140 Records of the Geological Surrey of India. [voi,. ix. 
On the four latter of these I will only remark that they in Europe are of iriassic age. 
To these I add now a fifth— 
Yoltzia heterophylla, Bgt., 1828. 
182S. Brongniart: Prodrome. 
1828. Histoire lies v£get foss. 
1813. Sohhnper and Mougeot: Monograf. 
1870. Sehimpev: Paleont. veg£t. 
Amongst the specimens brought by Dr. Stoliczka from Karharbari are also three, 
which are labelled Yoltzia heterophylla, Bgt. I cannot know by whom the label was 
written, but it is certain that already, five years ago, this species was recognized, but since 
that time, no doubt overlooked. It is the more important, as this species is just from the 
lower part of the Damudas, i. c., from the Barakar group* 
This species, as every body knows, is the most characteristic of the Trias, of course 
in Europe only ; but I for my part do not give up the same age for it here in India also. 
The discovery and determination of this plant agrees very well with those I later made 
quite independently, as I found the Yoltzia heterophylla, Bgt., which Dr. Stoliczka brought, 
after I had written my first paper on the Darnuda fossils. 
As far as I know, there is nothing known like those or similar plants from the 
lower coal-measures in Australia, and also in the upper portion is, besides Glossopteris, 
(a genus of wide range) only Phyllotheca and the doubtful Yertebraria in common with 
our Damudas, of which, however, the first genus is also in the Oolite of Italy pretty frequent, 
and the other Darnuda fossils have also abundantly representatives in the mesozoic forma¬ 
tions of Europe. 
So that with the same probability we can suppose a communication with Europe at 
that early date of Indian life, and this for the whole period from Trias till Oolite. 
5.—Cycadeous Plants in the Damudas. 
A.—Species of Noeggerathia, Stbg. 
Already Sir C. Bunburyf described from Kamthi a species with the name Noeggerathia 
Hislopi, B., of which he knew several specimens, but ouly one is figured. 
Noeggerathia was formerly, as were many fossils, a disputed genus; but already Sir C. 
Bunbury (1801) himself took it rather as belonging to the Vycadeaeew, as I think is now 
generally acknowledged; and wc have in Noeggerathia a genus belonging to the Zamioe. 
I will speak, therefore, first of Bunbury’s species. 
1. Noeggerathia Hislopi, Bunb. 
1861. Quar. Jour. Geol. Soe., Vol. XVII, p. 334, PI. X, f. 5. 
Sir C. Bunbury has figured only one specimen, which is rather fragmentary, from 
Bharat-ivada. From this locality also several specimens are in our collection. All descrip¬ 
tions, as Bunbury has given them, I can confirm. Wc have several fragments, from 
which I can judge that the leaves have been about 14 cm. long, beginning with a narrow 
base and becoming wider towards the apex, where the leaf is apparently oblique. 
Prom another locality in the Nagpur district, from Barkoi, thero is a specimen of the 
same Noeggerathia Hislopi, Bunb., in our collection, which plainly shows that the described 
» Of the Survey classification. 
| Quart, Jour. Geol, Soc-, XVII, p, 334, PI, X, f, 5, 
