54 MESOZOIC FLORAS OF UNITED STATES. 



Leckenby has descril^ed from the Scarborough OoUtes, as Fucoides 

 eredus," a singular plant that resembles one found in a single specimen 

 at locality No. 18. Owing to the small amount of material, this can not 

 be certainly identified with Leckenby's fossil. Seward has given Leck- 

 enby 's plant the name Marchantites eredus.'' The Oregon fossil shows 

 only the imprint, no plant matter being preserved. It is composed of a 

 rather flexuous stem, apparently once cylindrical in form, that sends off 

 obliquely and sparingly short stout branches that have obtuse ends. The 

 branches maintain their width to their ends and are nearly as strong as 

 the axis from which they are sent off. In the main stem, if it can be 

 called such, and in each branch, there is a single flexuous nerve quite dis- 

 tinctly shown. On the stem and branches there is a vague reticulation 

 on each side of the midnerve, which appears to be caused by depressed 

 areas. In the center of the depressed areas there is apparently a small 

 prominence, possibly due to a sorus. Leckenby describes his plant as 

 having a midnerve in each branch, on each side of which there is a fructi- 

 fication composed of one or more rows of ovate vesicles immersed in the 

 frond. The mode of branching of the Oregon fossil differs from that of 

 Leckenby in being not so palmate. It is similar to that of Brachyphyllum 

 ;and the plant may be really a twig of that conifer. 



JPhyKim I^TERIDOPHYT^ (Ferns and Fern 



Allies)/ 



Order FILICALES. 



Ferns. — Fems are not rare at some of the localities and the}^ show 

 a decided difference in distribution, for in some places they are almost 

 entirely wanting, being most deficient where the cycad remains are most 



F. eredus, the combination should have, by the mles of nomenclature, the earlier specific name. In his dis- 

 cussion, however, on the next page, after examining both the types, he says that "the specimen to which 

 Lindley and Button applied the latter name was much more imperfect than Leckenby's type, and it is not 

 certain, though highh' probable, that the two are specifically identical." 



I have not thought best, therefore, to change the combination, but the onl}- logical way to escape from 

 the difficulty is to omit the doubtful name entirely from the synonymy, which I have done. — L. F. W. 



"On the sandstones and shales of the Oolites of Scarborough, etc., by John Leckenby: Quart. Journ. 

 Geol. Soc. London, Vol. XX, 1864, p. 31, pi. xi, figs. 3a, 3b. 



b In his Yorkshire Flora, 1900, he redescribes the species on p. 49 and reproduces on p. 50, fig. 2, the figure 

 cited from his Fossil Plants in the above synonymy; which is from Bean's type specimen in the Woodwardian 

 Museum represented by Leckenby in his fig. 3a. He finds, however, in the British Museum of Natural His- 

 tory at South Kensington another specimen (No. V. 3652) which he figures on pi. xix, fig. 2, of his Yorkshire 

 Flora (see p. 51).— L. F. W. 



''See footnote to Bryophyta, p. 53. 



