Johnson — On Bothrodendron {Cyclostigma) kiltorJcense. 505 



Roehl (in 1869), and later as Lycopodites lycopodioides, Feistmantel. That 

 Solnis-Laubach did not at one time attach the importance to Bothrodendron 

 it deserves is evident from the following abstract from his pioneer work — 

 Introduction to Palaeophytology (12) (p. 293) : — 



" Other remains resembling Stigmaria from the Devonian formation 

 have been described under the names Cyclostigma, Bothrodendron, and 

 Arthrostigma, but they are only known in impressions, and are therefore of 

 small importance to the botanist . . . Heer, who had specimens from Bear 

 Island before him, declares that Haughton's figures are bad [Brongniart 

 called them beautiful], and figures a quincuncial position of the scars exactly 

 like that of Stigmarise ; and this is found in an Irish specimen which I saw 

 in the Museum at Breslau . . ." 



W. H. Baily had, in his reports (13) to the British Association (Norwich 

 Meeting, 1868 ; Exeter Meeting, 1869), called attention to the discovery at 

 Kiltorcan of forms which he identified with Sagenaria Vettheimiana as distinct 

 from Haughton's Cyclostigma. In 1873, in a paper entitled " Additional 

 Notes on the Fossil Flora of Ireland," he partly corrected (14) this wrong 

 identification, and stated that Schimper had in 1870-72 (15) named the 

 specimens he sent him from Kiltorcan Knorria Bailyana. Scliimper includes 

 under this name " ? Cyclostigma minufa, Haughton " (Nat. Hist. Review, 

 vol. vii, 1859, p. 209), and "Knorria Veltheimiana, Baily MS., and Mem. of 

 Geol. Survey, Ireland, 1864, p. 22." 



Baily, who was the Irish Geological Survey's Palseontologist for many 

 years, published the best connected account of his Kiltorcan Club-moss in the 

 Journal of the Royal Greological Society of Ireland (14) (vol. iii, new series ; 

 vol. xiii, 1870-73), in which, on plate vi, lie gives a series of figures indicative 

 of an attempt at restoration. Baily accepts Schimper's name of Knorria 

 Bailyana, and states his objections to the opinion of Carruthers that 

 Haughton's genus Cyclostigma' was founded (as Haughton himself, it is 

 cui'ious to learn, admitted to Carruthers) on insufficient evidence. 



Carruthers, who held the view that the Kiltorcan deposits were Devonian, 

 considered that the material did not show the three recorded genera Lepido- 

 dendron, Cyclostigma, and Knorria with four species, but one genus only and 

 one species — Lepidodendron Oriffithii of Brongniart, which was really of 

 the nature of a nomen mcdum. My own conclusions are in agreement with 

 Carruthers, viz. that there is only one genus with one species of Club-moss 

 represented, though it is not, as he thought, a Lepidodendron. 



' The name Cyclostigma had, as appears from the Index Eewensis, been already used several 

 times before Haughton's application of it : — in 1842 for one of the Aponaoese ; in 1853 for Croton, 

 and, as Potonie points out (in 1839), for a section of the genus Gentiana. 



