TEMPSKTA. 153 



matous tissue, and the larger bundles as strongly bent in a horse- 

 slioe pattern ; and he comes to the conclusion that the affinities 

 of the plant are probably with the Maraltiaoeee. On what grounds 

 this comparison is made is not very clear. The diarc nature of 

 the root vascular bundles is opposed to any Marattiaceous affinity.' 

 A large transverse section is figured in pi. xliii. of Schenk's Mono- 

 graph; the structure is far from perfect, but it suffices to give 

 conflrmation to the statement that the specimen is identical with 

 those from the Wealden rocks of England. The general absence 

 of the vascular bundles in the circular root sections and the 

 appearance of all such tissues as are preserved, exactly correspond 

 to what is usually found in our common English examples. 



Carruthers'' refers to the absence of all traces of foliage in 

 Tempskya Schimperi, and expresses the opinion that the species 

 may probably be considered as a portion of some arborescent fern. 

 Another species of this genus, T. cretao m, has been described by 

 Hosius and von Marck from the Lower Senonian of Haltern,' and 

 is compared by them to T. Schimperi. In 1872 Feistmantel* drew 

 attention to the doubtful value of Tempskya as a distinct genus, 

 and pointed to the probability of such forms being found to be 

 simply examples of Protopteris Sternlergii, Cord., in a particular 

 state of preservation. He suggests that possibly T. pulohra, Cord., 

 T. macrocaulis, Cord., T. mierorhi%a, Cord., are merely so many 

 states of fossilization of Protopteris Sternlergii, and identical with 

 Palniacites various, Cord., described by Corda in Reuss' " Versteine- 

 rungen der bohmischen Kreideformation" ;* the. latter he regards as 

 a mass of silicified air-roots of Protopteris Sternlergii.^ Feistmantel 

 makes the important announcement that in some of the Tempskyas 

 which he examined it was possible to detach the outer portions of 

 the specimen from an internal nucleus exhibiting the characteristic 

 markings of P. Sternlergii. 



Velenovsky' has supplemented Feistmantel' s remarks with regard 

 to this problematical fossil by his descriptions of specimens from 



' De Bary, Comp. Anat. p. 364. 



^ Dixon, Geol. Sussex, p. 282. 



' Palaeontographica, vol. xxvi. p. 192, pi. xxxix. figs. 161-163. 



* Abh. k. bohm. Ges. "Wias. ti. Folg. vol. v. 1872, p. 22. 



* p. 87, pi. xlvii. fig. 7. 



' Corda's figures in Eeuss' ■work have a distinct resemblance to Palm structures. 

 ' Abh. k. bohm. Ges. Wiss. vii. Folg. vol. ii. 1888, p. 23. 



