27,6 STUDIES IN FOSSIL BOTANY 



left by the deciduous cones after their fall. It would 

 follow that the fructification must have been borne on 

 the large stems (for it is on such that the scars occur), 

 and not on small terminal branches. This conclusion 

 is quite in agreement with the unbranched or little- 

 branched character of the Sigillarian stems. The 

 occurrence of Ulodendroid scars on stems referred to 

 Clathrarian Sigillariae {e.g. S. discophord) may be 

 mentioned here, though their relation to the cones 

 is open to doubt (see p. 167). 



The controversy as to the systematic position of 

 Sigillaria has gradually died out since the discovery 

 of the manifestly Cryptogamic fructifications of the 

 genus. The view, long maintained by Brongniart and 

 his school, that Sigillaria, or at least the smooth- 

 barked species, belonged to the Gymnosperms, no 

 longeV has any basis. The recent discovery of the 

 seed-like fructifications of certain Palaeozoic Lycopods 

 might at one time have been used in support of this 

 position, but there is at present no evidence that' any 

 of the Sigillariae possessed organs of this kind. 



We may take it as now definitely established that 

 Sigillaria was a genus of highly developed Lyco- 

 podiaceous Cryptogams, having the closest affinities 

 with Lepidodendron. The difficulty, in fact, is rather 

 to find constant distinctions between the two genera, 

 than to prove their relationship. 1 



It is not probable that Sigillaria had even a 

 remote affinity with the Cycads, the family with which 

 Brongniart and his followers endeavoured to connect it. 



1 The family Lepidodendreae is thus most naturally regarded as including 

 the genus Sigillaria. 



