ZAMITES. Ill 



1880. Tuccites, sp., Nathorst, Ofvers. k. Vet.-Akad. Forh. 1880, p. 79. 



1884. Tuccitet, ap., Richards, Synopsis, p. 8. 

 Fodozamites Icmceolatus, var. geminus, op. eit. p. 3. 



1885. ? Krannera miraUlis, VelenoTsky, Gymnosp. Bohm. Kreid. pis. i.-iii. 

 1894. Tmcites megaphylla, Woodward, Lower Ool. p. 598. 



The type -specimens of Phillips' Palceo%amia megaphylla and 

 P. longifolia are in the Oxford Museum ; the former is redrawn 

 in PL XII. Fig. 4, and the latter in Text-fig. 11. 



Frond pinnate; pinnae, attached to the raohis at a wide angle, 

 reaching a length of more than 30 cm. and a breadth of over 3 cm., 

 linear in form, attached by a slightly contracted concave basal 

 surface, which is somewhat thickened ; the lamina tapers gradually 

 to an elongated acuminate apex, frequently falcate near the tip, 

 one margin being practically straight, while the other is curved 

 (PI. XII. Pigs. 4-5). Veins numerous and parallel, converging 

 slightly towards the base and apex of the pinna. 



The material on which this diagnosis is based consists almost 

 entirely of detached pinnse, and it is impossible therefore to give 

 a complete account of the form of the frond. The specimen figured 

 by Phillips as Palceozamia longifolia represents a portion of a pinnate 

 frond; it is more accurately reproduced in Text-fig. 11. It is 

 impossible to speak with certainty as to the connection between 

 this pinnate fragment and the detached leaflets of the type named 

 by Phillips Paltsosamia megaphylla (PI. XII. Fig. 4). The former 

 specimen bears a close resemblance to some species of Podozamites, 

 e.g. P. lanceolatus, but the examination of a considerable number 

 of detached pinnse, varying in size from 3'5 to over 30 cm. 

 in length, leads me to regard Palceozamia megaphylla and 

 P. longifolia as specifically identical. The great length of the 

 pinnae, like that of which a portion is shown in Fig. 5, and their 

 shape can be matched almost perfectly with pinnse of recent 

 Cycadean fronds, e.g. Cerato%amia mexicana. On the whole I incline 

 to the opinion that the numerous Monocotyledon-like leaves from 

 Stonesfield are the pinnse of a Cycadean frond. In certain recent 

 Cycads, e g. species of Uncephalartos, the pinnse may be readily 

 detached from the rachis by a well-defined separation-surface, and 

 the narrow oval scars left on the axis of the frond are such as 

 might be formed by the bases of pinnse like that represented in 

 Fig. 4, PI. XII. 



