2 ARKIV FÖR BOTANIK. BAND 17. NIO 1. 



(1909 a, p. 22) substituted for Danaeopsis Hr. the generic 

 name Pseudodanaeopsis Fontaine (1883, p. 58). 



Fontaine had founded his genus Pseudodanaeopsis on 

 a species which he called Ps. reticulata. The genus differs, 

 according to him, from Danaeopsis Hr. through the more 

 frequent anastomosing of the secondary veins. While Da- 

 naeopsis is described as showing not rarely an anastomosis 

 of the lateral nerves, the species of Pseudodanaeopsis have 

 always the secondary nerves anastomosed, and this is clearly 

 no sporadic occurrence (Fontaine, 1. c). 



Krasser (1909 a, p. 23) states that the name Danaeopsis 

 Hr. cannot be regarded as valid because the name had been 

 used at an earher date by Presl (1845, p. 39) for a section of 

 the genus Danaea. He proposes to use Fontaine's name 

 Pseudodanaeopsis also for the species previously referred to 

 Danaeopsis, on the ground that the type species D. marantacea 

 may show at least marginal anastomoses and that the ana- 

 stomosing of the veins occurs in varying degree also in the 

 species of Fontaine's genus. 



Finally, Seward (1910, p. 407) includes Danaeopsis 

 marantacea (Presl) Heer in Marattiopsis Schimp., this name 

 being employed in a very wide sense — »interpreted as indic- 

 ating a family resemblance rather than special affinity to 

 the genus Marattia» (Seward 1. c, p. 408). 



Of the different generic names proposed for the species 

 in question Marattiopsis would seem to be better employed 

 in a narrow sense, and in that case the Danaeopsis-tj]pe of 

 Heer does not fall within its limits. In several Mesozoic 

 floras there occur forms with a very distinct Marattia-tj^e 

 of sorus and agreeing also in other respects so closely with 

 the recent genus that no difference can be traced, sufficient 

 to serve as a generic distinction. H ever a natural genus, 

 founded both on habit and on soral characters, can be distin- 

 guished in a fossil state, this is one. It may be questioned 

 whether these forms should not be referred unreservedly to the 

 recent genus Marattia. But if we object to referring a Mesozoic 

 plant to a recent genus, the best plan would seem to be to use 

 the name Marattiopsis for the forms which show the soral 

 characters of Marattia. It is true that Schimper did not 

 create the name Marattiopsis for these forms, which he referred 

 to Angiopteridium instead, but for a sterile Tertiary frond 



