﻿Vol. 
  53'] 
  SIGILLA.RIA 
  AND 
  GLOSSOPTEKIS 
  IN 
  SOUTH 
  AFRICA. 
  325 
  

  

  figured 
  by 
  Feistmantel 
  as 
  Schizoneura 
  gondwanensis, 
  Feistm., 
  1 
  from 
  

   the 
  Lower 
  Grondwanas. 
  There 
  is, 
  however, 
  a 
  close 
  resemblance 
  

   between 
  the 
  African 
  stems 
  and 
  the 
  specimens 
  of 
  Phylloiheca 
  

   australis 
  figured 
  by 
  Feistmantel 
  2 
  from 
  the 
  Newcastle 
  Beds 
  of 
  New 
  

   South 
  Wales. 
  See 
  also 
  the 
  specimen 
  figured 
  by 
  Bunbury 
  as 
  

   Phyllotheca 
  indica, 
  Bunb., 
  3 
  from 
  Central 
  India, 
  Ph. 
  Hookeri, 
  M'Coy, 
  

   figured 
  by 
  M'Coy 
  4 
  from 
  New 
  South 
  Wales, 
  and 
  Phyllotheca 
  sp. 
  

   described 
  by 
  Schmalhausen 
  from 
  Russia. 
  5 
  

  

  In 
  the 
  absence 
  of 
  leaves 
  it 
  would 
  seem 
  impossible 
  to 
  define 
  the 
  

   distinctive 
  characters 
  for 
  Phyllotheca 
  and 
  Schizoneura. 
  The 
  

   comparison 
  of 
  several 
  leaf-bearing 
  stems 
  of 
  these 
  two 
  genera 
  leads 
  

   one 
  to 
  express 
  the 
  opinion 
  that 
  possibly 
  the 
  retention 
  of 
  both 
  

   generic 
  names 
  may 
  be 
  unnecessary. 
  Some 
  exceedingly 
  interesting 
  

   specimens 
  of 
  Phyllotheca 
  from 
  Heraclea, 
  6 
  which 
  I 
  have 
  recently 
  had 
  

   the 
  opportunity 
  of 
  examining 
  through 
  the 
  kindness 
  of 
  my 
  friend 
  

   M. 
  Zeiller, 
  appear 
  to 
  throw 
  some 
  further 
  light 
  on 
  the 
  affinity 
  of 
  

   this 
  genus 
  ; 
  but 
  this 
  question 
  will 
  be 
  dealt 
  with 
  by 
  M. 
  Zeiller 
  in 
  his 
  

   description 
  of 
  the 
  new 
  material. 
  

  

  Fossils 
  of 
  doubtful 
  Affinity. 
  

  

  PI. 
  XXII. 
  fig. 
  46. 
  This 
  long, 
  finely-ribbed 
  specimen 
  has 
  a 
  length 
  

   of 
  27 
  cm. 
  and 
  a 
  breadth 
  of 
  5-5 
  cm. 
  The 
  ribs, 
  separated 
  by 
  very 
  

   narrow 
  grooves, 
  have 
  a 
  breadth 
  of 
  about 
  1 
  to 
  1*8 
  mm., 
  and 
  there 
  

   occasionally 
  occurs 
  a 
  less 
  distinct 
  groove 
  traversing 
  the 
  middle 
  of 
  

   some 
  of 
  the 
  ridges. 
  Towards 
  the 
  narrower 
  end 
  the 
  ribs 
  are 
  slightly 
  

   narrower 
  and 
  the 
  stem 
  is 
  somewhat 
  curved, 
  in 
  a 
  manner 
  suggesting 
  

   an 
  approach 
  to 
  the 
  point 
  of 
  attachment. 
  There 
  is 
  no 
  absolutely 
  

   certain 
  indication 
  of 
  a 
  node 
  ; 
  the 
  irregular 
  transverse 
  lines 
  at 
  x 
  x 
  

   are 
  no 
  doubt 
  casts 
  of 
  accidental 
  cracks, 
  but 
  near 
  the 
  upper 
  and 
  

   broader 
  part 
  of 
  the 
  specimen 
  there 
  is 
  an 
  indistinct 
  transverse 
  line 
  

   which 
  may 
  be 
  the 
  impression 
  of 
  a 
  feebly-marked 
  node. 
  It 
  is 
  not 
  

   easy 
  to 
  decide 
  in 
  the 
  case 
  of 
  a 
  fossil 
  such 
  as 
  this 
  between 
  a 
  broad 
  

   parallel-veined 
  leaf 
  and 
  a 
  flattened 
  stem 
  with 
  long 
  internodes. 
  In 
  

   the 
  present 
  example 
  there 
  are 
  no 
  indications 
  of 
  forked 
  veins 
  or 
  of 
  

   lateral 
  anastomoses 
  between 
  the 
  veins. 
  There 
  is 
  a 
  close 
  resemblance 
  

   between 
  this 
  fossil 
  and 
  some 
  of 
  the 
  larger 
  Cordaites-le&yes 
  from 
  the 
  

   European 
  Coal 
  Measures. 
  The 
  still 
  larger 
  parallel-veined 
  leaves 
  

   described 
  by 
  MM. 
  Renault 
  & 
  Zeiller 
  as 
  Titanophyllum 
  might 
  well 
  

   be 
  mistaken 
  for 
  stems. 
  One 
  may 
  compare 
  their 
  figures 
  in 
  pi. 
  lxix. 
  

   of 
  the 
  ' 
  Commentry 
  Flora 
  ' 
  7 
  with 
  the 
  present 
  doubtful 
  fossil. 
  On 
  

   the 
  whole, 
  however, 
  I 
  am 
  disposed 
  to 
  refer 
  the 
  specimen 
  to 
  some 
  

  

  1 
  ' 
  Flora 
  of 
  the 
  Damuda 
  & 
  Panchet 
  Divisions,' 
  pi. 
  ix. 
  a. 
  fig. 
  7, 
  pi. 
  v. 
  a, 
  etc. 
  

  

  2 
  Mem. 
  Geol. 
  Surv. 
  N.S.W., 
  Palaeontology 
  No. 
  3 
  (1890), 
  pi. 
  xiv. 
  fig. 
  5. 
  

  

  3 
  Quart. 
  Journ. 
  Geol. 
  Soc. 
  vol. 
  xvii. 
  (1861) 
  pi. 
  xi. 
  fig. 
  1. 
  

  

  4 
  M'Coy, 
  Ann. 
  & 
  Mag. 
  Nat. 
  Hist. 
  ser. 
  1, 
  vol. 
  xx. 
  (1847) 
  pi. 
  xi. 
  fig. 
  7. 
  

  

  5 
  Schmalhausen, 
  Mem. 
  Acad. 
  Imp. 
  Sci. 
  St. 
  Pet. 
  ser. 
  7, 
  vol. 
  xxvii. 
  (1879) 
  pis. 
  i., 
  

   ix., 
  etc. 
  — 
  The 
  rocks 
  spoken 
  of 
  by 
  Schmalhausen 
  as 
  Jurassic 
  are 
  probably 
  

   Permian: 
  see 
  Zeiller, 
  Bull. 
  Soc. 
  geol. 
  France, 
  ser. 
  3, 
  vol. 
  xxiv. 
  (1896). 
  

  

  6 
  See 
  note 
  by 
  Zeiller 
  in 
  the 
  Compt. 
  Rend. 
  vol. 
  cxxii. 
  June 
  4th, 
  1895. 
  

  

  7 
  ' 
  Flor. 
  houill. 
  Commentry,' 
  Atlas 
  Soc. 
  Industr. 
  Miner. 
  1890, 
  pi. 
  lxix. 
  

  

  