130 MESOZOIC FLORAS OF UNITED STATES. 



Genus BRAGHYPHYLLUM Brougniart. 



Brachyphtllum MAMiLLARE Bi'ongniart. 



PL XXXV, Figs. 4-8. 



1828. Brachyphyllum ma7nillare Brongn.: Prodrome, pp. 109, 200." 



1829. Thuites expansus ? Sternb. Phillips: Geology of Yorksliire, pp. 153, 167, 190, 



pi. X, fig. 11.* 

 18.35. Thuites expansus Sternb. Lindley & Hutton: Foss. Fl. Gt. Brit., Vol. Ill, 

 p. 49, pi. clxvii. 



1836. Brachyphyllum mammillare Brongn. Lindley & Hutton: Op. cit.. Vol. Ill, 



p. 99, pi. clxxxviii. 



1837. Brachyphyllum mammillare Brongn. Lindley & Hutton: Op. cit.. Vol. Ill, 



p. 177, pi. ccxix. 

 1870. Brachyphyllum Phillipsii Scliimp. : Pal. Veg., Vol. II, p. 336.'' 



Several specimens of a plant that seems to be identical with 

 Brachyphyllum maniillare Brongn. were obtained in the Oregon Jurassic. 

 The plant is very rare and only small fragments of stems are usually 

 found. These are poorly preserved and the leaves are generally distorted 

 by pressure. 



The specimen given in PL XXXV, Fig. 4 is a part of a branch about 

 12 mm. wide and 6 cm. long that has the leaves of this character. A 

 small portion of it is shown enlarged in Fig. 5. Fig. 6 shows a small 

 fragment of a branch with crowded leaves. This is shown enlarged in 

 Fig. 7. Fig. 8 denotes a larger fragment that is of somewhat doubtful 

 character. It is 9 cm. long and 2 cm. wide. It is an imprint made by 

 a decorticated stem. It shows, irregularly placed and remote from 

 one another, a number of obscure rhombic scars, and occasionally one 

 that is elongate-elliptical, placed transverse to the axis of the stem. 

 They can be seen distinctly only with the help of a lens. These scars 



"Brongniart never described or figured this species, but it is on page 109 of the Prodrome that lie describes 

 the genus Brachyphyllum, and places in it only this one species. This has proved sufficient to enable others 

 to identify it, and is equivalent to a description of the species. Brongniart, however, prepared drawings of the 

 plant, which were afterwards completed and published by Saporta (Plantes Jurassiques, Vol. HI, p. 328, 

 pi. clxii [xxxiv], figs. 3-7).— L. F. W. 



b The true Thuites expansus of Sternberg (Flora der Vorwelt, Vol. I, fasc. 3, p. 39, Tentamen, p. XXXVIII, 

 pi. xxxviii, figs. 1, 2) from the Stonesfield slate does not seem to occur in the Yorkshire Oolite, but both Phillips 

 and Lindley and Hutton wrongly referred some of the Yorkshire forms to that species. — L. F. W. 



'■ Schimper considered the form figured by Lindley and Hutton in the Foss. Fl. Gt. Brit., Vol. HI, pi. ccxi.x 

 as a distinct species, and Saporta's fresh drawings of Brongniart's plant were regarded as establishing this fact. 

 He states that both the figures of Lindley and Hutton are of the same specimen, but Mr. Seward, who found the 

 specimen in the Manchester Museum, does not mention this, and the figures do not make it certain. Saporta 

 says that Schimper was in error, and Mr. Seward includes this form in Brongniart species. — L. F. W. 



