A REVISION OF THE FOSSIL PLANTS OF THE GENUSNAGEIOPSIS OF FONTAINE.
By Edward W. Berry,Of the Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore.
In the elaboration of the Potomac flora of Maryland for the pro-posed monograph of the Maryland Geological .Survey it has beenfound necessary to reexamine all of the Virginia material and inmany eases to recast certain of the larger genera where the limitshave been found to be vague. That the multiplication of speciesin the past has been much greater than the facts warranted has longbeen suspected, and several writers, notably Seward, have voicedthis view. A careful study only serves to emphasize this opinion,and it is proposed to publish several of these systematic revisionsas fast as they are prepared, since the proposed monograph dealsmainly with species known to occur in Maryland. Furthermore,the Patuxent formation, the basal member of the Potomac group,is extremely deficient in plant remains in the Maryland area, whilea representative flora is present at this horizon in Virginia, so thatgeneric revisions lack balance unless the full data which form thefoundation of the new interpretations are given.The writer has had the advantage of studying at one time all ofthe specimens collected by Fontaine, Ward, Bibbins, and others,and this method has served to disclose certain errors of identifica-tion which resulted from the method of the former, who worked over
a long period of years upon collections from a large number of locali-ties and without the various types at hand for comparison. Thewriter is under obligations to the l T . S. National Museum, where allof the Potomac types are lodged, for many courtesies, and he alsogratefully acknowledges the constant advice and criticism of Dr.F. II. Knowlton.The first genus to be considered is Nageiopsis, which was foundedby Fontaine in 1890, for forms apparently allied to the modernspecies which make up the Nageia section of the genus Podocarpus.lie characterizes Nageiopsis as follows:Trees or shrubs with leaves and branches spreading in one plane; leaves varyingmuch in si/.e and shape, those toward the base of the twigs sometimes smaller thanthose higher up, distichous mostly, or rarely subdistichous, opposite and persistent,
Proceedings U. S National Museum, Vol. 38? No. 1738. 185
180 PROCEEDINGS OF THE VATIONAL MUSEUM. vol. S8.
attached by a short slightly twisted footstalk, usually to the ^ i< 1< ? of the twig, morerarely slightly within the margin on the upper or under surface of the stem, eitherattenuated toward the base or abruptly rounded off there, al their ends acute or Bub-acute; uerves several, coalescing ai base to Eorm a footstalk, forking immediately atthe base or a shorl distance above, then approximately parallel to near the tip's of theleaves, where they are somewhal crowded together, bu1 do uo1 converge to a union,ending in or near the extremity.The diagnostic characters which deserve emphasis are the branch-ing habit, the persistent leaves, and the parallel veins which do n<>tconverge to any great extent in the apex of the leaf. These allserve to distinguish the species <>f Nageiopsis from the cycadaceousfronds or leaflets, with which they are most. likely to he confused.Tin 1 genus Podozamites, for example, which is supposed to he Cyca-dean, although Seward suggests thai it may he Arancarian, is verysimilar in appearance 1 , so similar in fact that Professor Fontaineincluded a number of Podozamites leaflets in his various species ofNageiopsis. But ] }<><lo~<i/nih S IS usually represented by detachedleaves, hence it was deciduous in habit; the. fronds are not known tobranch, and this is not only a distinguishing character hut an argu-ment against an Arancarian affinity; finally, the veins converge,more or less, apically.Throughout the whole order Coniferales the phyllotaxy is as a rulespiral, more rarely it is cyclic in character. A true distichous or tworanked arrangement is unknown, although a great many coniferswith a spiral phyllotaxy are markedly distichous in habit, as forexample, Taxodium, Araucaria, Tumion, Taxus, etc. It seems prob-able that Nageiopsis was no exception to the general rule: in factsome specimens show leaves inserted on all four sides of the stem.More often, however, the exact method of attachment is obscured,but the more or less twisted base argues strongly for a spiral phyl-lotaxy. A distichous habit is strongly emphasized in fossil impres-sions which have been subjected to more or less compression, just as
it is in the case of pressed herbarium specimens.Their i- a suggestion in some specimens of Nageiopsis that thebase was markedly decurrent as in the modern Araucaria bidwiUi.This LS furnished by the extraordinarily large size of some of thestems, which are irregularly expanded and contracted as if certainof the decurrenl leaf bases had been spread out somewhat in theHat tening which accompanied fossilization. This feature is especiallywell shown in the portion of the specimen of Nageiopsis ;:iiini<>i<l<sfigured (lig. 1). The stem is broad at tin 1 base, giving oil' on eitherside subopposite leaves with apparently sheathing decurrenl bases.Above their insertion the stem is considerably narrowed, passingto a portion obscurely preserved. Above this point it is at leasttwice us broad, cqnl racl ing to form t he narrow base of t he right-handleaf, while just above t he main stem i> conl inued as a much narrowed
No. 1738. FOSSIL PLANTS OF THE OEXVR VAGEIOPSIS?BERRY. 187
twig, the nexl leaf above, that on the left, having its base concealedbehind the twig. In no instance is the preservation as good as couldbe desired, so that the question can not be definitely settled, but suchexamples as that figured go a long way toward proving that at leastsome of the forms referred to Nageiopsis had strongly decurrenlleaves and a spiral phvllotaxy. Similar features are shown in someof the specimens of Nageiopsis angustifolia and are indicated in thelatest published figures of this species."Fourteen supposed species have been described from the Potomacgroup, an additional one from the Kootanie, and Professor Sewardrecognizes a species in the English Wealden and doubtfully recordsa representative from the inferior Oolite of Yorkshire. The genus isalso possibly represented in the Neocomian of Japan by specimenswhich have been identified as Podozamites, but this is far from beingdemonstrable.The Potomac species, excluding those fragmentary species whichare not here recognized as related to Nageiopsis, fall naturally intothree species characterized, respec-tively, by the possession of very
_^^~long linear leaves, very narrowlanceolate leaves and ovate-lance-olate leaves. -They areespecially characteristic *^^^| i^^\L ^of the Patuxent formation, in factthe bulk of the unequivocal mate- ? , ?1 m Fig. 1.?Fragment of a twig of nageioposisrial comes from the single locality zamioides showing indications of decurrentat Fredericksburg, Virginia. They LEAVES AND A BHBAl PHYLL0TAXY - Nat?al?' ^ -1 size, hut somewhat exaggerated.evidently survived the close of thePatuxent, however, characteristic specimens of Nageiopsis <iu(/u.sti-folia occurring in the lower beds at Federal Hill in Maryland, and atvarious Patapsco outcrops in Virginia.Regarding the botanical affinity of Nageiopsis, Professor Fontainehas repeatedly pointed out its striking resemblance to Podocarpus.While admitting this resemblance both Nathorst and Seward havesuggested Araucaria for comparison. 6 Although there is, for exam-ple, considerable similarity between Nageiopsis zamioides and Arau-caria bidwiUi, where in the genus Araucaria is there an analogue ofNageiopsis longifoliaf In addition the Araucarieae have their leavesmuch crowded and the phvllotaxy is spiral while in Nageiopsis theleaves are much more remote and the evidence for a spiral phvllotaxyis not entirely conclusive although probable. Araucaria has mark-edly decurrent leaves and this character also can not be demonsl rated
a Monogr. U. S. Geol. Kurv., No. 48, L906, pi. 117, figs. I, 5.
''This is probably the true affinity of Seward's Lower Oolite Nageiopsis. JurassicFlora, pi. I, L900, p. 288, pi. 51.
188 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. vol. 38.for Nageiopsis although, as the writer shows elsewhere in tins paper,there is some evidence for both this and the preceding character insonic of the specimens. Taking into account all of the fads obtain-able, however, the reference of Nageiopsis to the Podocarpese seemsreasonably well established, at least the facts at our command do notwarrant our making any changes at the present time although thepossibility of Nageiopsis being related to the abundant MesozoicAraucarieae should not be lost sight of.The existing species of Podocarpus comprise about two score formsand they are as dominant representatives of the Coniferales in theSouthern Hemisphere as are the pines in the Northern. They extendnorthward to China, and Japan through the East Indian region andhave representatives in all three of the great southern land masses.This peculiar distribution in itself may be considered as an indicationof an extensive geological history, although the records of this his-tory are not nearly as complete as they are for many other genera.To summarize briefly there are fifteen or more described species comingchiefly from the European Tertiary and one of these has been doubt-fully recognized by Lesquereux in this country at Florissant, Colorado.The extra-American distribution includes Eocene species in England,Scotland, France, Italy, and Australia; Oligocene species in France,Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Styria, Tyrol, and Greece: Miocenespecies in Fiance, Styria, and Croatia; and Pliocene species in Italy.The descendants of Nageiojjsis have not, however, been recognized inlater American deposits.The comparison of Nageiopsis with Podocarpus is more especiallywith the section Nageia, one of the four sections into which Kichler"divides Podocarpus. Nageia. formerly regarded as a distinct genus,has a broad form, numerous parallel veins, and lacks a midrib, thelatter being present in the other three sections of the genus. It maybe questioned whether the reduction of Gaertner's genus to a sectionof Podocarpus L'lTeretier, as clearly expresses the natural facts asthey would be emphasized by its retention as a distinct genus.Xagcia has about a dozen species ranging from Japan southward tothe East Indies and New Caledonia.It has seemed wiser in considering detached and fragmentary leavessuch as are those specimens which have been referred to Nageiopsisfrom the Shasta, Lakota, and Ivootanie formations to fully indicatetheir extremely doubtful character. Likewise in regard to theaffinity of some of the fragmentary detached specimens of Nageiopsis,so called, from higher horizons in the Potomac group in cases where
t here is absolutely no evidence that thev are so related thev have beenreferred to Podozamites or Zamites, genera broad enough to includethem without the implications and the contravention of the genericdiagnosis which would be involved in retaining them in Nageiopsis.
a In Engk'i ami I'raiill.
No. 1738. Fossil PLANTS OF TEE GENUS NAOEIOPSIS?BERRY. 189
NAGEIOPSIS LONGIFOLIA Fontaine."
Nageiopsis longi/olia Fontaine, Monogr. U. S. Geol. Surv., No. L5, L890, p.195, pi. 75, fig. 1; pi. 76, figs. 2-6; pi. 77, figs. 1, 2; pi. 78, figs. L-5; pi. 79,fig. 7; pi. 85, figs. I, 2, 8, 9.?? Fontaine, in Diller and Stanton, Bull. Geol.Soc. Amer., vol. 5, L894, p. 150.?? Fontaine, in Stanton, Bull. L33, I'. S.Geol. Surv., 1896, p. 15.
?
Fontaine, in Ward, Monogr. U. S. Geol. Surv.,No. IS, 1905, pp. 259, 311, 484, 491, 510, 528, 548, 557; pi. 68, figs. 9-12;pi. 73, fig. 9 (not pi. 45, figs. 1-5).? ? Knowlton, in Diller, Bull. Geol.Soc. Amor., vol. 19, 1908, ]>. 386.Angiopteridium strictinerve Fontaine ? in Diller and Stanton, Bull. Geol. SocAmer., vol. 5, 1894, p. 150.
?
Fontaine, in Stanton, Hull. 133, U. S. Geol.Surv., 1896, p. 15.Nageiopsis crassicaulis Fontaine, Monogr. U. S. Geol. Surv., No. 15, 1890, p.198, pi. 79, figs. 2, fi; pi. 82, fig. 1; pi. 84, figs. 3, 9, 11.Description.?Branching leafy twigs of large size, stout and thick,apparently branched in approximately one plane. Leaves linear-lanceolate, often slightly curved, somewhat inequilaterally narrowedinto a short slightly twisted petiole; above gradually narrowed tothe acute or subacute tip. Length, 8 to 20 cm.; width, 5 mm. to1.3 cm. The leaves are not crowded ami usually appear oppositeor subopposite, as if inserted on the lateral margins of the stem,although at times they seem to be attached to its upper or lowerside. As previously remarked, none of the material is conclusivein regard to the phyllotaxy. Veins nine to twelve in number,usually ten, forking only at the base and running parallel untilthey abut against the leaf margin, about 0.7 mm. apart, somewhatcoarser in caliber than in the other members of the genus, distincton both surfaces of the lamina and apparently not immersed. Leafsubstance not coriaceous.This species is quite distinct from its congeners, and the greatdevelopment of its evergreen foliage must have rendered it a moststriking object in life.Included under this species are the few and rather poor remainsupon which Fontaine founded Nageiopsis crassicaulis. All but oneof the specimens which that author so names are fragments of de-tached leaflets, somewhat shorter and broader than the typicalleaves of Nageiopsis longifolia, but absolutely uncharacteristic andincapable of identification. The specimen with leaves attached isobviously a poorly preserved fragment of a twig of Nageiopsislongi folia
.
This species occurs abundantly in characteristic and fine specimensat Fredericksburg. It has also been recorded from a large number
a Iritrs alashana Lesquereux is made a synonym of this species in Monograph 48.According to the principles so often set forth by Professor Ward, this species shouldbe renamed if hites alaskana is included in it, since the latter was published threeyears before; Xageiopsis longifolia. As the Alaska remains are not those of a Xagei-opsis this name is omitted from the synonymy.
1 (.)() PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEl I/. vol.38.
of localities in Virginia and Maryland, mostly as detached specimens,generally with the base and apex missing, so that the record of itsrange is somewhat unreliable, nor can it be otherwise from thenature of the material. These doubtful occurrences are indicated bya query in the table of distribution.Professor Fontaine has recorded this species from Cape Lisburne,Alaska; from several Californian localities referred to the Shastagroup; from the Kootaine formation at Geyser, Montana, and fromthe Lakota formation in the Western Black Hills, at Barrett, Wyo-ming. Referring to these very briefly, it may be said that theAlaska locality is much older than any of the others, and the fossilsreferred to this species, previously identified by Lesquerenx as .Irites alaslcana Lesqucreux and Bmciv pa/mata I leer, are entirelyuncharacteristic, and, in the writer's judgment, are in nowise relatedto Nageiopsis. The Shasta records are based entirely on smallfragments, which show only the middle portion of leaves and oftenlack the venation. The following quotation from Fontaine's report(1905, p. 259) sufficiently indicates their reliability: "The presenceof X. longifolia in the flora of the Shasta formation can not be posi-tively determined from the specimens found."The Kootaine record is likewise extremely doubtful, and is basedon five or six fragments from Geyser which are unattached and show-neither bases nor lips. The specimens reported from the Lakotaformation are also all fragmentary and uncharacteristic, and whilewe would expect to find this species in the west, the nature of theremains thus far collected scarcely justifies the identifications whichhave been based upon them, and as furnishing facts for stratigraphiccorrelation they are absolutely valueless.Occurrence.?Patuxent formation. Dutch Gap, Kankeys, Cock-pit Point, Telegraph station (Lorton), Virginia. Arundel forma-tion. Langdon, District of Columbia. PatAPSCO FORMATION. NearBrooke, Mount Vernon, Deep Bottom (?), Chinkapin Hollow (0,Virginia; Fort Foote, Federal Hill, Vinegar Hill ( ?), Maryland.
' Lakota formation. Barrett, cliff on north side of valley of SouthPork of Hay Creek, Wyoming. ( ?) Kootaine formation. Geyser,Montana. ( ?) Shasta FORMATION. Knoxville and Horsetown beds,Tehama County, ( 'alit'ornia.NAGEIOPSIS ANGUSTIFOLIA Fontaine.
Nageiopsis angustifolia Fontaine, Monogr. U. S. Geol. Surv., No. L5, L890, p. 202,pi, 86, figs, 8, 9; pi. 87, figs. 2 6; pi. 88, figs. 1, 3, I, 6 8; pi. s!i, fig. 2.- Fon-taine, in Ward. L9tb Ann. Rept. V . S. Geol. Snrv., pt. 2, ISO!), p. 684, pi.168, fig. 7.?Fontaine, in Ward. Monogr. V. S. Geol. Surv., No. 18, 1905,pp. 219, 491, 516, 528, 560, pi. 117, figs. I. 5.Description. Much branched stems, of comparatively large caliber.Leaves variable in size, becoming smaller on ultimate twigs, but con-
No.1738. FOSSIL PLANTS OF THE GENUS VAGEIOPSIS BERRY. 191
st ant in their proportions; very long and narrow, linear-lanceolate,sometimes somewhat falcate, acute, averaging about 3 nun. in width,in some instances only 1 .."> mm. wide, greatesl width observed 1 mm.;length 2 to 7 cm., averaging about 5 cm.; veins of fine caliber, gen-erally eight in number, sometimes observed to fork at the base. Anabundant species suggestive of Cephalotaxopsis in general appearance,but perfectly distinct and easily distinguished by the stomatalgrooves of the latter.Occurrence.?Patuxent formation. Fredericksburg, near DutchGap, near Potomac Run, Virginia; Sixteenth street, District of Co-lumbia. Arundel formation. Bay View, Maryland. Patapscoformation. Near Brooke, Mount Vernon, Virginia; Federal Hill,Fort Foote, Fort Washington (?), Maryland. ( ?) Lakota forma-tion. Barrett, Crook County, Wyoming. ( ?) Shasta formation.NAGEIOPSIS ZAMIOIDES Fontaine.
Nageiopsis zamioides Fontaine, Monogr. I*. S. Geol. Surv., No. L5, L890, p. L96,pi. Tit, figs. 1, 3; pi. 80, figs. 1, 2, 4; pi. 81, figs. L-6.
?
Fontaine, in Ward,Monogr. U. S. Geol. Surv., No. 48, 1905, pp. 510, 521, 528, 545.Nageiopsis recurvata Fontaine, Monogr. U. S. Geol. Surv., No. 15, 1890, p. L97,pi. 75, fig. 2; pi. 7'.), fig. 4; pi. SO, fig. 3.Nageiopsis decrescens Fontaine, Monogr. V. S. Geol. Surv., No. 15, 1890, p. 1!)!),pi. 77, fig. 3.Nageiopsis ovata Fontaine, Monogr. L*. 8. Geol. Surv., No. 15, 1890, p. 199, pi.77. fig. I; pi. 80, fig. 5.Nageiopsis heterophylla Fontaine, Monogr. U. S. Geol. Surv., No. 15, 1800, p. 201,pi. 84, fig. 4; pi. 86, figs. 6, 7; pi. 88, figs. 2, 5.?Fontaine, in Ward, Monogr.F. S. Geol. Surv., No. 48, 1905, pp. 219 (?), 483, 520, 548, 561, pi. 117, fig. (i.Nageiopsis microphylla Fontaine, Monogr. U. S. Geol. Surv.. No. 15, 1890, p. 201,pi. 84, fig. ti; pi. 85, fig. 14; pi. 86, figs. 1-3, 5. Fontaine, in Ward, Monogr.IT. S. Geol. Surv.. No. 18, 1905, p. 484.Nageiopsis cf. N. heterophylla Fontaine, Seward, Wealden Flora, pt. 2, 1895,p. 211, pi. 12, fig. 3.Description.? Leaves ovate-lanceolate, proportionately shorter andwider than in X. angustifolia and much shorter and more rounded inoutline than in N. longifolia, broadest toward the rounded base, themaximum width observed being 1.5 cm., although the average widthis much less and may be put at 1 cm. or slightly less; very variable in
size, tip generally acute, although an occasional specimen may beobtuse. The greatest length observed is 8 cm., but the average lengthis much less than this, and may be placed at 3 cm. to 1 cm.Occasional twigs like the solitary specimen described as N. decres-cens or the specimens referred to X. microj>/i i/l/a may be muchsmaller than the above; the latter arc, however, of the same gen-eral shape, while in the former case the fact that the larger leavesat the base of the specimen are replaced by very minute leaves indi-cates that the specimen is an abnormal twig. Veins line in caliber,somewhat remote, generally six to nine in number, forking at the base
1
'. t li PROCEEDINGS OF THE \ \ll<>\ \i. UUSEl I/, vol. 88.
and diverging rapidly al first, then parallel until the} abul upon themargin.While ii might seem al first sight thai too greal ;i variety of leafform had been lumped under this specific name, the greal variabilityof the leave on single twi^s should be kepi in mind. The leaves inthe type forms are c monly smallest toward the base of the twigs,as the} are also in the \. ovata forms. In N. decrescens the l>;is;illeaves are one hundred percenl longer than are the succeeding leaves.In the forms described by Fontaine as N. heterophylla the leaves areespecially variable, some being identical with those he called \.microphylla, while others are like those he calls A. decrescens, others
till simulating his A', ovata and A', zamioides with two or more ofthese types present on the same twins. Others referred l>\ him in\ amioide8 show an equally wide range of variation. I have figured(fig, 2) a specimen labeled A', zamioides which shows bul five leaves,ami includes leaves easily referable to hisspecies microphylla decrescens, ovata, heter-ophylla, and zamioides, leaving only his A'.recurvata to he accounted for. Since theseV latter are detached, there is reallj no proof
I hat t hey are col reel ly idenl ilied. They are,v however, exactly like certain somewhat fal-cate leaves of A'. <iini<>hl<s found on twigs
a ng normally straight leaves, so thatthere is little doilhl hill that the Virginiaspecimens are referable to this species. The
pWiooi iqeiop i zaw form identified as A', recurvata from Vinegarwinq vabiatio i Hill, Maryland, is different from the othersFORM ANI IVI . ' .
,and IS a I <></<> ilinih s leallet. ( orrohoraleevidence is furnished by the similarity in venation characters and inthe fact thai all hill one of I he six so-called species, A'. i/< cr< set us, arefrom the single limited exposure at Fredericksburg, ami this wasdescribed from a near hv ami probably synchronous outcrop ami isii'.illv presenl al Fredericksburg attached to a twig labeled N. hetero-phylla. Four of i hem are again associate! I a i tic Dutch Gap locality.Again ai Fredericksburg the typical amioides of Fontaine are veryabundant, while the variants which he described as separate speciesare represented in some cases by a single specimen, in others hv buttwo or three specimens. I think a glance at the various figures inFonti >'s monograph and a perusal of the accompanying descrip-tion will be convincing, and this is onlv emphasized l>.\ a consulta-tion of the speci men t hemselves.Compare, for example, fig. 5 of ovata with fig. 3 of amioides and it willbe seen thai thej might have \<rfw drawn from the same specimens.This is likewise true when the single specimen of A', decrescens is
No 1738. FOSSIL I'LAXTS OF I'll I' CESUS \ \(!ElOI'S!S KERRY. L93
compared with fig. 3 and fig. 6 of A', microphylla, and similar compar-isons can be made back and forth indefinitely.Seward describes and figures a few small fragments from theEnglish Wealden ;it Hastings and Ecclesbourne, which he compareswith N.heterophylla Fontaine. The specimen figured shows well thebranching habit, and as near as can be judged, is ;i species of Nageiopsis. Since, however, the name A. heterophylla Fontaine becomes asynonym <>f N. zamioides Fontaine, the English fossils may be giventhe latter name without question, il seems to me.Occurrence. Patuxent formation. Fredericksburg, Dutch Gap,Cockpit Point, near Potomac Run, Virginia. Aim ndel formation.Langdon, District of Columbia; Bay View, Hobb's Iron Mine (?),Maryland. Patapsco formation. Vinegar Hill, Overlook InnRoad, Maryland. ('> Siiasia formation. Tehama County, Cali-fornia.
It remains to notice several forms described as species of Nageiopsis
;iinl which are obviously not related to that genus. The lirst to beconsidered is Nageiopsis acuminata Fontaine, rounded on a singledetached lea I' from near Telegraph Station, Virginia. Professor Fon-taine's figure is quite accurate in outline and the veins are very dis-tinct although he says "veins not seen;" they number about twentyand are thus more numerous than in Nageiopsis, besides beingcoarser and more distinctly immersed. This leaf appears to beidentical with the leaflets of PodozamiteS acutifolius of the sameauthor, some specimens of which have been found at this samelocality.Another form, named N. subfalcata by Professor Fontaine, is alsobased on a single imperfect specimen which came from near DutchGap, Virginia. As figured and described it presents no charactersh\ which it can be recognized and none which ally il with Nageiopsis.The writer has been unable to locate this specimen in the NationalMuseum collections. Professor Fontaine says of it: ''Its position isdoubtful, and it luaV be a Sequoia, for the footstalks seem to bedecurrent. They leave imprints on the stem resembling those ofSequoia." It is extremely probable that this specimen should bereferred to Sequoia, as Fontaine suggests.
"Wealden Flora, pi. 2, 1895, j?. -Ml, pi. \1, fig. :',.ProcN.M.vol.38?10 13
194 PROCEEDINGS OF THE VATIONAL UUSEUM. vol.. 38.
PODOZAMITES INjEQUILATERALIS ( Foniaine), new combination.
Nageiopsis obtusifolia Fontaine," Monogr. U.S. Geol. Surv., No. !">, I son, p. l'imi,pi. 85, fi*;. 7. Fontaine, in Ward, Monogr. I'. S. Geol. Surv., No. is. lime.p is I.Nageiopsis insequilateralis Fontaine, Monogr. U. S. Geol. Surv., No. L5, L890,]>. i'oo. P l. 85, fig. 6.Nageiopsis montanensis Fontaine, in Ward, Monogr. U. S. Geol. Surv.. No. 18,L906, p. 312, pl. 7:;, fig. 7.The 1 description of N. inasquilateralis is an alliteration of thai ofthe preceding N. obtusifolia. It is based on a single specimen.Veins arc twenty-two in number, much thicker than in Nageiopsisand like those in X. acuminata, which has already been referred toPodozamites. They converge toward the tip of the leaf, which ismissing in the specimen. Leaf pedicellate at base.N. montanensis, from the Kootanie at Geyser, Montana, is basedon a single detached leaflet with nineteen or twenty veins, convergentin the obtuse tip. There is absolutely no ground for including it inNageiopsis. The insequilateralis specimen comes from Kankeys.Virginia, and obtusifolia was found near Potomac linn and at CockpitPoint, Virginia.These imperfect forms are suggestive of Podozamitep ajjinis (Schenk ISchimper of the Wernsdorfer schichten, but are not representativeenough for accurate comparison.Occurrence.?Patuxent formation. Kankeys, Cockpit Point,near Potomac Run, Virginia. Kootanie formation. Geyser, Mon-tana. PHYLLITES LATIFOLIUS i Fontaine ', new combination.
Nageiopsis lati/olia Fontaine, Monogr. I . S. Geol. Surv., No. 1">. L890, p. L98,pl. 82, fig. 3. Fontaine, in Ward, Monogr. U. S. Geol. Surv., No. 18, L906,p. 260, pl. lis. fig. L3.Description. "Leaves very broad and short, base and apex notseen; leaf-substance thin; shape of Leaves probably broadly elliptical;nerves not fully disclosed, but probably branching near the base;they are then approximately parallel to near the apex, following themargins, and parallel." Fontaine, 1890.This species was based on several detached leaves, from near Dutch
( lap Canal and Potomac linn, none of w hie h show base, apex, generalform, or method of attachment, the mosl complete one found beingthe one' figured. They present no characters which ally them toNageiopsis, from which they art 1 excluded by their deciduous nature.The single specimen which Fontaine identifies as this species from
oThe specific namer obtusifolia can not be used for a species of Podozamites, as, therehas been quasi use of this combination by Eeer: Bandl. ELongl. Sven. Vet. Akad.(Fl. Foes. Am., vol. L pt. 1 1. L876, p 39, pl. 8, fig. (3.
No.1738. FOSSIL PLANTS OF THE GENUS VAGEIOPSIS?BERRY. 195the Shasta, is equally unsatisfactory, and judging by the analogiesfurnished by the existing Podocarpeae it serins extremely unlikelythat conifers of the Nageiopsis type should have included such broad-leaved forms.They are possibly referable to sonic of the large-leaved Cycadaceaeof the Lower Cretaceous, Professor Fontaine suggesting their possible'reference to Podozamites (cf. grandifolius Fontaine). They may alsobe compared to conifers of the Dammara type, but the materialcollected up to the present time is incapable of throwing any light ontheir true botanical affinity.O'ccummce.?Patuxent formation. Near Dutch Gap, near Poto-mac Run, Virginia. (?)Shasta formation. Near Riddles, Oregon.