138 AEAtrCAEITES. 



V. 3363. Figured by Carruthers, Geol. Mag. pi. ii. fig. 1, 1869. 

 This specimen is difficult to interpret ; it appears to consist of the- 

 impression of a stalk hearing rhomhoidal leaf- areas, which are- 

 not quite so distinctly marked as in Carruthers' figure. The stalk 

 expands into what is probahly the base of a large cone, but the 

 preservation is too imperfect to admit of a more detailed description. 

 There is no positive evidence that the cone of which a portion is 

 represented by the specimen bore scales identical with the detached 

 cone-scales referred by Carruthers to Araucarites Brodiei. 



Brodie Coll. 



Other specimens ;— V. 6593, V. 9707, 41,384, 41,404 (a large 

 slab with several cone-scales of Araucarites, also twigs and well- 

 preserved cones of Tkuites expansus ; Morris Coll.). 



Araucarites sphsericus (Carruthers). 



[Geol. Mag. vol. iv. p. 105, pi. vi. fig. 8, 1867.] 



1867. Cycadeostroiits sphcericus, Carruthers, Geol. Mag. vol. iv. p. 105. 



1872. Zamioslrobus sphmiicus, ScMmper, Trait, pal. veg. vol. ii. p. 202. 



1885. Z. sphcrriciis, Zigno, Flor. loss. Oolit. vol. ii. p. 151. 



1895. Gycadeostroius sphcericus, Woodward, Lower Ool. p. 402. 



The cone which Carruthers described as Cyeadeostrohus sphcericus 

 is in all probability another example of Araucarites, but without 

 seeing a specimen in section one cannot arrive at any definite 

 conclusion. 



Carruthers' type-specimen was found in the Oxford Clay, Wiltshire. 



Araucarites Bucklaudi (Lindley & Hutton). 



[Fobs. Flor. vol. ii. pi. cxxix. 1834.] 



1834. Strohilites Buchlandi, Lindley & Hutton, Foss. Flor. vol. ii. pi. cxxix- 



1850. S. microphylla, tTnger, Gen. spec. foss. plant, p. 301. 



1854. S. Bueklandi, Monis, Brit. Foss. p. 23. 



1896. Armicantes Bueklandi, Seward, Annals Bot. vol. x. p. 216. 



The specimens referred by Lindley & Hutton to Strobilites 

 Buchlandi are no doubt portions of an Araucarian cone ; the scales 

 are shown to be hollow, and agree closely with those of Araucarites 

 ooliticus (Carr.). The drawings published in the Fossil Flora were- 



