530 Dutt . — Pityostrobus macrocephahts , Z. and 7Z 
longitudinal and one transverse) a closer comparison of the two forms of 
cone has been rendered possible. My thanks are also due to Mr. Irwin 
Lynch, Curator of the Cambridge Botanic Garden, who has granted 
me facilities in obtaining specimens of recent cones. 
It will be convenient in the following description, for the purpose 
of reference to the different slides, to retain the specific designations, 
although this can be dispensed with in the general summary. Throughout 
the paper the generic name Pityostrobtis will be used instead of Pinites , 
except in the case of citations from particular authors. Nathorst’s name 
Pityostrobus is adopted in preference to Feistmantel’s term Pmostrobus , 
recently revived by Dr. Stopes, on the ground that the former designation 
is more appropriate for Abietinean cones which cannot be safely referred to 
any one recent genus. In the present case the characters clearly point to an 
affinity with Pinus , but nothing is known of the vegetative features of the 
tree on which the cone was borne. 
Literature. 
The history of these cones shows many vicissitudes with regard to 
terminology as well as error in the determination of their geological 
horizon. Of the four specimens which have been referred to by Carruthers 
as Pinites macrocephalus , the one on which is based the original description 
of Professor Henslow in the Fossil Flora of Lindley and Hutton ( 7 ) is 
a large cone which was found in clearing out a pond near Dover. Both 
Lindley and Hutton agreed in assigning the fossil to the genus Zamia , and 
they gave it the name Zamia macrocephala. From one of Henslow’s 
figures Endlicher ( 4 ) was led to believe that the cone differed from Zamia 
in possessing only a single ovule on each scale, and he therefore established 
the new genus Z amiostrobus for its reception, retaining the specific 
designation macrocephala . Morris (10), in his revision of the fossil Cycadeae, 
adopts the genus Zamites introduced by Presl ( 11 ) and includes under 
it three species of Zamia of Lindley and Hutton, among which is Zamia 
macrocephala . Miquel (8) and Goeppert (6) accept Endlicher’s genus, 
the last named adding to it three of Morris’s species of Zamites . In 1850 
Unger ( 16 ) added three more, and all seven were included by Miquel ( 9 ) 
under Z amiostrobus in his ‘ Prodromus Systematis Cycadearum ’ of 1861. 
In the meanwhile Corda ( 3 , p. 84) in 1846 had suggested that the affinities 
of the fossil lay with the Coniferae rather than the Cycadeae, but it 
was left for Carruthers (2), in an important paper on P"ossil Coniferous 
Fruits, published in 1866, definitely to establish this fact, and to show that 
it more closely resembled the recent genus Pinus than any other plant. He 
assigned the fossil to the genus Pinites , used in a comprehensive sense 
to include all cones of Abietinean affinity. With the aid of three other 
