Bd. III: 14) 
THE MESOZOIC FLORA. 
85 
same plant as Elatocladus heteropliylla. It seems 
better, however, to keep the two forms separate. 
On the whole, the species does not present any 
marked resemblance to any other known form. 
As has already been noted by NatiiORST (1904, 
p. 1448), the branches showing radial development 
display a certain resemblance to BrachypJiyllum 
marnmillare FeiSTM. (non Brongniart). The 
leaves are seen to be of another type, however, 
being longer and more free of the stem. The en- 
larged portion shown in fig. 12 pi. 8, is mis- 
leading, since it represents the apical portion of a 
branch in which the leaves evidently are modified 
and which possibly is of reproductive nature. The 
radial shoots also recall not a little Pagiopliyllum 
densifolmm Salfeld (1909, p. 29; pi. 5, figs. 
10, ii); but that species has the leaves somewhat 
shorter and broader, and is not known to have 
been heterophyllous. The dimorphism of the 
shoots is, indeed, a very characteristic feature of 
this plant, and one of rare occurrence in Meso- 
zoic conifers. There is in the Rhætic Stachyo- 
taxîis septenti'ionalis (Agardh) (NafiiORST 
1878, p. 98; 1878 a, p. 29) a plant of very 
much the same habit, showing dimorphic shoots. 
Both types of leaves are different, however, from 
the corresponding kinds in the present species, 
being shorter and broader and more obtuse. There 
can therefore be no question of specific identity, 
although it must be admitted that Stachyotaxus 
septejitrionalis, as far as the heterophylly is con- 
cerned, represents one of the closest analogies to our species among Mesozoic coni- 
fers. In regard to the generic position of the Antarctic species, it is impossible to 
form any opinion, no distinct fructification being present; and so it has to be kept 
under the provisional name Elatocladus. 
Text-fig. 18. Elalocladtts hctcrophylla n. ?p. 
