Maryland Geological Survey 469 



It is exceedingly satisfactory to be able to establish upon a somewhat 

 firmer basis Professor Fontaine's choice of the term Sapindopsis for 

 these Potomac plants. They are so abundant in their occurrence, so 

 striking in appearance, their strict habit and glossy texture giving them 

 every appearance of some fern-like plant as for example the common 

 Acrostichum aureuin of the tropics, that their original describer deserves 

 great credit for having correctly determined their modern affinities. 



Sapindopsis variabilis Fontaine 

 Plates LXXXIII, LXXXIV, LXXXV 



Sapindopsis variabilis Fontaine, 1890, Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. xv, 



1889, p. 298, pi. cli, fig. 1; pi. clii, figs. 1, 4; pi. cliii, fig. 3; pi. cliv, 



figs. 2-4; pi. civ, figs. 2-5. 

 Sapindopsis parvifolia Fontaine, 1890, Mon. U. S. Geol. Surv., vol. xv, 1889, 



p. 300, pi. cliv, fig. 6. 

 Sapindopsis variabilis Fontaine, 1899, in Ward, 19tli Ann. Rept. U. S. Geol. 



Survey, pt. ii, p. 690, pi. clxix, fig. 9. 

 Sapindopsis variabilis Fontaine, 1906, in Ward, Mon. U. S. Greol. Survey., 



vol. xlviii, 1905, pp. 481, 482, 489, 532, pi. cxiv, fig. 2. 

 Eucalyptus rosieriana Ward, 1906, in Fontajne, Mon. U. S. Geo] Surv., 



vol. xlviii, 1905, p. 530, pi. cxiii, figs. 9, 10. 

 Ficus myricoides Ward, 1906, in Fontaine, Mon. U. S. G€ol. Surv., vol. 



xlviii, 1905, p. 531, pi. cxii, fig. 12 (non Hollick, 1896). 

 Rogersia angustifolia Fontaine, 1906, in Ward, Mon. U. S. Geol. Surv., vol. 



xlviii, 1905, pp. 491, 510 (non p. 521). 

 Sapindopsis variabilis Berry, 1910, Proc. U. S. Natl. Mus., vol. xxxviii, p. 



641. 



Description. — Leaves odd pinnate, sometimes abruptly pinnate, with 

 three pairs of lateral leaflets, which may be opposite although usually 

 there is a tendency toward a subopposite arrangement, markedly so in 

 several specimens. Leaflets normally lanceolate, individuals of the same 

 leaf about of a size, usually markedly decurrent, but variable in this 

 respect. The proximal leaflets are always less decurrent than the pair 

 next above and in some cases even have short petioles. The upper 

 leaflets are remarkably variable, sometimes with an abnormal decurrent 

 wing which joins the inner lamina of the next lower pair of leaflets, at 

 other times the rachis entirely lacks a wing. The leaf may be ter- 



