1915] HOLDEN—CUTICLES OF CONIFERS 223 
is parallel to the leaf margin. This distribution is quite unlike 
that of Taxitis zamioides (28), where there are two narrow rows of 
stomata, one each side of the midrib, and warrants at least a specific 
distinction. As to its affinities, it is impossible to go farther than 
to state that it is totally unlike Taxus or any other living member of 
the Taxineae. 
Podozamites lanceolatus 
The last specimen to be described was referred by FEISTMANTEL 
to Podozamites lanceolatus (11). Isolated leaves were found fairly . 
commonly in the Jabalpur group of South Rewah (Jurassic), but 
there were none attached to the rachis. Various specimens showing 
the characteristic shape are represented in figs. 2—5. pl. 1 (loc. cit.), 
and their resemblance to the type specimen of LINDLEY and Hutton 
is obvious. There is no difference between the epidermis of the 
upper and lower surfaces; these cells (fig. 10) are all straight- 
walled, more or less elongated over the veins, while the stomata are 
confined to the area between the veins, with their long axes parallel 
to the margin of the leaf. The structure of a single stoma is shown 
in fig. 7. There are usually 6 accessory cells, rarely 4 or 5. The 
character of the guard cells is unfortunately difficult to determine, 
but there seems to be a double rim of cuticle around the opening. 
This appearance is constant in the best preserved specimens, but 
its interpretation is doubtful. Probably there was at least one 
row of cells intercalated between the accessory cells and the guard 
cells, and the rims referred to may represent cuticular projections 
on these intercalary cells, such as are characteristic of certain 
living conifers and cycads. The lignified lamellae of the guard 
cells have invariably disappeared. 
The resemblance of the cuticle of this Indian specimen to that 
of Zamites distans Prestl., as described by SCHENK (21), is very close; 
both have straight-walled epidermal cells with stomata between the 
veins. In the latter, however, there are no stomata on the upper 
surface. The difference between Podozamites and Zamites is 
rather obscure, BRONGNIART including the former as a subsection 
of the latter. The cuticles, however, show them to be entirely 
distinct, for Zamites (29) has all the bennettitalean characters, 
sinuous-walled cells and long axis of stomata at right angles to 
