Bd. III: 14) 
THE MESOZOIC FLORA. 
75 
They are very thick, and keeled, thus assuming a somewhat pyramidal shape. The 
apex is acute. The leaves are not very densely placed on the stem. Sometimes, 
they appear narrower and thinner; but this is due to their being seen edgewise and 
to partial covering up in the matrix. The small fragment to the left of the main 
stem, which is not drawn in the figure, probably represents a branch. The leaves 
of this fragment are even thicker and broader than in the large specimen. 
Pagiophyllum crassifolium, as described by SCJIENK, is not a very well charac- 
terized species. Saporta (1884. p. 655; pi. 98) has later referred to it a specimen 
from the Upper Jurassic of France; but as already noticed by Sewari) (/. this 
attribution seems at least very doubtful. The best specimens known of Pagiophyllum 
crassifoliiim are those described and figured by Seward from the English Wealden 
(1895, p. 212; pi. 16, figs. I, 2). These resemble very closely the Antarctic speci- 
mens, especially the small fragment mentioned. The onl}- difference which can be 
noticed, is that the leaves of the English specimens seem to be a little more falcate 
and sometimes a little broader at the base than those of the present plant. As 
stated by Seward (/. c., p. 213), the English fossils display a certain amount of 
variation in this respect; and the agreement is, on the whole, so close, that the 
identity of the Antarctic form with Pagiophyllum crassifoliiim must be regarded as 
fairly probable. 
Both Schenk’s and Seward’s specimens of Pagiophyllum crassifoliiim are 
from the Wealden. The specimen described by Saporta (/. ci) under this name 
from Upper Jurassic rocks cannot, as remarked abov^e, with confidence be included 
in the same species. 
Pagiophyllum cfr. Heerianum Sap. 
PI. 8, figs. 15, 16; pi. 9, figs. 3, 4. 
Pathvphyllum {Pagiophyllum) Heerianum, Sai’Orta 1894, p. 108: pi. 19, fig. 25. 
Aff. Pagiophyllum peregrinum (Liniic. & Hutt.). 
To this species have been referred some leaf-bearing coniferous branches, all 
rather fragmentary and showing no remains of fructifications. The best specimens 
are those shown in pis. 8 and 9. 
The branches appear very thick on the impressions; this is due to the very dense 
disposition of the leaves, the axis itself is not seen. The leaves are placed spirally 
on the stem, are directed upwards and somewhat adpressed. They are ovate to 
triangular, acute, somewhat falcate, keeled and very thick. The specimen in pi. 8, 
fig. 16, is somewhat incorrectly drawn, in regard to the leaves. These are repre- 
sented as narrow but in the specimen they are broad and thick, even more so than 
in the branch shown in pi. 9, fig. 4. The leaves are sometimes seen, as in the 
