Maryland Geological Survey 385 



This species is quite distinct from its congeners and the great develop- 

 ment of its evergreen foliage must have rendered it a most striking 

 object in life. 



Included under this species are the few and rather poor remains 

 upon which Fontaine founded Nageiopsis crassicaulis. All but one of 

 the specimens which that author so names are fragments of detached 

 leaflets, somewhat shorter and broader than the typical leaves of 

 Nageiopsis longifolia, but absolutely uncharacteristic and incapable of 

 identification. The specimen with leaves attached is obviously a poorly 

 preserved fragment of a twig of Nageiopsis longifolia. 



This species occurs abundantly in characteristic and fine specimens 

 at Fredericksburg. It has also been recorded from a large number of 

 localities in Virginia and Maryland mostly as detached specimens gener- 

 ally with the base and apex missing so that the record of its range is 

 somewhat unreliable, nor can it be otherwise from the nature of the 

 material. 



Professor Fontaine has recorded this species from Cape Lisburne, 

 Alaska; from several Californian localities referred to the Upper, or 

 Lower Cretaceous portion of the Shasta Group; from the Kootanie for- 

 mation at Geyser, Montana; and from the Lakota formation in the 

 western Black Hills at Barrett, Wyoming. Eeferring to these very 

 briefly, it may be said that the Alaska locality is much older than any 

 of the others and the fossils referred to this species, previously identified 

 by Lesquereux as Irites alasJcana Lesq., and Baiera pahnata Heer, are 

 entirely uncharacteristic and in the writer's judgment are in no wise 

 related to Nageiopsis. The Shasta records are based entirely on small 

 fragments which show only the middle portion of leaves and often lack 

 the venation. The following quotation from Fontaine's report (1906, 

 p. 259) sufficiently indicates their reliability: "The presence of N. 

 longifolia in the flora of the Shasta formation cannot be positively 

 determined from the specimens found." 



The Kootanie record is likewise extremely doubtful and is based on 

 five or six fragments from Geyser which are unattached and show 

 neither bases nor tips. The specimens reported from the Lakota forma- 



