DFKIVATION OF THE FLORA AND FAUNA 399 



the East Indies, etc. without reacliinf^ the coast of Chile. They are much more 

 numerous than Joiiow th()uj4ht, 28 species: C/adium, Carcx bcrtcrojiianni, Pepcro- 

 tiiia hcrteroana, ii/aroariti/cra and Skottsbcr^rii^ BocJimeria, SaiilaluiH, RiDiwiculnSy 

 Fagara (2), Halorrliagis {3), Euphrasia, Coprosma (2), Wahle7tbergia (5), Robinso- 

 7iia (5), Syinpliyochacta and Rlutiiiodendroii, the three last p;enera endemic. Objec- 

 tions may be raised against including Carcx and Hup lira sia\ the section to which 

 Carcx bcrtcro)iia>ia was referred by Ki Ki:\i IIAI, is almost confined t(^ \ew Zealand 

 and barely represented in iXustralia, Tasmania and Norfolk Island, but one little 

 known Chilean species is included, and liuplirasia foriiiosissiuia is distantly related 

 to /:". pcrpusilla of South Chile. The species of W'alilodnrgia are puzzling, but 

 I have given my reasons for bringing them here as representing an African sector. 

 The most eloquent members are, perhaps, Sautalum, Ranunculus, ffa/orr/iagis and 

 Coprosma. 



This element is conspicuous also among the ferns: the extremely old Tliyr- 

 sopteris, Arthropteris, entirely unfamiliar with the neotropical flora, Dicksonia, 

 Blechnuni Schottii and Pier is bertcroana. 



I never looked in earnest for a direct road across the south Pacific from 

 Australasia to Juan Fernandez, a route which ought to have had South America 

 as its terminus. I preferred to think that the group in question reached the islands 

 over the Scotia bridge and South America where, however, it had become extinct. 

 To prove this we must turn to palaeontological evidence. The Eocene beds on 

 the mainland contain leaves of many different plants, and it is not impossible 

 that a revision of the material will contribute to a solution of the problem. In 

 the lists published by Berrv two items call for attention, CyatJieoidcs thyrsopt- 

 eroidcs in the Arauco flora, and Coprosma from Pichileufu, but the material is 

 sterile. It is true that, to judge from Berry's illustrations, Cyatheoides suggests 

 T/iyrsopteris, but the author later [28. 57) compared it with his Dicksonia patago- 

 uica, which was found with sori and undoubtedly belongs to the Cyatheaceae. 

 Thyrsopteris-like fossils have been reported from various places in the north 

 hemisphere. He described 2 species of Coprosma, based on leaf impressions 

 which, as far as I can see, tell us little about tlieir systematic position. To 

 C spatltulifolia he remarks: 



These tiny leaves have occasioned a good deal of trouble, as the South American 

 representatives of the genus are not similar to the fossil. . . . The Chilean species are 

 not closely similar. . . . 



and to C. inccrta, a most appropriate name: 



. . . they are so much like the endemic species of Coprosma of the Juan Fernandez 

 Islands and several forms from the Hawaiian Islands that I feel constrained so to 

 identify them, at least tentatively. . . . 



I cannot find that they agree better with Coprosma than with many other 

 genera. When Berrv gives the distribution of the genus as "from the Malayan 

 archipelago through the Pacific islands to Chile" he includes Juan P'ernandez under 

 Chile where, politically, the islands belong, for there are no species on the mainland. 



