JURASSIC FLORA OF DOUGLAS COUNTY, OREG. 113 



Genus CTENIS Lindley and Hutton. 



Ctenis sulcicaulis (Phillips) Ward n. comb/' 



PL XXV, Fig. 9; PL XXVI. 



1828. Zamia longifolia Brongn.: Prodrome, pp. 94, 199 (nomen). 



1829. Cycadites sulcicaulis PhilL: Geology of Yorkshire, pp. 148, 189, pi. vii, fig. 21. 

 1834. Ctenis falcata L. & H.: Foss. Fl. Gt. Brit., Vol. II, p. 63, pi. ciii. 



1841. Zarnites longifolius (Brongn.) Morr. : Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist., let Ser., 



VoL VII, p! 116. 

 1864. Pterophyllum falcatum (L. & H.) Sandberger [non Nath.]:* Verh. d. Natiirvv. 



Ver. in Karlsruhe, Heft I, p. 35 [6]. 



A number of specimens of this fine plant were obtained. Unfortu- 

 nately the stratum which contains most of them has no cleavage and 

 tends to break across the plane of the leaves. Hence the specimens 

 procured are smaller than the parts contained in the rock. The figures 

 given by Zigno'' of this plant very accurately represent it as found in 

 the Oregon strata. I do not find, however, on the axes, the regular 

 reticulation given in Zigno's Fig. la. The marking on the axes is an 

 irregular wrinkling or puckering of the epidermis, seen only when that 

 is present. The axes seem to be very robust, but the amount of vas- 

 cular tissue is not so great as might be supposed from its width. They 

 were apparently succulent, with a large proportion of cellular tissue. 

 The apparent width is increased also by the continuation, over the axis, 

 of the thick epidermis of the base of the leaflets. The leaves must 



« The name Ctenis falcata L. & H. certainly can not stand. Lindley and Hutton ihemselves state that it is 

 the Cycadites sulcicaulis of Phillips, of which that author gives a fair figure in his Geology of Yorkshire ( 1829) . 

 That Lindley and Hutton had better material and made a better figure is no reason for changing a name, 

 as this would permit anyone at any time to make a new name if better material were discovered. The name 

 Zamia longifolia of Brongniart, given by Mr. Seward (Jur. Fl. Yorksh. Coast, p. 235) may be ignored as a 

 nomen nudum, no description or figure of it having ever been published either under that name or under 

 the name Zarnites longifolius, first used by Morris in 1841, and later by Brongniart himself in his Tableau 

 (pp. 62, 106). The fact that Mr. Seward found in the Paris Museum a specimen labeled Zamia longifolia 

 belonging to this species is scarcely sufficient to justify giving this specific name to the plant. If it had been 

 the type, so designated by Brongniart in his Prodrome, or even on the label, it might have been accepted under 

 some codes, as, for example, that of the Ornithologists' Union, Canon XLIH, p. 53; but Mr. Seward does not 

 say that the label was in Brongniart's handwriting, and, moreover, the specimen was found at Cayton near 

 Scarborough, while Brongniart (Prodrome, p. 199) gives Whitby as the locality. All things considered, there- 

 fore, it does not seem possible to adopt Brongniart's name, and it must become a synonym. — L. F. W. 



''This combination is usually credited to Schimper (Pal. V6g., Vol. II, p. 137), who does not mention 

 Sandberger's paper. The Pterophyllum f falcatum Nath., Fl. v. Bj'uf, Hft. II, p. 71, pi. xiii, figs. 16, 17 

 (1879), whatever it may be, is a preoccupied name and must be changed. — L. F. W. 



cFlor. Foss. Form. Oolith., Vol. I, pp. 190-192, pi. xxiv, figs. 1-3. 



MON xLvin — 05 8 



