Xo. 517] 



MIOCENE TREES 



45 



said to go down to the Laramie. (4) Arulia zadihichi; 

 of uncertain determination, one of the specimens was 

 Plat anus dissecta. None of these is found in the Lamar, 

 but F. antipofii is in the Ye] low stone Fort Union. 



Eight other species from the Auriferous gravels are 

 stated to be allied to Miocene species, five of these being 

 also related to living plants. One of the five, Jur/laus 

 orcc/unimia, has since proved to be from the Mascall, and 

 not to occur in the Auriferous gravels. The other three 

 are as follows : 



Ficus sonVuhi Lx. Allied to, or perhaps identical 

 with, F. grcenlandica of Greenland. A frag- 

 ment referred to this has been found in the 



Ficus mensm n. n. (F. microphylla Lx., 1878, not 

 Salzm., Mart. PL Braz. 4: 93). Allied to F. 

 plcmicostata— but this is a species of the Basal 

 Eocene and Laramie. 



Alalia ichituct/i Lx., said to be allied to an Evans- 



It is thus apparent that the Auriferous gravels flora 



when I recently suggested to Dr. J. V. Merriam, of the 

 I niversity of California, that it might perhaps be partly 

 Pliocene and partly Eocene, he replied that this might 

 indeed be the case. 



It is further to be remarked that Knowlton formerly 

 regarded the Mascall flora as having affinity with that of 

 the Auriferous gravels; but he subsequently discovered 

 that certain of the species he had most relied on were 

 reallv confined to the Mascall, and did not occur in the 

 -ravels at all. "This correlation therefore fails," he 

 states, and the absence of relationship stands as an argu- 

 ment against the Miocene age of the gravels. 



The conclusion seems to be legitimate that the Yellow- 



or at least older than Miocene. Were they really Mio- 



