REPORT OF THE STATE PALEONTOLOGIST 1901 603 



vania explains the discrepancy as due to confusion on the 

 part of Goppert of Haliserites and Psilophyton at the begin- 

 ning, representatives of both genera being included by him 

 in the same species. Penhallow regards Haliserites as an 

 alga which he defines as characterized by "Fronds plane, mem- 

 branaceous, costate and dichotomous throughout; the more or 

 less linear ramuli with simple terminations; sporangia in groups 

 lateral to the midrib." As the true Haliserites dechen- 

 ianus he describes and figures 1 a fragment 2 from Factory- 

 ville Pa. having the fronds regularly dichotomous at an angle of 

 about 40°, the divisions linear, 3mm or more in width, equally 

 and strongly costate throughout, with regularly wavy or ruffled 

 margins. 



From the foregoing it appears that the lower Devonic Hali- 

 serites of Goppert can not be regarded as congeneric with 

 Sternberg's Cenomanian monotypic genus which is perhaps a 

 dicotyledon; and that great uncertainty exists among paleo- 

 botanists as to the nature and characters of Haliseri tes 

 dechenianus, it being regarded as a Psilophyton by 

 some and as a taeniate, membranaceous alga by others. It 

 is evident therefore that, whether Goppert's plant be one or 

 the other, the name Haliserites can not, without violation 

 of the common laws of nomenclature, be retained either for 

 Psilophyton or for a genus of Paleozoic thallophytes. 



For the flat, taeniate, costate, linear, regularly dichotomous, 

 membranaceous algoid plant conforming to the genus Halise- 

 rites as defined by Penhallow 3 I would propose the name 

 Taeniocrada. 4 The type species of the genus is Taeni- 

 ocrada lesquereuxi,a specimen of which (no. 25164 of 

 the Lacoe collection, United States national museum) was illus- 

 trated as Haliserites dechenianus in the 16th volume 



1 Loc. cit. pi. 10, fig. 6. 



2 25164 of the Lacoe collection, United States national museum ; from the 

 Catskill at Factoryville Pa. 



3 Loc. cit. p. 112. 



4 The clause relating to the fructification should be omitted from the 

 generic diagnosis, since the mode of reproduction of this and the allied 

 species has not been observed. 



