342 Systematic Paleontology 



? Podozamites minor Heer, 1882, Fl. Foss. Arct., Bd. vi, Abth. ii, p. 44, pL 



xvi, fig. 8. 

 Podozamites lanceolatus Velenovsky, 1885, Gymn. Bohm. Kreidef., p. 11, 



pi. ii, figs. 11-19, 24. 

 Podozamites lanceolatus Dawson, 1886, Trans. Roy. Soc, Can., vol. iii, sec. 



iv, p. 6, pi. i, fig. 3. 

 Podozamites distantinervis Font., 1890, Mon. U. S. Geol. Surv., vol. xv, 1889, 



p. 179 (pars). 

 Podozamites lanceolatus Lesq., 1892, Mon. U. S. Geol. Surv., vol. xvii, p. 28, 



pi. i, figs. 5, 6. 

 Podozamites angustifolius Newb., 1896, Mon. U. S. Geol. Surv., vol. xxvi, p. 



44, pi. xiii, fig. 2 (non figs. 1, 3, 4). 

 Podozamites angustifolius Hollick, 1904, Bull. N. Y. Bot. Garden, vol. iii, 



p. 410, pi. Ixxi, fig. 8. 

 Podozamites lanceolatus Penhallow, 1905, Summary Geol. Surv., Can., 1904, 



p. 9. 

 Podozamites lanceolatus Fontaine, 1906, in Ward, Mon. U. S. Geol. Surv., 



vol. xlviii, p. 110, pi. xxiv, figs. 17-20. 

 Podozamites pedicellatus Font., 1906, in Ward, Mon. U. S. Geol. Surv., vol. 



xlviii, p. 532, pi. cxiv, fig. 1 (non other references). 

 Podozamites distantinervis Font., 1906, in Ward, Mon. U. S. Geol. Surv., 



vol. xlviii, 1905, pp. 165, 281. 

 Zamia wasMngtoniana Fontaine, 1906, in Ward, Mon. U. S. Geol. Surv., vol. 



xlviii, 1905, p. 503 (pars), pi. cxi, fig. 2 (non. fig. 1). 

 Podozamites lanceolatus Knowlton, 1907, Smith. Misc. Coll., vol. iv, pt. i; 



p. 120, pi. xiv, fig. 4, 

 Podozamites lanceolatus Hollick, 1907, Mon. U. S. Geol. Surv., vol. 1, p. 35, 



pi. ii, fig. 1. 



Description. — " Pinnis distantibuS;, alternis oppositisve^ elongatis, hasi 

 sensim angustatis, inferioribus lanceolato-linearibus, superioribus elon- 

 gato-ellipticis ; nervis crebris." — Schimper, 1870. 



This is a species of great geological range, being recorded from the 

 Jurassic upward to the Upper Cretaceous. The geographical range is 

 equally great, embracing two continents, jSTorth America and Europe. 

 It is quite probable that the species is composite but no certain grounds 

 for segregation are apparent. 



While some students may doubt the wisdom of correlating both Lower 

 and Upper Cretaceous forms with a species which is essentially a Jurassic 

 type, specific differentiation founded merely upon stratigraphy has gone 

 astray so often that in cases like the present synthesis may well precede 



