warpD.] TRIASSIC FLORA OF YORK COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA. 253 
Sequoia Reichenbachi longifolia of the Potomac formation, while the 
other he identified with Leptostrobus foliosus, also of the Potomac. 
Professor Fontaine finds them the same, and refers this form to the 
Schizolepis Braunit of Schenk. Schenk worked over all of Braun’s 
material, from the Rhetic of Veitlahm, near Culmbach, in the vicinity 
of Baireuth, in Bavaria, and found that he had given several names to 
this form. As itisa Schizolepis, Braun’s name, S. léaso-hkeuperina must 
be retained, and can not be changed to S. Brauniz, as Schenk proposed 
to do. 
The following is Professor Fontaine’s comment on this plant: 
This is what appears to be a specimen of Schizolepis Braunii, differing from the type 
only in the somewhat narrower leaves. This is given in Pl. XX XIII, Fig. 3. Fig. 5 
of this same plate gives a plant which Mr. Wanner calls Leptostrobus foliosus. It isthe 
same Schizolepis. This latter specimen is a fragment of a large twig, with several 
ultimate branches carrying leaves. 
Mr. Wanner’s notes follow. Relative to the first of these specimens 
he says: 
Two specimens were found, only the better of which, Fig. 3, Pl. XX XIII, is illus- 
trated. They probably belong to anew species. The author is unable to locate the 
specimen, and names it as he does simply because the leaves in width and falcate 
arrangement, particularly in the specimen not drawn, suggest Sequoia Reichenbacht 
longifolia Font. Fig 4 shows a leaf magnified two diameters. 
On the other specimen he remarks: 
In the only specimen collected, Fig. 5, Pl. XX XIII, the parallel nerves are faintly 
visible in several leaves, but the number is not definitely revealed. Three nerves 
are. recognized beyond question, but doubt exists as to whether or not there is another. 
As yet no entire leaf has been found. Closely crowded pit marks on the macerated 
stems indicate a dense foliage, without betraying the order in which the leaves were 
attached. 
Locality._N. C. R. R. cut, south of York Haven. 
Genus ARAUCARITES Presl. 
ARAUCARITES ! PENNSYLVANICUS Fontaine n. sp. 
Pl. XXXIV, Figs. 1, 2. 
Mr. Wanner made scarcely any attempt to identify this specimen, 
and contents himself with saying: 
The author is unable to locate Fig. 1, Pl. XXXIV. The venation is shown in Fig. 
2. Anotlier specimen, not drawn, has leaves of about the same length, but of greater 
width. In it the nerves still more plainly converge at the tip. 
Professor Fontaine is in doubt with regard to the generic affinities, 
and describes it as a new species, probably of Araucarites. He says: 
The specimen figured by Mr. Wanner is a portion of a twig with a number of small 
leaves. These in size resemble somewhat Saporta’s Araucaria microphylla. On the 
label accompanying this plant Mr. Wanner has given the name Nageiopsis heterophylla ? 
