Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T16:20:35.122Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

V.—On Fossil Flowering or Phanerogamous Plants

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

Extract

Our attention has been devoted exclusively this year to the fossil flowering or phanerogamous plants. The results of our researches point to the conclusion that while that section known as Gymnospermous, to which the Coniferæ belong, is of the highest antiquity, being almost coeval with the first definite remains of plants in the Palæozoic age, there are no Angiospermous plants in British rocks of greater antiquity than the Secondary period, if we except the problematic plant known as Spirangium. Even down to so late as the Lias we have been unable to ascertain that any indisputable Angiosperm has been discovered within our area, for we are led to the conclusion that the supposed Monocotyledons from the Rhætics, near Bristol, hitherto referred to the family of Pond-weeds under the name Najadita, are really cryptogamic plants of the moss tribe, closely allied to the river moss Fontinalis. This group had not previously been found fossil, and, so far as it goes, would indicate rather a temperate climate. It is important to notice that these conclusions are shared by such high authorities on fossil plants as Prof. Williamson, Mr. Carruthers, and by all botanists who have examined them, as well as Mr. Brodie, the possessor of the specimens. The Lilia, Bensonia, and other supposed Monocotyledons of similar age are very imperfectly preserved and, doubtless referable to Cycads, a family which abounded then.

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1886

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 498 note 1 Journ. of Bot. vol. iv. pl. lvii. fig. 9.

page 500 note 1 A far larger specimen than that originally described, 8 inches long by 1¾ inches in diameter, has since been found.