228 Lindsey .— The Branching and Branch 
stem. From this it seems clear that the branch was attached to the stem 
in a quite normal way, and not in the manner in which M. Renier supposes, 
for in the latter case there would be a distinct ring where the cortex of the 
stem joined that of the branch. 
It seems reasonably certain that while the second specimen is a main 
stem with the branches attached, the first is a branch which has fallen off. 
Such a branch on falling would leave a ulodendroid scar. Supposing 
all the branches were to fall off the second specimen you would then have 
two alternate rows of scars on opposite sides of a main axis just as is 
most usual in ulodendroid stems. 
In regard to this, however, one question crops up, and that is in 
connexion with the spacing of such scars. Should the branches fall from 
the second specimen, the distance between consecutive scars would be 
considerable, and though not as large as appears at first sight owing to the 
bases of the branches spreading out as they do, still it would leave larger 
spaces between than occur in the stems figured by M. Renier. In these the 
scars are practically contiguous, as they are in a good many specimens 
figured. But this close arrangement is not universal. In the Manchester 
Museum, it is true, there are a certain number of examples of this type, but 
there are also others in which the scars have a separation of eight or nine 
inches. There is unfortunately no series of scars of the size such as would 
be left on specimen 2 (which is obviously far from full-grown); the most 
usual is that of specimen i, i. e. about 3! inches in diameter. Taking, then, 
six specimens which showed scars of approximately this size, the distances 
between consecutive scars were measured with the following results : 
A. Diameter 
B. Distance from 
bottom of scar to 
the top of the scar 
C. Index 
_ A 
of Scar. 
below. 
B’ 
1. 3-8" 
9 - 5 " 
0-30 
2. 3-6" 
8-i" 
o -33 
3 - 4 ' 1 '' 
7*o" 
0*58 
4 - 3 - 5 " 
5 ’ 4 " 
o’66 
5 . 3 * 8 " 
2-9" 
i‘3i 
6. 3-9" 
2 * 3 " 
1-69 
It would therefore seem as if the distance between one scar and 
the next was not constant, but probably depended on conditions of growth, 
or possibly on the genus of the specimen, for in the specimens in the 
Manchester Museum it is noticeable that the scars on Bothrodendron are, 
on the whole, further apart than those of Ulodendron proper, and it has 
already been pointed out that the specimens figured by Renier are 
Lepidodendron , whereas the two new specimens are Bothrodendron. There 
are not, however, enough specimens of Ulodendron rnajus (i. e. the lepido- 
dendroid form) from which to state this as a definite assertion, but it does 
seem quite reasonable. 
