292 OLDER MESOZOIC FLORAS OF UNITED STATES. 
ical form of this plant that is so common in the Older Mesozoic of Vir- 
ginia. None of them, however, are as large specimens as some obtained 
from the Virginia beds. The number of specimens in the collection 
is proportionally large, and this fact seems to indicate that in the strata 
of North Carolina, as in those of Virginia, the fossil is a common one. 
Fig. 6 of Pl. XX XIX gives a portion of the midrib and parts of 
several leaflets taken from a specimen 9 cm. long, with numerous 
leaflets on each side of the midrib. 
Emmons gives, in American Geology, Pt. VI, p. 121, pl. iv, fig. 11, a 
description of a form that he calls Dionztes linearis. The original of 
this was found in his collection. The specimen shows leaflets slightly 
wider than those drawn by Emmons. He represents the bases of some 
of the leaflets as inserted on the upper face of the midrib. This appear- 
ance is caused by distortion due to pressure. The bases have slipped 
over slightly, owing to the creeping of the shale. The plant is, no 
doubt, a form of Ctenophyllum Braunianum var. « that is somewhat 
narrower in its leaflets than the average. Perhaps this narrowing is 
also due to pressure. The type specimen of Pterophyllum decussatum 
was also seen. 
Emmons’s fig. 1 on pl. iii gives an exact representation of this fossil. 
It is clearly Ctenophyllum Braunianum var. a. The specimen belongs 
to a lower portion of the leaf, but the leaflets probably did not origi- 
nally stand so exactly at right angles with the midrib. They proba- 
bly were brought into this position by pressure. The shale on which 
these fossils are preserved seems sometimes to have crept, under the 
action of pressure, producing more or less displacement of the parts 
of the fossils. ; 
Emmons gives, on p. 120 of his work, a description of a form which 
he calls Pterozamites spatulatus, representing it by fig. 88. The origi- 
nal of this was found in his collection, and it is given in Fig. 7 of this 
paper. Emmons’s figure is erroneous and would completely mislead 
one. He represents all the leaflets on the right side of the midrib as 
showing their original terminations. None of them do this, and they 
were originally longer than the parts they now show. The narrowing 
of the leaflets toward their bases, as represented by Emmons, is much 
more decided than that shown in the specimen. What is present 
appears to be due mainly to pressure, which has in the basal parts 
pushed the margins down in the shale to a slight extent. The basal 
portions are not so far apart as Emmons represents them to be. The 
specimen now in question is the only one seen that has any tendency 
to a spatulate shape. There can hardly be a doubt that this is a dis- 
torted specimen of Ctenophyllum Braunianum var. a, 
' 
