Maryland Geological Svkvky 261 



Carpolithus provincialis Saporta ' 



Filicites lacerus Saporta 



Filicites vedensls Saporta 



Flabellaria longirachis Unger 



Frenelopsis hohcneggeri Schenk 



Nelumbium provinciate Saporta 



Osmunda gerini Saporta 



Phyllites obscurus Saporta 



Phyllitcs tenuis Saporta 



Pinus oxyptera Saporta 



Pistia mazeli Saporta and Marion 2 



Hhizocaulon macropJiyllitm Saporta 



Rhizocaulon subtilinervium Saporta 



Sequoia reichenbachi (Geinitz) Heer (Geinitzia cretacea 



Endlicher) 

 Typhacites lavis Saporta 

 Typhacites rugosa Saporta 



PORTUGAL 



The writer has already commented' on the paleobotanieal importance 

 of the Mesozoic section in Portugal. Saporta's great work, 4 the Last 

 important contribution from his pen, fully treated of the late Jurassic 

 and the various Lower Cretaceous floras. The considerable flora from 

 Nazareth described in that volume (pp. 198-219) and referred to the 

 upper Albian (Vraconnian) has since been shown to be of Cenomanian 

 age. Large collections from later Cretaceous horizons in Saporta's pos- 

 session at the time of his death have never been described except in the 

 short paper hy De Lima 5 published in 1900. From this work it appears 

 that there is a considerable flora from various horizons in the Upper 

 Cretaceous, namely, the flora recorded from Bussaco, which Choffat has 

 shown to be Turonian, and the plants collected at Casal dos Bernardos, 

 Vizo, Bizarros, Mira, and S. Pedro de Mnrcella, which are of Senonian age 

 (probably Emscherian). 



1 Not related to Nipadites in the judgment of the writer. 



2 Saporta and Marion. L'Evolution du Regne Vegetal. Les Phanerogames, 

 tome ii, 1885, p. 37. 



3 Berry, E. W., Md. Geol. Survey, Low. Cretaceous, 1911, p. 103. 



4 Saporta, G. de, Fl. Foss. Portugal. Trav. Geol. Port., Lisbon, 1894. 



5 De Lima, W., Noticia sobre algum vegetaes fosseis da flora senomiana 

 (sensulato) do solo Portuguez communicacoes de Direccao dos servicos geolo- 

 gicos de Portugal, tome iv, 1900, pp. 1-12. 



