Fossil plants, Vol. 2 : $b A text-book for students of botany and geologySeward, A. C. (Albert Charles)
Science
Fossil plants, Vol. 2 : $b A text-book for students of botany and geology
Seward, A. C. (Albert Charles)
Paleobotany
Nathorst proposed this generic name for Rhaetic fronds[964] resembling
those of _Clathropteris_ and _Dictyophyllum_, but differing in the
form of the pinnae and in habit. The habit of the type-species, _C.
spiralis_, is shown in fig. 287. An examination of the specimens in
the Stockholm Museum convinced me of the correctness of Nathorst’s
restoration[965]. Each of the forked arms of the rachis bore as many
as 150–160 long and narrow pinnae characterised by an anastomosing
venation (fig. 282, C) and by a spiral disposition due to the
torsion of the axes. The sporangia agree in essentials with those of
_Dictyophyllum_.
_Hausmannia._
A critical and exhaustive account of this genus has been given by Prof.
Von Richter[966] based on an examination of specimens found in the
Lower Cretaceous rocks of Quedlinburg in Germany. The name was proposed
by Dunker[967] for leaves from the Wealden of Germany characterised by
a deeply dissected dichotomously branched lamina. Andrae subsequently
instituted the genus _Protorhipis_[968] for suborbicular leaves with
dichotomously branched ribs from the Lias of Steierdorf. A similar
but smaller type of leaf was afterwards described by Zigno[969]
from Jurassic beds of Italy as _P. asarifolius_, and Nathorst[970]
figured a closely allied form from Rhaetic rocks of Sweden. While
some authors regarded _Hausmannia_ and _Protorhipis_ as ferns, others
compared them with the leaves of _Baiera_ (Ginkgoales); Saporta
suggested a dicotyledonous affinity for leaves of the _Protorhipis_
type. The true nature of the fossils was recognised by Zeiller[971],
who called attention to the very close resemblance in habit and in
soral characters to the recent genus _Dipteris_. A comparison of the
different species of _Dipteris_, including young leaves (fig. 231,
p. 297), with those of the fossil species reveals a very striking
agreement[972]. There can be no doubt, as Richter points out, that the
names _Hausmannia_ and _Protorhipis_ stand for one generic type.
_Hausmannia_ may be defined as follows:
Rhizome creeping, slender, dichotomously branched; leaf-stalks
slender (2–25 cm. long), bearing a leathery lamina (1–12 cm. long
and broad), wedge-shaped below, occasionally cordate or reniform,
entire or more or less deeply lobed into broad linear segments.
The leaf is characterised by dichotomously branched main ribs
which arise from the summit of the rachis as two divergent arms
and radiate in a palmate manner, with repeated forking, through
the lamina. Lateral veins are given off at a wide angle, and, by
subdivision, form a fairly regular network similar to that in
_Dictyophyllum_, _Clathropteris_, and _Dipteris_.
[Illustration: FIG. 288. _Hausmannia dichotoma._ (Specimens from
the late Dr Marcus Gunn’s Collection of Upper Jurassic plants,
Sutherlandshire; very slightly reduced.)]
_Hausmannia dichotoma_, Dunker[973]. Fig. 288, A, B.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account