42 
Remarks. — 1 This plant may be a new species, and not identical with S. Currani 
(Ten.-Woods), of which only a fragment of a pinna is known. If, however, the lower 
left-hand pinna seen in fig. 7 be compared with Tenison-Woods’s illustration, it will be 
seen that there is very close agreement, and for this reason I am inclined to think 
that the two fossils may be identical. 
Occurrence. —Mokoia, Gore (? Lower Jurassic). 
2. Sphenopteris (Ruffordia) Goepperti Dunker. Plate I, figs. 2, 4. 
Sphenopteris Phillipsii Mantell, Geol. S.E. England, p. 239, fig. 2. 
Cheilanthites Goepperti Dunker, Uber Norddeutsch. Sogen. W alderthon, &c., p. 6. 
Sphenopteris Gopperti, Dunker, Monogr. Norddeutsch. Wealdenbild., p. 4, pi. 1, fig. 6 
pi. ix, figs. 1-3. 
S. Hartlebeni Dunker, ibid., p. 4, pi. ix, fig. 9. 
S. longifolia Dunker, ibid., p. 4, pi. viii, fig. 6. 
Sphenopteris Jugleri Ettingshausen, Abhandl. k.-k. geol. Reichs, Bd. i, Abth. iii. 
No. 2, p, 15, pi. iv, fig. 5. 
Sphenopteris (Davall.) Hartlebeni Scliimper, Traite Pal. Veget., vol. i, p. 393, pi. xxx, 
figs. 2, 3. 
Sphenopteris Gopperti (pars) Schenk, Palceontogr., vol. xix, p. 209, pi. xxv, figs. 2-5. 
Sphenopteris Auerbachi Trautschold, Nouv. Mem. Soc. Nat. Moscou, vol. xiii, p. 207, 
pi. xviii, fig. 5. 
Sphenopteris Gopperti Dupont, Bull. Acad. Roy. Belgique, ser. • ii, vol. xlvi, p. 396. 
Sphenopteris valdensis (pars) Heer, Sect. Trav. Geol. Portugal, 4to, p. 14, pi. xv, 
fig. 11, ? figs. 9, 10, 12-14. 
Sphenopteris cfr. Gopperti Nathorst, Denkschr. lc. Akad. Wissen. Wien (Math.-Nat. Cl.), 
vol. lvii, p. 51, pi. vi, figs. 2, 3. 
Sphenopteris sp. Yokoyama, Journ. Coll. Sci. Tokyo, vol. iii, p. 34, pi. xiv, figs. 13, 13a. 
Ruffordia Gopperti Seward, Wealden Flora, pt. i, p. 76, pi. iii, figs. 5-6; pi. iv; 
pi. v; pi. vi, figs. 1, la. 
Ruffordia Gopperti Seward, Jurassic Flora, pt. i, p. 133. 
Ruffordia Goepperti Seward, Mem. Mus. Roy. Hist. Nat. Belgique, vol. i, p. 18, 
pi. iii, fig. 33. 
Sphenopteris (Ruffordia?) Goepperti HaUe, Wissensch. Ergebn. Schwed. Sudpolar-Exped., 
Bd. iii, Lief. 14, p. 25, pi. iii, fig. 9. 
Sphenopteris (Ruffordia) Goepperti, Zeiller, Rev. gener. Botan., vol. xxv bis, p. 451, 
pi. 20, fig. 2. 
Diagnosis. —The following diagnosis of this species was given by Seward in 1894 
(see above): “ Frond tripinnate-quadripinnate, deltoid or rhomboidal, rachis frequently 
flexuous, pinnae alternate, deltoid to ovate-lanceolate ; pinnules delicate, decurrent on 
the rachis, ultimate segments linear acuminate or ovate-cuneate. Venation of the 
type Goenopteridis and Sphenopteridis. Fructification in the form of scattered sporangia 
on fertile fronds or pinnae, of which the leaf lamina is considerably reduced.” 
Description of the Specimens. —A small portion of a sterile frond of Sphenopteris 
Goepperti is seen on Plate I, fig. 2. Another is shown by fig. 4 of the same plate, 
also natural size. The latter has rather broader segments, but, on the whole, despite 
the imperfection of the preservation, I am inclined to regard it as another example of 
Sphenopteris Goepperti Dunk. 
Occurrence. —Mokoia, Gore (? Lower Jurassic). 
3. Sphenopteris gorensis sp. nov. Plate II, fig. 4. 
Diagnosis. —Frond pinnate ; rachis slender ; pinnules opposite, more or less wedge- 
shaped, very broad in proportion to their length, contracted at the base ; lamina deeply 
dissected into broad wedge-shaped lobes, which are themselves often broadly toothed or 
lobed. 
1833. 
1844. 
1846. 
1846. 
1846. 
1852. 
1869. 
1871. 
1876. 
1878. 
1881. 
1890. 
1890. 
1894. 
1900. 
1900. 
1913. 
1914. 
