SOME FERNS FROM THE CARBONIFEROUS FORMATION". 139 



In regard to C. Haueri, Stur,* the type has apparently been so imperfectly 

 preserved that little of its structure can be discerned — the specimen is repre- 

 sented by little more than a mere carbonaceous stain on the matrix. It, 

 however, shows the peculiar character of the sporangia (?) (segments of the 

 indusium according to Dr Stub) being united in pairs by their basal por- 

 tions, but whether the thong-like bodies are segments of a split indusium or 

 sporangia cannot be satisfactorily settled from an examination of his figure. 

 The union of the thong-like bodies in pairs is taken as an objection by Dr 

 Stur to the sporangial explanation of these fruits, but as the union of 

 sporangia is of frequent occurrence in the Marattiacew, their apparent 

 partial union in C. Haueri does not militate against the view that in 

 Calymmatotheca we are dealing with marattiaceous sporangia arranged in 

 groups. 



As to the affinities of these ferns, I have nothing to add to that mentioned 

 in my former paper in the Quart. Jour. Geo!, Soc, where I said, " Calymmato- 

 theca as here restricted (and as restricted in the present communication) is 

 probably related to the Marattiacece, whereas Zeilleria appears to have 

 affinities with the Hymenophyllaceee."^ This is very different to that which Dr 

 Stur gives as my views on the affinity of Calymmatotheca, where he states, 

 " Dass Calymmotheca eine Hymenophyllacee, wie der ungenannte Autor meint, 

 nicht sein konne, geht klar aus dem Fehlen des verlangerten oder fadenformigen 

 Receptaculums am Grunde der Kapsel hervor."| 



It was only the members of the genus Zeilleria that I thought might have 

 hymenophyllaceous affinities, but as none of the specimens of this genus, which 

 have come under my notice, have afforded any glimpse of the arrangement of 

 the spores within the indusium (whether they were attached to a column or not), 

 we can only throw out a suggestion as to the affinities of Zeilleria, a suggestion 

 which must be corroborated or refuted as subsequent investigations decide. 

 Calymmatotheca, however, as I have proposed to restrict it, possesses appa- 

 rently an undoubted marattiaceous form of fruit. 



The specimens to which reference was made when first treating of Dr Stur's 

 genus Calymmatotheca were those on which the genus Zeilleria, were founded,§ 

 hence Dr Stur is mistaken in assuming that my views were established on a 

 Hawlea. 



A further distinction that was pointed out between Calymmatotheca and 

 Zeilleria is found in the fruiting portions of the fronds of Calymmatotheca being 

 reduced to masses of fruit, unassociatecl with any ordinary foliage pinnules, 

 whereas in Zeilleria the fruiting portion of the frond varies little from the 

 ordinary barren condition, the fertile being mixed with the ordinary barren 



* Culm-Flora, Heft i. pi. i. fig. 2. f Quart. Jour. Geol, Soc, vol. xl. p. 591. 



X Carlon-Flora, p. 241. § Quart. Jour. Geol. Soc, vol. xl. p. 590. 



