88 



a true chloronym or not. For instance, Parryclla A. Gray 

 (1868), named for Dr. C. C. Parry, is not a chloronym of Parry a 

 R. Br. (1824), named for Capt. W. E. Parry; and Pringleophy- 

 hiin A. Gray (1885), named for Mr. C. G. Pringle, is not a chlo- 

 ronym of Pringlea Anders. (1845), named for Sir John Pringle. 

 As there is no law compelling an author who proposes a new 

 generic name to give the derivation of that name, it is often a 

 matter of mere guess-work whether two names which might be 

 of the same derivation are actually so. Perhaps Professor Greene 

 has some means of determining facts like these. 



pleistocp:ne plants from Virginia 



By Edward W. Berry 



The investigation of American Pleistocene floras stands in 

 striking contrast to the splendid results of European research, 

 due mainly to more intensive methods of collecting and study 

 there pursued. Aside from the work of Penhallow and a few 

 scattered papers by Lesquereux, Knowlton and others, practically 

 nothing has been done in this country. While leaf-impressions 

 may not be common in the Pleistocene clays, careful search of 

 swamp deposits by a sort of placer-mining process is almost sure 

 to yield an interesting collection of seeds many of which are 

 readily identifiable. 



The material upon which the following notes are based con- 

 sisted of a small quantity, perhaps a pound in all, of hard lignite 

 collected by Dr. B. L. Miller, of Bryn Mawr College, and depos- 

 ited in the collections of the Johns Hopkins University. It was 

 collected at Tappahannock on the Rappahannock River, Virginia, 

 and is from the Talbot formation, the latest Pleistocene formation 

 recognized. 



Fagus AMERICANA Sweet. 



Fagus femiginea Michx. Lesq. Am. Jour. Sci. 27: 363. 1859. 



Geol. Tenn. 427. //. K. f. 11. 1869. — Knowlton, Am. Geol. 



18 : 371. 1896. 



Nuts indistinguishable from those of the American beech are 

 occasionally present. They are somewhat distorted, although 



