396 DR. E. A. NEWELL ARBER ON PSYGMOPHYLLUM FROM 
the leaf was really split or dissected above. The nerves can be seen here and there at 
the base. They are rather fine, but, despite Lindley and Hutton’s conclusions, they 
undoubtedly dichotomise, as is also the case in many other specimens (Pl. 44. fig. 11). 
I have also seen other, much smaller, detached leaves. "There is one in the Sunderland 
Museum (Pl. 44. fig. 11) which is more flabellate in form. It apparently has a rounded, 
Pentire apex; but here, again, the higher portion of the leaf is probably not preserved. 
This specimen is 7 em. long and 6 em. across at its broadest part. 
Another leaf, also in the Sunderland Museum, is shown in Pl. 44.fig. 10. It exhibits 
the nervation very clearly. Here it will be noticed that the leaf is cleft almost to the 
base into several segments. It is very difficult to say how far this was a natural feature. 
From a comparison with many other specimens I am inclined to think it was largely 
artificial. Evidence of the same splitting is seen in the case of the leaf shown on the 
left-hand side of fig. 8 of the same Plate. On the other hand, the apex may have been 
slightly incised or fimbriated, as Schimper* states, though I have not seen any 
absolutely definite evidence of the fact. 
Of greater interest, perhaps, are the specimens which show several leaves attached to 
an axis}. I have studied several such examples, which appear to me to demonstrate 
beyond doubt, as Renault has already concluded, that we are dealing here with an 
axis bearing a number of spirally arranged leaves, and not with a pinnate frond. The 
leaves have long sheathing bases, which closely clasp the axis. The whole appearance 
of the leafy shoot is quite distinct from that of Ginkgo, and would lead one to believe 
that such fossils represent a herbaceous plant, and not a branch of an arborescent 
or shrubby genus. One of the clearest examples § I have seen is shown ? nat. size in 
Pl. 44. fig. 8. This specimen is in the Sunderland Museum. At least three leaves are 
seen here attached to the axis. A slightly enlarged portion of this shoot, showing the 
basal portions of three leaves, is reproduced on PI. 42. fig. 3. The sheathing nature 
of the bases and the nervation of the leaves are clearly seen here. Between two of the 
leaves, fragments of what may have been the naked axis of a shoot is seen. In the 
photograph in Pl. 42. fig. 2, an axis is seen with the long sheathing portion of a leaf. 
The sheathing bases of two leaves are also clearly seen in Pl. 43. fig. 7. 
In the case of one specimen in the Sunderland Museum, similar to Pl. 44. fig. 8, a 
number of rounded or irregularly oval, shallow depressions occur on the leaves. ‘These 
contain no trace of any organic structure, and there is no evidence to lead me to believe 
that they mark the position of sori. Similar markings occur on certain fronds of 
Glossopteris, and are no doubt quite unconnected with the fructification of that plant. 
Distribution—So far as I am aware, this fossil is only known from England and 
* Schimper (’70), p. 193. 
H sere pde er specimen in the British Museum (Nat. Hist.), Reg. No. 38,927, from “ Jarrow Colliery, 
Durham : E Newcastle], which shows five leaves attached to an axis. The leaves are both very imperfect and 
much split into segments, and this specimen is inferior to those in the Sunderland Museum. 
t Renault ('81), p. 65. 
$ The type-specimen of Lindley and Hutton appears to have been a very confused, and a far from clear impression. 
It has been refigured by Renault (81), p. 65, pl. 7. fig. 5, probably with less accuracy. 
