DERIVATION OF THE FLORA AND FAUNA 387 



Berry {2^) distinguished more than 130 species, most of them referred to still 

 living genera and belonging to 48 families and 21 orders. The general character 

 is subtropical, and the following families may be mentioned: Anacardiaceae, An- 

 nonaceae, Apocynaceae, Asclepiadaceae, Bignoniaceae, Burseraceae, Caesalpinia- 

 ceae, Celastraceae, Cochlospermaceae, Erythroxylaceae, Euphorbiaceae, Flacourt- 

 iaceae, Icacinaceae, Lauraceae, Loganiaceae, Meliaceae, Mimosaceae, Monimiaceae, 

 Moraceae, Myristicaceae, Myrtaceae, Nyctaginiaceae, Rubiaceae, Rutaceae, Sapinda- 

 ceae, Sapotaceae, Sterculiaeae, Styracaceae, Symplocaceae, Vitaceae. Of conifers 

 we find Araucaria pichileufuensis, Fiizroya tertiaria, Libocedrus prechilensis and 2 

 Podocarpus\ further, there is a species of Zaniia and Ginkgo patagonica, and of 

 ferns 3 species, one of them a Dicksonia. Araucaria and Libocedrtis are, according to 

 Florin, correctly named (pj), Ginkgo should be called Ginkgoites\ Fitzroya belongs 

 to Podocarpus, and one of the Podocarpus sp. belongs to Acmopyle of PiLGER. 



There is no trace of Fagaceae and Berry referred the flora to Low^er Mio- 

 cene and regarded it as contemporaneous with the Arauco flora; they have 20 

 species in common, the general character is the same and is said to bear witness 

 of the same climate. The relief of the Andes was low, no rain-shadow existed, 

 prevailing westerly winds carried abundant moisture across the country, there 

 was rain forest where now we have dry grass-land. Still, there is a difference 

 between Arauco and Pichileufu. Berry [zf] pointed out that the present South 

 Chilean rain forest flora is not represented in the Arauco flora whereas the 

 Pichileufu beds contain such Chilean genera as Azara, Berberis, Maytenus and 

 Myrceugenia and, in addition, the following Antarcto-tertiary genera: Drimys, 

 Embothrium, Eucrypliia, Laurelia, Libocedrus and Lontatia — provided that the 

 determinations are correct. Nevertheless the age is supposed to be the same. 

 Lower Miocene according to Berry, Eocene according to Florin, thus older 

 than the Araucaria-Nothofagus beds of Magallanes. It is surprising that, if the 

 two floras are of exactly the same age, the advancing Antarctic flora had not 

 found its way to the coast of Chile; Pichileufu ought to be younger, but perhaps 

 still Eocene, a period of very great length. 



The Chalia flora. — Of considerable interest was the discovery, in Santa Cruz 

 Territory in the valley of Rio Chalia about 51° s. lat., of a fossil flora similar 

 to the Arauco and Pichileufu floras and proving that the subtropical vegetation 

 had extended far south. Araucaria and Nothofagus are absent, the only conifer 

 found, Fitzroya tertiaria, is, as shown by FLORIN, a Podocarpus. Of angiosperm 

 families Anacardiaceae, Annonaceae, Bignoniaceae, Lauraceae, Monimiaceae, Myr- 

 taceae, Sterculiaceae etc. are represented, of Chilean genera Laurelia and Peumus 

 may be mentioned. The age is early Miocene according to BERRY (jj^). Eocene 

 according to Frenguelli [337), the climate warm temperate. 



Berry {313) regarded all the fossil floras containing an abundance of Faga- 

 ceae [Nothofagus, according to DUSEN also Fagus, which is questionable) as of 

 approximately the same age and older than the Concepcion-Arauco series. 



The Nirihuao flora. — Three localities close together on Nirihuao river near 

 Lake Nahuelhuapi. Some ferns, among them Alsophila australis, also known from 

 Seymour Island, further Zamia, Araucaria Nathorstii, Fagus (?) and one species 



