312, MESOZOIC FLORAS OF UNITED STATES. 



Nageiopsis montanensis Fontaine n. sp. 

 PI. LXXIII, Fig. 10. 



A single imprint of a nearly entire leaf with the reverse was found 

 in the Geyser l^eds that seems to be a new Nageiopsis. It is 2 cm. long 

 and 8 mm. wide in its widest portion. Its shape is elliptical with an 

 olDtuse tip, and it narrows at the base to a pedicel. The nerves at the 

 base of the leaf are sometimes once forked and sometimes single. They 

 go nearly parallel to the tip of the leaf, where they are more crowded, 

 but do not converge as in Podozamites. There is not enough material 

 to determine certainly whether or not this is a new species of Nageiopsis, 

 but I provisionally so regard it. It is like some of the leaves of N. 

 zamioides Font., of the Potomac of Virginia, but is more obtuse and 

 narrows to the base more gradually and more decidedly than the leaves 

 of that plant. 



Family PINACE.E. 



Genus LARICOPSIS Fontaine. 



Laricopsis longifolia latifolia Fontaine n. var. 



PI. LXXIII, Figs. 11-14. 



1898. Laricopsis longifolia Font.? in Weed & Pirsson: Eighteenth Ann. Kept. U. S. 

 Gedl. Surv., 1896-97. Pt. Ill, p. 482. (Pi. LXXIII, Fig. 14.) 



A large number of imprints of a conifer with narrow thread-like 

 leaves occur in the Geyser specimens collected by Professor Ward and 

 several in those obtained by Mr. Weed from the Grafton locality. They 

 have the character of Laricopsis longifolia Font., a plant characteristic 

 of the Lower Potomac of Virginia. The leaves, however, have on an 

 average a greater width, being I mm. in width, while in the Virginia 

 fossil they average only half as much. This greater width may, however, 

 be clue to the better preservation of the Montana specimens. The shale 

 which carries these Montana imprints is verj^ fine grained and shows 

 the entire original width of the leaflets. The Virginia rock material 

 is coarser, and the leaves whose imprints are shown on it appear to 

 have suffered somewhat from maceration, which may have dimin- 

 ished their apparent width. But notwithstanding the shaipness of 

 outline shown in the Montana specimens, the nerves are very obscure 

 and not more distinctly shown than in the Virginia forms. There 

 appears to be one in each leaf. The leaves are attached singly or in 



