Notes. 
619 
of the sections, that, considering the identical locality, I have no doubt 
they are one and the same thing, and therefore refer the specimen 
here described to Araucarioxylon antiquum (With am sp.). The 
Craigleith Tree ( Araucarioxylon Withami , Lindl. and Hutt. sp.) is 
doubtfully distinct 1 . No observations appear to have been made 
hitherto on the primary structure of these fossils. 
If we now compare the two species described, it is noticeable that 
Araucarioxylon fascicular e has a distinctly Coniferous or Cordaitean 
rather than Cycadean type of secondary wood. The rays are narrow, 
and the elements of moderate size. It is significant that in this 
stem (as also, in some degree, in Protopitys Buchiana) this type 
of secondary wood co-exists with a Filicinean or Cycadofilicinean 
primary structure. 
In A . antiquum the larger elements and broader rays give the wood 
a more Cycadean character, but the general anatomical habit suggests 
a Cordaitean stem rather than anything else. The primary bundles, 
which afford the connecting link with more primitive forms, are 
here a much less conspicuous feature than in the former species. 
In fact the primary structure of A antiquum is much less like Cycado- 
filices than that of A. fascicular e, while as regards the secondary wood 
the reverse is the case. Personally, I put all the weight on the 
primary structure, and suspect that A. fasciculare may still have 
belonged to the more primitive group, while A. antiquum may have 
been already far on the road towards Cordaiteae. 
The facts described in the present note establish a further link 
between Cordaiteae and Cycadofilices, and so far tend to sup- 
port the hypothesis of the Filicinean origin of the Gymnosperms 
generally. 
The further discussion of the question of the affinities of these 
fossils must be reserved for the fuller communication which is to 
follow. In the mean time I will only add that both Araucarioxylon 
fasciculare and A. antiquum will certainly require generic separation, 
on the basis of their primary characters. 
D. H. SCOTT, Kew. 
1 See Goeppert, Revision meiner Arbeiten iiber die Stamme der fossilen Coniferen 
(under Pity s). Bot. Centralblatt, vols. v and vi, 1881. In one of Witham’s 
original sections of the Craigleith fossil, kindly lent by Prof. I. Bayley Balfour, 
I find distinct remains of the primary xylem-strands around the pith, agreeing 
with those of Mr. Kidston’s specimen of Araucarioxylon antiquum. 
