194 



THE AMERICAN NATURALIST [Vol. XL 



It was not until many years after Hitchcock's description was 

 published that any further discovery of similar remains was made, 

 or at least recorded, and to Professor Oswald Heer belongs the 

 credit of first recognizing their affinities with the living Coniferous 

 genus Dammara, in his description of specimens identical with 

 those from Gay Head, under the name D. borealis,^ from the 

 Cretaceous of Greenland, in his discussion of which he says (p. 55) : 

 "Es haben diese Schuppen so grosse Aehnlichkeit mit derjenigen 

 von Dammara (Agathis), dass wir sie derselben Gattung zutheil- 

 en diirfen." For purposes of comparison a figure of this species, 

 representing a specimen collected at Gay Head, is shown on Plate 

 l,Fig. 1. 



Two other so called species were also described and figured 

 by the same author, viz.: D. microlepis^ and D. macrosperma.^ 

 A specimen of the former, collected at the Gay Head locality, is 

 shown on Plate 1, Fig. 2, which, by comparison, may be seen to 

 differ from D. horealis merely in size. D. macrosperma has not 

 been recognized in any collection of material except that from 

 Greenland, and it is doubtful if it should be regarded as speci- 

 fically distinct from the other two. In other words all three of 

 these so called species might very well be included under D. 



Heer was evidently in considerable doubt in regard to the 

 identity of some of his specimens and also with regard to their 

 botanical relationships. In his discussion of D. microlepis for 

 example he says (p. 55, loc. cit.): "Hat einige Aehnlichkeit mit 

 den Bluthenknospen des Eucalyptus Geinitzi," and a comparison 

 with the figures of the objects which he refers to the fruit of that 

 species * shows them to be so closely similar in appearance to his 

 Dammara scales as to be practically indistinguishable from them. 



Krasser, Beyer, and Velenovsky subsequently described and 

 figured similar remains from the Cretaceous of pAirope, with vary- 

 ing opinions as to their probable botanical affinities. The last 



'Fl. Foss. Ard., vol. 6, pt. 2, p. 54, pi. 37, fig. 5, 1882. 



UUd., p. 55, -pi. AO. fig. 5. 



Ubid., vol. 7, p. 17, pi. 53, fix). 11, 1883. 



* Ibid., vol. 6, pt. 2, p. 93, pL JfS, figs. 4-9, 1882. 



