24 
T. G. HALLE. 
(Schwed. Südpolar-Exp. 
always the case, however: sometimes, as in fig. 4, pi. 29, of the work mentioned, the 
agreement in this respect is perfect. The incisions of the lobes occasionally seen in 
the Antarctic specimens appear from the illustrations not to be present in the Indian 
ones. These differences cannot be regarded as being of great importance; and the 
specific identification appears fairly safe. 
The Antarctic fronds are both sterile. The Indian specimens are frequently 
found in the fertile state, but the only illustrations given are very unsatisfactory, 
and not quite correct (FeiSTMANTEL, 1877 a, p. 40). Feistmantel states that 
the fructification approaches very near to that of his Dicksofiia Bindrabunensis ; 
and in his last mention of the species (1880 p. XII) he accordingly refers it to 
the genus Dicksojiia. With the classification now generally adopted, the species 
should be included in the genus Conioptcris^ and Seward (1900, p. 41) compares 
it with C. arguta. As the Antarctic specimens are sterile, it would be preferable 
to refer the species for the present to a form-genus. This should be in this case 
Sp/icnopteris, to which this type of frond belongs rather than to Pccopteris, as stated 
already by FEISTMANTEL (1877 rr, p. 40). This course would imply, however, the 
institution of a new specific name because the name Sphcnoptcris lobata has been 
used previously for a Palæozoic species, and in order to escape this the name 
Coniopieris has been preferred. It is not impossible that the specimen described here 
as C. nephroca)pa is the fertile frond of this species; but this is not certain, since it 
differs somewhat from the fertile specimens from India (cfr. p. 22). 
The Antarctic specimens of Coniopteris lobata may be compared also with 
Spkenopteris Murrayana Brgn. (1835, p. 358; pi. 126, figs, i — 5), coming nearer 
to that species than do the Indian type-specimens. The difference is mainly in the 
shape of the pinnules. These are in Brongniart’s species much shorter, with only 
3 — 4 lobes on each side, and are more triangular and more rapidly tapering from 
the base. It is probable, therefore, that the present specimens should rather be re- 
ferred to Coniopteris lobata, to which species they present a much closer resem- 
blance. 
There is a certain, and indeed striking, resemblance in habit to the fronds re- 
ferred here (p. 26) to Sphcnoptcris Nauckhoffiana. Though the lobes are occasion- 
ally incised in the specimens referred to Coniopteris lobata, they are on the whole 
quite different from those of the former species, and the agreement between the two 
forms is no doubt only superficial. 
Coniopteris lobata has been recorded only from the Upper Gondwanas of India 
and recently from the Liassic of the Austrian Alps (Krasser 1908, p. 443). 
