PART 3.] 
Feistmantel: Fossil Floras in India. 
73 
Bunbury’s Glossopteris muscefolia seems from the drawing rather to belong to Teeniop- 
teris, Brgt., although the author says that the veins anastomose near the stalk. This the 
figure, however, does not exhibit at all, and the same may be said of Glossopteris strieta, 
Bunb., from Kamtbi. Tate's JDictyopteris simplex, (1. e.) PL VI, fig. 6, is a Glossopteris 
of the same group to which some of our Indian species also belong. 
In one way Glossopteris, Brgt., may be considered evidence of a mesozoic age: if it 
is compared with other ferns with reticulated leaves, the most nearly allied is the Tri assic 
and Rh retie Sagenopteris, Brgt., and some forms of Glossopteris are evidently related to this 
Triassic genus. 
b. Gangamopteeis, Mo’Coy. 
In the lower group of the Damiidas (Barakars) there occur some ferns resembling 
Glossopteris, which, however, on a closer examination, show different characters; the most 
prominent of these is the want of the distinct midrib, which is found in the real Glossop¬ 
teris, Brgt.; there are instead of it only three or four thicker veins starting from the base ; 
the other veins radiating from the base towards the margin. This is a character which we 
find partly in Cyelopteris, hut while iu the latter genus the veins between their point of 
origin and the margin are divided only dichotomously, in this form from the Barakars they 
are reticulated, as in Glossopteris, Brgt. We have therefore in these leaves— 
1. —Want of a distinct midrib. 
2. —A venation radiating from the base towards the margin, as in Cyelopteris, but yet 
reticulated, as in Glossopteris. 
3. —A rounder leaf than in Glossopteris. Similar forms have been described by 
Mc’Coy (Pakaontol. of Victoria, Dec. II) from Australia as Gangamopteris, and I think 
I am not wrong in putting these forms from the Barakar group in the same genus. 
The species I will call— 
Gangamopteris Cyclopteroides, Fstm. 
As this species occurs also in the T a 1 c h i r group, where it is almost the only fossil, 
I will give a diagnosis and a fuller discussion when treating of that group. A similar 
form* is described by Mr. Tate from the Karoobeds( Triassic) in S o u t h Africa as 
Cyelopteris Jenkinsiana, which, I think, also belongs to this genus. 
The occurrence of this genus in the Barakars is very important, not for the de¬ 
termination of the age,hut because of the connexion it shows between the lower Damiidas 
and the Talehirs. It thus unites the latter with the whole Dam lid a group. These 
forms have been lately found iu the Barakars of the Kurliurbari coal basin. I have also 
one or two fragments from Kamthi which belong to the same species. 
c. Sagenopteeis, Brgt. 
If we take Glossopteris, Brgt., as a single-leaved genus, with a certain venation, some 
other forms with several leaves coming out from the same stalk and a different venation 
must he separated from this genus and placed with Sagenopteris, Brgt. This is especially 
the case with the Glossopteris acaulis, Mc’Clell. (Hep. XIV, fig. 3), which, however, 
* See Tate 1. e. p. 146, Tab. VI, fig. 4. 
