28 
T. G. HALLE, 
(Schwed. Südpolar-Exp. 
little broader pinnules, but this cannot be regarded as a difference of any import- 
ance whatever. Heer (/. c.) mentions a curious sculpture of fine dots on the sur- 
face of the pinnules. In the best preserved pinnules of the Antarctic fronds there 
is also seen a similar sculpture, only finer and not so strong as in the Greenland 
specimens. Apart from this remarkable resemblance in detail, there is such a close 
agreement with Heer’s species, that the Antarctic specimens can without hesitation 
be referred to it. There is no ground whatever for referring the species to Asplé- 
nium; so it has been transferred here to Sphenopteris, in which genus it seems to 
find its proper place, together with such forms as Pecopteris Murrayana Brgn. and 
P. lobata Ol.DH. & Morr. 
In a later volume of the Flora Fossilis Arctica, Heer (1882, p. 4; pi. 2, fig. i) 
again mentions this species, from another locality. The specimen figured is very 
different, however, and no doubt belongs to quite another species. Most probably 
it should be brought together with the specimens in figs. 2 and 3 (4?) in the same 
plate, which are now mentioned as two distinct species, A. Dicksonianum Hr. and 
A. lapideurn Hr. respectively. 
Splienopteris Nauckhoffiana does not seem to come very near to any other 
known species. The greatest resemblance seems to be found in Sphenoptei'is stiperba 
Shirley (i8g8, p. 18; pis. 4 and 8) from Queensland, since that species shows the 
same shape and bidentate ending of the lobes; but in other respects there is a great 
difference, the Australian frond being much stouter with longer pinnules and of 
quite another habit. There is a very great resemblance in general habit between 
the Antarctic specimens of S. Nauckhoffia)ia and the fronds referred here to Conio- 
pteris lobata (Oldh.). This resemblance is indeed so striking as to suggest specific 
identity, were it not that the bidentate lobes afford a very remarkable characteristic 
of the former species. 
The occurrence of S. Nauckhojfiana in the Hope Bay flora is very interesting, 
because it constitutes an unusually certain link with the both geographically and 
geologically distant Kome-flora of Greenland. 
Sphenopteris Fittoni Seward. 
PI. 3, figs. 15 — 18, 22, 25; text-fig. 7 a — c. 
Sphenopteris gracilis, Fxtton 1836, p. 181. 
Sphenopteris Delgadoi ?, Saporta 1893, p. 30, 54; pi. 4, fig. 5. 
Sphenopteris Fittoni, Seward 1894, p. 107; pi. 6, fig. 2; pi. 7, fig. i. 
Sphenopteris Fittoni, Seward 1903, p. 17; pi. 2, figs. 7, 8. 
A number of impressions appear to be best placed in this wide and varying 
species. It is not excluded that they may represent two or more distinct species; 
