1876.] Knowledge oftlie Fossil Flora in India. 317 



The first specimen was described by Ad. Brongniart,* from Aus- 

 tralia ; it was the Phyllotheca australis, Bgt. ; later, Mr. McCoy added the 

 Pliyllotli. ramosa and Ph. Hooker i,f which, however, seem not to be 

 different. Subsequently Sir Ch. Bunbury described the Pliyllotli. indica 

 from the Nagpur District, J and later still Mr. de Zigno§ described complete 

 specimens from Italian Oolite. 



No forms like these are known from true coal-measures anywhere. 



This genus has, therefore, its analogues as well in the upper Australian 

 coal-measures as in the Italian Oolite. 



The Australian Phyllotheca resembles the Italian forms most wonder- 

 fully 



From India the real Phyllotheca indica, Bunb., was formerly only 

 known from the Kamthi group || (Nagpiir district). 



But only lately I succeeded in discovering a specimen of Phyllo- 

 tJieca, Bgt., in the real sense in our Baniganj collection ; it is identical with 

 the Kamthi species, and is further evidence that both these groups belong 

 to the same horizon. 



Although our Phyllotheca at first sight seem very near some from 

 Australia, they are yet distinct from them in the mode of formation of the 

 leaf-spathe in the articula ; our specimens having generally much thinner, 

 and therefore more numerotis leaflets, which are not grown together into 

 so long a tube (spathe) as hi some of the Australian specimens, the leaflets 

 of which are generally broader : in which respect they agree more with 

 those from Italy : the spathe is also longer. 



INCEE.T2E SEDIS. 



Genus Vertebraria, Royle, 1839. 



PL XV, Fig. 3, and PI. XVI, Fig. 4. 



Amongst Mr. Wood- Mason's specimens is also numerously represented 



that form which is so common throughout the whole Danvuda Series, and 



which was first called by Boyle Vertebraria, but the true nature of which 



has not been satisfactorily made out to date. 



Dr. Boyle^f mentions this fossil only, without any description. He dis- 

 tinguished two species, which I do not consider to be different. The 

 one called Yertebr. indica is the more common type. 



* Prodrome 1828, pp. 175, 152. 



t A. and M. N. H. 1847, pp. 155-157. 



% Q. J. G-. Soc. XVII. p. 355, Pis. X. XI. 



§ Flor. form. Oolith. 1856 — 1868. (Only these fascicles are in my hands.) 



|| Most of the other specimens which are mentioned from elsewhere as Phyllotheca, 

 especially from the Raniganj field, and which represent mostly stalks and stems, belong-, 

 as I think, to the genus Scltizoneura, Schimp., as stem portions, the real FhyUothcca, Bgt.. 

 being rather rare. 



H Illustr. Bot. etc. Him. Mount. 1839, p. 29. PL II. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5, 



