1052 
DE. HEEE ON THE EOSSIL ELOEA OE BOVET TEACET. 
where a twig of Glyptostrobus of the Hohe Ehonen is represented for comparison). 
The adnate scale-like leaves are straight in Glyptostrohus, or only somewhat curved out- 
wards and obtuse, as in Glyptostrohus heteropliyllus, Br. The spreading leaves are often 
provided with an acute and usually straight point, and, but seldom, a little curved ; when 
this is the case, they have at all events a great likeness to our Sequoia. 
As we have the branches, fruits, and seeds of this tree, the determination of the 
genus is undoubted. It resembles in all its principal points Sequoia, Endl. It has 
decurrent leaves, globose cones with peltate scales. They are provided on the surface 
with wi’inkles radiating from a small mucro. 
Several flat-winged seeds are lying under the scales. The scales and seeds very much 
resemble those of Sequoia sempervirens. Lamb., of California (cf this cone, Plate LX. 
fig. 48, and the seeds of this species, fig. 47, magnified 47 h) ; but the nucleus of the 
seed is somewhat curved in the fossil species. The leaves are quite different, those of 
the sterile branches of Sequoia sempervirens being distichous and long linear, almost as in 
Taxus haccata, Linn. The Sequoia Couttsice approaches S. gigantea {Wellingtonia, Lindl.) 
in the form and position of the leaves, but differs in the much smaller cones. The Bovey 
species is in some measure intermediate between the two existing species. 
In comparing the species of Bovey with the tertiary species of Sequoia, the S. Langs- 
dorfi, Br., will be first taken into consideration. The cones are very similar (cf. Flora 
Tertiaria Helvetise, pi. 21. fig. 4 d, pi. 146. fig. 16; and Ludwig, Palaeontographica, 
Band viii. pi. 15. fig. I); but this species has the leaves of S. sempervirens. Our species 
still more resembles S. Hardtii *, the scales of the cones being of the same length and 
form, but Unger and Ettingshausen describe the cones as subconical, and the seeds as 
provided with a mucro ; further, thq leaves of the fertile twigs are more acute, and 
those of the sterile ones are linear and spreading. The Bovey species difiers from 
S. Sternhergi [Araucarites, Gp.) in the much more slender twigs, and the different con- 
struction of the leaves. It differs from S. Ehrliclii, Ung., in the shorter leaves and the 
globose cones. 
If we compare all the Sequoise now known, we have to place them in the following 
manner : — 
1. Sequoia gigantea, Lindl. ; California. 
2. Sequoia Ehrlichi, Ung. ; tertiary formation near Spital in Austria. 
* Cupressites Hardtii, Groeppert, Monogr. der Eossilen Coniferen, p. 184. 
Cupressites taxiformis, linger, Chloris protogaea, p. ]8, pL 8. figs. 1-3, pi. 9. figs. 1-4. 
CTiamcecyparites Hardtii, Endl. Synopsis Conifer, p. 277 ; Ettingshausen, Elora von Haering, p. 35, pi. 6. 
figs. 1-21. 
Exdlicheb and Ettingshausen have wrongly referred this species to Chamascyparis ; the leaves 
of which genus are opposite, and ranged in four rows round the branch, whilst they are alternate in 
S. Hardtii, as in Sequoia ; the cones of Chamcecyparis are much smaller, and the seeds have a thicker 
nucleus, the base and point of which are not surrounded by the thin wing. This species has no doubt been 
referred to Chamascyparis by Hngee from a comparison with Gupressus thurifera, Humb. et Bonpl. {Chamas- 
cyparis, Endl.). 
