Notes. 
169 
The specimen, which is about 7 mm. in diameter, bears the bases 
only of somewhat crowded leaves, the arrangement of which, though 
not quite clear, was most probably verticillate, with from nine to 
twelve leaves in a whorl, those of successive whorls being superposed. 
Each leaf-base consists of a superior and an inferior lobe, and each 
lobe is palmately subdivided into two or three segments. 
The leaf-traces, which are single bundles where they leave the 
central cylinder, subdivide in both planes on their way through the 
cortex to supply the lobes and segments of the leaf. 
The central cylinder is polyarch, the strand of wood having from 
nine to twelve prominent angles, with phloem occupying the furrows 
between them. With the exception of the spiral protoxylem-elements 
at the angles, the tracheae have multiseriate bordered pits, thus 
differing conspicuously from the scalariform tracheae of the Lepi- 
dodendreae. The interior of the stele is occupied by tracheae 
intermingled with conjunctive parenchyma. There is a well-marked 
formation of secondary tissues by means of a normal cambium h 
The Strohilus . 
Mr. R. Kidston, F.G.S., kindly informed me that he had in his 
possession sections of a fossil cone from Burntisland having certain 
points in common with the Williamson specimen. On inspecting 
these sections with Mr. Kidston, I was soon convinced that this 
undescribed cone really belonged to the same plant as the fragment 
of stem in the Williamson Collection, and that the latter might well be 
the peduncle of the former. At the same time I satisfied myself, and 
Mr. Kidston agreed with me, that the whole organization of his cone 
is fundamentally different from that of any Lepidostrobus , the decisive 
1 The general structure of this axis, including the course of the bundles and the 
subdivision of the bracts, is correctly described by Williamson, loc. cit., p. 297. 
As regards the latter point, he says, ‘ peripherally the bark breaks up into main or 
primary bracts, which again subdivide, as in the transverse section, into secondary 
ones, demonstrating that each primary bract does not merely dichotomize, but 
subdivides, both horizontally and vertically, into a cluster of bracts — a condition 
corresponding with what I have already observed in the smaller strobili described.’ 
These smaller strobili are those of the Burntisland Lepidostrobus , to which, by 
a strange coincidence, Williamson, loc. cit., p. 295, erroneously attributed the 
same character, as regards subdivision of the bracts, which actually exists in 
the new cone. The only explanation appears to be that Williamson interpreted 
the structure of the Lepidostrobus in the light of that of the peduncle, which, as we 
shall see, really belonged to a totally different fructification. 
