THE BRIAN OR DEVONIAN FORESTS. 



101 



rpslsonly on more juxtaposition of frngmonts, and on the Hlipht rosoin- 

 blanoo of the dooorticntocl ends of tho hranchos of the latter plants 

 to pHihphi/fon, It is contradicted by the obtuse ends of the 

 branches of tho Lepidndendron and Li/ropodifeti, and by the apj)ar- 

 ently strobilaceous termination of some of them. 



Salter's descrijit ion of \m Lcpitlodendntn uothnvi is quite defi- 

 nite, and accords with specimens placed in my hands by Mr. i'each : 

 "Stems Imlf an inch broad, taperinp: little, branchc short : set on at 

 an acute angle, blunt at their teriniiuitions. Loaves in seven to ten 

 rows, very short, not a line long, and rather spreading than closely 

 imbricate." These charactei-s, however, in so far as they go, are 

 rather those of the genus Lycopodilen than of Lcpidodvndron, from 

 which this plant differs in wanting any distinct leaf-bases, and in its 

 short, crowded leaves. It is to be observed that they ajiply also to 

 Salter's Lycopodifes MiUeri, and that the (^'(Terence of the foliage 

 of that species may be a result merely of dillerent state of preser- 

 vation. For these reasons I am disposed to place these two sup- 

 posed species together, and to retain for the species tho name 

 Lycopodifes Miller i. It may be characterised by the descri{)tion 

 above given, with merely the modification that the leaves are some- 

 times nearly one-third of an inch long and secund (Fig. 17, supra, 

 lower figure). 



Decorticated branches of tho above species may no douot be mis- 

 taken for Psilnphyton, but are nevertheless quite distinct from it, and 

 the slender branching dichotomous stems, with terminations wfiich, 

 as Miller graphically states, are " like the tendrils of a pea," are too 

 characteristic to bo easily mistaken, even when neither fruit nor 

 leaves appear. With reference to fructification, the form of L. 

 Milleri renders it certain that it must have borne strobiles at the 

 ends of its branchlets, or some substitute for these, and not naked 

 spore-cases like those of Psilophyton, 



The remarkable fragment communicated by Sir Philip Egerton 

 to Mr. Carruthers,* belongs to a third grouj). anil has, I think, been 

 quite misunderstood. I am enabled to make this statement with 

 some confidence, from tho fact that the reverse or counterpart of Sir 

 Philip's specimen was in the collection of Sir Wyville Thomson, and 

 was placed by him in my hands in 1870. It was noticed in my 

 paper on " New Devonian Plants," in the " Journal of the Geologi- 

 cal Society of London," and referred to my genus Itilopfiyton, as 

 stated above under Section II., page 8G et seq. 



* "Journal of Botany," 1873. 



