398 Systematic Paleontology 



The second, Araucaria oMusifolia^ was based on a tiny specimen of 

 undeterminable affinities from the Patuxent formation at Trents Eeach, 

 Va. The third, Araucaria zamioidesf was based on similar scant and 

 indefinite material from the Patuxent formation at Potomac Eun, Va., 

 which its author states may represent a small species of Zamia-like 

 cycad. While there are no reasons for a denial of the presence of 

 Araucaria foliage in the Potomac flora (in fact there are strong reasons 

 for predicting its presence), the foregoing species do not afford reliable 

 data on this point. 



Many remains of cones and cone-scales have been described from 

 various Mesozoic horizons as species of Araucaria or Araucarites, but 

 it seems scarely worth while to enumerate them in the present connection 

 since none resemble the present species at all closely. 



Aeaucaeites aquiensis Fontaine ^ 



Araucarites aquiensis Fontaine, 1890, Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. xv, 



1889, p. 264, pi. cxxxiii, figs. 8-12. 

 Araucarites aquiensis Fontaine, 1906, in Ward, Mon. U. S. Geol. Surv., vol. 



xlviii, 1905, pp. 489, 514, 528. 



Description. — " Scales of the cones varying considerably in size and 

 shape, attaining the maximum dimensions in length of 5 cm. and in 

 width across the top of 3 cm. with the minimum of 3.5 cm. by 1.5 cm.; 

 scales probably closely appressed and imbricated, wedge-shaped, and 

 narrowed at base into a sort of foot-stalk, thickened at the summit, 

 and rounded on the upper margin, with a depressed transverse furrow, 

 very deciduous, and always found scattered singly and sparingly in the 

 clay."— Fontaine, 1890. 



These scales were described originally from the Brooke area where 

 they are not uncommon. The writer has collected similar scales at a 

 number of localities within the Patapsco terrane but can add little to the 

 foregoing description. No positive evidence of a single seed is observable 

 on any of the specimens either old or new, although their form is sug- 

 gestive of such a habit. They were compared by their describer with 



^ Ibid., pi. Ixxxv, fig. 13. 

 -Ibid., p. 250, pi. cxxi, fig. 1. 



