JURASSIC PLANTS FROM CROMARTY AND SUTHERLAND, SCOTLAND. 881 
supply, though this difference may be due to imperfect preservation. We have, 
unfortunately, no satisfactory evidence in regard to the number of seeds borne on the 
sporophylls of Contes Juddi, though such data as are available suggest that one or 
probably more small seeds were attached to the upper face of the thick sporophylls 
between the free end of the ligule and the cone-axis. In the case of the American 
specimens there is a strong probability that the xylem tracheides possessed the 
Araucarian type of pitting such as is clearly shown in the elements of the wood 
(Brachyoxylon) associated with the cone-seales ; the few pits we have detected in the 
ease of the Scotch cones do not appear to be typically Araucarian, but on the other 
hand it is worthy of note in this connection that the xylem elements in the cone-scale 
of Agathis are frequently characterised by the presence of spiral bands in place of the 
typical Araucarian pits. 
In the presence of a ligule and in the general anatomical features the Kathie cone- 
scales closely resemble those of recent species of Araucaria, e.g. A. Ruler. The chief 
difference would seem to be the occurrence of the seeds above the sporophyll in the 
fossil species, as in Agathis, instead of being enclosed in the tissues of the scales as is 
the case in Araucaria; in other words, characters now met with in Araucaria and 
Agathas respectively are combined in the sporophylls of Contes Juddr. 
The result of a comparison of the fossil sporophylls with those of the recent 
Araucarieze and with the scales of Athrotaxis, Cunninghamia, Sequoia, and other 
genera is that we consider them to agree more closely with the Araucarian type of 
sporophyll than with those of any other recent genus. The apparently small size of 
the seeds and their relation to the ligular outgrowth, as well as the occurrence of 
separate bordered pits on the tracheides, suggest comparison with such a recent genus 
as Cunninghamia, though the structure of the scales is more like that of Araucarian 
sporophylls. The combination of features which are now distributed among different 
genera is to be expected in extinct types belonging to evolutionary stages anterior to 
the divergence of generic characters along independent lines. The occurrence in 
certain fossil woods of a mixture of Abietinean and Araucarian characters is regarded 
by Professor JEFFREY as evidence in favour of the thesis which he vigorously maintains, 
that the Abietineze are older and more primitive than the Araucariee. In itself such 
combination affords general support to the view that the Abietineze are a more 
specialised and a more recently evolved family than the Araucariee. We are not 
concerned at the moment with the general problem of the relative position of different 
sections of the Coniferales in an evolutionary series, but we would draw attention to 
the necessity of a careful and impartial examination of the foundations on which 
Professor JEFFREY bases his contention. We believe that the teaching of comparative 
morphology and paleobotany supports the view that in the Araucarieze we have the 
oldest and most primitive members of the Coniferales. 
