540 MR ROBERT KIDSTON ON 



1883. Macfarlane. "On Lepidophloios, a Genus of Carboniferous Plants," Trans. 



Bot. Soc. Edin., vol. xiv. p. 181. 



Dr Macfarlane here points out the true relationship of Halonia to Lepidophloios, 

 and in support of his views figures several specimens of Lepidophloios Scoticus, Kidston 

 (Lepidophloios laricinum, Macfarlane, not Sternb.). The general points at issue are 

 fully brought out, though some of his proposed unions of species and genera do not 

 appear to be tenable. 



1884. Weiss. Aus der Flora der SteinJcohlenformation (2nd ed.), p. 8, pi. v. fig. 33. 



Weiss here reproduces a part of Goldenberg's figure of Lomatophloios macrolepidotum * 

 which he names " Lepidostrobus macrolepidotus (hitherto named Lomatophloios macro- 

 lepidotus, Gold.), which must be regarded as a large cone." Weiss' previous mistake in 

 regarding a small fragment of the stem of Lepidophloios, in which the structure was 

 partially preserved, as a Lomatophloian cone,t has evidently originated the opinion on 

 which he here acts, in placing what is evidently a fragment of a Lepidophloios bark in 

 the genus Lepidostrobus. 



1884. Lepidophloios, Lesquereux. Coal Flora, vol. iii. p. 781. 

 Lesquereux adds nothing here to his remarks made in vol. ii. p. 418. 



1886. Kidston. Catalogue of Palceozoic Plants, pp. 171-173. 

 I here treat Halonia, as a fruiting branch of Lepidophloios. 



1888. Lepidophloios and Halonia, Schenk. Diefossilen Pfanzenreste, pp. 66, 67. 



This author gives a general review of the subject without expressing any conclusive 

 opinion on the several points in dispute. He, however, unites Lepidophloios and 

 Lomatophloios, and rejects Corda's opinion as to Lomatophloios having had a Stern- 



BERGIAN pith. 



Schenk seems to adopt the views promulgated by the late Dr Weiss, who mistook 

 portions of the bark of Lepidophloios for cones, which he referred to that genus as its 

 fructification. Halonia he also treats in the same manner, and does not express an 

 individual opinion as to its systematic position. 



1888. Lepidophloios, Dawson. Geological History of Plants, p. 157. 



Sir Wm. Dawson's views regarding Lepidophloios are here modified, in so far as he 



states, in explanation of the genus, that " species with long and drooping leaf-bases have 



been included in Lepidophloios and Lomatophloios, species with short leaf-bases and 



cone scars in two rows have been called Ulodendron, and some of these have been 



* Goldenberg, Flora samp, foss., pi. xiv. fig. 25. t Zeitsch. d. deutsch. geol. GeselL, vol. xxxii. p. 354. 





