44 
Psyche 
[Mar. 
2) ; it depicts a basal piece of the fore wing-pad, a com- 
plete bind wing or its bnd, and fragments of the thorax 
and abdomen. As in the case of the preceding species, 
the figure shows the wings extending laterally from the 
thorax, and it was reproduced by Comstock (1918, fig. 
81) to demonstrate the lateral formation of wings in 
palseodictyopterous nymphs. 
Examination of the fossil convinces me that Hand- 
lirsch, in making his drawing, confused plant remains 
with those of the insect, as can be seen from the ac- 
companying photograph (plate 7, figure 2). The frag- 
ment of the fore wing represented in his figure is either 
a piece of a plant or of the insect’s body; it is clearly 
not a wing or wing-bud, and it bears a relationship to the 
true wing different from that shown in his figure. The 
parts of the “thorax” and “abdomen” are clearly of 
plant origin. The wing itself is about 10 mm. long, and 
much more oval than shown in Handlirsch’s figure. 
There are faint indications of veins or ridges, but they 
cannot be followed satisfactorily because of numerous 
wrinkles. Although this wing is very different from that 
of the foregoing insect in shape, size and texture, there 
is no evidence that it was either pakeodictyopterous or a 
nymphal structure. 
Insectorum gen. indet. mazonum Handl. 
Plate 6, figure 3. 
(Palceodictyopteron) mazonum Handlirsch, 1906, Foss. 
Ins. : 63, pi. 8, fig. 17 ; 1906, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., 29 : 
688, fig. 14. 
This is preserved in an ironstone nodule, from the 
vicinity of Morris, Illinois (Type no. 38831, U. S. 
National Museum). Handlirsch’s figure is correct in 
depicting the distal part of a wing, 18 mm. long, which 
could be either nymphal or mature. The apparent thick- 
ness of the fossil suggests that it is a wing-pad, possibly 
of a roach or Protorthopteron. Its assignment to the 
Palaeodictyoptera is entirely without foundation and 
Handlirsch gave no reason for placing it there. 
