INCEET^ SEDIS. 21 



alternating rows. There is certainly a marked resemblance 

 between some specimens of fertile branches in members of the 

 Lycopodium Phlegmaria group and the Wealden fragment ; but the 

 nature of the fossil renders it unwise to give expression to this 

 resemblance by adopting the name Lycopodites. 



The occurrence of this genus in Wealden rooks has previously 

 been hinted by Mantell ' ; he includes ? Lycopodites in a list of 

 fossil plants from Tilgate Forest. 



Nathorst* figures and describes a specimen as "undoubtedly 

 Lycopodiaceous," from a Japanese locality which has afforded a 

 flora with a distinct Wealden facies. In Saporta's recent list of 

 plants from the Wealden of Portugal ' there are included certain 

 species of Lycopodiaceous plants. 



At first sight the specimen suggests, as Mr. Rufford pointed out, 

 a moss-like plant. So far as I have been able to determine there 

 are no species of true mosses which show any close similarity in 

 habit to the fossil, but in the Hepaticce there are some forms in 

 which the resemblance is distinctly close, e.g. the genus Porella. 



A strong argument, however, against adopting such a generic 

 term as Jungermannites is the indication of a woody axis, to which 

 reference has already been made. 



PinaUy the possibility must be noted that the real affinities of 

 specimen B may eventually prove to be with the Coniferm. Cf. 

 PI. I. Pig. 8, with Heer's figures of Widdringtonites Reichii (Ett.) * 

 and Juniperus macilenta (Hr.),* both from the Cretaceous of 

 Greenland ; also Lesquereux's figure of Glyptostrolus gracillimus,^ 

 Lesqx., another Cretaceous conifer. 



' Trans. Geol. Soc. ser. ii. vol. iii. 1835, p. 213. 



2 Denkschr. k. ALWiss. math.-nat. CI. vol. Ivii. 1890, p. 50, pi. ii. fig. 3. 



= Compt. Eend. vol. oxiii. 1891, p. 249. 



* Fl. foas. Arct. vol. vii. 1883, pi. lil. fig. 5. 



5 Ibid. vol. vi. 1882, pi. xxxv. fig. 10. 



« Sep. U.S. Geol. Surv. vol. vi. 1874, pi. i. fig. 11. 



