NOTES. 
CANTHELIOPHORUS, BASSLER : NEW RECORDS OF SIGILLARIO 
STROBUS (MAZOCARPON). — In my recent paper 1 I regret having overlooked 
some interesting incrustation specimens which Nathorst had recorded 2 some years 
previously from the Palaeozoic rocks of Spitzbergen. After figuring them and 
discussing their nature he concludes as follows : 
‘ Als Resultat unserer Untersuchungen kann nur gesagt werden, dass dieselben 
wahrscheinlich die Mikrosporophylle eines bisher unbekannten Lepidostrobus - oder 
Lepidocarpon-Typws darstellen, dessen Sporangien durch ihren komplizierten, 
vorlaufig aber nicht naher zu bestimmenden Bau von den bisher bekannten Lepido- 
phyllum-kxten abweichen.’ 
In the August number 8 of the ‘ Botanical Gazette ’ of 1919, Bassler brought the 
above specimens into line with a number of American incrustation fossils not hitherto 
described. I owe to him, therefore, the fact that my attention has been drawn to this 
large numbej of new specimens. Bassler has, however, misinterpreted, as I conceive, 
both Nathorst’s specimens and his own. He thinks they all exhibit ‘ a large lamellar 
sporangiophore developed in the radial plane of the strobilus from the superior face of 
the sporophyll pedicel, bearing two large elongate sporangia, one upon each side, 
pannier-like ’ ; and it is this interpretation which has suggested the generic name 
Cantheliophorus (Kav 0 rj\ia, pack-saddle with panniers) for both Nathorst’s specimens 
and his own. 
Thus Bassler thinks he has discovered in these impressions evidence of ‘ a truly 
sporangiophoric Lepidophyte ’ and thus shown that the Lepidodendreae ‘ are not the 
homogeneous, stereotyped group they were long supposed to be \ 
Before proceeding to discuss his position I will state at once that all the species 
included in Bassler’s_„new genus appear to me to admit of an alternative explanation. 
«- It is unfortunate that Bassler, owing possibly to his work being carried out in 
a geological laboratory, has overlooked the full account of Mazocarpon , or I feel sure 
he would have realized the features of resemblance to the microsporophylls there 
described. He only refers to a very inadequate preliminary reference to Mazocarpon 4 
which was published before the critical specimens had been obtained. In my view 
the bulk of the specimens figured, if not all, belong to various species of Sigillariostrobus 
( Mazocarpon ) and represent microsporophylls which have become separated from the 
cone axis. 
1 Benson : Mazocarpon , or the Structure of Sigillariostrobus. Ann. Bot., vol. xxxii, 1918, p. 569. 
2 Nathorst : Zur fossilen Flora der Polarlander. Nachtrage zur palaeozoischen Flora Spitz- 
bergens, Teil I, 1914, p. 62. 
3 Bassler: A Sporangiophoric Lepidophyte from the Carboniferous. Bot. Gaz. , vol. txviii, 
1919, p. 73. 
4 Benson: The Sporangiophore. New Phyt., vol. vii, pp. 143-9, 1908. 
[Annals of Botany, Vol. XXXIV. No. CXXXIII. January, 1920.] 
