, but the few 

 examples of cones that have been figured do not exhibit with 



. ! Goeppert and Menge (83) A. p. 45, PL xvi. figs. 218224. 



2 Heer (82) i. p. 49, PL xxix. figs. 1, 2; PL XLIII. fig. Id. 



3 Newberry and Hollick (95) p. 53, PL x. figs. 1, la. 



4 In Murchison and Lyell (29) p. 298, fig. B. 



5 Saporta (65 2 ) p. 42, PL i. fig. 4. 6 Unger (47) p. 11, PL n. 



7 Ettingshausen (70) p. 39; (88) p. 273. 



8 Ibid. (67 2 ) p. 109, PL v. figs. 17, 14; Engelhardt (85) PL vm. figs. 2730. 



9 Heer (55) A. p. 47, PL xxi. fig. 2. 



n Goeppert and Menge (83) A. PL xv. figs. 175177. 



11 Massalongo (59) p. 153, PL v. figs. 2023. 12 Marty (08). 



202 





