Floras of the Pocono 

Formation and Price 

Sandstone in Parts of 

Pennsylvania, Maryland 

West Virginia, and Virginia

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263
Floras of the Pocono 

Formation and Price 

Sandstone in Parts of 

Pennsylvania, Maryland 

West Virginia, and Virginia

By CHARLES B. READ

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263

Including descriptions of 22 new species, 

I new genus, and 4. new combinations of 

Mississippian age

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1955
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Douglas McKay, Secretary

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

W. E. Wrather, Director

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office

Washington 25, D. C.
CONTENTS

Abstract-__________________________________________

Introduction.______________________________________

History of paleobotanical investigations.______________

History of stratigraphic nomenclature of the Pocono formation and the Price sandstone___________________

Floral differentiation in the Pocono formation and the 

Price sandstone_______________________________

Catskill formation._____________________________

Lower Pocono formation and Price sandstone. _____

Tipper Pocono formation and Price sandstone_____

Floras of the lower part of the Mauch Chunk shale 

and equivalent formations— ___________________

Summary of floral succession.____________________

Page 

1

1

2

12

12

Page

Collection localities.__________-____-___-_----_______ 14

Adiantites flora.___________--______-------_----_ 15

Triphyllopteris flora.____________________________ 15

Floras of the Mauch Chunk and other higher Mississippian formations____-----_-__--------_-----_ 16

Descriptions of species_____________________________ 16

Lower Pocono formation and Price sandstone. _____ 16

Tipper Pocono formation and Price sandstone. _____ 21

Ferns and fernlike plants__________________— 21

Lepidodendrales_ _ __________________________ 25

Mauch Chunk shale and equivalent formations- _____ 27

Literature cited___________________________________ 29

Index._________-___-______----____--_------__---__ 31

ILLUSTRATIONS

[Plates follow index]

PLATE 1. Sphenopteridium and Carpolithes

2. Cardiopteris and Adiantites

3. Rhodea and Adiantites

4. Rhodea

5. Triphyllopteris

6. Triphyllopteris

7. Triphyllopteris and Adiantites

8. Triphyllopteris

9. Cardiopteris and Triphyllopteris

10. Cardiopteris, Adiantites, and Triphyllopteris

PLATE 11. Adiantites and Triphyllopteris

12. Adiantites and Triphyttopteris

13. Adiantites and Triphyllopteris

14. Adiantites

15. Girtya

16. Alcicornopteris, Oirtya, Rhodea, and Rhacopteris

17. Lagenospermum, Calathiops, and Alcicornopteris

18. Rhodea, Rhacopteris, and Lepidodendropsis

19. Lepidodendropsis

20. Lepidodendropsis

FIGURE 1. Map showing geographic positions of sections examined and localities where collections were obtained.

Page 

14

ill

FLORAS OF THE POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE IN PARTS OF 

PENNSYLVANIA, MARYLAND, WEST VIRGINIA, AND VIRGINIA

By CHARLES B. READ

ABSTRACT

This report embodies the results of several years' investigations of the floras of the Pocono formation and Price sandstone. These formations contain floras of Mississippian age. 

The area in which they have been studied extends from the 

Lehigh River, northeastern Pennsylvania, to Pulaski County, 

southwestern Virginia. For the most part, work has been restricted to the landward facies of the formations, that is to say, 

the eastern and southeastern belts of outcrop. In addition, 

there are brief discussions of the higher Mississippian floras in 

the Mauch Chunk shale and correlative formations, and several 

species are described.

The Pocono from Lehigh to Susquehanna Rivers, Pennsylvania, is shown to range from approximately 1,100 to 1,600 feet 

in thickness, coarse elastics comprising the greater part of the 

unit. In the upper part there are numerous coaly partings by 

which an upper coal-bearing zone can be recognized. This zone 

is characterized by an abundance of species of Triphyllopteris. 

Another floral zone near the base of the section is characterized 

by species of Adiantites.

On the east side of Broad Top syncline, Pennsylvania, the 

formation appears similar to the sequence in the anthracite 

region and is 1,200 to 1,400 feet thick. Westward the formation becomes marine, and coal beds are no longer present. In 

Meadow Branch syncline, Maryland and West Virginia, the 

Pocono is 1,000 to 1,200 feet thick and includes only the Rockwell 

formation, Purslane sandstone, and Hedges shale of Stose and 

Swartz. The Myers shale and Pinkerton sandstone are believed 

to be equivalent to the Mauch Chunk shale and basal Pennsylvanian. The Hedges shale is shown to be the zone of Triphyllopteris. Along the Allegheny Front in the vicinity of Altoona, 

Pa., the Pocono carries only the Adiantites flora. The occurrence of strata that contain the Triphyllopteris flora has not 

been established.

In the Valley coal field of Virginia, valuable coal beds occur 

in the upper part of the Price sandstone, which is the equivalent 

of the Pocono in that region. These coal beds are in the upper 

part of the formation and are associated with the Triphyllopteris 

flora. Succeeding the Price sandstone are redbeds known as 

the Maccrady shale. This unit carries numerous coaly horizons, as indicated by coal streaks and beds of underclay or soil 

zones. The Maccrady is believed to interfinger with the Price 

to some extent, although the evidence is not conclusive.

It is apparent that the flora of the Upper Devonian Catskill 

formation characterized by Archaeopteris spp. is distinct from 

the floras of the lower Mississippian Pocono formation and 

Price sandstone. The meager available evidence suggests that

the post-Pocono Mississippian floras may be equally distinct 

from those of the Pocono and Price.

New species or new combinations described and known species redescribed are as follows:

Lower part of Pocono and Price—zone of Adiantites:

Rhacopteris latifolia (Arnold), n. comb.; Adiantites spectaUlis, n. sp.; A. ungeri, n. sp.; A. cyclopteroides, n. sp.; 

A, cardiopteroides, n. sp.; Rhodea tionestana, n. sp.; R. 

alleghanensis, n. sp.; Alcicornopteris anthracitica, n. sp.; 

A. altoonensis, n. sp.; Lagenospernwm sp.; CalatMops 

pottsvillensis, n. sp.; Girtya pennsylvanica, n. sp.

Upper part of Pocono and Price—zone of Triphyllopteris: 

Cardiopteris antecedens, n. sp.; C, irregularis, n. sp.; Rhodea 

Wacksburgensis, n. sp.; R. vespertina, n. sp.; R. sp.; Triphyllopteris alleghanensis (Meek), n. comb.; T. latilobata, 

n. sp.; T. lescuriana (Meek) Lesquereux; 5P. virginiana 

(Meek), n. comb.; T. rarinervis, n. sp.; T. ~biloba, n. sp.; 

Lagenospermum imparirameum Arnold; Lepidodendropsia 

sooUniformis (Meek), n. comb.; L. sigillarioides Jongmans, 

Gothan, and Darrah; L. vandergrachti Jongmans, Gothan, 

and Darrah.

Mauch Chunk shale: Sphenopteridium virginianum, n. sp.; 8. 

Irrooksi, n. sp.; 8. girtyi, n. sp.; Cardiopteris abbensis, n. sp.; 

Adiantites ~beechensis, n. sp.; Carpolithes virginianus, n. sp.

INTRODUCTION

For short intervals during the period 1936-39, the 

writer had the opportunity to study in the field certain 

areas of outcrop of the Pocono formation and Price 

sandstone and to examine carefully both in field and 

laboratory the contained floras. Sections were studied 

and collections of plants made along the southern 

margin of outcrop of the Pocono from Mauch Chunk, 

Pa., to the Susquehanna Kiver above Harrisburg, Pa.; 

in and around the Broad Top coal field, chiefly in Bedford County, Pa.; along the Allegheny Front from 

about Philipsburg, Pa., south into Maryland and West 

Virginia; at a few points where interesting collections 

required a field review of stratigraphic data in the plateau region of northwestern Pennsylvania; in Sleepy 

Creek Mountain, W. Va.; around Cheat Mountain in 

Kandolph County, W. Va.; in the Pocono outlier near 

Kawley Springs, Va.; from the Price sandstone in the
FLORAS OF THE POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE

region around Lewisburg, W. Va., and White Sulphur 

Springs, W. Va.; and farther south in the Eidge and 

Valley province of the Appalachian Mountains into 

Pulaski County, Va. The writer's chief interest was in 

the fossil floras and their positions in the sections, affording an opportunity for application of the plants to 

problems of stratigraphic geology. Concentration was 

on the more landward phases of the sequences, and little 

attempt was made to examine regions where the section 

is marine.

During the course of field investigations of the Pocono and Price, the overlying Mauch Chunk shale, which 

is also of Mississippian age, was generally examined. 

Fossil plants that have been collected from several localities in this sequence of red beds were studied in 

the laboratory, and the results are incorporated in this 

report.

It is hoped that the recorded results of this work 

will provide a convenient starting point for future investigations of the floras of the Mississippian series. If 

this is the case the purpose of this account will be 

achieved. In any event, it should be understood that 

the following pages are a statement of progress and not 

a monograph of the Mississippian floras of the Appalachian region.

This paper is divided into two parts. The first summarizes the stratigraphic data and the writer's opinions 

regarding the floral zones of the formations. The second presents the descriptions and other facts pertinent 

to the floras from the viewpoint of the paleobotanist.

The writer wishes to acknowledge his indebtedness 

for help in the field to Mr. C. W. Unger, of Pottsville, 

Pa.; Mr. Bradford Willard, at the time attached to the 

Pennsylvania Geological Survey; Mr. D. B. Eeger, of 

Morgantown, W. Va.; Mr. W. C. Holden, of Virginia 

Polytechnic Institute; and Mr. H. A. Swenson of the 

Geological Survey, U. S. Department of the Interior. 

All have supplied collections or information relative to 

collections or sections.

HISTORY OF PALEOBOTANICAL INVESTIGATIONS

When one considers the span of years during which 

there has been general knowledge of the presence of 

fossil plant material in the Pocono formation and Price 

sandstone and also the accessibility of many of the 

critical areas of outcrop, it is remarkable that so little 

has been done with these organic remains. The fact 

is that no serious attempt has ever been made to thoroughly study these floras and to determine the value of 

the assemblages for stratigraphic work.

As is indicated in another section of this report, the 

Pocono formation was first called the Vespertine series 

by the first Pennsylvania Survey (Rogers, 1844, p. 143-

158), and in "The geology of Pennsylvania" (Rogers, 

1858, p. 108, 141-146) there is found mention, for the 

first time, of the occurrence of fossil plants in this unit. 

Lesquereux (1858) figured and briefly described from 

the Vespertine the spfecies Noeggerathia bockschiana 

[Adiantites ungeri, n. sp.] and Lepidodendron sp. 

[L]epidodendropsis sp. ] The rather common occurrence 

of the former species was reported.

In 1880 a rather important, though brief, contribution by Meek was published posthumously. While visiting at White Sulphur Springs, W. Va., Meek became 

interested in the succession of strata in the vicinity, and 

visited the Devonian and Mississippian exposures in 

the cuts of the Chesapeake and Ohio Eailroad at Lewis 

Tunnel. His paper (Meek, 1880, p. i-xix, pis. 1,2) gives 

a general description of the rock sequence and describes 

a number of species of fossil plants from the upper part 

of the Price sandstone: Lepidodendron scobiniforme 

Meek, Stigmariaf, Carpolithesf, Cyclopterisf (Archaeopteris} lescuriana Meek, Cyclopteris virginiana Meek, 

and Cyclopteris (Archaeopteris} alleghanensis. The 

lycopod, as Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis, and the 

ferns, as Triphyllopteris spp., are now recognized to be 

marker fossils for the upper parts of the Price and 

Pocono.

In 1884, Lesquereux (1884, p. 850, 851) added considerably to the knowledge of Mississippian floras. He 

indicated the presence of Triphyllopteris in the flora, T. 

lescuriana (Meek) Lesquereux, although he failed to 

recognize the generic identity of Meek's other two species of ferns. He recorded the presence of a number of 

species of Archaeopteris, a matter which will be discussed below. Likewise, he listed a number of highranging (Pennsylvanian) types from the Price sandstone. The complete record of Pocono occurrences, as 

given in Lesquereux's summary of distribution, is as 

follows:

Pennsylvania:

Mauch Chunk—Archaeopteris bockschiana, A. obtusa, A. 

minor

Pottsville—Archaeopteris bockschiana, A. obliqua

Sideling Hill, Huntingdon County—Knorria aticularis, 

Lepidodendron sp., Rhachiopteris fragments, Sphenopteris flaccida, Stiffmaria minuta, Stiffmariocannaf, Ulodendron sp. 

West Virginia:

New River—Alethopteris helenae, Archaeopteris halliana, 

Megalopteris dawsoni, Pseudopecopteris obtusiloba, 

Sphenophyllum antiquum. 

Virginia:

Lewis Tunnel—Archaeopteris alleghanensis, A. royersi, A. 

bockschiana, Lepidodendron corruffatum, Pseudopecopteris virginiana, Triphyllopteris lescuriana.

In Lesquereux's records of plants from Mauch Chunk, 

Pa., Pottsville, Pa., and Lewis Tunnel, Va., species of
HISTORY OF PALEOBOTANICAL INVESTIGATIONS

Archaeopteris are important elements. These occurrences, which are at variance with records given in this 

report, fall into two categories.

In the first category are the forms such as Archaeopteris bockschiana [Adiatntites ungeri\ and Archaeopteris alleghanensis ^TriphyUopteris'] that have been 

more recently assigned to other genera and which definitely are not referable to Archaeopteris. In the second 

are the species Archaeopteris obliqua, A. minor, and A. 

rogersi, which are correctly assigned to the genus. 

Some of these records are due to confusion in collecting. 

Thus, A. obliqua is recorded from the "Red shale of the 

Vespertine below Pottsville," A. obtusa from "Vespertine red shale below Mauch Chunk," and A. mmor from 

red shale below Mauch Chunk. These are clearly from 

the Catskill rather than the Pocono. It will be recalled 

that the Vespertine as originally defined included strata 

between the Serai [Pottsville] and the Ponent [Catskill] . It is possible that at places red Ponent [Catskill] 

may have been wrongly interpreted by local collectors 

as Vespertine, or the basal boundary of the Vespertine 

may have been drawn lower than the base of the Pocono 

is now drawn. At any rate, collections of more recent 

date have not revealed these species in the Pocono. The 

record of A. rogersi at Lewis Tunnel is probably a misidentification of a species of TriphyUopteris. The 

plants listed from "New River" evidently came from 

Pottsville (lower Pennsylvanian) horizons, probably 

in the Sewell formation, which were incorrectly correlated with the Pocono.

David White (1913, p. 429), in cataloging the fossil 

flora of West Virginia, recorded the presence at Lewis 

Tunnel, Va., of Archaeopteris alleghanensis (Meek) 

Fontaine and I. C. White, Archaeopteris bockschiana 

Lesquereux, TriphyUopteris lescuriana (Meek) Lesquereux, TriphyUopteris virginiana (Meek) Read, 

Lepidodendron scobiniforme Meek, and Lepidocystis 

siliqua (Dawson) D. White. No mention of the occurrences or further data regarding the plants is given.

A number of short papers bearing on Pocono floras 

appeared in 1933 and 1934. Arnold (1933a, p. 114-117) 

recorded a lycopodiaceous strobilus from strata said to 

be Pocono in age in a quarry near Port Allegany, Pa. 

A little later that same year Arnold (1933b, p. 51-56) 

described from the Oswayo sandstone in the same 

quarry Archaeopteris cf. A. roemeriana Goeppert, Rhacopterisf sp., and Trochophyllum breviinternodum 

Arnold. He suggested that the presence of Archaeopteris and Bhacopteris in the same flora indicated an 

overlap in ranges such as one might expect in strata at 

the boundary between the Devonian and Mississippian. 

Apparently he favored the interpretation of the plantbearing strata as Devonian. The writer has not examined Arnold's material and hesitates to offer an 

opinion based on the few photographs seen. It may be, 

however, that the Archeopteris cf. A. roemeriana is a 

Rhacopteris, or that the Rhacopteris? sp. is an Archeopteris. The preservation of the specimens is apparently rather poor.

David White (1934a, p. 34), at the meetings of the 

Geological Society of America in 1933, presented a 

paper entitled "Pocono orogeny, age, and climate" in 

which he stated his impressions regarding the problems 

of the formation. Likewise, he gave a brief analysis 

of the flora. He did not recognize, however, the two 

distinct assemblages present in the formation. Later, 

White published a criticism of Chadwick's conclusions 

regarding the age of the Pocono. It will be borne in 

mind that Chadwick, on the basis of stratigraphic work, 

had suggested that the Pocono and Mauch Chunk of 

eastern Pennsylvania might be Devonian in age and in 

fact had more or less challenged the Mississippian age 

of these units. White stated his opinion regarding the 

location of the type section, which he seems to have 

thought of as in the gap of Lehigh River at Mauch 

Chunk, Pa., on the flank of the Pocono Mountains. He 

made the very important point that nomenclatorial 

shuffling, which might result from the recognition that 

no Mississippian strata are present in the Pocono Mountains, has no bearing necessarily on the Mississippian 

age of strata of so-called Pocono elsewhere. Again, he 

discussed the general floral features of the Pocono and 

outlined the general features of the TriphyUopteris 

flora. He seems to have thought of Adiantites (Aneimites) as an upper Pocono rather than lower Pocono 

type and, in consequence, failed to realize the distinctness of the lower Pocono flora.

Jongmans and Gothan (1934, p. 17-44) published an 

account of the collections made from 13 localities in the 

Pocono and Price and indicated correlation with certain European strata. In that report they listed a number of forms as new and stated their intention of describing the plants.

In 1935, there was held at Heerlen, Netherlands, an 

important scientific meeting, the Second Congress for 

the Advancement of Studies of Carboniferous Stratigraphy. Arnold, Jongmans, Darrah, and Gothan presented papers which had a bearing either directly or 

indirectly on the Pocono floras. The final papers were 

published in 1937.

Arnold (1937, p. 47-62) gave a general account of 

the Mississippian floras in the light of recent work. 

His opinion regarding the Pocono is stated as follows:

That there are no rocks of Mississippian age between the uppermost Upper Devonian and the Pottsville along the northern 

Appalachian region in localities where the "Pocono" was sup-
FLORAS OF THE POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE

posed to occupy a prominent place now seems well established. 

On the other hand a distinct Mississippian flora is present in 

the Pocono at Pottsville, Pennsylvania, as well as in other 

places farther south. The exact relation between the Mississippian "Pocono" and Devonian "Pocono" and the extent of each 

horizon, it seems is not clear.

A good share of Arnold's comments on the features of 

the Pocono floras and the ranges of the plants is extracted from some of White's earlier work.

Jongmans (1937, p. 377, 378) gave a general account 

of his American work and discussed the features of the 

Pocono and Price floras as indicated by his collections. 

He held that the plant evidence supported the Carboniferous age of the formations and assigned a Visean 

age to them.

Jongmans, Gothan, Walther, and Darrah (1937, p. 

423 111), largely on the basis of Jongman's collections, 

presented a taxonomic paper on the Pocono flora. They 

listed and described from 13 localities in Pennsylvania 

and Virginia (Anthracite region and Valley coal field 

region) 19 specifically identified forms and several types 

which could be carried no farther than the genus. The 

specifically identified are SpJienopteridium rhoniboidale, Sphenopteris (DiplotJimema?) remota, Rliodea 

cf. R. tennis, B. tennis, R. cf. R. geikei, C ardiopteridium 

holdeni, Neurocardiopteris antiqua, Triphyllopteris 

minor, T. compacta, T. cf. T. lescuriana, T. cf. T. collomfiiana, T. adiantiformis, T. cf. T. minor, Lepidodendropsis vandergrachti, L. hirmeri, L. cyclostigmatoides, L. 

siffttlazriodes, Cyclostigma (Pinakodendron?} ungeri, 

Lepidophyllum fimbriatum.

Some of their descriptions and accompanying figures 

are good, but for the most part the writer, at least, has 

difficulty identifying his material from their work. 

The illustrations are in many cases too poor to give any 

idea of the fossil studied. In some cases this is, of 

course, due to the poor quality of the material. Little 

attempt is made to identify Meek's, Dawson's, or Lesquereux's species, other than Triphyllopteris lescuriana. 

Their conclusions regarding age were those previously 

expressed by Jongmans.

In the present work the writer has adopted a few of 

the names proposed. For the most part he has not 

recognized them. This is not through lack of knowledge of the existence of these named species but rather 

is for the above stated reasons.

C. A. Arnold (1939, p. 297-303, figs. 1-10) described, 

from the upper Pocono section at Fishing Creek Gap 

near Pine Grove, Pa., the species Lagenospertnwm imparirameum. In that account he suggested that the 

form might be of some stratigraphic value.

HISTORY OF STRATIGRAPHIC NOMENCLATURE OF THE 

POCONO FORMATION AND THE PRICE SANDSTONE

The term "Vespertine" was proposed by H. D. Rogers 

(1844, p. 156) for a stratigraphic unit comprising "the 

interesting formations above the horizon of the Ponent 

conglomerate, and that at the base of the great conglomerate under the coal measures. In Pennsylvania 

it is * * * the thick red shale deposit of the coal regions." In the same address it is stated that "The 

Ponent series includes all the rocks between the base 

of the Catskill red sandstone and the top of the overlying conglomerate. (Formation X, of the Pennsylvania 

and Virginia Annual Reports)."

Fourteen years later there appeared Rogers' (1858, p. 

141-146) "Geology of Pennsylvania" in which these 

units were discussed at length. It is interesting to note 

that the Vespertine is defined as largely coarse-grained 

gray sandstone, conglomerate, and some coaly shale that 

carry plants. A new term, "Umbral series," is introduced for the red shale unit overlying the Vespertine 

and underlying the Serai. The Ponent is described as 

underlying the Vespertine and consists of red sandstone and shale with gray to olive beds in the upper 

part and at the top a red sandstone containing quartz 

pebbles.

A consideration of these early statements defining 

the map units of the Rogers surveys makes it apparent 

that Vespertine was orginally defined in 1844 as a red 

shale and later in 1858 as a hard, gray sandstone unit. 

Umbral was introduced to take the position in the 

column originally reserved for Vespertine, and the gray 

sandstone beds (apparently a part of Rogers' original 

Ponent conglomerate) were removed from the Ponent 

and placed in the Vespertine.

In 1876 Pocono was used as a substitute for Vespertine 

on a map of Bradford and Tioga Counties, Pa., prepared by Sherwood. In 1877 Ashburner and Platt 

more fully defined the unit. Ashley and Willard 

(1935, p. 615-617) have recently gone into this matter 

of the original definition of Pocono, and the writer 

has referred freely to their account in this connection. 

Ashburner (1877, p. 522-525) refers to the "Pocono 

(Vespertine) gray sandstone." Platt (1877, p. 23-30) 

indicates the same usage, namely substitution of Pocono 

for Vespertine. Ashburner's published section, unfortunately, was the one at Sideling Hill tunnel, the 

details of which apparently need revision. Platt, 

though conveying the same idea of substitution of 

Pocono for Vespertine, uses it primarily in a discussion 

of Allegheny Plateau sections. He does, however, state 

that it attains its maximum development in the Pocono 

Mountains.
HISTORY OF PALEOBOTANICAL INVESTIGATIONS

According to Ashley and Willard (1935, p. 615-617), 

"It appears that Lesley, perhaps at a staff conference, 

certainly not later than 1876, proposed the term Pocono 

to replace Vespertine and intended it to be applied 

throughout the state wherever Vespertine had been 

used, whatever his type locality may have been." The 

usage of the term "Pocono" for the predominately gray 

sandstone unit between the Catskill formation and 

Mauch Chunk shale has been generally followed since 

then.

In the Summary Eeport (Lesley, 1895, p. 1629-1789) 

of the Second Pennsylvania Survey there is an excellent discussion of the features of the Pocono in Pennsylvania. It is perhaps noteworthy that the first 

detailed sections given are those along Lehigh River 

in the vicinity of Mauch Chunk. One is tempted to assume from this report that Lesley may have regarded 

the type section of the Pocono as being situated in that 

general area.

This final report of the Second Pennsylvania Survey 

included a general discussion of the features of the 

Pocono and reported the occurrence of minable coal in 

southwest Virginia. Numerous sections are given along 

Lehigh River; in Perry County; in Huntington County, 

including several around the Broadtop syncline and in 

Sideling Hill; in Blair County, Tipton Run coals, which 

have been shown to be Pennsylvanian; in the Allegheny 

Plateau; and in northern Pennsylvania. These data in 

northern Pennsylvania do not enter into the present 

discussion because they are outside the area of the report. It it interesting to note that at this early date 

the presence of a marine member (Riddlesburg shale 

member) in the Pocono on the west flank of the Broad 

Top basin had been noted (Lesley, 1895, p. 1659-1663).

In the meantime, the lower Carboniferous No. X of 

Virginia had been studied by several geologists. In 

W. B. Rogers' (1836, p. 183) reconnaissance of the Virginia area in 1835 he reports the general features of 

formation "No. 10" and mentions the occurrence of coal 

in Montgomery, Augusta, Botetourt, Rockingham, 

Berkeley, Frederick, and Shenandoah Counties. A 

number of other geologists, including J. P. Lesley (1862, 

p. 30-38), J. J. Stevenson (1887, p. 61-108), and McCreath and d'lnvilliers (1887, p. 1-171), also reported 

the occurrence of coal in the Valley region of southwest 

Virginia.

The most important of these early reports on the No. 

X (Vespertine, Pocono) coals of Virginia was published by W. M. Fontaine (1877, p. 37-48). Fontaine 

outlined the areas of occurrence of Vespertine, indicating two belts of outcrop:

1. On the east flank of Alleghany Mountain, near White Sulphur Springs. * * * This belt extends an unknown distance

315934—55———2

north of the railroad, probably to the northern part of Bath, 

County. To the south, it terminates near the northeastern border of Monroe County.

2. A much more extended and important belt, which lies about 

30 miles east of the last. This commences in * * * Berkeley 

County and extends thence south through the State with somei 

minor interruptions.

Fontaine (1877, p. 115-123) gave a detailed section 

measured near Greenbrier River at Lewis Tunnel in 

which he recognized the units seen in more recent work 

and discussed the correlation of the redbeds (Maccrady) above the Vespertine. He stated that the Vespertine here is divisible into three members: 1, a lower 

flagstone, sandstone, and conglomerate member some 

560 feet thick; 2, a middle gray, coal-bearing sandstone 

member some 350 feet thick; and 3, an upper redbed 

member about 250 feet thick. He indicated the presence below the Vespertine of a thin Catskill sequence. 

The coal-bearing Vespertine in Augusta and Rockingham Counties was discussed, and a general section was 

given that shows some 400 feet of sandstone constituting the lower member and resting on Catskill, above 

which are 40 feet of gray flagstone succeeded by a shaly 

and coaly interval and capped by an undetermined 

thickness of shales and sandstones. The important 

Montgomery County, Va., area was likewise discussed. 

Along Poverty Creek a section was measured in which 

the following units were recognized: 1, Sandstone and 

flagstone, 930 feet; 2, sandstone, flagstone, and coal, 670 

feet; 3, red shale, about 1,000 feet.

Campbell (1894, p. 171-190) named the No. X, or 

Vespertine, of earlier work in southwestern Virginia 

the Price sandstone and indicated his opinion regarding its correlation by placing "(Pocono)" after the 

name Price. He pointed out the rapid change in f acies 

of the formation as it passes to the north and west 

in this region from a coal-bearing unit to one in which 

coals are rare and thin or absent. He also named the 

overlying red shale the "Pulaski," from exposures near 

the town of that name. He expressed the opinion that 

the relations between the Price and early Paleozoic 

limestone are due to overlap, though they are now 

known to be due to extensive thrust faulting. Campbell (1896, p. 3) again described these units in the Pocahontas quadrangle.

At the time Campbell was working in Montgomery 

County, Darton was mapping the Staunton, VirginiaWest Virginia quadrangle. In 1894 the Staunton folio 

was published (Darton, 1894, p. 2, 3), and in it was 

described most of the coal-bearing lower Carboniferous 

area of Rockingham and Augusta Counties. Two units, 

a lower division of 300 feet of white to buff quartzite 

followed by an upper member of 450 feet of sandstones, 

shales, and coals, were recognized.
6 FLORAS OF THE POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE

J. J. Stevenson (1903, p. 16-45), in the first part of 

his memoir on the Carboniferous of the Appalachian 

basin, assembled the available information regarding 

the Pocono and Price in the region under discussion 

and considered the problem of their correlation with 

Mississippian units in other areas. In summarizing 

the general relationships of the Pocono, Stevenson came 

to the following conclusions :

1. The Pocono, when traced south westward from 

Pennsylvania (Broad Top region), retains its general 

features into Virginia, although the upper portion becomes shalier and more notably coal-bearing. In extreme southwestern Virginia, some 60 to 70 miles from 

the Tennessee line, it becomes notably calcareous, the 

upper part becoming much like the overlying Mississippian limestone, while the lower passes into the Grainger 

shale.

2. When traced westward in the northern area (Pennsylvania), the formation thins, owing partly to disappearance of the lower beds. Notable changes in 

lithology are likewise apparent.

3. The Pocono, which in the past was regarded as 

entirely lower Carboniferous, probably in some areas 

contains units of Devonian age (northwestern Pennsylvania and Ohio particularly).

4. The coal-bearing shale and sandstone of Pennsylvania (upper 400 feet in Bedford and Huntingdon 

Counties) and of Virginia are probably equivalent to 

the Keokuk and Burlington limestones and the Kinderhook group of the Mississippi Valley. The rest of the 

Pocono of these areas is Devonian. The term "Logan" 

(an Ohio name) is suggested for the upper part of the 

Pocono.

Charles Butts (1905, p. 3, 4) published his survey of 

the Edensburg, Pa., quadrangle and gave a rather detailed section of the Pocono formation as it is exposed 

on the Allegheny Front west of Altoona on the right-ofway of the Pennsylvania Railroad (Horseshoe Curve). 

He named the prominent sandy unit at the top of the 

section the Burgoon sandstone member and correlated 

the red shale band directly below with the Patton shale 

member of adjacent areas. Butts pointed out the occurrence of fossil plants low in the section, which he 

assigned, on the authority of David White, to the 

Mississippian. He pointed out the difficulty of precisely fixing the base of the Pocono and drew the line 

on purely lithologic evidence. As regards the top of 

the formation, the Loyalhana limestone was given as 

the uppermost member. The thickness of the Pocono 

was given as 1,030 feet.

Stose and Swartz (1912, p. 1-25) made a notable contribution to the stratigraphy of the Pocono in the Pawpaw-Hancock folio, which they published in 1912. They

divided the Pocono into five units, which are, from top 

to bottom, as follows:

Pinkerton sandstone 

Myers shale

Hedges shale (coal-bearing) 

Purslane sandstone 

Rockwell formation

The total thickness of the units fe 1,800-2,000 feet. Determination of the upper limit was based on evidence 

of a few plant fragments.

In the same year, Willis' (1912, p. 417-420) "Index 

to the stratigraphy of North America" appeared and 

carried a brief account of the Pocono and Price. Most 

of the statements related to the stratigraphy of the sequence in the Meadow Branch syncline.

Grimsley (1915, p. 136-166) in a survey of Jefferson, 

Berkeley, and Morgan Counties, W. Va., gave a detailed 

account of the stratigraphy and structure of the Meadow Branch or Sleepy Creek Mountain coal field. The 

stratigraphic divisions of Stose and Swartz were used, 

but much detailed information not published in the 

Paw-paw-Hancock folio was included.

M. R. Campbell (1925, p. 1-322) and his associates 

published an important account of the Valley coal fields 

of Virginia. In this report there are discussions of the 

geology of coal-bearing areas in the Price sandstone in 

Montgomery, Pulaski, Wythe, Bland, Smyth, Roanoke, 

Botetourt, Augusta, and Rockingham Counties, Va. A 

general account of the features of the Price in the Valley area is again based primarily on surveys in Montgomery County. At the base there is said to be at many 

localities a conspicuous conglomerate named the Ingles 

member. Above are 1,000 feet or more of sandstone 

and shale, followed by a coal-bearing unit and capped 

by 700 feet of sandstone and shale that grade into the 

Maccrady shale, a red shale above the Price (Stose, 

1913, p. 232-255). The coal beds are shown to be several, although only two thick ones, the Merrimac and 

the Langhorne, are commonly mined.

In 1926, D. B. Reger (and others, 1926, p. 503-532) 

gave a general section and proposed a classification of 

the Pocono strata in Mercer, Monroe, and Summers 

Counties, W. Va., as follows:

Feet

Sandstone, Logan (Burgoon) (Big Injun sand)—__—— 0-250 

Shales ______________-__________-_____ 0-50 

Sandstone (Squaw oil sand)_______——_____— 0-50 

Shales __________________________-__ 0-50 

Coal, Merrimac_____—_—————————————————— 0-5 

Shale ____________________________— 0-9 

Sandstone, Lindside__——_————————————————— 0-40 

Coal, Langhorne_—___——————————————————— 0-1 

Sandstone, Broad Ford (Weir oil sand) and associated

marine beds_-_______________—————————— 50-250

Shales _______________________________ 25-95 

Shale, Sunbury (Coffee)__________________—— 25-50

Sandstone, Berea_________________——_—— 25-150
HISTORY OF STRATIGRAPHIC NOMENCLATURE

It is apparent that Reger followed the practice of the 

West Virginia Survey in breaking down formations 

into numerous small named units, presumably to facilitate mapping. It was felt that the tracing into the 

area under consideration of units from other regions 

was adequate to permit adoption of Ohio names. This 

general plan of classification has been followed by other 

West Virginia Survey reports of more recent date 

(Price, 1929, p. 189-200; Reger, 1931, p. 341-351).

Chadwick (1933, p. 91-107) brought up the possibility that the Pocono of certain areas in Pennsylvania 

might be Devonian rather than Mississippian. Concerning the so-called Pocono deposits in the Pocono 

plateau and in certain portions of the Allegheny 

Plateau, Chadwick expressed his opinion that they are 

contemporaneous with Catskill, Chemung, Portage, and 

Genesee "facies" of other areas. Furthermore, the 

opinion was stated that little, if any, Mississippian is 

present in the Pocono plateau. In consequence, the conclusion seems to have been reached that all of the eastern 

Pennsylvania Pocono strata were simply facies of 

Devonian beds of other areas. The Mauch Chunk shale 

was likewise suspected of being Devonian.

A number of geologists soon challenged Chadwick's 

conclusions. David White (1934b, p. 265-272) published a criticism of the idea and pointed out that the 

proving of the Devonian age of certain strata supposed 

to be type Pocono in the Pocono Mountains did not 

necessarily mean that certain other strata, particularly along the south side of the Anthracite region, were 

also Devonian and not Mississippian. In discussing 

this matter White went into some detail regarding 

paleontologic evidence that there is a Mississippian unit 

in the area under consideration. White pointed out 

the presence of a Triphyllopteris flora in the Pocono and 

suggested that Adiantites [Aneimites] was a Mauch 

Chunk form. Likewise, he cited the relationships 

between the Mauch Chunk and the Loyalhanna limestone as proof of the Mississippian age of the former.

In reply Chadwick (1935, p. 133-143) stated his belief 

that I. C. White was correct in his opinion that there 

was no Carboniferous in Pocono Knob or in the whole 

Pocono plateau, except in a few small outliers. He did, 

however, admit the occurrence of Carboniferous in the 

adjacent Moosic Mountains and suggested the term 

"Moosic" be used for these deposits. In the absence of 

specific evidence regarding the floras of the southern 

outcrops in the Anthracite region, Chadwick expressed 

skepticism regarding White's unqualified conclusion 

that they were Mississippian.

Ashley and Willard (1935, p. 615-617) likewise discussed Chadwick's views on the Pocono. Their view 

is that "Lesley's original thought * * * was to apply

the name to sandstone between the 'Catskill' and Mauch 

Chunk * * *." They point out that the original use 

of the term "Pocono" by Sherwood was on a map of a 

region remote from the Pocono plateau. The concept 

of a type section in the case of the Pocono formation 

apparently cannot be used, but they urged that Pocono 

be continued as a name for the early Carboniferous 

formation it has come to designate in the literature.

Willard (1936, p. 565-607) published a long article 

on the continental Upper Devonian deposits of eastern 

Pennsylvania and went into some detail regarding the 

Pocono problem. He expressed the view that Lesley's 

type Pocono was in the Moosic Mountains, "an illdefined, elevated area along the western portion of the 

Pocono Plateau." Apparently there can be little doubt 

regarding the Carboniferous age of the so-called Po^ 

cono in that area. Willard favored the view that "for 

the present, the Pocono should continue to be interpreted essentially as Lesley defined it and as observations indicate." Willard likewise concluded that there 

is a hiatus between the Pocono and the underlying Devonian over much of Pennsylvania. Furthermore, it 

is his view that the base of this unit is essentially 

synchronous over most of the area.

Willard and Cleaves (1938, p. 17, 18) published a 

composite section for south-central Pennsylvania. 

They recognized 1,600 feet of Pocono along the Susquehanna River above Harrisburg and proposed three member names: Second Mountain member, for massive gray 

sandstone and conglomerate resting on Catskill; Peters 

Mountain member, for platy gray sandstone and conglomerate; and Cove Mountain, for gray sandstone, 

conglomerate, and several coaly beds.

FLORAL DIFFERENTIATION IN THE POCONO 

FORMATION AND THE PRICE SANDSTONE

CATSKILL FORMATION

Underlying the Pocono in the sections studied in 

Pennsylvania, Maryland, and parts of West Virginia 

is the Catskill formation. The Catskill at many of the 

localities where the Pocono was examined is also plant 

bearing, but the remains are usually very fragmentary. 

At Tamaqua, Pa., Archaeopteris spp. was collected 

about 500 feet below the base of the Pocono. Fragments perhaps attributable to that genus were seen in 

Pottsville Gap and in Westwood Gap, Pa. In sections 

along the Allegheny Front in the vicinity of Altoona 

and Bell wood, Pa., Archaeopteris sp. was obtained 

within a few feet of the top of the Catskill, and in a 

similar position in the Broad Top coal field. In fact, in 

this latter region Reger has named the Saxton shale, 

which is some 330 feet below the base of the Pocono, and
8 FLORAS OF THE POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE

which is replete with plant fragments assigned to Archaeopteris sp. This unit is recognizable at least as far 

south as Randolph County, W. Va., where it carries 

numerous specimens of Archaeopteris and lies about 150 

feet below the base of the Pocono.

LOWER POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE 

SANDSTONE

In the lower part of the Pocono, fossil plant material 

is rarely abundant or well preserved. At a number of 

localities, however, small collections have been obtained 

which indicate the existence of a distinct flora.

In the Southern Anthracite field the position of this 

flora is shown in the following section measured in 

Westwood Gap near Pottsville, Pa.:

Section of the lower part of the Pocono and part of upper Catskill 

in Westwood Gap, Pottsville, Pa.

Pocono formation: . Feet

1. Sandstone, gray, hard, with lenses of conglomerate, massive to medium-bedded______ 310

2. Sandstone, silty, and siltstone, olive; irregularly bedded; a few thin beds of conglomerate 

present _______________________ 60

3. Sandstone, olive, medium-grained, massive__ 100

4. Siltstone, dark-gray, carbonaceous, irregularly

bedded, carrying abundant plant remains_ 2±

5. Sandstone, gray to olive, medium-grained and

medium-bedded _________________ 32

6. Shale, dark-gray, silty, carrying abundant roots

in lower part and a few quartz pebbles___ 1

7. Sandstone, gray, massive, very conglomeratic_ 15

8. Conglomerate, massive, hard, containing pebbles up to 1% inches in diameter, chiefly 

quartz_______________________ 5

9. Sandstone, silty, olive, massive_________ 12

10. Sandstone, olive to gray, medium-grained, massive__________________________ 30

11. Sandstone and siltstone, interbedded, olive, 

some conglomerate lenses present This unit 

is badly contorted so that there may be some 

repetition of beds. The thickness here given 

is therefore approximate_1_________ 240

Total_____________________ 807 

Catskill formation:

12. Siltstone, red, massive______________ 12

13. Sandstone, olive, medium-bedded, conglomeratic________________________ 55

14. Red shale and sandstone not measured_____ __

In unit 4 of the preceding section, a florule was obtained in which the following species were identified:

Adiantites ungeri Read (abundant) 

Alcicornopteris anthracitica Read

In Pottsville Gap at the same horizon additional 

plant material has been collected by C. W. Unger, of

Pottsville, Pa., and the writer. Unger's collections, 

which were examined in the Reading Public Museum, 

contained the following species :

Adiantites ungeri Read (abundant) 

Alcioornopteris anthracitica Read 

CalatMops pottsvillensis Read

In the section below Millersburg, Pa., on the Susquehanna River, coal is present in the lower Pocono at the 

position of the Adiantites zone. Unfortunately, the 

plant material associated with it is very poorly preserved. However, numerous petiole fragments and a 

few pinnules attributable to Adiantites sp. were noted.

In the section of the Pocono exposed in Bell Gap west 

of Bellwood and along the abandoned branch line of the 

Pennsylvania Railroad, Adiantites and associated forms 

make their appearance almost immediately above the 

Catskill redbeds.

Section of the Pocono in Bell Gap west of Bellwood, Pa.

Pocono formation :

1. Sandstone, olive, fine-grained, massive2. Covered, probably soft beds- _ — ___

3. Sandstone, olive, fine-grained, massive

Feet 

80

— 22 

— 8

4. Shale, gray, irregularly bedded, carrying occasional specimens of Lingula sp_ _ - _ _ _ __ —— 6

5. Sandstone, medium-gray, massive, calcareous, 

carrying abundant specimens of marine invertebrates ________________________ 3

6. Shale, gray, massive _________________ 2

7. Underclay, rather carbonaceous, dark-gray, massive ___________________________ 2

8. Shale and siltstone, gray to olive, carbonaceous 

partings occasional, carrying abundant plant 

fossils __________________________ 14

9. Sandstone, gray, massive, root-bearing _____ 2

10. Siltstone, olive, massive _______________ 1

11. Sandstone, olive, fine-grained, root-bearing ___ 3

12. Shale, olive, irregularly bedded _ _ ________ 1

13. Sandstone, olive, fine-grained, massive ______ 2

Total____________________________

Catskill formation:

14. Shale, red to olive, and sandstone, red to olive, 

thickness not measured______________________

146

From unit 8 in the above section a florule containing 

the following species was collected:

Adiantites spectalilis Read (abundant) 

Lagenospermum sp. 

Girtya pennsylvanica Read

Somewhat higher but still definitely in the lower 

part of the Pocono there has been collected in the exposures along the main line of the Pennsylvania Railroad on the Horseshoe Curve above Kittanning Point 

a flora containing the following forms:
FLORAL DIFFERENTIATION 9

Rhacopteris latifolia (Arnold) Eead 

Adiantites spectabilis Eead (Abundant) 

Rhodea sp.

Alcicornopteris altoonensis Eead 

Lepidodendropsis sp.

At Tionesta, in Forest County, Pa., collections have 

been made of a small but extremely interesting flora. 

The locality is a small, roadside exposure of silty olive 

shale and olive siltstone which, at that point, cannot be 

definitely tied to reference planes. It is, however, clear 

from the contained flora that the horizon is low in the 

Pocono. Elsewhere in the same region remains of very 

poorly preserved specimens of Adiantites spectabilis 

have been found in the lower part of the Pocono and 

presumably mark a lateral continuation of the plant bed 

explored at Tionesta. The list of plants collected is as 

follows:

Adiantites spectabilis Eead (abundant)

cyolopteroides Read (abundant) 

Rhodea tionestana Read

alleffhanensis Read 

Girtya pennsylvanica Read

At a horizon, the position of which is not definitely 

established but which is known to be low in the Price 

sandstone in the vicinity of Lewis Tunnel, Va., a few 

specimens referable to Adiantites cardiopteroides Bead 

have been collected. These are apparently from the 

same general zone as the abundant Adiantites spp. 

known from the localities just discussed.

The complete flora of the lower Pocono is as follows:

Rhacopteris latifolia (Arnold) Eead 

Adiantites spectabilis Read

ungeri Eead

cyclopteroides Read

cardiopteroides Read 

Rhodea tionestana Eead

alleffhanensis Eead 

Alcicornopteris anthracitica Eead

altoonensis Read 

Lagenospermum sp. 

Calathiops pottsvillensis Read 

dirty a pennsylvanica Read 

Lepidodendropsisf sp.

TTPPEB POCONO FOBMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE

The upper, coal-bearing, member of the Pocono usually contains some plants, and at a number of localities 

they are exceedingly abundant. Because the exposures 

below Pottsville in the gaps of the Schuylkill River 

and West Branch of Schuylkill River provide the best 

and most continuous sections seen in the Southern Anthracite region, the relationships of the plant-bearing

strata there may be taken as a typical example. The 

sequence is as follows:

Section of the upper part of the Pocono formation in Pottsville 

Gap, Pottsville, Pa.

Mauch Chunk shale: Feet 

Shale, siltstone, and sandstone, red—————————— 35+ 

Pocono formation:

1. Sandstone, fine-grained, silty, yellowish, rather

massive ——————————————————————— 10

2. Covered, probably sandstone, quarried locally— 37

3. Sandstone, light-gray, coarse, gritty, with occasional quartz pebbles—————————————— 12

4. Shale, green to grayish-green and olive, irregularly bedded and fracturing irregularly, carrying some plants———————————'——————— 5

5. Shale, thin-bedded, dark-gray, carrying plants— 2

6. Eootsilt, gray, massive———————————————— 2

7. Siltstone, massive, gray-green—————————— 3

8. Sandstone, medium-grained, gray, flaggy—_—— 3

9. Sandstone, massive, light-gray, medium-grained,

with some grit lenses___——————————— 7

10. Shale, gray to olive______________—— %

11. Sandstone, olive, silty above, becoming mediumgrained near base, thin-bedded, weathering 

massive __—_______——————————_—— 9

12. Siltstone, sandy, olive, massive__________— 6

13. Claystone, olive to gray___—__________ %

14. Siltstone, olive to gray——————————_—— 2

15. Shale, somewhat silty, olive_______———_—— 4

16. Siltstone, olive to gray—____________ 14

17. Sandstone, gray, coarse, gritty, with numerous

bands and lenses of quartz pebbles______ 199

18. Shale, black, micaceous, thin-bedded; carries

plants ___——______—________— 5

19. Sandstone, gray, fine-grained, flaggy_______ 38

20. Sandstone, gray, medium-grained, massive___ 30

21. Shale, black, bony; pyrite nodules containing

fragments of secondary wood observed___ 1

22. Sandstone, medium-grained, gray, massive___ 2

23. Shale, silty, gray, fracturing conchoidally, carrying fragments of plants__——_________ 1

24. Coal, anthracite, with a thin gray claystone bed

at base—————————___——________ %

25. Sandstone, gray, medium-grained, massive___ 18

26. Sandstone, medium to fine-grained, gray, flaggy__ 23

27. Claystone, gray——————————__________ 1

28. Shale, silty, carbonaceous, dark gray_______ 1

29. Sandstone, conglomeratic, gray, massive_____ 24

30. Shale, silty, even-bedded, gray; a few plant fragments observed__________________ 6

31. Sandstone, gray, gritty and pebbly, massive__ 25

32. Shale, gray, badly squeezed_____________ %

33. Sandstone, gray, tending to be conglomeratic,

massive________________________ 29

34. Shale, gray to olive, with a lenticular gray sandstone up to 3 feet thick in middle of unit, 

thin-bedded, carrying plants__________ 9±

35. Sandsone, gray, medium-grained, massive, not

well-exposed—___________________ 15

36. Sandstone and siltstone to Adiantites beds___ 410

Total______________________ 990
10 FLORAS OF THE POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE

From this section collections have been made as 

follows: 

Units 4 and 5:

Rhodea vespertina Read 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek) 

Laffenospermum imparirameum Arnold 

Lepidodendropsis vandergrachti Jongmans, Gothan, and

Darrah

scobiniformis (Meek) 

Unit 18:

Triphyllopteris lescuriana 

Cardiopteris antecedans 

Unit 21:

Carried only pyritized fragments of secondary xylem

which have not been further studied. 

Units 23 and 30:

Fragments are doubtfully identifiable as Triphyllopteris

sp. 

Unit 34:

Rhodea vespertina Read 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek) 

Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis (Meek)

In exposures at Mauch Chunk, Tamaqua, and at High 

Bridge, northwest of Pine Grove, Pa., similar plant remains were noted or collected. At Mauch Chunk very 

fragmentary material was identified in the field as 

Triphyllopteris lescuri-ana and Rhodea vespertina.

In the exposures in the gap of the West Branch of 

Schuylkill River the following florule was collected 

from strata about the equivalent of unit 34 in the Pottsville Gap exposures already discussed:

Rhodea vespertina Read 

Triphyllopteris lesouriana (Meek)

Lepidodendropsis vandergraohti Jongmans, Gothan, and 

Darrah

scobiniformis (Meek)

siffillarioides Jongmans, Gothan and Darrah

The plant-bearing strata at Fishing Creek Gap or 

High Bridge, northwest of Pine Grove, Pa., have 

yielded the following remains:

Rhodea vespertina Read 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek)

latilobata Read

biloba Read

Lagenospermum imparirameum Arnold 

Lepidodendropsis vandergrachti Jongmans, Gothan, and 

Darrah

sco biniformis ( Meek)

sigillarioides Jongmans, Gothan and Darrah

In all of the exposures of the Pocono along the Susqnehanna River from the vicinity of Millersburg, Pa., 

south to a point below Dauphin, Pa., abundant remains 

of Triphyllopteris lescuriana,, Rhodea vespertina^ and 

Lepidodendropsis scobini/ormis were found.

As regards plant remains in the upper part of the 

Pocono in the Allegheny Plateau region and Broad Top 

region of western Pensylvania the information is scant.

In the section measured on the Horseshoe Curve above 

Altoona, Pa., a few fragments of Lepidodendropsis 

scobiniformis are reported from shale partings in the 

Burgoon sandstone (Butts, 1905). The writer has not 

seen these, but their reported position is at a horizon 

where the species might be expected.

In the exposures examined on the west side of the 

Broad Top coal field no plant remains have been seen in 

the upper part of the Pocono. However, in the section 

at the Broadtop railroad tunnel described by Ashburner, there appear to have been abundant plant remains in the coal-bearing shale in the upper part of the 

formation ("New River Coal Series") (Ashburner, 

1895, p. 1663-1679). Unfortunately, the old collection 

made by the Pennsylvania Survey cannot be located, 

and additional material is not available. It appears, 

however, that these specimens included fragments of 

some of the representatives of the Triphyllopteris 

flora.

In the Meadow Branch syncline, West Virginia and 

Maryland, it has already been indicated that there is 

a question regarding the correlation of the units assigned in the past to the Pocono formation (Stose and 

Swartz, 1912). The rock sequence, as previously described, is as follows:

Feet

Pinkerton sandstone______________________ 125 

Myers shale (red)_____________________ 800-900 

Hedges shale (coal-bearing)_______________— 200 

Purslane sandstone_______________________ 320 

Rockwell formation-_____________________ 500

The coal-bearing Hedges shale contains a flora, which 

was reported in the Paw-paw-Hancock folio (Stose and 

Swartz, 1912) and which the writer has examined more 

recently. It is as follows:

Rhodea vespertina Read 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek) 

Carpolithes sp. 

Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis (Meek)

This flora is clearly that of the Triphyllopteris zone, 

widespread in the upper part of the Pocono. Its position, according to past classifications of the strata, is 

about in the middle of the so-called Pocono group.

Above the Hedges is the red Myers shale, and above 

the Myers is the light-gray Pinkerton sandstone containing rounded quartz pebbles. Coaly beds at the top 

of the Pinkerton are reported to yield material referable to Lepidodendron [Lepidodendropsis} cf. L. corrugatum. If this identification were positive, there 

could be no reasonable doubt regarding the Pocono age 

of the Pinkerton sandstone. However, the writer has 

examined the material and does not concur with the 

previously expressed opinion. Rather, he feels that the 

material is not identifiable, except in a general way as
FLORAL DIFFERENTIATION 11

Lepidodendron. It therefore seems only fair to reopen the question of the age of the post-Hedges formations. Lithologic evidence favors the correlation of 

Myers with'Mauch Chunk, and Pinkerton with basal 

Pennsylvanian, and the flora of the Hedges indicates 

an upper Pocono age for that unit.

Lewis Tunnel, Alleghany County, Va., furnished 

some of the earliest collections of Pocono plants. These 

were obtained by Meek and reported posthumously in 

1880 (Meek, 1880, p. i-xix, 26^44). In 1937, the writer 

visited the tunnel and measured a section there.

Section at and, above west portal of Lewis Tunnel (Alleghany 

Station), Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, Va.

Maccrady formation: " Feet

1. Siltstone and clay shale, variegated (red and 

olive), with occasional thin beds of olive sandstone and nodular, dark-gray, fresh-water 

limestone_____________————_———— 40

2. Limestone, dark-gray, nodular, cherty (fresh

water) __________—____————————— 2±

3. Shale, silty, variegated____________—— 11

4. Siltstone, calcareous, yellowish to red-___—— 1±

5. Sandstone, olive, massive, fine-grained___—__ 6

6. Shale, variegated (olive to red), silty, with occasional olive sandstone layers————_——— 17

7. Sandstone, olive, fine-grained, and olive to gray

Siltstone and silty shale___———___—— 14

8. Shale, dark, carbonaceous and coaly_____—— 6

9. Underclay, light-gray_____—_____—— 3

10. Shale, silty, red to gray____———————__——— 4

11. Shale, carbonaceous, coaly_______—__—_—— %

12. Underclay, light-gray________________ 1%

13. Siltstone, olive, massive—________—______ 4

14. Shale, silty, variegated (red, olive, gray)____ 11

15. Siltstone and sandstone, gray to olive, with plant 

fragments, including pyritized woody fragments and a few, erect trunk stumps of Lepidodendropsis corrugatum—______———_—____ 12

16. Shale, coaly and bony________________ 1

17. Underclay and root silt, light-gray_________ 2

18. Shale, coaly______________________ 1

19. Underclay, light-gray________________ 1

Total________________________ 133 

Price formation:

20. Sandstone, gray, massive, medium-grained___ 15 ±

21. Sandstone and siltstone, thin-bedded, carbonaceous_________________________ 1±

22. Sandstone, gray, massive, medium-grained___ 12

23. Sandstone, shaly, lenticular, poorly exposed___ %±

24. Sandstone, massive, gray, medium-grained____ 45

25. Sandstone, irregularly thin-bedded, mediumgrained, light-gray, somewhat carbonaceous_ 5

26. Sandstone, medium-grained, gray, massive___ 50

27. Sandstone, thin-bedded, carbonaceous, dark-gray,

fine-grained, silty__________________ 5

28. Sandstone, massive, gray, medium-grained___ 4

29. Sandstone, thin-bedded, silty, irregularly bedded, 

carbonaceous, with a few specimens of Lepidoscobiniformis______________ 15

Price formation—Continued Feet

30. Siltstone, thin-bedded, dark-gray, carbonaceous— 1%

31. Sandstone, massive, root-bearing, gray—————— 6

32. Coal, impure——————————————————————— %

33. Rootsilt, dark-gray—————————————————— 1

34. Coal, impure_..______————————————— %

35. Sandstone, gray, silty, irregularly bedded, medium-grained, with abundant plant fragments— 18

36. Rootsilt, dark-gray_______———————————— 2

37. Sandstone, massive, gray, root-bearing————— 3

38. Coal, impure___________————————__ %

39. Rootsilt, dark-gray_____________———_———— 5

40. Sandstone, medium- to coarse-grained, gray,

massive________——————————————— 80

41. Siltstone, thin-bedded, carbonaceous——————— 5

42. Sandstone to top of marine Riddlesburg shale

member___—____—————————————— 50

Total______________________ 3251/2

The flora obtained by Meek came from somewhere in 

the interval of units 20-35. The precise horizon cannot 

be determined, because the old collections came from 

material removed during the excavation of the tunnel. 

Additional specimens cannot be obtained. The revised 

identifications are as follows:

Rhodea blacJcsburgensis Read

vespertina .Read 

Triphyllopteris alleghanensis (Meek)

lesouriana (Meek)

virginiana (Meek) 

Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis (Meek)

A short distance north of Vicker, Montgomery 

County, Va., in Price Mountain, the coals of the Price 

sandstone have been mined extensively. Along the 

secondary road leading from Vicker to the Merrimac 

mine, collections in shale and siltstone above the Merrimac coal bed yielded the following florule:

Rhodea blacJcsburgensis Read

vespertina Read 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek)

latilobata Read

virginiana (Meek )

rarinervis Read

biloba Read 

Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis (Meek)

In fine-grained sandstone and siltstone beds that underlie the Merrimac coal bed and which are probably 

above the Langhorne coal bed, there were collected, a 

few hundred yards farther down this same road, a 

florule that included Triphyllopteris lescuriana and 

Lepidodendropsis vandergrachti.

Farther south, in the section north of Dublin, abundant, although badly weathered, specimens of Triphyllopteris spp. and Lepidodendropsis spp. mark the coalbearing zone of the Price. Collections of well-preserved 

material were not obtained.
12 FLORAS OF THE POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE

Similarly in Draper Mountain near Pulaski, Va., 

poorly preserved specimens of Triphyllopteris lescuriana and Rhodea vespertina were noted.

FLOBAS OF THE LOWEB PABT OF THE MAUCH 

CHUNK SHALE AND EQUIVALENT FOBMATIONS

The nature of the present report makes it desirable 

to summarize the present status of knowledge concerning the post-Pocono and post-Price Mississippian floras 

as a basis for the separation of the lower from the upper 

units on the basis of their contained plants. Therefore, 

a portion of the systematic chapter is devoted to these 

higher floras, and in the following paragraphs an attempt is made to outline their general features as now 

known.

At the beginning, it must be emphasized that the lithology of the Mauch Chunk is not a type well suited for 

the preservation of plant material in an identifiable 

form. Similarly, its correlatives in the northern and 

central Appalachian regions rarely show many wellpreserved plant fossils. On the other hand, the bedding 

planes are not infrequently covered with what probably 

are the oxidized remains of plants, and roots running 

across the bedding planes give evidence that plant life 

existed in moderate abundance on the Mauch Chunk 

delta surfaces.

In Pennsylvania along the belt of Mauch Chunk outcrop south of the Southern Anthracite coal field, root 

remains are very common in the Mauch Chunk. In 

addition, the writer has seen in the cabinets of local 

collectors a few isolated pinnules of Aneimites sp. that 

are not sufficiently well preserved to be described. It is 

at once apparent that the material does not present a 

sufficient number of species to provide any basis for 

floral characterization.

In Fork Lick district, Webster County, W. Va., along 

Elk River a short distance below Whitaker Falls, White 

and Girty collected in 1895 a very interesting florule 

which is described in this report. The stratigraphic 

position of this assemblage has been determined as near 

and probably below the horizon of the Big Spruce Knob 

coal of Reger (1920, p. 221-225). The following tabulation is a general section of the succession of Mauch 

Chunk along upper Elk River.

General Section of Mauch Chunk shale on upper Elk River, 

Webster County, W. Va., Mauch Chunk shale (in part Reger, 

1920) :

Feet

1. Shale and thin sandstone, chiefly red with some 

olive beds, the unit predominantly soft and forming a long slope in which exposures are poor_ 725

2. Sandstone, olive, thin-bedded, fine-grained, probably the Big Spruce Knob sandstone member 

of Reger————___————____________ 25

3. Shale, dark-gray, carrying plant fragments4. Coal, bituminous, reported very impure_____

Feet 

2

5. Shale and thin sandstone, red to olive—„_———— 300

6. Sandstone, massive, olive to gray, micaceous, the

Webster Springs sandstone member of Reger__ 75

Total _____________________ 1,127 

Greenbrier limestone:

Thickness not measured—stream level of Elk River— 51

The florule is apparently from unit 5 in the section. 

Its composition is as follows:

Sphenopteridium virginianum Read

Rhodea f sp.

Carpolithes virginianus Read

A related florule has been obtained from outcrops 

apparently higher in the section, in adjacent Upshur 

County on Beech Fork, about half a mile southeast of 

Left Fork of Beech Fork at the level of the now abandoned Alexander Lumber Company Railroad grade. 

This florule is as follows:

Sphenopteridium brooksi Read

girtyi Read

Adiantites beechensis Read 

Sphenopteris? sp.

From the lower part of the Bluefield shale, just above 

the Greenbrier limestone in the vicinity of Abbs Valley,, 

Va., a collection made by White and Campbell many 

years ago has yielded abundant material of the species 

here described as Cardiopteris dbbensis, together with 

numerous stems, and petioles that cannot be identified. 

According to invertebrates from the underlying marine 

limestone as well as from the Bluefield, the rocks are 

believed to be Chester and at least correlative in part 

with the Glen Dean limestone (Butts, 1933, p. 42, 43).

SUMMABY OF FLOBAL SUCCESSION

In the preceding discussion an attempt has been made 

to present the evidence regarding the occurrences of 

fossil plants in the sections which have been studied. 

It now seems appropriate to examine the data and to 

arrive at conclusions, if possible, regarding the stratigraphic ranges of floras or definite assemblages of 

plants.

It has been indicated that the very characteristic 

rocks of the Pocono are set off in many of the sections 

by equally distinct floras. Underneath, the red shales 

and sandstones of the Catskill carry at numerous localities the remains of Archaeopteris spp. These occur 

high in the formation and only a short distance stratigraphically below the base of the Pocono. Thus there 

appears to be some basis in fact for the prevalent idea 

that Archaeopteris is characteristic of the Catskill and 

its equivalents. Likewise, it seems to be restricted, if
FLORAL DIFFERENTIATION 13

one may judge from the present work, to these Devonian rocks. Not a single well-substantiated occurrence of Archaeopteris in the Mississippian is known 

to the writer.

The lower part of the Pocono appears to be rather 

well characterized by a flora, the most conspicuous element of which is the genus Adiantites. Collectively 

this flora is as follows:

Rhacopteris latifolia, (Arnold) 

Adiantites spectaMlis Read

ungeri Read

cyclopteroides Read

cardiopteroides Read • 

Rhodea tionestana Read

alleghanensis Read 

Alcicornopteris anthracitica Read

altoonensis Read 

Lagenospermum sp. 

Galathiops pottsvillensis Read 

Girtya pennsylvanica Read 

Lepidodendropsisf sp.

This flora, numbering only 13 forms, is extremely interesting because of the association with remains of 

Adiantites, a representative of the genus Rhacopteris^ 

two species of Alcicomopteris, and some interesting 

fructifications and polleniferous synangia (Girtya, 

CcdatJiiops, Lagenospermwri). In the anthracite region it seems to be characteristic of the lower, flaggy, 

olive sandstone and shale beds that in some sections 

(Susquehanna Kiver) carry thin coals. Any single locality is poor in species, and usually Adiantites is the 

most conspicuous element.

Along the Allegheny Front in Pennsylvania this flora 

has been seen at a number of localities where, as in the 

anthracite fields, remains of species of Adiantites are 

very abundant. In fact, it is in this area of outcrop 

that the Adiantites zone can be seen to best advantage.

Farther south the Adiantites zone can be recognized 

by its contained fossils only in the vicinity of Lewis 

Tunnel, Va. There, a few specimens of Adiantites 

cardiopteroides occur in the lower part of the Price 

sandstone at a horizon, the exact position of which is 

unknown. The absence of this floral zone in most sections in Virginia is due in all probability to the marine 

f acies of much of the lower part of the Price sandstone.

Separated from the Adiantites zone by a variable 

but always considerable thickness of sandstone and 

shale is an upper coal-bearing member of the Pocono 

and Price. This member carries abundant material, in 

almost all sections, of a flora very distinct from the 

lower or Adiantites assemblage. Because of the almost invariable presence in great abundance of material 

referable to Triphyllopteris this has been called the 

Triphyllopteris zone and the plant assemblage the Triphyllopteris flora. It is a very conspicuous unit in the 

anthracite region, where evidences of its presence can 

be found in every section.

On the Allegheny Front the Triphyllopteris zone appears to be in the position of the Burgoon sandstone 

member of the Pocono, if one may judge from the occurrence of Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis. There is 

some question in the writer's mind regarding this, however, and it may be that the Burgoon represents sandstone beds only at the base of the Triphyllopteris zone. 

If this is true, a hiatus may exist between the Burgoon 

and the overlying Loyalhanna limestone, since the bulk 

of the upper coal-bearing member of the anthracite 

region is then missing. The evidence is not conclusive.

The Triphyllopteris zone on the east side of the 

Broad Top coal field is apparently the upper coal-bearing member, although this correlation is based to a considerable extent on lithology and on early reports about 

fossil occurrences.

In Meadow Branch syncline the coal-bearing Hedges 

shale is very definitely the Triphyllopteris zone. Available collections show the presence of the characteristic 

species in abundance.

At Lewis Tunnel, Va., the Triphyllopteris flora again 

is seen to be associated with coal in the upper part of 

the Price sandstone (Pocono equivalent). Apparently, 

it carries upward into the Maccrady shale, as do the 

coal-forming conditions.

Farther southwest in the Valley coal fields, the coalbearing member of the Price sandstone is identical with 

the Triphyllopteris zone. Species referable to this flora 

are found everywhere associated with the coals.

A list of the species in the Triphyllopteris flora is as 

follows:

Gardiopteris irregularis Read

anteoedens Read 

Rhodea "blacksburgensis Read

vespertina Read

sp. 

Triphyllopteris alleghanensis (Meek)

lesouriana (Meek)

latilobata, Read

virginiana, (Meek)

rarinervis Read

Mloba Read

Laffenospermum imparirameum Arnold 

Lepidodendropsis vandergrachti Jongmans, Gothan, and 

Darrah

scoftiniformis (Meek)

sigillarioides Jongmans, Gothan, and Darrah

The overlying Mauch Chunk and its equivalents contain little plant material of importance. From various localities fairly low in the formation there have 

been obtained the following species:
14 FLORAS OF THE POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE

Sphenopteridium virginianum Read

brooksi Read

girtyi Read

Cardiopteris abbensis Read 

Adiantites beechensis Read 

Aneimites sp. 

Carpolithes virginianus Read

In a general way it appears that this higher Mississippian must be characterized by the presence of Sphenopteridiwn and Cardiopteris along with Aneimiteslike species of Adiantites. The data are insufficient to

provide an adequate characterization, and they are here 

published simply to emphasize the distinctness of the 

Pocono floras.

COLLECTION LOCALITIES

The following list assigns numbers to the points 

(shown in fig. 1) at which collections of specimens were 

made and gives the species found at each collection 

station. The collection points are arranged according 

to fossil zones. The locality numbers are referred to 

in the systematic descriptions and plate explanations.

LAKE ERIE

NNSYLVArNIA

FIGURE 1.—Map showing geographic positions of sections examined and localities where collections were obtained. Localities are marked by X,

and number refers to list on pages 15-16.
COLLECTION LOCALITIES 15

ADIANTITES FLORA

1. Shale in lower part of Pocono formation along Pennsylvania Railroad right-of-way in gap south of Pottsville, 

Schuylkill County, Pa. 

Adiantites ungeri Read 

Alcicornopteris anthradtica Read 

Calathiops pottsvillensis Read

2. Shale in lower part of Pocono formation in Westwood Gap 

on east side of West Branch of Schuylkill River, near 

Pottsville, Schuylkill County, Pa. 

Adiantites ungeri Read 

Aloicornopteris anthradtica Read

3. Shale in lower part of Pocono on Horseshoe Curve just 

above Kittanning Point on main line of Pennsylvania 

Railroad near Altoona, Blair County, Pa. 

Rhacopteris latifolia (Arnold) 

Adiantites spectabilis Read 

Rhodea sp.

Alcicornopteris altoonensis Read 

Lepidodendropsis sp.

4. Shale in lower part of Pocono on now abandoned branch 

line of Pennsylvania Railroad at Collier Station near 

Bellwood, Blair County, Pa. 

Adiantites speotab'ilis Read 

Lagenospermum sp. 

Oirtya pennsylvanica Read

5. Shale in lower part of Pocono formation on hill along road 

about 2 miles south of Tionesta, Forest County, Pa. 

Adiantites spectabilis Read

cyclopteroides Read 

Rhodea tionestana Read

alleghanensis Read 

Oirtya pennsylvanica Read

6. Sandy shale in lower part of Pocono south of Gray Gables, 

Elk County, Pa. 

Adiantites spectabilis Read -

7. Shales in lower part of Pocono at east end of railroad tunnel 

near Caledona, Clearfield County, Pa. 

Adiantites spectabilis Read

8. Alleghany Station, Va.: Outcrop of lower Price sandstone 

along road near west portal of Lewis Tunnel on Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad. 

Adiantites cardiopteroides Read

9. Patton, Jefferson County, Pa., in lower part of Pocono 

formation. 

Laffenosperiwum sp.

TRIPHYLLOPTERIS FLORA

10. Coaly beds in upper part of Pocono formation on east side 

of Lehigh River, Mauch Chunk, Carbon County, Pa. 

Material noted but too poor to be collected. 

Rhodea vespertina Read 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek)

11. Coaly and shaly beds in upper part of Pocono formation 

along Pennsylvania Railroad right-of-way south of Pottsville, Schuylkill County, Pa. 

Cardiopteris antecedent Read 

Rhodea vespertina Read 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek) 

Lagenospermum imparirameum Arnold 

Lepidodendropsis vandergrachti Jongmans, Gothan, and

Darrah 

scobiniformis (Meek)

12. Coaly and shaly beds in upper part of Pocono formation 

along West Branch of Schuylkill River in Westwood Gap 

near Pottsville, Schuylkill County, Pa. 

Rhodea vespertina Read 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek) 

Lepidodendropsis vandergrachti Jongmans, Gothan, and

Darrah

scobiniformis (Meek) 

sigillarioides Jongmans, Gothan, and Darrah

13. Shale in upper part of Pocono formation at High Bridge 

Park near Pine Grove, Schuylkill County, Pa. 

Rhodea vespertina Read 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek)

latilobata Read

biloba Read

Lagenospermum imparirameum Arnold 

Lepidodendropsis vandergrachti Jongmans, Gothan, and 

Darrah

scobmiformis (Meek)

sigittaroides Jongmans, Gothan, and Darrah

14. Dark coaly shale in upper part of Pocono formation near 

Millersburg, Dauphin County, Pa. 

Rhodea vespertina Read 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek) 

Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis (Meek)

15. Shale in upper part of Pocono, one fourth of a mile north of 

Riddlesburg, Bedford County, Pa., and on west side of 

Raystown Branch of Juniata River. Reported in notes 

by D. White. 

Triphyllopteris latilobata Read

16. Shale in upper part of Pocono in gap in Tussy Mountain, 2 

miles north of Riddlesburg, Bedford County, Pa. 

Triphyllopteris latilobata Read

17. Hedges shale in coal prospects on Short Mountain southeast 

of Devils Nose and at foot of hills, Morgan County, W. Va. 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek) 

Rhodea vespertina Read 

Carpolithes sp. 

Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis (Meek)

18. Hedges shale in Chapelle shaft, Short Mountain, Morgan 

County, W. Va. 

Rhodea vespertina Read 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek)

latilobata Read 

Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis (Meek)

19. Shale in Pocono formation, 4 miles southwest of Rawley 

Springs, Rockingham County, Va. 

Rhodea vespertina Read 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek) 

latilobata Read 

rarinervis Read

20. Shale and fine-grained sandstone in upper part of Price 

sandstone at and in Lewis Tunnel on Chesapeake and 

Ohio Railroad near Alleghany Station, Alleghany 

County, Va. 

Rhodea blacJcsburgensis Read

vespertina Read 

Triphyllopteris alleghanensis (Meek)

lescuriana (Meek)

virginiana (Meek) 

Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis (Meek)
16 FLORAS OF THE POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE

21. One and a half miles north of Vicker, Montgomery County, 

Va., on road to Price Forks in an outcrop of upper part 

of Price sandstone above Merrimac coal. 

Rhodea blacksburgensis Read

vespertina Read 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek)

latilobata Read

virginiana (Meek)

rarinervis Read

biloba Read 

Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis (Meek)

22. One and a half miles north of Vicker, Montgomery County, 

Va., on road to Price Forks in an outcrop of upper part 

of Price sandstone below Merrimac coal. 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek)

Lepidodendropsis vandergrachti Jongmans, Gothan, and 

Darrah

23. Keifer's mine in Merrimac coal, upper part of Price sandstone, Price Mountain near Vicker, Montgomery County, 

Va. 

Triphyllopteris latilobata Read

24. Keifer's and Shaeffer's mines in Merrimac coal, upper part 

of Price sandstone, Price Mountain near Vicker, Montgomery County, Va. 

Lepidodendropsis vandergrachti Jongmans, Gothan, and

Darrah 

scobiniformis (Meek)

25. Crockett-Price's mine in Merrimac coal, upper part of Price 

sandstone, Price Mountain near Vicker, Montgomery 

County, Va.

Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis (Meek) 

sigillarioides Jongmans, Gothan, and Darrah

26. Meyers Brothers' mine in Merrimac coal, upper part of 

Price sandstone, Price Mountain near Vicker, Montgomery 

County, Va.

Lepidodendropsis vanderffrachti Jongmans, Gothan, and 

Darrah

27. Upper part of Price sandstone near Long's Shop Post Office, 

Montgomery County, Va.: Cowin's mine, Husier Hollow 

Creek, 2y2 miles from post office in a 22-inch coal, 15 feet 

below Merrimac coal. 

Lepidodendropsis vanderffrachti Jongmans, Gothan, and

Darrah

scobiniformis (Meek) 

sigillarioides Jongmans, Gothan, and Darrah

28. Upper part of Price sandstone at Altoona mines near Pulaski, Pulaski County, Va. 

Rhodea WacJcsburgensis Read 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek)

29. Shale in upper part of Price sandstone and above Merrimac 

coal at prospect of N. H. Herd, 2 miles northwest of 

Pulaski, Pulaski County, Va. 

Rhodea sp. 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek)

30. Stony Creek mines in the Merrimac coal, upper part of 

Price sandstone, 6 miles northwest of Wytheville, Wythe 

County, Va.

Rhodea blacJcsl)urgensis Read 

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek)

31. Roof shale of coal bed in upper part of Price sandstone on 

Stony Creek, 6 miles northwest of Wytheville, Wythe 

County, Va. 

Cardiopteris irregularis

FLORAS OF THE MAUCH CHUNK AND OTHER HIGHER 

MISSISSIPPIAN FORMATIONS

32. Near or below the horizon of the Big Spruce Knob coal along 

Elk River near Whitaker Falls, Fork Lick district, Webster County, Virginia.

Sphenopteridium virginianum Read

Rhodea? sp.

Carpolithes virginianus Read

33. Mauch Chunk formation on Beech Fork about half a mile 

southeast of Left Fork of Beech Fork at the level of 

the abandoned Alexander Lumber Company Railroad 

grade, Upshur County, W. Va. 

Sphenopteridium brooksi Read

girtyi Read

Adiantites ~beechensis Read 

Sphenopteris? sp.

34. Lower part of Bluefield shale just above Greenbrier limestone in Abbs Valley, Tazewell County, Va. 

Cardiopteris atibensis Read

DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES

LOWER POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE 

Genus RHACOPTERIS Schimper, 1869

1869. Rhacopteris Schimper, Traite" de paleontologie vegetal* 

v. 1, p. 481,482.

Genotype.—Rhacopteris elegans (E'ttingshausen) 

Schimper.

Fronds generally once pinnate, linear; the pinnules 

opposite to alternate, asymmetrical, basally contracted, 

and attached by a short stalk or sessile; pinnules often 

lobed and variously incised. Venation dichotomous, 

f anlike, without midrib. Texture of lamina coriaceous. 

Fructifications borne on otherwise naked segments 

which are at least once dichotomous, the resultant arms 

bearing pinnate branches upon which are borne exannulate sporangia.

Rhacopteris latifolia (Arnold) Read, n. comb. 

Plate 16, figure 5; plate 18, figures 2, 3

1939. Archaeopteris latifolia Arnold, Mich. Univ., Mus. Paleontology, Contr., v. 5, no. 11, p. 307; pi. 7, fig. 3; pi. 9, figs. 

1-16; pi. 10, fig. 1.

Frond pinnate, possibly bipinnate. Species known 

from fronds or pinnae up to 12 centimeters in length, 

narrow, linear, apparently lax. Pinnules crowded, 

overlapping, subopposite, obovate, asymmetrical, sessile 

to subsessile on the rachis. Proximal margins of pinnules entire, slightly concave. Distal margins crenate 

or dentate; venation apparently originating from a 

plexus of strands at base, dichotomizing frequently to 

fill the laminae, with veins closely spaced as they pass
DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES 17

chiefly to the distal margins. Texture apparently 

coriaceous.

The aspect of two specimens referable to this species 

is seen in plate 16, figure 5, and plate 18, figure 3. It 

appears from the available material that this species is 

perhaps bipinnate. If so, this is one of the few bipinnate forms known. However, it is possible that the 

structure which appears to be a primary rachis is in 

reality a stem bearing small pinnate fronds.

In plate 18, figure 2, is seen a fertile specimen referred 

by Arnold to the same species as the sterile frond just 

discussed. They were found in the same beds and at 

the same locality, but their organic connection has not 

been demonstrated. It is apparent that such specimens 

have slightly sinuous axes bearing short lateral branches 

crowded with sporangia. Details of the sporangia are 

not discernible. This specimen is similar to the fertile 

fragment described by Walton (1926, p. 205-208) under 

the name Rhacopteris fertilis.

This species was referred by Arnold to Archaeopteris 

but appears more correctly assignable to Rhacopteris. 

The very close agreement of the pinnule form with 

Rhacopteris inaequilatera Goeppert and Rhacopteris 

circularis Walton is at once apparent. The fertile fragment, supposedly referable to the species, is likewise in 

agreement with the fertile segments of the genus already 

known.

Locality 3.

Genus ADIANTITES Goeppert, amend.

1836. Adiantites Goeppert, Die fossilen Farrnkrauter: p. 216, 

217.

Genotype.—Adiantites antiquus Ettingshausen.

Fronds several times pinnate, rather lax, the fronds 

often angular, probably owing to a climbing habit. 

Pinnae alternate. Pinnules alternate, usually cuneate, 

apically truncate, attached at the base by a footstalk 

or sessile, the base constricted. Venation derived from 

a single strand or plexus of strands at the base and 

radiating to supply the lamina by repeated dichotomy. 

Texture usually coriaceous.

Adiantites spectabilis Read, n. sp.

Plate 7, figure 3; plate 10, figure 6; plate 11, figures 4, 5; plate 

14, figures 1-4

Fronds of large size, lax, flexuose, probably tripinnate with a flexuose rachis. The primary pinnae set at 

close to right angles on the rachis, also flexuose, the same 

features being true of the secondary pinnae, which are 

oblong-lanceolate, lax, rachis slender, pinnae nearly 

touching or slightly overlapping.

Pinnules broadly ovate or deltoid to obcuneate ovate, 

short pedicellate, entire or cut slightly or nearly to the 

base into two, three, or sometimes more, varyingly 

obcuneate and flabellate, erect divisions which may 

themselves be sublobate. Lamina apparently thick. 

Nervation palmate from the single basal nerve, the 

veins arching slightly.

This is a particularly large representative of the 

genus Adiantites. Judging from the lax habit and 

markedly sinuose rachides, a climbing or clambering 

habit was likely.

It has been shown by Walton that in the related 

Adiantites antiquus (Ettingshausen) Stur (1875, p. 66- 

68, pi. 16, figs. 4-6; pi. 17, figs. 3, 4) the main rachis 

is basally dichotomous, the two divisions being quadripinnate. This may, however, be a false dichotomy, 

since a scar exists at the base of this fork suggesting 

a prolongation of the main axis into a fertile division.

From Adiantites antiquus the American A. spectabilis 

differs in the somewhat larger pinnules with more 

rounded apices and in the more marked tendency toward 

lobation of the lamina.

Localities 3-7.

Adiantites ungeri Read, n. sp. 

Plate 2, figures 4-6

Specimens consisting of numerous detached pinnae 

that are mostly cut into from 2 to 5 lobes, though some 

are very slightly incised or simple. The general shape 

is oblong-cuneate, with the apices of the pinnules or 

pinnule segments broadly rounded or truncate. The 

bases of the pinnules show evidence of a distinct stalk. 

Venation indistinct but apparently consisting of a number of equally strong, closely spaced veins radiating 

from the bases and dichotomously forking as they pass 

toward the distal margin.

Specimens of this species occur in considerable abundance in the basal portion of the Pocono in Pottsville 

Gap and Westwood Gap, where they are associated 

with Alcicomopteris anthracitica. Only the detached 

pinnules are definitely known, although associated with 

them are numerous fragments of smooth axes of pinnae 

and larger rachides that are almost certainly the remains of the phyllopodial framework upon which the 

pinnules were borne. These pinnules are very common 

in some of the thin arenaceous shale beds that occur in 

the lower part of the Pocono.

The species appears to be closely related to Adiantites 

antiguus (Ettinghousen) Stur (1875, p. 66-68, pi. 16, 

figs. 4-6; pi. 17, figs. 3, 4), from which it may be distinguished by the somewhat larger pinnules. However, 

there is so much variation in the form and size of the
18 FLORAS OF THE POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE

pinnules in both species that positive distinction in some 

cases may not be possible. In fact, the two species 

might be regarded as identical; but, considering the 

dominantly European distribution of A. antiques, it 

seems best for the time being to set up the American 

form as distinct.

Similarly, Adiantites ungeri is related to, but distinct from, A. ~bassleri Read from the Lower Carboniferous from the Paracas Peninsula, Peru (Read, 1938, 

p. 396-404, fig. 6). It has been pointed out that this 

species is also very closely related to A. antiquus.

This form from the Pocono has been named for C. W. 

Unger, of Pottsville, Pa., who has cooperated with the 

writer in obtaining the material and first showed specimens to the writer while in the field.

Localities 1 and 2.

Adiantites cyclopteroides Eead, n. sp. 

Plate 11, figures 1, 2; plate 12, figures 1, 2

Nature of frond and of larger divisions unknown. 

Pinnules short-stalked, obliquely placed on the slender, 

flexuose rachis; reniform to oval, markedly asymmetrical, tending to be sublobate. Venation partially concealed, apparently owing to thickness of lamina, 

sparsely distributed short hairs on the surface. Nervation rather distant, palmate, curving slightly in passing 

to the margin.

Locality 5.

Adiantites cardiopteroides Read, n. sp. 

Plate 3, figure 5; plate 13, figures 1, 2, 4, 5

Pinnae linear, rachis slightly flexuose. Pinnules 

large, open, sessile with relatively broad attachments, 

sometimes auriculate, broad, heteromorphous, rounded, 

ovate or orbicular, often cut deeply into 2 or 3 lobes. 

Nerves slender, distinct midrib absent, the basal nerves 

forking 4 to 5 times while arching to the border.

Locality 8.

Genus RHODEA Fresl

1838. RJiodea Presl, in G. K. Sternberg, Versuch einer geognostischbotanischen Darstellung der Flora der Vorwelt, 

Heft 7, 8, p. 109.

Genotype.—RJiodea furcata Presl.

The genus Rhodea Presl includes sterile, fernlike 

fronds and frond fragments, the pinnules of which are 

sphenopteroid in their general aspect but dissected 

deeply into numerous segments, each of which is traversed by a single vein. The lamina is at the same time 

markedly reduced so that the frond divisions appear 

to be little more than the vascular strands with but a 

feeble suggestion of the leaf segment adjacent.

Rhodea is a form genus, and material referable to it 

is very common in the Mississippian of this continent 

as well as the Lower Carboniferous of Europe.

Rhodea tionestana Bead, n. sp. 

Plate 18, figure 1

Larger divisions of frond at present unknown. Ultimate divisions linear-lanceolate, rigid, carrying 

crowded, alternate pinnules; pinnules deeply cut into 

4 to 6 lobes that are directed upward all the way from 

base of pinnae. Lobes narrow, forming only a slight 

wing on either side of the single vein or vascular bundle 

that traverses each division of the pinnule, the lobes 

thus being deeply incised and dissected; apices of the 

lobes rounded.

The reference of this fernlike plant to Rhodea is provisional. As has been shown at another point in this 

report, Rhodea is a form genus for pinnule types that in 

the past have been placed in the genus Sphenopteris but 

which are now segregated as Rhodea because of the high 

degree of dissection. This dissection and partial elimination of lamina is in fact so marked in Rhodea, as defined, that only a single vein traverses each lobe of the 

pinnule, and the lamina forms but a narrow wing on 

each side of the vein. It is possible that Rhodea tionestana should be referred to Sphenopteridium, though 

this genus is marked by a dichotomous rachis, and no 

evidence of such a feature was seen in the specimen 

from Pennsylvania. However, the pinnule type approaches to some extent that of the known species of 

Sphenopteridium.

This species is quite distinct among now known American representatives of Rhodea. The linear-lanceolate 

aspect of the pinnae, the crowded pinnules, and the 

rather rigid, erect aspect of the pinnae all serve to set 

the form apart from others described in this paper. In 

addition, it is quite large for a representative of the 

genus.

Rhodea tionestana recalls somewhat the European 

species of Sphenopteris, such as S. pachyrachis. It is, 

however, a smaller form than most of the species known 

from abroad.

Locality 5.

Rhodea alleghanensis Read, n. sp. 

Plate 16, figure 4

Frond small, dichotomous at the apex, bipinnate or 

tripinnate, the pinnae crowded, lax, broadly lanceolate, 

with rounded apices. The pinnules alternate, crowded, 

frequently overlapping, deeply cut into several lobes, 

each of which carries a single vein, the lamina on either 

side of the vein being very narrow, lobed, erect, and in 

general tapering toward the apices of the pinnae.
DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES 19

This species occurs in the lower part of the Pocono 

formation of northwestern Pennsylvania and is rather 

common, but usually in a rather fragmentary state. An 

examination of the figure indicates that the specimen 

is of the same general type of Rhodea blacksburgensis 

and R. vespertina, from which it differs in the more 

marked, erect attitude of the pinnule lobes as well as 

in the apical dichotomy of the frond. This feature is 

not known in either of the two comparable types, although abundant specimens are available of both. It 

is possible that the generic references of the species 

here described should be changed in view of this difference in frond architecture.

No attempt is here made to compare this form with 

European species. There are perhaps several similar 

types from the Lower Carboniferous of Europe, but 

since the writer has seen material of none of these, it is 

obviously impossible to make very close comparisons.

Locality no. 5.

Genus ALCICORNOFTERIS Kidston

1887. Alcioornopteris Kidston, Royal Soc. Edinburg Trans., v. 

33, p. 152.

Genotype.—Alcicomopteris convoluta Kidston.

Under this generic name there have been described 

several examples of naked petioles that are dichotomous 

near the apex and then repeatedly branch dichotomously to form a markedly convoluted system of flattened segments which usually show evidences of much 

reduced laminae. There have also been described under 

this name several fertile structures, namely large, canpanulate synangia of the Calathiops type which are 

presumably microsporangial. The relationships of the 

fertile and sterile organs are not entirely clear.

Alcicomopteris anthracitica Read, n. sp. 

Plate 17, figure 9

Larger divisions of the frond unknown, the specimens consisting of fragments of the apices of very 

small pinnae that show one to two dichotomies and 

that are highly convolute. The laminae, if present, are 

very slightly developed, but the axes of the pinnae are 

markedly flattened.

There is very little to distinguish this form, and 

question may be raised concerning the desirability of 

reporting the fragment under a new specific name. 

However, it does seem desirable to distinguish this type 

of structure from other known forms, and its small size 

does appear to be a distinction of possible value. In 

Alcicomopteris zeilleri Vaffier (1901, p. 124-126, pi. 6, 

fig. 5; pi. 7, fig. 1) which is a larger form, there is a 

fairly well developed lamina. The present species differs in the lack of any lamina and in the smaller size. 

No fertile fragments have been observed in the material 

at hand so that it is impossible to compare A. (mthracitica with the fructifications referred to the genus. It 

is to be hoped that better and less fragmentary material 

of this form may be obtained in the future so that a 

more satisfactory characterization may be given.

This species is associated with Adiantites imfferi in 

the lower portion of the Pocono formation in both the 

Pottsville and Westwood Gaps in the southern edge of 

the Southern Anthracite Coal Field of Pennsylvania. 

It has not been noted elsewhere.

Localities 1 and 2.

Alcicomopteris altoonensis Read, n. sp. 

Plate 16, figures 1, 2

Larger divisions unknown, the fragments consisting 

of fairly large pinnae that are apparently fleshy and 

flabellate, and near flabellate, irregularly lobed, lax, 

convoluted pinnules that also appear fleshy. No venation is present, although the surface is irregularly longitudinally striate and furrowed.

This species is very closely related to Alcicornopteris 

convoluta Kidston (1924, p. 418-421) and, in fact, may 

be identical. The American species does not, however, 

show such marked convolutions of the pinnules as does 

Kidston's form.

It is probable that this structure is related in some 

way to Adiantites spectdbilis from the same locality. 

Dawson (1873, p. 26, 27, pi. 7, figs. 61-63) has noted a 

similar association in the case of Adiantites acadica, 

and Schimper (Schimper and Schenk, 1891, p. 110, 111, 

fig. 87) reports structures of the same type as the fertile 

pinnae of Triphyllopteris collombiana.

Locality no. 3.

Genus LAGENOSPERMUM Nathorst

1914. Lagenospermum Nathorst, A. G., Zur fossilen Flora der 

Polarlander, teil 1, p. 29.

Genotype.—Lagenospermum sinclairi (KidstonMS.) 

Arber.

Lagenospermum, is a name proposed by Nathorst for 

small seeds and seedlike bodies preserved as impressions, 

radiospermic in their general aspect and agreeing in 

external features with Lagenostoma Williamson, Physostoma Williamson, Conostoma Williamson, and Radiospermwm Arber. This genus is, to the writer's 

knowledge, known only from Mississippian and Lower 

Carboniferous strata.

Lagenospermum sp.

Seed bearing organ, small, varying from 6 to 9.5 millimeters in length and about 2 millimeters broad at the
20 FLORAS OF THE POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE

widest point, spindle shaped, with the chalazal end 

bluntly rounded. Sheath apparently 6-lobed and possibly finely striate, although this is not clear; the apical 

teeth or lobes of the sheath acuminately pointed. Seed 

about 5 millimeters long and 1.2 millimeters broad, 

spindle shaped, rounded both at the chalazal and mieropylar ends, the vascular strand at the chalazal end being 

small but distinct.

The features which distinguish Lagenospernrvwm sp. 

are its extremely small size, its marked spindle shape, 

and the acuminate teeth of the cupule lobes. Unfortunately the matrix is not favorable to the preservation of 

details of small specimens so that many of the characters which might serve to set apart these interesting 

seeds cannot well be recognized.

Lagenospermum sp. is of particular interest because 

of its association with Adiantites spectabilis. It will be 

recalled that Nathorst, in his discussion of the Culm 

Flora of Spitzbergen, pointed out the association of L. 

arberi and A. bellidulus and suggested that they might 

be seed and frond of the same plant. While he could 

not demonstrate actual organic connection, he apparently regarded the association as fairly convincing. In 

consequence, it is extremely interesting to discover again 

sheathed, spindle-shaped radiospermic seeds associated 

with the abundant remains of a species of Adiantites 

that is closely related to A. bellidulus.

Locality 9.

Genus CALATHIOFS Goeppert

1865. Calathiops Goeppert, Paleontographica, Band 12, p. 268- 

270, pi. 64, figs. 4-10.

Genotype.—Calathiops beinertiana Goeppert.

Calathiops pottsvillensis Read, n. sp. 

Plate 17, figure 5

Organs superficially suggesting seeds, elongate, oval, 

with somewhat truncate apices and bases; length about 

19 millimeters, width 9.5 millimeters; marked on the 

exterior of the exposed side by 12 to 15 longitudinal ribs 

that are slightly irregular and that are raised above 

the rest of the fossil. To some extent these ribs appear 

fused at the base and apices of the specimen, and their 

interpretation is somewhat problematical.

Determination of the true nature of the single specimen of this species is difficult, although the fossil itself 

is very well preserved. From examination of the illustration, it will be seen that the fructification is elongate, oval, and of fair size, suggesting, in fact, a 

Rhdbdooarpus from the Pennsylvanian. It is longitudinally ribbed as described above and at first glance 

impresses one as being a seed. However, upon further

consideration it appears more likely that it is a synangium of microsporangia. This opinion is founded 

upon the interpretation of the riblike structures exposed 

on the surface as tubular microsporangia which are free 

or slightly adnate. It is quite possible that the whole 

structure may be a mass of such sporangia so crowded 

as to form the compact headlike organ resembling a 

seed. However, it is only fair to point out that this is 

simply an interpretation of structure, and the specimen 

may be an early seed type.

The single specimen is associated with Adiantites 

ungeri and Alticornopteris anthradtica in the lower 

part of the Pocono in the Pottsville Gap, Schuylkill 

River.

In referring this species to the genus Calathiops the 

writer adopts the usage of several recent authors who 

have listed the genus as a provisional one, the microsporangial or megasporangial nature of which is not 

finally determinable.

Locality 1.

Genus GIRTYA Read, n. gen.

Under the new generic name Girtya are included 

specimens of campanulate synangia similar in some 

respects to Whittleseya but differing in several important respects. The four critical features are as follows:

1. The synangium massive, somewhat cup-shaped, at 

least externally.

2. The microsporangia elongate, tubular, presumably 

dehiscing distally, free except at the base.

3. The microsporangia in a compact head arranged 

irregularly owing to their terminal positions on short, 

crowded branches, the internodes very short. The apex 

of the master branch system is marked by a dichotomy, 

the successive anadromic helicoid branches bearing 

terminally the sporangia which are given off close together just above the dichotomy, so that a sort of pseudoreceptacle is formed by the dichotomy.

4. Synangia borne on a "scorpioid" or markedly 

dichotomously branched and probably flattened axis 

that may be identical with Alcicornopteris.

It is probable that in this genus may be included the 

synangia figured by Kidston (1924, pi. 108, figs. 7-9a; 

text figs. 39, 40) under the name of Alcicornopteris as 

specimens of the Schuetzia bennieana type. As has 

been indicated by Halle (1933, p. 54), it is improper to 

include in Alcicornopteris such synangia as were figured by Kidston, this genus being a form genus and 

restricted to a scorpioid frond. Likewise, Schuetzia 

bennieana, which is from the Calciferous sandstone of 

Great Britain, is probably not generically identical 

with the genotype, Schuetzia anomala Geinitz, from the 

Permian. Halle has suggested that these forms might 

possibly be placed in Calathiops, or a new genus might
DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES 21

be set up. Apparently he had no material and took no 

steps to institute such a change.

The details of morphology of the material at hand 

will be discussed in connection with the description of 

species. However, it is perhaps appropriate here to 

speculate briefly on the probable relationship of Girtya 

to certain of the sterile fronds that are described here.

Material of Girtya is known from two localities, one 

in Blair County, Pa., and the other in Forest County, 

Pa. At both localities -the material is associated with 

Adiantites so abundantly as to form Adiantites beds. 

In Blair County the species is A. spectabilis and in 

Forest County, A. cyclopteroides. With the exception 

of specimens of Rlwdea, the beds are otherwise barren 

of fern or pteridosperm material. In consequence, the 

natural inference from the association is that the synangia placed in the form genus Girtya may be the microsporangia of Adiantites.

From the point of view of morphology, this opinion 

also finds support to the extent that the axes upon 

which the synangia are borne are superficially similar 

to the rachides of Adiantites, and, furthermore, these 

two species are angular-branching fronds suggesting a 

clambering or climbing habit, the angularity of branching being frequently almost scorpioid. Of course, it is 

impossible to demonstrate any actual organic continuity, but the occurrence is suggestive, and it appears not 

unlikely that further search will reveal specimens supporting or proving this view.

This genus is named for the late Mr. G. H. Girty, of 

the U. S. Geological Survey, who collected the material 

in 1903.

Girtya penusylvanica Bead, n. sp.

Plate 15, figures 1-3; plate 16, figure 3

Synangium cup-shaped, slightly constricted distally, 

about 11 millimeters long and 9 millimeters wide. The 

"receptacle," formed by the apical dichotomy of the 

master branch system, bearing an indefinite number of 

elongated, narrowly cylindrical microsporangia that 

are free except at their bases, where they may be united 

into pairs. The sporangia are not sessile on the master 

branch system but are on short pedicels that are given 

off in crowded succession by the master branch system 

in the cup of the dichotomy so that the arrangement of 

the sporangia is irregular but crowded.

Synangia borne on short branches of a scorpioid 

ramification, these branches flattened.

The material at hand consists of numerous specimens 

that are quite similar in their general features, although 

it is possible that it may eventually be necessary to 

separate them specifically. As is indicated in the illustrations, the principal type of the species is an isolated 

synangium exposed along an imperfect parting of a

buff, fine-grained, silty sandstone. The specimen is 

partly compressed and in consequence shows considerable relief. Unfortunately, the counterpart of the 

specimen is missing. The specimen is obviously cupshaped but slightly constricted distally. An examination of the illustrations definitely demonstrates that 

the sporangia are long, tubular bodies mounted on short 

pedicels that are dichotomous.

The synangia that have been described above are 

comparable both with those described as Alcicornopteris 

zettleri Vaffier and Schuetzia bennieana Kidston. The 

chief difference between the two types is one of habit 

rather than morphology of the synangium. Thus 

A. zettleri is borne terminally on some of the lobes of 

a scorpioid branch of frond, while S. bennieana is borne 

spirally on rather rigid branches. It would thus appear 

that the material under discussion should be referred 

to Alcicornopteris, but when it is recalled that this 

genus was established by Kidston to include peculiar 

sterile pinnae it then becomes questionable whether the 

modification of this genus is justifiable. Therefore, 

based on the American material, the new name Girtya 

has been proposed.

Localities 4 and 5.

UPPER POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE

FERNS AND FERNLIKE PLANTS 

Genus CARDIOPTERIS W. P. Schimper

1869. Cardiopteris W. P. Schimper, Traite de paleontologie 

vegetale, tome 1, p. 451

Genotype: Cardiopteris polymorpha (Goeppert) 

W. P. Schimper.

Fronds pinnate; rachis striate. Pinnae inserted at 

approximately right angles, opposite to subopposite, 

often crowded. Pinnules opposite to subopposite, attached by the central portion of the base, sessile or 

subsessile, round-cordate to elongate-cordate, usually 

symmetrical. The venation with a primary or several 

primaries at the base, forking equally and fanlike to 

supply the whole pinnule. Texture apparently 

coriaceous.

This genus is fairly common in the Lower Carboniferous of Europe. In North America it appears to be 

a rare genus and is known only from a few stations 

in theMississippian.

Cardiopteris irregularis Bead, n. sp. 

Plate 10, figures 1, 2

Complete fronds unknown; fragments of pinnae the 

only parts preserved; pinnules large, alternate, close,
22 FLORAS OP THE POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE

oblique, attached by a broad and slightly oblique base 

to the distinctly lineate rachis, slightly asymmetrically 

ovate to inaequilaterally triangular, rounded to acute 

at the apex, with irregularly undulate borders and the 

rachis in many specimens distinctly sublobately cut on 

the proximal side. Lamina rather thin, slightly concave ventrally, in many pinnules rolled back at the 

borders. Nervation distinct, of moderate strength, the 

exact nature indicated by the figures.

This plant, which at present is known only from fragments collected in a single locality, is unquestionably 

related to Cardiopteris polym-orpha (Goeppert) 

Schimper (1869, p. 452). Cardiopteris potymorpha is, 

of course, a younger form, being more generally characteristic of the Chester group and its equivalents. 

From C. polymorpha, C. irregularis is to be distinguished by its elongated, conspicuously asymmetrical, 

and acute pinnules, which are sometimes irregularly 

parted into one or two broad lobes on the lower side.

Locality 31.

Cardiopteris antecedent Read, n. sp. 

Plate 9, figures 1, 2

Frond divisions unknown. Pinnules nearly flat, narrowly and obliquely ovate or ovate deltoid to rhombic, 

strikingly asymmetrical, entire or slightly lobate, 

rounded at the apex, basally cordate. Nervation neuropteroid, with an indistinct median nerve, the nerves 

curving outward and forking two or three times in 

passing to the border.

This species has a rather striking neuropteroid aspect 

and is quite distinct in the Pocono flora. Both in nervation and in outline the fragments are so similar to 

Neuropteris that one is strongly tempted to place it in 

that genus.

Cardiopteris antecedent is apparently related to 

Neuropteris antecedent Stur (1875, p. 53-56, Taf. 15, 

figs. 1-6).

Locality 11.

Genus RHODEA Fresl

Rhodea blacksburgensis Read, n. sp. 

Plate 3, figures 1, 2

Frond unknown, the material consisting of fragments of pinnae bearing pinnules. The pinnae tending to be angularly flexuose, very slender, and smooth 

or slightly striate longitudinally. Ultimate pinnae 

alternate, distant, set at an acute angle on the rachis 

of the larger order, the rachides of these also slender 

and angularly flexuose, short, the pinna outline short 

ovate. Pinnules narrow, highly divided, each lobe

coursed by a single vein, the lobes rounded at the apices, 

the whole pinnule tending to be somewhat more compact and less slender than in Rhodea vespertina.

The separation of this species from Rhodea vespertina 

is based on the relatively more compact and somewhat 

smaller pinnules that appear to characterize this species, 

and also on the nature of the lobes of the pinnule which 

are much shorter and slightly broader in this than in 

R. vespertina.

Rhodea ~blacksburgensis is to- be compared also with 

R. smithi Kidston (1923b, p. 226, 227, pi. 56, figs. 1, 2; 

pi. 57, figs. 2, 3), from the Calciferous sandstone of 

England. Unfortunately, no material of that species 

has been on hand, so that firsthand comparison is impossible. From the published illustrations it appears 

that R. smithi is a slightly larger type.

This is a fairly common species in the Mississippian 

Price sandstone and correlative formations in the Appalachian trough.

Localities 20, 21, 28, and 30.

Rhodea vespertina Read, n. sp. 

Plate 3, figures 3, 4; plate 4, figures 1-4; plate 16, figure 6

Frond rather delicate, the rachis slender, apparently 

rigid, slightly flexuose, finely striate. Ultimate pinnae 

alternate or subopposite, distant, set at an angle of 

about 45°, linear lanceolate, the axis very slender. Pinnules of the Rhodea type, finely divided, alternate, wellseparated, linear and very narrow, with a single nerve; 

apex of the pinnule rounded. The pinnules are set at 

acute angles and branch into numerous lobes.

The details of frond division of this fern are at present unknown. As will be seen, this species finds its 

closest relationships in Rhodea tenuis Gothan (1913, p. 

15, pi. 2, fig. 2) and Rhodea smithi Kidston (1923b, 

p. 226, 227, pi. 56, figs. 1, 2; pi. 57, figs. 2, 3). It may, 

in fact, be identical with Rhodea tenuis, but as little 

material of that species is available and in view of the 

distribution difficulties involved it seems best tentatively to separate the two.

Rhodea vespertina is the species referred by Lesquereux to Sphenopteris -flaccida Crepin (1874, p. 7, 8, 

pi. 2, figs. 1-5), an identification which has been quoted 

by several American authors. This identification is 

obviously incorrect, S. flaccida having no resemblance 

to R. vespertina as the species is now understood.

Rhodea vespertina is the most widely distributed 

and most abundant plant species in the lower Mississippian of the Appalachian trough, being present at least 

in fragments and usually very profusely distributed at 

most plant-bearing localities.

Localities 10-14,17-21.
DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES 23

Rhodea sp.

A number of small specimens of a large Rhodea-like, 

form from High Bridge, near Pine Grove, Pa., have 

previously been referred to Rhodea. Specimens were 

observed at many places in the Lehigh River section of 

the Pocono near Mauch Chunk, Pa. Other than the 

relatively large, compact, broad lobes of the pinnules, 

there is little to identify this form, and were it not for 

its possible stratigraphic significance, it would have 

been considered too poorly preserved to mention in this 

report.

Locality 13.

Genus TRIPHYLLOPTERIS W. P. Schimper

1869. Triphyllopteris W. P. Schimper, Traite de paleontologi© 

ve"g6tale, tome 1, p. 478.

Genotype.—Triphyllopteris collombi W. P. Schimper.

Fronds bipinnate or perhaps tripinnate in some species. Rachis heavy, transversely marked by short, 

broad rugosities, the base somewhat enlarged and showing evidence of a clean-cut abcission layer. Pinnae alternate to subopposite, set at acute angles, usually close 

and not infrequently overlapping. Ultimate pinnae 

similar. Pinnules sphenopteroid to modified archaeopteroid in form, that is, sessile or very short-stalked, the 

base tapering to the point of attachment; form rhombic to obovate, entire or more frequently trilobed or 

bilobed, the divisions obovate to linear and acute. Venation derived from one or more basal strands, forking 

palmately several times to supply the whole pinnule. 

Texture apparently coriaceous in many instances.

The representatives of this genus are very characteristic of the upper parts of the Pocono formation and 

Price sandstone. They appear to be very important 

contributors to the associated coals, if one may judge 

from their abundance in close association with such 

deposits.

Key to the known American species of Triphyllopteris

Fronds bipinnate or tripinnate, the rachides marked 

by transverse rugosities. Pinnae tending to be rigid 

and frequently set at a rather acute angle to the rachis. 

Pinnules bilobate, trilobate, or multilobate, cuneate, 

the nervation palmate.

1. Pinnules and pinnule lobes broad-cuneate, distally rounded 

or rhombic, the general aspect of the frond somewhat lax.

a. Pinnules small, frequently oval, and rarely showing much 

angularity, not uncommonly broader than long ........ T.

alleghanensis (Meek)

6. Pinnules largei", rounded, oval, the basal pinnules broader 

than long ...... T. latilo'bata Read, n. sp.

c. Pinnules large, rhomboidal, the basal pinnules markedly 

heteromorphous, nervation distant ...... T. rarinervis Read,

n. sp.

d. Pinnules but slightly incised into lobes, these lobes compressed, the general aspect of the pinnules compact, the lobes distally pointed but rather broad . . . . . T. mrginiana (Meek)

2. Pinnules and pinnule lobes narrow, rounded, or pointed, 

the general aspect of the frond rigid.

a. Pinnules quite small, lobes separate, narrow, chiefly 

pointed, pinnules frequently bilobed, aspect fasciculate ..... 

T. biloba Read, n. sp.

6. Pinnules large, narrow, lobate, the lobes well separated, 

narrow, the apices rounded or pointed ...... T. lescuriana

(Meek)

Triphyllopteris alleghanensis (Meek) Read, n. comb. 

Plate 5, figures 1, 2

1880. Cyclopteris (Archaeopteris) alleffhanensis Meek, Philos.

Soc. Washington, Bull. v. 2, app. 8, p. xviii, 44, pi. 1,

figs. 2a, 2b. 

1880. Adiantites (Asplenites) alleghanensis Meek, Philos. Soc.

Washington Bull. v. 2, app. 8, p. six, 44. 

1880. Palaeopteris alleffhanensis Meek, Philos. Soc. Washington

Bull., v. 2, app. 8, p. xix, 44.

1879. Archaeopteris alleghanense (Meek) Lesquereux, Pennsylvania 2d Geol. Survey Rept. P, atlas, p. 9, pi. 49, figs.

9, 9a; text (1880), p. 307. 

1913. Archaeopteris alleffhaniensis David White, West Virginia

Geol. Survey, v. 5 (A), pt. 2, p. 392, 429.

Frond narrow, bipinnate; pinnae linear, slightly 

arcuate, rachis transversely corrugated; ultimate pinnae 

small, alternate to subopposite, open, often nearly at a 

right angle to the rachis, closely and markedly overlapping, ovate or deltoid and short below to ovate triangular above, ultimate rachis sometimes flexuose, ventrally 

sulcate, narrowly alate.

Pinnules variable in form, alternate, the lower being 

very broadly and asymmetrically obovate to obcuneate, 

truncately rounded at the apex, and short to round 

obcuneate and ovate-obcuneate, obtuse; those higher 

being more narrowly obovate-cuneate and sublobate. 

The lowest pinnule on the primary rachis shortest, 

somewhat polymorphous, broadly ovate to round and 

cut into 3 to 5 broadly cuneate, asymmetrical lobes. 

Lamina broadly inflated, coriaceous, nerves often concealed, the single primary nerve forking twice in the 

larger lobes or pinnules.

This species differs decidely from the other species 

of the genus by its much smaller size and the relatively 

broader pinnules and lobes. The extremely broadly 

cuneate, short lateral or basal pinnule which appears 

pedicellate, together with the small size, is the most 

distinctive characteristic. As in other species, the pinnules vary greatly both in form and size.

An interesting feature of this species is the occasional 

occurrence in the lower parts of the frond or pinna 

of small heteromorphous or reduced pinnules that are 

broader and more rounded than those which are normal 

to this type. It is difficult to refer, with confidence,
24 FLORAS OF THE POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE

these pinnules to the species with which they are found, 

though in size they are in accord with the associated 

type.

It is interesting to note, particularly in some of the 

basal pinnae, a sort of foreshadowing in form of the 

later Sphenopteris trifoliolata Artis.

Locality 20.

Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek) lesquereux 

Plate 5, figures 3, 4; plate 6, figures 1-3

1880. Cyclopteris (Archaeopteris) lescuriana Meek, Philos. Soc.

Washington Bull., v. 2, app. 8, p. xvi. 

1880. Sphenopteris lescuriana MeeTj, Philos. Soc. Washington

Bull. v. 2, app. 8, p. xvii. 

1880. Adiantites (Asplenites) lescurianus Meek, Philos. Soc.

Washington Bull., v. 2, app. 8, p. xvii. 

1880. Palaeopteris lesouriana Meek, Philos. Soc. Washington

Bull., v. 2, app. 8, p. xvii.

1879. Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek) Lesquereux, Pennsylvania 2d Geol. Survey, Kept. P, atlas, pi. 50, figs. 6-6c;

text (1880), p. 297, 298. 

1913. Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek) Lesquereux. David

White, West Virginia Geol. Survey, v. 5 (A), pt. 2, p.

392, 429.

Fronds probably bipinnate, ovate-lanceolate, markedly dissected, very graceful in general aspect, with a 

slender, ventrally sulcate rachis. Lateral pinnae alternate, open nearly at a right angle at the base of the 

frond and becoming more acute apically, close, slightly 

overlapping, lanceolate; rather rigid in general aspect, 

tending to be decurrent. Pinnules obcuneate or oblanceolate, the upper ones distant, very oblique to nearly 

erect at the top of the pinna, asymmetrical, bluntly 

narrowed at the apex and bluntly bidenticulate or tridenticulate at the top, slightly decurrent.

Nervation rather coarse. Primary nerve diverging 

gradually from the rachis and forking 4 to 5 times at 

a narrow angle; the lateral nerve forking once or twice 

while passing straight or slightly arched and nearly 

parallel to the apex.

This species is characterized by its narrowly obcuneate or oblanceolate pinnules with deeply dissected lobes 

that are bluntly rounded or bluntly dentate at the apex, 

the erect venation, the narrowly lanceolate pinnae that 

appear stiff and rigid, and finally by the generally 

fragile yet graceful aspect.

Although large collections numbering hundreds of 

specimens of Triphyllopteris have been examined, this 

beautiful species is apparently rare. The forms here 

described as T. rarinerms and T. ~bilobata are apparently similar but must be regarded as distinct. The 

points of distinction will be indicated in connection with 

the descriptions of those species.

From Triphyllopteris alleghanensis Meek this species 

differs in the much narrower pinnules or pinnule lobes,

in its somewhat more rigid aspect, in the generally 

larger pinnule size, and in the venation. 

Localities 10-14, 17-22, and 28-30.

Triphyllopteris latilobata Read, n. sp. 

Plate 8, figures 1-3; plate 10, figure 5

Fronds bipinnate, linear lanceolate, inclined to be 

slightly lax. Rachis petiolate, of medium width, 

rugose.

Pinnae fairly close, not uncommonly overlapping 

slightly, alternate to subopposite; broadly ovate to 

narrowly ovate in outline; set at an open angle on the 

rachis.

Pinnules obliquely placed on the pinnae rachides; 

the basal pinnules very broad, often squarrose, sessile, 

tending to be heteromorphous; the other pinnules narrower although markedly ovate, sessile and tending to 

be broadly attached; the pinnules chiefly simple, becoming bilobed or trilobed only in the upper portion of 

the frond and in the apical and subapical portions of 

the pinnae; the lobes usually shallowly incised. 

Venation palmate.

Triphyllopteris latilobata is distinguished from T. 

lescuriana by the broader, less rhomboidal pinnules that 

are more broadly attached, by the rarity of lobate or 

sublobate pinnules, and by the tendency towards laxity. 

The distinction is at times rather difficult, suggesting a 

transitional series. However, the common forms of 

the two species are recognized readily, and in consequence separation is attempted.

Localities 13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, and 23.

Triphyllopteris virginiana (Meek) Read, n. comb.

1880. Gyclopteris virginiana, Meek, Philos. Soc. Washington 

Bull., v. 2, app. 8, p. xviii 43, pi. 1, fig. 3.

Although a large number of specimens from Lewis 

Tunnel, Greenbrier County, W. Va., near Alleghany 

Station, Va., have been examined, no fragments seem 

referable to the species described by Meek as Oyclopteris virginiana. It thus appears probable that there 

was a paucity of the material in the first place, that is, 

the plant is a rare one; and also it is to be borne in 

mind that in all probability many plant-bearing horizons were penetrated in the cutting of the tunnel and 

that these are no longer exposed.

Meek's description, which may not be available to 

many paleontologists, is as follows:

Frond apparently attaining a large size, and probably tripinnate. Primary pinnae with a rather stout, rigid, smooth, or 

slightly striated rachis. Secondary pinnae long lanceolate, 

regularly alternating, nearly straight, rather closely arranged, 

and standing nearly or quite at right angles to the rachis. 

Pinnules more oblique, rather approximate and regularly alternating ; lower or inner ones shorter and broader than the
DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES 25

others, abruptly narrowed, or apparently sometimes subcordate 

at the base, and attached to the rachis by an extremely short 

petiole, more or less distinctly trilobate, the lobes being obtuse, 

and broad ovate in form; succeeding pinnules gradually becoming flve-lobed, more elongated, or obtusely sublanceolate, more 

oblique, and less abruptly tapering at the base; beyond these, 

the others are less and less strongly lobed, or merely undulated 

on the margins, while a few near the extremities of the pinnae 

are quite simple, still more oblique, and very gradually tapering to, and more or less decurrent upon, the rachis. Nervation 

distinct, nerves slender, palmately spreading, and bifurcating 

several times.

Localities 20 and 21.

Triphyllopteris rarinervis Bead, n. sp. 

Plate 7, figures 1, 2; plate 12, figures 3, 4; plate 13, figure 3

Fronds at least bipinnate, inclined to be broadly 

lanceolate, rather rigid, the pinnae set at a slightly acute 

angle in the lower portion of the frond and becoming 

more acute distally.

Rachis rugose, heavy. Secondary pinnae slightly 

overlapping, dense, alternate, or subopposite, linear to 

oblong ovate, slightly decurrent on the main axis.

Pinnules large, decurrent, attached by a broad and 

short stalk, chiefly broad ovate but ranging to narrower 

forms, wedge-shaped basally, the basal pinnules on the 

pinnae, particularly in the lower parts of the frond, 

tending to be very broad and slightly heteromorphous. 

Lobation varying from entire forms to bilobate or trilobate, the entire or unlobed forms commonest, and the 

lobation, when it occurs, not deep cut. Terminal pinnules bilobate or trilobate are rounded apically.

Venation obscure, a single nerve apparently entering 

the base of the pinnule and by repeated dichotomy 

giving rise to a series of distant bundles that pass 

subparallel to the margin.

This is a very distinct species and includes the largest 

forms of this genus yet known. Its typical form with 

the broad pinnules is readily recognized.

Localities 19 and 21.

Triphyllopteris biloba Bead, n. sp. 

Plate 9, figures 3-5; plate 11, figure 3

Pinnae close, overlapping, the pinnules and lobes 

smaller than in Triphyllopteris lescuriana, sessile, and 

pinnules open; lobes erect and oblique, presenting a 

fasciculate aspect and usually very narrow. Nerves indistinct, fine, close, running nearly parallel to the apex 

of the pinnule or lobe.

This species is a smaller, much more compact type 

than T. lescuriana, to which it is unquestionably-closely 

related. As is suggested by the name, the bilobate condition of the pinnules is very common, the two lobes

usually being of the same length. The pinnules are 

usually bluntly rounded at the apex.

The type specimens of Triphyllopteris biloba are 

chosen from a long series indicated by Meek as T. 

lescuriana.

Localities 13 and 21.

Genus LAGENOSPEBMUM Nathorst 

Lagenospermum imparirameum Arnold

1939. Ldffenospermwn imparirameum Arnold, Torrey Bot. Club 

Bull., v. 66, no. 5, p. 297-303, figs. 1-10.

Seeds borne in cupules or sheaths on slightly unequally dichotomous branches; the cupules paired or 

in fours. Cupules approximately 3 millimeters broad 

and 10 millimeters long, formed by 5 bracts that are 

fused below, are free above, and are acutely pointed 

apically. Seeds single in each cupule, apparently borne 

on very short pedicels, enclosed almost completely by 

the sheath and scarcely visible. Seeds, oval, about 2 

millimeters in diameter and about 5 millimeters in 

length, radiospermic. Details unknown.

The general aspect of the material that is referred 

by Arnold to this species is seen in the figures. In fact, 

plate 17, figure 8, reproduces a photograph of one of 

Arnold's type specimens. The cupular nature of these 

fossils, as they appear ordinarily, is quite apparent. 

They are readily mistaken for polliniferous organs, and 

were it not for Arnold's careful work in demonstrating 

the presence of seeds it is probable that they would be 

at this time placed in that category.

Arnold records this species from Fishing Creek Gap 

(High Bridge), near Pine Grove, Pa., and from Merrimac mine in Price Mountain, Montgomery County, 

Va. In addition, he states that a few specimens were 

seen in a collection from the lower part of the Pocono 

formation on Horeshoe Curve of the Pesnnsylvania 

Railroad, Blair County, Pa. The writer has not been 

able to specifically confirm this latter identification.

Localities 11 and 13.

Genus LEPIDODENDROPSIS Lutz

1933. Lepidodendropsis Lutz, Palaeontographica, Band 78, Abt. 

B, p. 118-130.

Genotype. — Lepidodendropsis hirmeri Lutz.

Lepidodendron-like plant remains with small, elongate, longitudinally directed, closely appressed, generally spindle-shaped, leaf bolsters of the general type 

of Sublepidodendron Nathorst; leaf scars indistinct, 

without accompanying ligule and without parichnos 

scar; vascular strand single; margins of the bolsters 

distinctly raised into narrow ridges or lines.
26 FLORAS OF THE POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE

Lepidodendropsis has long been known in America, 

the literature usually referring to it as "Lepidodendron 

scoliniforme" Meek (1880, p. xii-xv, 38-40, pi. 1, fig. 1), 

or "the group of Lepidodendron scobiniforme Meek," 

or "Z. corrugatumn Dawson (1859, p. 68, figs. 2a, 2b)." 

Such material is, in fact, relatively common in the lower 

Mississippian coal-bearing clastic formations such as 

the Pocono formation, the Price sandstone, and the 

Horton series, all of which lie in the central and northern portions of the Appalachian trough. The genus is 

a very distinct one and deserves to be separated from 

Lepidodendron. It is not readily confused with other 

American types. Lepidodendropsis is known in Europe 

from abundant material of the genotype, Lepidodendropsis hirmeri Lutz, from the Lower Carboniferous 

strata in Bavaria, Germany. In America it was identified by Jongmans, Gothan, and Darrah (1937, p. 429- 

441) prior to the present paper. These writers listed as 

new species, Lepidodendropsis cyclostigmatoidks, Z. 

vandergrachtii, and Z. sigillarioides. Neither Lepidodendropsis corrugatus (Dawson) nor Z. scobiniformis 

(Meek) were included among the described species as 

new combinations, although, according to the authors, 

they may be referable to the genus Lepidodendropsis. 

These writers seemed to prefer to use new names rather 

than the older names which they apparently did not 

regard very highly, although these older species are 

based on adequate material and the illustrations are 

as well executed in the older as in the more recent 

contributions.

According to Jongmans, Gothan, and Darrah, Lepidodendron corrugatwn Dawson may be identified with 

Lepidodendropsis hirmeri Lutz (1933, p. 118-130). If 

this is correct, and it can be determined only after very 

careful comparison of actual specimens, then it follows 

that Lepidodendropsis hirmeri Lutz becomes a synonym 

of Lepidodendron corrugatum Dawson, and the latter 

becomes the genotype. This is, of course, purely speculative and as has been remarked above, cannot be stated 

as a fact until close comparison of the specimens has 

been made.

Lepidodendropsis vandergrachti Jongmans, Gothan, and Darrah 

Plate 18, figure 4; plate 20, figures 4, 5

1937. Lepidodendropsis vandergrachti Jongmans, Gothan, and 

Darrah, 26me congres pour J'avancement des etudes de 

stratigraphie carbonifere, Compte rendu, tome 1, p. 

436-439, pi. 52, figs. 33, 34; pi. 53, fig. 35; pi. 54, figs. 36- 

38; pi. 58, fig. 49.

Leaf bolsters arranged in nearly perfect horizontal 

and vertical rows, very broadly rhomboidal; the basal 

portion of the bolsters more attenuate than the apical 

portion; leaf scars situated in the upper portion of

the bolsters; large, oval, somewhat broader than long, 

carrying a centrally located, small vascular scar and 

below it an indistinct marking which has been interpreted as the parichnos scar; bolsters closely rather 

than widely spaced, bordered by broadly rounded raised 

areas.

The writer has had only the rather poor halftones of 

Jongmans, Gothan, and Darrah, made from inferior 

specimens, as a basis for his identifications. However, 

there can be little doubt as to the specific reference, the 

critical features of leaf bolsters being quite apparent 

in the illustrations referred to above.

A comparison of the illustrations of the type lot with 

the specimens illustrated in this paper indicates the 

very close similarity. The very broad bolsters, rounded 

rather than angular; the large, oval, transversely elongate leaf scar; the centrally located vascular strand as 

well as the scar below the vascular strand that has been 

doubtfully interpreted as a parichnos scar, are all features that set this species apart from material now 

known and referable to other species of the genus Lepidodendropsis Lutz.

The parichnoslike scar perhaps merits some discussion. The precise identification of these markings is 

very difficult. The bolsters are not distinct on the leaf 

bases, but judging from the position of the small scars 

there can be very little doubt concerning the parichnoian nature.

This species is fairly common, being known from a 

number of localities in the anthracite region of northeastern Pennsylvania as well as in the Virginia region.

Localities 11-13, 225 24, 26, and 27.

Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis (Meek) Bead, n. comb. 

Plate 19, figures 3-5; plate 20, figures 1-3

1880. Lepidodendron scobiniforme Meek, Philos. Soc. Washington, Bull., v. 2, app. 8, p. xiii-xv, 38-40, pi. 1, fig. 1.

Bolsters elongate, rhomboidal, about three-eights of 

an inch long and about one-eighth of an inch wide,, 

slightly angular, arranged in a very close spiral so that 

the adjacent bolsters appear to be in nearly horizontal 

as well as vertical rows. Bolster margins clearly 

marked by narrow, raised areas; lower portion of thebolsters devoid of any markings; the leaf scars indistinct, situated in the upper portion of the bolsters, somewhat quadrangular, the angles somewhat rounded; 

vascular strands centrally located, but the details not 

apparent.

. The original specimen of this species came from Lewis 

Tunnel on the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad in Alleghany County, Va., near White Sulphur Springs, W_ 

Va. Associated with Lepidodendropsis sGobiniformi&
DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES 27

are Triphyllopteris lescuriana, T. virginia/no,, and T. 

alleghanensis.

Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis has long been recognized by various geologists as a rather good index fossil 

of the Pocono formation and its equivalent, the Price 

sandstone in Virginia. In a number of localities where 

the coal-bearing shale facies of this formation is developed, the species, or one closely related, occurs in 

profusion.

There can be no doubt that Lepidodendron scdbiniforme Meek is more correctly referable to Lepidodendropsis. The rather angular bolsters, the very indistinct leaf scars, the absence of parichnos and ligules, 

and the generally smooth bolster surface set off by raised 

margins point to its affinity with Lutz' genus. Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis is evidently identical with 

Jongman, Gothan, and Darrah's (1937, p. 431-434) 

Lepidodendropsis hirmeri Lutz, if one may judge accurately from the figures of those authors. Thus, there 

comes up the question of treatment of a named American species which may be synonomous with an European form. For the time being, the writer is following 

the rather questionable procedure of ignoring the assignment of the European name to the species, owing 

to the lack of material of L. hirmeri for 'comparison. 

Furthermore, if it does develop that L. Mrmeri and L. 

scobiniformis are identical, then L. scobmiformis will 

stand and L. hirmeri will become the synonym. The 

continued use of both names will serve a useful purpose, 

however, if each is restricted to the continent from 

which it was originally described.

It has not been possible to examine type material, or 

even specimens identified by Dawsoh, of Lepidodendron 

corrugatum, but that species is probably identical with 

Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis; and if further investigation demonstrates that fact, then L. scobiniformis 

will in turn become a synonym of the earlier L. corrugatwn.

As has been stated above, Lepidodendropsis scobmiformis is a very common species in the Pocono, occurring at most localities where a considerable amount of 

plant material is obtainable.

Localities 11-14,17,18,21, 24,25, and 27.

Lepidodendropsis sigillarioides Jongmans, Gothan, and Darrah 

Plate 19, figures 1, 2

1937. Lepidodendropsis sigillarioides Jongmans, Gothan, and 

and Darrah, 2*me Congres pour 1'avancement des etudes 

de stratigraphie carbonifere, Compte rendu, tome 1, 

p. 438-441, pi. 55, figs. 39-41; pi. 56, figs. 42-44.

A number of fragments of this species are set apart 

because of the very apparent vertical and horizontal 

alignment of the bolsters and leaf scars as well as the

vertical ribbing. One of these specimens is here illustrated. In no example seen by the writer has preservation been sufficiently good to warrant comment. 

Localities 12, 13, 25, and 27.

MAUCH CHUNK SHALE AND EQUIVALENT 

FORMATIONS

Genus SPHENOPTERIDIUM W. P. Schimper 1874

1874. Sphenopteridium W. P. Schimper, Trait6 de pal£ontologie 

vegetale, tome 3, p. 487.

Genotype.—Sphenopteridium dissectwn (Goeppert) 

W. P. Schimper.

Frond bipinnate, rachis heavy, characteristically 

transversely rugose, owing to apparently heavy sclerotic 

bands in the cortex; dichotomous usually below leafy 

portion of frond; the dichotomy usually an acute angle. 

Pinnules obliquely set, sphenopteroid, wedge- to rhomboid-shaped and usually somewhat dissected; contracted 

at the base, and seated on the axis of the ultimate pinna 

by a short footstalk. Venation sphenopteroid, veins 

numerous.

This genus is generally characteristic of the Lower 

Carboniferous in Europe. It has not been previously 

recorded in America.

Sphenopteridium virginianum Bead, n. sp. 

Plate 1, figures 7, 8, 9

Fronds bipinnate and probably tripinnate. Ultimate 

pinnae alternate to subalternate, set at an angle of about 

45°, lanceolate and not very long. The rachis of 

the ultimate and subultimate pinnae longitudinally 

coarsely striate, the striate widely spaced. Pinnules 

crowded, slightly overlapping, deltoid, cuneate at the 

broad, short-stalked base, obtuse apically, and deeply 

cut into 2 to 5 narrow, linear, obliquely set lobes.

Nervation partly obscured, originating in one or possibly more strands at the base, running upward, and 

dichotomizing to supply the several lobes with one or 

more veins.

The assignment of this species to the genus Sphenopteridium is perhaps questionable. In the general form 

of the pinnules and in the nervation, the agreement with 

Sphenopteridium, dissectum (Kidston, 1923a, p. 160- 

163), for example, is rather close. However, the specimens seen fail to show the transverse rugosities so 

characteristic of the genus. In fact, were it not for the 

longitudinal markings, the specimen would be assigned 

to Spathulopteris Kidston (1923a, p. 172, 173).

Sphenopteridium) virginianum differs from S. girtyi 

in its more erect and elongated pinnules, which are 

more deeply dissected; the latter also has rugose axes 

which distinguish it. From S. brooksi, 8. virgimanum
28 FLORAS OF THE POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE

is separated by the absence of transverse rugosites and 

by the marked dissection of the pinnules. 

Locality 32.

Sphenopteridium brooksi Head, n. sp. 

Plate 1, figures 10, 11, 14

Frond small, slender, bipinnate, dichotomous below, 

the angle about 30°. Rachis longitudinally striate and 

transversely rather sparingly rugose. The rachis below 

the dichotomy carrying subopposite short pinnae which 

are clothed with distant to crowded, lobed pinnules and 

pinnatifid pinnules; the pinnae in this portion of the 

frond never crowded and giving a rather loose appearance. The divisions above the dichotomy bipinnate, 

the pinnae forming an angle of 30° to 60° with the main 

rachis, the pinnae rather crowded, tending to overlap. 

Pinnae lanceolate, rigid; axis slender, carrying multilobate pinnules below and 2- to 5-lobate pinnules distally. Pinnules ovate-cuneate in outline, but this 

modified by lobation, the lobes frequently slender, although more rounded than in Sphenopteridium vir.ginianum. Venation obscure, apparently similar to S. 

mrginianwm.

From Sphenopteridium girtyi this species is to be distinguished by its more robust habit, its thicker corrugated rachis, the more erect position of the generally 

closer pinnules, and the less distinctly cuneate form of 

the latter. At the same time it is separated from S. 

virginianum by the narrower, laciniate pinnules as well 

as by the narrower, more delicate rachis of the latter.

Locality 33.

Sphenopteridium girtyi Head, n. sp. 

Plate 1, figures 1-6

Fronds imperfectly known, probably not very large.

Pinnae lanceolate or linear, slender; the axes narrow, 

and densely clothed with markedly decurrent pinnules 

which tend to overlap slightly. Pinnules pointed and 

cut into 3 to 5 narrow and often outwardly curved lobes, 

which in turn may be incised slightly into 2 to 3 lobes. 

Lamina rather thick. Nervation springing from the 

median zone of the rachis at a very oblique angle and 

passing outward, apparently as 2 to 3 nerves into the 

pinnule, where there is palmate division as a result of 

successive dichotomies, the nerves being fairly widely 

spaced.

Occurring on slabs of shale with the pinnae just 

described are occasional fragments of larger axes 

marked by the longitudinal striations and short, irregular, transverse ridges which are recognized as so 

characteristic of Sphenopteridium. This associated 

material suggests that the generic reference should be

Sphenopteridium rather than Spathulopteris (Kidston, 

1923a,p.170-172).

Sphenopteridium girtyi recalls to some extent the 

European S. specioswni Kidston (1923, p. 170-172) in 

the general aspect of the pinnae and in pinnule form. 

However, S. girtyi is somewhat larger and the pinnule 

lobes hardly so slender.

Locality 33.

Genus CARDIOPTERIS W. P. Schimper 1869

Cardiopteris abbensis Read, n. sp.

Plate 2, figures 1-3

Known only from abundant isolated pinnules that 

range in size from 1-3 centimeters in width and 1-4 

centimeters in length; the general aspect of the pinnules 

round-cordate, symmetrical, the apex either very gently 

rounded or slightly elongate with sharper rounding. 

Venation radiates from the point of attachment of the 

pinnule to the rachis, no midrib evident. Texture probably coriaceous.

This species is known from abundant specimens from 

the basal Bluefield shales in the vicinity of Abbs Valley, 

Va. Numerous isolated petiole fragments and stems 

are likewise present but cannot be related with certainty to this species.

In the rotundity of the cordate pinnules and in their 

small size this species stands well apart from other 

forms here described and cannot be confused with 

Pocono types.

Locality 34.

Genus ADIANTITES Goeppert, emend.

Adiantites beeehensis Read, n. sp.

Plate 10, figures 3, 4

Ultimate pinnae close, alternate, narrowly oblong, 

with rather slender, flexuose rachis. Pinnules alternate, ranging from deltoid-ovate, trilobate, and shortstalked to oblong, obtusely rounded, 4- to 6-lobed, the 

lobes deeply parted, obovate, with a rhomboidal and 

sublobate terminal. Nervation distinct, with a primary 

nerve continuing apically for about one-third to onefourth of the distance and giving off decurrent and 

arching secondaries. The primairy nerve gradually 

diffuses into similar secondaries, all of which fork once 

or twice in passing to the margins of the pinnules.

This species, so named because of its occurrence at 

Beach Fork, Randolph County, W. Va., is readily distinguished by its obovate-cuneate and lobate pinnules 

and by its small size. In its general aspect this form is 

suggestive more of the Pottsville types than of the Mississippian types.

Locality 33.
LITERATURE CITED 29

Genus CARPOLITHES Schlotheim 

1820. Carpolithes Schlotheim, Petrefactenkunde, p. 418. 

Genotype.—Carpolithes dbietinus Schlotheim.

Carpolithes virginianus Bead, n. sp. 

Plate 1, figures 12, 13

Associated with the fragments of Sphenopteridiwm 

virginiawwin and attached to an axis that is marked by 

the same distant longitudinal markings as is the axis 

of S. virginianum is a small seed rather similar to that 

described as characteristic of Aneimites fertilis White 

but differing in the more rounded outline and narrower 

border as well as in the larger size. The seed coat is 

traversed by slender, subparallel ribs which form an 

annular border at the apex. The seed is slightly decurrent on the stem, but there can be little room for 

doubt concerning its attachment or the association with 

S. wrginianum, although the exact morphological relationships are unknown.

Locality 32.

LITERATURE CITED

Arnold, C. A., 1933a, A lycopodiaceous strobilus from the Pocono 

sandstone of Pennsylvania: Am. Jour. Botany, v. 20, p. 114- 

117.

———— 1933b, Fossil plants from the Pocono (Oswayo) sandstone of Pennsylvania: Mich. Acad. Sci. Papers, v. 17, p. 

51-56.

———— 1987, Devonian and Mississippian plant-bearing formations in eastern North America: 26me Congres pour 

I'avancement des etudes de stratigraphie carbonifere, 

Compte rendu, tome 1, p. 47-62.

———— 1939, Lagenospermum impariramewni, n. sp. from the

Pocono and Price formations of Pennsylvania and Virginia: 

Torrey Bot. Club Bull, v. 66, no. 5, p. 297-303, figs, 1-10. 

Ashburner, C. A., 1877, A measured section of the Paleozoic 

rocks of central Pennsylvania: Am. Philos. Soc. Proc., v. 

16, p. 522-525.

———— 1895, in Lesley, J. P., d'lnvilliers, E. V., and Smith, 

D. W., A summary description of the geology of Pennsylvania: Pa. Geol. Survey, Final Kept., v. 3, pt. 1, p. 1663- 

1679.

Ashley, G. H., and Willard, Bradford, 1935, The use of the 

term Pocono: Science, new ser., v. 81, p. 615-617.

Butts, Charles, 1905, Description of the Edensburg quadrangle, 

Pa.: TJ. S. Geol. Survey GeoL Atlas, folio no. 133, 9 p.

———1933, Geologic map of the Appalachian Valley of Virginia,

with explanatory text: Va. GeoL Survey Bull. 42, p. 42, 43. 

Butts, Charles, and Leverett, Frank, 1904, Description of the

Kittanning quadrangle, Pa.: TJ. S. Geol. Survey Geol. Atlas,

folio, no. 115, 15 p. 

Campbell, M. R., 1894, Paleozoic overlaps in Montgomery and

Pulaski Counties, Virginia: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 5,

p. 171-190.

——— 1896, Description of the Pocahontas Sheet, Va., W. Va.: 

U. S. Geol. Survey Geol. Atlas, folio 26, 5 p.

——— 1904, Description of the Latrobe quadrangle, Pa.: U. S. 

Geol. Survey Geol. Atlas, folio 110,15 p. 

315034—55——9

Campbell, M. R., and others, 1925, The Valley coal fields of 

Virginia: Va. Geol. Survey Bull. 25, p. 1-322.

Chadwick, G. H., 1933, Great CatskiU delta, and revision of late 

Devonic succession: Pan-Am. Geologist, v. 60, p. 91-107.

——— 1935, What is "Pocono"?: Am. Jour. Sci., 5th ser., v. 29,

p. 133-143. 

Crepin, Francois, 1874, Description de quelques plantes fossiles

de 1'etage des Psammites du Condroz: Acad. royale Belgique Bull., 2d ser., tome 38, p. 7,8, pi. 2, figs. 1-5. 

Darton, N. H., 1894, Description of the Staunton Sheet, Va., W.

Va.: U. S. Geol. Survey Geol. Atlas, folio no. 14, 4 p. 

Dawson, J. W., 1859, On the Lower Coal Measures as developed

in British America: Geol. Soc. London Quart. Jour., v. 15,

p. 68, figs. 2a, 2b.

——— 1873, Report on the fossil plants of the Lower Carboniferous and Millstone Grit formations of Canada: Canada 

GeoL Survey, p. 26,27, pi. 7, figs. 61-63.

Fontaine, W. M., 1877, Notes on the Vespertine strata of Virginia 

and West Virginia: Am. Jour. Sci., 3d ser., v. 13, p. 37-48f 

115-123.

Gothan, W., 1913, Die Oberschlesiche Steinkohlenfiora: Preuss. 

geol. Landesanstalt Abh., nf., Heft 75, Teil 1, p. 15, pi. 2, fig. 

2; Teil 3, fig. 1.

Grimsley, G. P., 1915, Jefferson, Berkeley, and Morgan Counties : W. Va. GeoL Survey County Repts., p. 136-166.

Halle, T. G., 1933, The structure of certain fossil spore-bearing 

organs believed to belong to pteridosperms: K. svenska 

vetensk. akad. HandL, 3d ser., Band 12, no. 6, p. 54.

Jongmans, W. J., 1937, Contribution to a comparison between 

the Carboniferous floras of the United States and of Western Europe: 24me Congres pour I'avancement des; etudes de 

stratigraphie carbonifere, Compte rendu, tome 1, p. 377, 378.

Jongmans, W. J., and Gothan, Walther, 1934, Florenfolge und 

vergleichende Stratigrafie des Karbons der ostliehen Staaten 

Nord-Amerikas; vergleich mit West-Europe: GeoL Bur. 

NederL Mijngebied Heerlen, Jaarv. 1933.

Jongmans, W. J., Gothan, Walther, and Darrah, W. C., 1937, 

Beitrage zur Kenntnis der Flora der Pocono-Schichten aus 

Pennsylvanien und Virginia: 24me Congres pour I'avancement des etudes de Stratigraphie Carbonifere, compte 

rendu, tome 1, p. 423-444, 429-441, 431-434.

Kidston, Robert, 1923a, Fossil plants of the Carboniferous rocks 

of Great Britain: Great Britain GeoL Survey Mem., Paleontology, V. 2, pt. 2,160-163; 170-172,172, 173.

——— 1923b. Fossil plants of the Carboniferous rocks of Great 

Britain: Great Britain Geol. Survey Mem., Paleontology, v. 

2, pt. 3, p. 226, 227, pi. 56, figs. 1, 2; pi. 57, figs. 2, 3.

——— 1924, Fossil plants of the Carboniferous rocks of Great

Britain: Great Britain GeoL Survey Mem., Paleontology, 

v. 2, pt. 5, p. 418-421, pi. 108, figs. 7-9a; text figs. 39, 40. 

Lesley, J. P., 1862, On the coal formation of southern Virginia: 

Am. Philo. Soc. Proc. no. 9, p. 30-38.

——— 1895, A summary description of the geology of Pennsylvania : Pa. GeoL Survey, v. 3, pt 1, p. 1629-1789.

Lesquereux, Leo, 1858, in Rogers, H. D., 1858, The geology of 

Pennsylvania: v. 2, p. 854, 855, pi. 3, figs. 1-ld; pi. 21, fig. 2V

——— 1884, Description of the Coal Flora of the Carboniferous

formations in Pennsylvania and throughout the United 

States: Pa. 2d GeoL Survey Rept. P, v. 3, p. 850, 851.

Lutz, Josef, 1933, Zur Kulmflora von Geigen bei Hof: Paleontographica, Band 78, Abt. B, p. 118-130.

McCreath, A. S., and d'lnviUiers, B. V., 1887, The New RiverCripple Creek mineral region of Virginia: p. 1-171.
30 FLORAS OF THE POCONO FORMATION AND PRICE SANDSTONE

Meek, F. B., 1880, Descriptions of new .species of fossil plantsi

from Alleghany County, Va.: Philo. Soc. Wash. Bull. 2, app.

8, p. i-xix, pis. 1, 2; p. xii-xv, 38-40, pi. 1, fig. 1; p. i-xix, 

J 26-44. 

Platt, Franklin, 1877, Report of Progress in the Cambria and

Somerset district of the bituminous coal fields of western,

Pennsylvania. Pt. 1, Cambria: Pa. 2d Geol. Survey Kept.

H2, p. 23-30. 

Price, P. H., 1929, Pocahontas County: W. Va., Geol. Survey

County Repts., p. 189-200. 

Read, C. B., 1938, The age of the Carboniferous strata of the

Paracas Peninsula, Peru: Wash. Acad. Sci. Jour., v. 28,

no. 9, p. 396-404, fig. 6. 

Reger, D. B., 1920, Webster County and portion of Mingo district,

Randolph County, south of Valley Fork of Elk River: W. Va.

Geol. Survey County Repts., p. 221-225.

————1931, Randolph County: W. Va. Geol. Survey County 

Repts., p. 341-351.

Reger, D. B., and Price, P. H., 1926, Mercer, Monroe, and Summers Counties: W. Va. Geol. Survey County Repts., p. 

503-532.

Richardson, G. B., 1904, Description of the Indiana quadrangle, 

Pa.: U. S. Geol. Survey Geol. Atlas, folio 102, 7 p.

Rogers, H. D., 1844, Address on the recent progress of geological 

research in the United States: Am. Jour. Sci., 1st ser., v. 47, 

p. 153-158.

————1858, The geology of Pennsylvania, a government survey,

v. 1, p. 108,141-146; v. 2, pt. 2. 

Rogers, W. B., 1836, Report of the geologic reconnaissance of the

State of Virginia: p.. 183. 

Schimper, W. P., 1869, Trait<§ de Paleontologie veg<5tale, tome

1, p. 452. 

Schimper, W. P., and Schenk, A., 1891, in Zittel, K. A., TraitS

de Paleontologie, pt. 2, Pal<5ophytologie, p. 110, 111, fig. 87.

Stevenson, J. J., 1887, A geological reconnaissance of Bland, 

Giles, Wythe, and portions of Pulaski and Montgomery 

Counties, Virginia: Am. Philo. Soc. Proc. no. 24, p. 61-108.

————1903, Lower Carboniferous of the Appalachian Basin:

Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 14, p. 16-45. 

Stose, G. W., 1913, Geology of the salt and gypsum deposits of

southwestern Virginia: U. S. Geol. Survey Bull. 530, p.

232-255. 

Stose, G. W., and Swartz, C. K., 1912, Description of the Pawpaw

and Hancock quadrangles, Md., W. Va., Pa.: U. S. Geol.

Survey Geol. Atlas, folio 179, 24 p. 

Stur, D. R. J., 1875, Beitrage zur Kenntniss der Flora der Vorwelt, Band 1: Die Culm-Flora: K.-k. geol. Reischsanstalt

Abb,, Band 8, p. 53-56, Taf. 15, p. 66-68, figs. 1-6; pi. J6,

figs. 4-6; pi. 17, figs. 3, 4. 

Vaffier, A., 1901, Etude g^ologique et palSontologique du Carbonifere infe"rieur du Maconnais: Univ. Lyon Annales, new ser.,

v. 1, no. 7, p. 124-126, pi. 6, fig. 5; pi. 7, fig. 1. 

Walton, John, 1926, Contributions to knowledge of Lower Carboniferous plants: Royal Soc. London Philo. Trans., B ser.,

v. 215, p. 205-208. 

White, David, 1913, The fossil flora of West Virginia: W. Va.

Geol. Survey, v. 5 (a), pt. 2, p. 429.

———— 1934a, Pocono orogeny, age, and climate: Geol. Soc. 

America Proc., 1933, p. 34.

———— 1934b, The age of the Pocono: Am. Jour. Sci., 5th ser,

v. 27, p. 265-272.

Willard, Bradford, 1936, Continental Upper Devonian of northeastern Pennsylvania: Geol. Soc. America Bull., v. 47, no. 

4, p. 565-607.

Willard, Bradford, and Cleaves, A. B., 1938, A Paleozoic section in south-central Pennsylvania: Pa. Topog. and Geol. 

Survey Bull. G 8, p. 17,18.

Willis, Bailey, 1912, Index to the stratigraphy of North America: 

U. S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 71, p. 417-420.
INDEX

[Italic numbers indicate description]

Page 

abbensis, Cardiopteris.............. 1, 12,14,16, S8, pi. 2

Abbs Valley, Va.f fossil collected at..__...... 12

abietinus, Carpolithes......————..————-. 29

Abstract————————————————————— 1 

acadica, Adiantites............................. 19

acicularis, Knorrfa...................-...„—— 2

adiantiformis, Triphyttopteris.................... 4

Adiantites.................................... 7,13,17

acadica..................................... 19

antiquus.................................... 17

bassleri...................................... 18

beechensis.................... 1,12,14,16, 28, pi. 10

bettidulus................................... 20

cardiopteroldes.............. 1,9,13,15, 18, pis. 3,13

cgclopteroides........... 1,9,13,15,18,21, pis. 11,12

spectabttis....................————— 1,8,9,

13,15, 17, 19, 20,21, pis. 7,10,11,14 

ungeri............ 1,2,3,8, 9.13,15, 17, 19,20, pi. 2

zone.————————————————————— 8,13 

(Asplenites) atteghanensis................... 23

(Asplenites) lescurianus..................... 24

sp__..——__—————————————— 9 

Alcicornopteris.................................. 19, 20

attoonensis—.................. 1,9,13,15, 19, pi. 16

anthracitica............ 1,8,9,13,15,17, 19, 20, pi. 17

convoluta—................................. 19

zeOleri..————.—....................... 19,21

Altthopteris helenae............................. 2

atteghanense, Archaeopteris...................... 23

atteghanensis, AdiantUes (Asplenites)............ 23

Archaeopteris.........———————————— 2,23

Cyclopteris (Archaeopteris).................. 2,23

Palaeopteris................................ 23

Bhodea........................ 1,9,13,15, 18, pi. 16

TriphyUopteris........... 1,11,13,15, 25,24,27, pi. 5

Allegheny Front—.—————————————— 1,7,13 

Allegheny Plateau region, plant remains in

upper Pooono in——————————— 10 

altoonensis, Alcicornopteris......... 1,9,13,15, 19, pi. 16

Aneimites...................................... 7

fertais...................................... 29

sp.......................................... 12,14

•anomala, Schuetzia.............................. 20

•antecedens, Cardiopteris............ 1,10,13,15, SS, pi. 9

Neuropteris................................. 22

•anthracitica, Aleicornopteris.................... 1, 8,

9, 13, 15, 17, 19, 20, pi. 17

•antiqua, Neurocardiopteris....................... 4

•antiquum, Sphenophyttum....................... 2

•antiquus, Adiantites............................. 17

•arberi, Lagenospermum......................... 20

Archaeopteris aUeghanense....................... 23

atteghanensis.............................:. 2,3,23

bockschiana................................. 2,3

hattiana..................................... 2

latifolia..................................... 16

minor...................................... 2,3

obliqua....................................-_• 2,3

obtusa...................................... 2

roemeriana.................................. 3

rogersi...................................... 2,3

'(Archaeopteris) atteghanensis, Cyclopteris........ 2,23

lescuriana, Cyclopteris....................... 2,24

sp ________________________ 7,8,12 

Area studied——.______._______ . 1 

Arnold, O. A., quoted______________ 3-4 

Ashley, Q. IL, quoted_________.___ 5,7 

(Asplenites) atteghanensis, AdiantUes.....___ 23

lescurianus, Adiantites...................... 24

B

bassleri, Adiantites.............................. 18

Beach Fork, florule obtained from_______ 12 

beechensis, Adiantites............. 1,12,14,16,2$ pi. 10

Page 

beinertiana, Calathiops.......................... 20

Bell Gap, Pa., section of Pocono in_______ 8 

bettidulus, Adiantites............................ 20

bennieana, Schuetzia............................ 20,21

Berea sandstone________________ 6 

Bibliography................................... 29-30

Big Injun sand___:.::___________ 6 

Big Spruce Knob coal____.___.'.___ 12,16 

Big Spruce Knob sandstone member, Mauch

Chunk shale____________ 12 

bUoba, Triphyttopteris—........................ 1,

10,11,13,15,16,23,24, SS, pis. 9,11 

blacksburgensis, Rhodea...... 1,11,13,15,16,19, SS, pi. 4

Bluefleld shale.—_.___..._________ 12,16 

Board sandstone.—_______________ 6 

bockschiana, Archaeopteris....................... 2,3

Noeggerathia................................ 2

breviinternodum, Trochophyttum................. 3

Broad Top basin..———___________ 5 

Broad Top coal field—__. _______ 1,6,7,10,13 

Broad Top region________________ 6,10 

Broadtop syncline._______________ 5 

brooksi, Sphenopteridium-...... 1,12,14,16,27,28, pi. 1

Burgeon sandstone member _________ 6,10,13 

Burlington limestone———_____._.__ 6

Calathiops. ........... ...... ......... .... ... .... 19, 20

beinertiana .................................. 20

pottsvittensis.... ............. 1, 8, 9, 13, 15, SO, pi. 17

Cardiopteridium holdeni.. ......... ..... .... ... 4

Cardiopteris ............. ........................ SI

abbensis.....-— .-.-....-... 1, 12, 14, 16,28, pi. 2

antecedens ........ ... .......... 1, 10, 13, 15, SS, pi. 9

irregularis.. ..... . ............... 1, 13, 16, SI, pi. 10

polymorpha ..... ...... .. .......... ....... ... SI

cardiopteroides, Adiantites... .... 1, 9, 13, 15, 18, pis. 3, 13

Carpolithes.... ...... ............................ 2, S9

abietinus .................. : ........... ... ... 29

virginianus.. ............ .. ... . 1, 12, 14, 16, S9, pi. 1

sp . __________ 10, 15

Catskill formation ________________ 3, 7

floral differentiation _____________ 7-8

section of part of upper. __ . _ ———— _ 8

Chest Mountain, W. Va... . ____ . ___ . __ 1

Chemung formation _______________ 7

circularis, Bhacopteris ....... ....... .. ..... ... ... 17

Coffee shale _____ —— ________ — _ 6

Collection localities. ______________ 14-16

Adiantites flora ___________ . __ .. 14-15

Mauch Chunk formation __________ 16

Summary of —————— —— — . ———— ... 12-14

Triphyttopteris flora.. ____________ 15-16

cottombi, Triphyttopteris ......................... SS

cottombiana, Triphyttopteris ..... ................ 4,19

compacta, Triphyttopteris ... .............. .... ... 4

Conostoma ...................................... 19

convoluta, Alcicornopteris... ..................... 19

corrugatum, Lepidodendron.. ........... .... 2, 10, 26, 27

corrigatus, Lepidodendropsis ..................... 26

Cove Mountain member, Pocono member.. __ 7

Cowin's mine __________________ 16

Croekett-Price's mine ____________ ... 16

Cyclopteris virginiana ............................ 2, 24

(Archaeopteris) atteghanensis. ............... 2,23

(Archaeopteris) lescuriana ................... 2, 24

cyclopteroides, Adiantites ... 1,9,13,15,18,21, pis. 11, 12

Cyclostigma (Pinakodendron) ungeri. ... . ____ 4

cyclostigmatoides, Lepidodendropsis. .............. 4,26

D

dawsoni, Megalopterls........................... 2

Description of species_____.____.__„_ 16-29

(Diplothmema) remota, Sphenopteris............. 4

Page 

dissectum, Sphenopteridium..................... S7

Draper Mountain, Va., fossils at——..__._ 12

E

elegans, Rhacopteris............................. IS

Elk Elver, florule collected at_________ 12

section of mauch Chunk shale along..——— 12

fertilis, Aneimites................................ 29

Rhacopteris......................,.......... 17

fimbriatum, Lepidophyttum...................... 4

Fishing Creek Gap, Pa.....—————__—— 4,10

flaccida, Sphenoteris............................. 2,22

Floral differentiation in Pocono formation and

Price sandstone——.——_——— 7-14 

Catskill formation_____________.. 7-8 

Mauch Chunk, lower———————.——_.. 12 

Pocono formation, lower, and Price sandstone_______;________ 8-9 

Pocono formation, upper, and Price sandstone__________________ 9-12 

Fontaine, W. M., quoted.._————..—.—— 5 

Formation X___________—____. 4,5 

/•rente, Rhodea...................T ——————— 18

Q

geikei, Rhodea. . 

Genesee group 

Girtya..... ....

........................... 4

7 

....-.....— ............... SO

Pennsylvania .... . ....... 1,8, 9, 13, 15, SI, pis. 15,16

girtyi, Sphenopteridium ... - __ 1, 12, 14, 16, 27, *8, pi. 1 

Glen Dean limestone —————————————— 12 

Greenbrier limestone ___ .. _ — — __ —— . 12 

Greenbrier River. ———————————————— 5

hattiana, Archaeopteris................__.__,.—— 2

Hedges shale__. ________——___ 6,10,13,15 

helenae, Alethopteris............................. 2

High Bridge, Pa., Pocono exposure at————— 10,15 

hirmeri, Lepidodendropsis..................... 4,25,27

History of investigation___...—____— 2-4 

History of stratigraphie nomenclature_____ 4-7 

holdeni, Cardiopteridium......................... 4

Horseshoe Curve, exposure of Pocono at———— 8,10 

flora from—————————————————— 15

imparirameum, Lagenospermum.. 1,10,13,15,25, pi. 17 

inaequilatera, Rhacopteris........................ 17

Introduction——————————————————— 1-2 

irregularis, Cardiopteris......... .__.» 1,13,16, SI, pi. 10

Keifer's mine..—— 

Keokuk limestone. 

Knorria acicularis..

Lagenospermum................................ 19

arberi...........................-........... 20

imparirameum........'....... 1,10,13,15,25, pi. 17

sinclairi.———............................ 19

sp————————.——.-—..- 1,2,8,9,13,15, 19 

Lagenostoma.........'..'........'................. 19

Langhorne coal bed..—————————————— 6,11 

latifolia, Archaecopteris.....——————— 16

Rhacopteris.........'....... 1,9,13,15, 18, pis. 16,18

latOobata, Triphyttopteris... 11,13,15,16,23, 84, pis. 8,10 

Lehigh River, Pa....——————.———. 3,5,15

Lepidocystis sttiquv.............................. 3

31
32 INDEX

Page 

Lepidodendron eorrugatum................. 2,10,26,27

scobiniforme................................ 2,3,26

spLepidodendropsis................................ SS

corrugatus.................................. 26

cyclostigmatoides............................. 4, 26

hirmeri.................................... 4,85,27

scobiniformis...... 1,2, 10,11,13,15,16, 86, pis. 19,20

sigiaarioides............. 1,4,10,13,15,16, J?7, pl.19

vandergracML... 1,4, 10,11,13,15,16, S6, pis. 18,20 

sp_——.__.........._...._..._. 9,11,13,15

LeptdophyUum fimbriat urn...................... 4

lescuriana, Cyclopteris (Archaeopteris)........... 2,24

Palaeopteris................................ 24

Spbenopteris................................ 24

Triphyttopteris.............................. 1,

2,3,4,10,11,13,15,16,23, 84, 25,27, pis. 5,6 

Uscurianus, Adiantites (Asplenites).......------- 24

Lewis Tunnel, Va_...___.____ 2,3,5,9,13,15 

section at......_....___.......___.. 11

Lewisburg, W. Va__....____..__..... 2

Lindside sandstone_______________ 6 

Logan member, Pocono formation_______ 6 

Lower Carboniferous No. X__________ 5 

Loyalhana limestone_____________ 6,7,13

M

Maccrady formation_______________ 11

section of at Lewis Tunnel_________ 11

Maccrady shale_______________... 6,13

Mauch Chunk, lower, floral differentiation in_. 12

Mauch Chunk, Pa__.____._...___1,2,10

Mauch Chunk shale__________. ____ 7

section of on Elk River___________ 12

Meadow Branch syncline___________ 6,10,13

Megalopteris dawsoni........................... 2

Merrimac coal bed.__........____._ 6,11,16

Merrimac mine_________________ 11 

Meyers Brother's mine_____________ 16 

Millersburg, Pa., coal in lower part of section

below________________ 8 

minor, Archaeopteris............................ 2,3

Triphyttopteris.............................. 4

minwta, Stigmaria............................... 2

Moosic Mountains..___________^__ 7 

Myers shale..—___..._.____.___ 6,10

N

Neurocardiopteris antigua....................... 4

Neuropteris......................________ 22

antecedent.................................. 22

New River, W. Va________.__........ 2,3

New River Coal series_____________ 10

Noeggerathia bockschiana......................... 2

O

oStiqua, Archaeopteris........................... 2,3

obt-usa, Archaeopteris............................ 2

obtusiloba, Pseudopecopteris..................... 2

pacbyrachis, Spbenopteris........................ 18

Palaeopteris aHegbanensis....................... 23

lescuriana................................... 24

pennsyhanka, Oirtya........ 1,8,9,13,15, SI, pis, 15,16

Peters Mountain member, Pocono formation... 7

Philipsburg, Pa_________________ 1

Pbysostoma..................................... 19

(Pinakodendrori) ungeri, Cyclostigma............ 4

Pinkerton sandstone..___..„_______ 6,10 

Pocono formation, floral differentiation in

See also Floral differentiation—— ___... 7-14

section of lower part of ___________ 8

Pocono Knob—————————————————— 7

polymorpba, Cardtopteris—...................... SI

Ponent conglomerate_____________. 3,4

Port Allegany, Pa________________ 3

Page

Portage formation______________— 7 

Pottsville, Pa.....-............—..........— 2,15

Pottsville formation_____________— 3 

Pottsville Gap, Pa.........———————— 7,8

section of upper part of Pocono at ___— 9,10 

pottsvillensis, Calathiops......... 1,8,9,13,15, HO, pi. 17

Poverty Creek________.....____—— 5

Price Mountain, coals mined at _______— 11,16 

Price sandstone, floral differentiation in...__ 7-14

See also Floral differentiation. 

Pseudopecopteris obtusiloba...................... 2

virginiana................................... 2

Pulaski shale__________________— 5 

Purslane sandstone______________.. 6,10

R

Radiospermum................................. 19

rarinervis, TripbyUopteris........................ 1,

11,13,15,16,23,24, SB, pis. 7,12,13 

Rawley Springs, Va________________ 1 

remota, Sphenopteris (Diplothemema)............ 4

Rhabdocarpus..............................r .— 20

Rkachiopteris................................... 2,16

circularis................................... 17

elegans............................___— 16

fertHis...................................... 17

inaequilatera................................ 17

latifolia-.....-.-—....... 1, 9,13,15, 16, pis. 16,18

sp.............................—..—..... 3

Rhodea......................................... IS

atteghanensis................... 1, 9,13,15, 18, pi. 16

blacksburgensis..-....— 1, 11,13,15,16,19, SS, pi. 4

furcata...................................... 18

geikei....................................... 4

smithi——.—............................. 22

tenuis—.................................... 4,22

tionestana..................... 1,9,13,15, 18, pi. 18

vespertina....... 1,10,11,13,15,16,19, SS, pis. 3,4,16

sp._...___.._________ 1,9,12,13,15,16 

rhomboidale, Sphenopteridium................... 4

Riddlesburg shale member__——.......—.. 5

Ridge and Valley province....————————— 2

Rockwell formation..,1___————..__.. 6,10 

roemeriana, Archaeopteris....................... 3

Rogers, D. H., quoted—————————————— 4 

rogersi, Arehaeopteris............................ 2,3

Saxton shale__________——.—~__.. 7 

Schaeffer's mine________..„..__._.. 16 

Schuetzia anomala............................... 20

bennieana................................... 20,21

Schuylkill River, Pocono section at_____— 9 

scobiniforme, Lepidodendron.................... 2,3,26

scobiniformis, Lepidodendropsis—............... 1,

2,10,11,13,15,16, S6, pis. 19,20

Second Mountain member, Pocono formation.. 7 

Serai series__________._____..... 3

Sewell formation....—————————————— 3

Sideling Hill, Pa.-..——...——————..— 2,4,5 

sigittarioides, Lepidodendropsis.................. 1,

4,10,13,15,16,07, pi. 19 

siligua, Lepidocystis............................. 3

sindairi, Lagenospermum....................... 19

Sleepy Creek Mountain, W. Va.——.———— 1 

Sleepy Creek Mountain coal field, W. Va.-—— 6 

smithi, Rhodea.................................. 22

Southern Anthracite region, Pocono section in.. 9 

Spathulopteris.................................. 27,28

speciosum, Sphenopteridium..................... 28

spectabUis, Adiantites........................... 1,

8,9,13,15, 17, 19,20,21, pis 7,10,11,14 

Sphenopbyttum antiquum....................... 2

Sphenopteridium................................ 18,27

brooksi..................... l,12,14,16,27,'«S,pl. 1

dissectum................................... £7

girtyi....................... 1,12,14,16,27, 88, pi. 1

rhomboidale................................. 4

Pace

Sphenopteridium—Continued

speciosum................................... 28

virginianum................ 1,12,14,16, 27, 28, pi. 1

Spbenopterisflactida............................ 2,22

lescuriana................................... 24

pachgracbis..-............................... 18

trifoliolata...-—............................ 24

(Diplathmema) remota...................... 4

sp.

Squaw oil sand__ 

Stigmaria...........

minuta.........

Stigmariocanna..... 

Stony Creek mines.

..———————— 12,16

........._____._ 6

,.....——............ 2

———————— 2

————————— 2

......._____...... 16

Stratigraphic nomenclature, history of____.. 4-7

Subkptdodendron............................... 25

Sunbury shale.—_______..—._____— 6 

Susquehanna River_____________ 1,7,10,13

Tamaqua, Pa__________________ 7 

ttnuis, Rhodea.................................. 4,22

Tionesta, Pa, fossfl collections made at..___. 9 

tionestana, Rhodea................. 1, 9,13,15, 18, pi. 18

trifoliolata, Spbenopteris......................... 24

TriphyUopteris.................................. tS

adiantiformis—............................. 4

aUegbanensis............ 1, 11,13,15, SS,24, 27, pi. 5

biloba......... 1,10,11,13,15,16,23,24, SS, pis. 9,11

cottombi.................................... SS

coltombiana................................. 4,19

eompacta................................... 4

latUobata.............. 11,13,15,16,23, 84, pis. 8,10

lescuriana...................___. 1,2,3,

4, 10,11, 13,15, 16, 23, 84, 25, 27, pis. 5, 6 

minor...................................... 4

rarinervis...... 1,11,13,15,16,23,24, 85, pis. 7,12,13

virginiana.................. 3,11,13,15,16,23, 84,27

zone____—————__———————— 10,13 

sp....................—————.———. 2,11

TroehophyUum bresiinternodum.................. 3

Tussy Mountain, Pa., flora from upper Pocono 

section at———-.„.——————— 15

U

Ulodendron sp_________———____. 2 

TTmbral series...———————————————— 4 

ungeri, Adiantites...... 1, 2, 3,8,9,13,15, 17, 19,20, pi. 2

Cydostigma (Pinakodendron)................ 4

Valley coal field________——————. 4,6,13 

vandergrachti, Lepidodendropsis................ 1, 4,

10,11,13,15,16, S6, pis. 18,20

vespertina, Rhodea.. 1, 10,11,13,15,16,19, SS, pis. 3,4,16 

Vespertine series.——.————————————— 2,4,5 

firginiana, Qyclopteris........................... 2,24

Pseudopecopteris............................ 2

TriphyUopterit—..—-— 3,11,13,15,16,23, 84, 27 

virginianum, Sphenopteridium.. \, 12,14, 16,57,28, pi. 1 

virginianus, Carpoltihes ...-.—.- 1,12,14,16, S9, pi. 1

W

Weir oil sand_____. ____———————— 0

West Branch of Schuylkill River———————— 15

Pocono section at...———.———————— 9,16

Westwood Gap, Pa——————————————— 7

White Sulphur Springs, W. Va————————— 2

WhUOesega..................................... 20

Wfllard, Bradford, quoted——————————— 5,7

zeitteri, Alcicornopteris..................———.. 19,21

Zone, AdiantUes................................ 8,13

TriphyUopteris.............................. 10,13

O
PLATES 1-20
PLATE 1

[All figures natural size unless otherwise indicated on plate]

FIGURES 1-6. Sphenopteridium girtyi Read, n. sp. (p. 28).

1-5. General features of organization of frond. Loc. 33. 1, USNM 40675. 2, USNM 40676. 3, USNM 40677. 

4, USNM 40678. 5, USNM 40679.

6. The details of venation. Loc. 33. USNM 40678.

7-9. Sphenopteridium virginianum Read, n. sp. (p. 27).

7. 9. Form of pinnule and pinna. Loc. 32. 7, USNM 40636. 9, USNM 40637.

8. The venation. Loc. 32. USNM 40637.

10, 11, 14. Sphenopteridium brooksi Read, n. sp. (p. 28).

Features of frond. Note the dichotomy of the rachis. Loc. 33. 10, 11, USNM 40654. 14, USNM 40655.

12, 13. Carpolithes virginianus Read, n. sp. (p. 29)

Form of the seed. Loc. 32. USNM 40698.
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE 1

SPHENOPTERIDIUM AND CARPOLITHES
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE 2

CARDIOPTERIS AND ADIANTITES
PLATE 2

[All figures natural size]

FIGURES 1-3. Cardiopteris abbensis Read, n. sp. (p. 28)

Isolated pinnules, showing form and venation. This species is known only from such material. Loc. 34. 1, USNM 

40680. 2, USNM 40681. 3, USNM 40682.

4-6. Adiantites ungeri Read, n. sp. (p. 17)

Isolated pinnules referred to this species, showing variation in size and form. Loc. 1 and 2. 4, USNM 40660. 

5, USNM 40661. 6, USNM 40662.
PLATE 3

[All figures natural size unless otherwise indicated on plate]

1, 2. Rhodea blacksburgensis Read, n. sp. (p. 22)

Fragment of a pinna showing the slender, angular, flexuose nature, and the relatively compact, highly divided 

pinnules. Loc. 20, 21, 28, 30. USNM 40656.

3, 4. Rhodea vespertina Read, n. sp. (p. 22)

Several fragmentary pinnae, the pinnules of which are somewhat larger and with broader lobes than in R. blacksburgensis Read, n. sp. Loc. 10-14, 17-21. USNM 40639.

5. Adiantites cardiopteroides Read, n. sp. (p. 18)

Fragment of a pinna Loc. 8. USNM 40683.
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE 3

.../••mTtf'-'l!

RHODEA AND ADIANTITES
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE 4

X 2
PLATE 4

[All figures natural size unless otherwise Indicated on plate]

FIGUEES 1-4. Rhodea vespertina Read, n. sp. (p. 22)

General aspect and details of pinnae of this species. The form in figures 1 and 2 is typical of the species, whereas 

that seen in figures 3 and 4 is more nearly like Rhodea Macksburgensis. Loc. 10-14, 17-21. 1, 2, USNM 40638. 

3, 4, USNM 19923.
PLATE 5

[All figures natural size unless otherwise indicated on plate]

FIGURES 1, 2. Triphyllopteris alleghanensis (Meek) Read, n. comb. (p. 23)

Fragment of a pinna showing the small oval pinnules. The general aspect suggests some of the Diplothmemas of 

the Pennsylvanian. Loc. 20. USNM 40689.

3, 4. Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek) Lesquereux (p. 24)

Large pinnae showing general rigidity of the ultimate pinnae and pinnules, and the form of the pinnules. Loc. 

10-14, 17-22, 28-30. 3, USNM 40644. 4, USNM 1467.
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE 5

TRIPHYLLOPTERIS
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE 6

TRIPH YLLOPTERIS
PLATE 6

All figures natural size]

FIGURES 1-3. Triphyllopteris lescuriana (Meek) Lesquereux (p. 24)

Considerable portions of fronds, showing the rigid aspect of the markedly lobed, narrow, apically pointed pinnules. 

Note the generally erect nature of the pinnae. Loe. 10-14, 17-22, 2&-30. 1, USNM 2190. 2, TJSNM 40704. 

3, USNM 19956.
PLATE Y

[AU figures natural size]

FIGUBES 1, 2. Triphyllopteris rarinervis Read, n. sp. (p. 25)

Specimens showing the large rhomboidal pinnules, the general aspect of the frond, and the distant venation in 

specimens of considerable portions of fronds. Loc. 19 and 21. 1, USNM 19934. 2, USNM 40641.

3. Adiantites spectabilis Read, n. sp. (p. 17)

Fragment of the rather angular rachis with pinnae departing at a right angle. Fragments of pinnae are seen to 

the right. Loc. 3-7. USNM 40634.
GEOLOGICAL, SURVEY PROFESSIONAL, PAPER 263 PLATE 7

TRIPHYLLOPTERIS AND ADIANTITES
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE

TRIPHYLLOPTERIS
PLATE 8

[All figures natural size unless otherwise indicated on plate] , ....

FIGURES 1, 2, 3; Triphyllopteris latUdbata Read, n. sp. (p. 24)

Frond fragments, natural size and enlarged, showing the relatively large oval pinnules and the extremely broad 

basal pinnules. Note the close venation indicated in the .enlargement, figure 3. It is possible that the specimen shown in figure 1 is slightly distorted by the intense pressure to which the shale has been subjected. 

Loc. 13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 23. 1, USNM 40693. 2, 3, USNM 40694. , . *
PLATE 9

[All figures natural size unless otherwise indicated on plate]

FIGURES 1, 2. Cardiopteris antecedens Read, n. sp. (p. 22)

Distal portion of a pinna showing the rhombic terminal (fig. 1) and a fragment (fig. 2) with more rounded pinnules. 

Loc. 11. 1, USNM 40645. 2, USNM 40690.

3-51 Triphyllopteris biloba Read, n. sp. (p. 25)

Specimens showing the rigid-appearing pinnae and pinnules, and the small, separate, narrow, and pointed lobes. 

Loc. 13 and 21. 3, USNM 40703. 4, 5, USNM 40635.
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE 9

CARDIOPTERIS AND TRIPHYLLOPTERIS
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE 10

CARDIOPTERIS, ADIANTITES, AND TRIPHYLLOPTERIS
PLATE 10

[All figures natural ske unless otherwise Indicated on plate]

FIGURES 1, 2. Cardiopteris irregularis Read, n. sp. (p. 21)

Opposite sides of the same specimen, showing the pinnule form and venation. Loc. 31. 1, USNM 40663. 2, 

USNM 40664.

3, 4. Adiantites beechensis Read, n. sp. (p. 28)

Apical fragment showing the An&imites-like form of the pinnules. Loc. 33. USNM 40699.

5. Triphyllopteris latiloibata Read, n. sp. (p. 24)

Large pinna showing ultimate pinnae and the oval pinnules. Loc. 13, 15, 16, 18, 21, 23. USNM 40695.

6. Adiantites spectabilis Read, n. sp. (p. 17)

A slab showing a sinuous rachis to which is attached several pinnae carrying pinnules dissected into rather linear 

lobes. Loc. 3-7. USNM 40665.
PLATE 11

[All figures natural size unless otherwise indicated on plate]

FIGURES 1, 2. Adiantites cyclopteroides Read, n. sp. (p. 18)

Pinnule and fragment of the axis of the pinna to which it was attached. Note the obcordate form, owing to dissection, of the pinnule, its venation, and the irregularity of the rachis. Loc. 5. USNM 40684.

3. Triphyllopteris biloba Read, n. sp. (p. 25)

Fragment of a pinna showing the general rigid aspect and the narrow pinnules. Loc. 13, 21. USNM 40644.

4, 5. Adiantites spectabilis Read, n. sp. (p. 17)

Slabs carrying fragments of pinnae. Note, in figure 4, the great variation in pinnule form. In figure 5 may be 

seen a fragment of an angularly sinuose rachis with attached pinnae bearing pinnules. Loc. 3-7. 4, USNM 

40687. 5, USNM 40688.
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE 11

ADIANTITES AND TRIPHYLLOPTERIS
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE 12

ADIANTITES AND TRIPH YLLOPTERIS
PLATE 12

[All figures natural size unless otherwise indicated on plate]

FIGURES 1, 2. Adiantites cydopter&ides Read, n. sp. (p. 18)

Typical pinnule referable to this species showing the reniform asymmetrical form and the details of venation. Loc. 

5. USNM 40652.

3, 4. Triphyllopteris rarinervis Read, n. sp. (p. 25)

Portion of a frond showing the transverse rugosity of the rachis, the form of the pinnae, and the general variation 

in form and venation of the pinnules. Loc. 19, 21. USNM 19974.
PLATE 13

[All figures natural size unless otherwise indicated on plate]

FIGURES 1, 2, 4, 5. Adiantites cardiopteroides Read, n. sp. (p. 18)

Specimens showing the relatively large, heteromorphous, ovate to orbicular pinnules and the features of 

venation. Loc. 8. 1, USNM 40700. 2, USNM 40685. 4, USNM 40701. 5, USNM 40686.

3. Triphyllopteris rarinervis Read, n. sp. (p. 25)

Portion of the specimen shown in plate 7, figure 2, to show the details of pinnule-form and variation, and 

venation. Loc. 19, i 1. USNM 40641.
GEOLOGICAL SUKVEY PKOFESSIONAL PAPEK 263 PLATE 13

ADIANTITES AND TRIPHYLLOPTERIS
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE 14
PLATE 14

[All figures natural size unless otherwise indicated on plate]

FIGURES 1-4. Adiantites spectabilis Read, n. sp. (p. 17)

1. A fragment of a rachis with numerous subaverage-sized pinnules attached; note the angularity of the insertions 

of the pinnae. Loc. 3-7. USNM 40646.

2. 3. Typical isolated pinnules, the varying degrees of dissection being at once apparent. Loc. 3-7. USNM

40647, USNM 40648. 

4. A fragment near the apex of a large frond or frond segment is seen; note the variation in size and form of the

pinnules. Loc. 3-7. USNM 40640.
PLATE 15

[All figures natural size unless otherwise indicated on plate]

FIGURES 1-3. Girtya pennsylvanica Read, n. gen. and sp. (p. 21)

Morphology of the synangium. Note the tubular nature of the sporangia, their position on the branch system, 

and their free arrangement. Loc. 4, 5. 1, 3, TJSNM 40696. 2, TJSNM 40697.
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE J5
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE 16

ALCICORNOPTERIS, GIRTYA, RHODE A, AND RHACOPTERIS
PLATE 16

[All figures natural size unless otherwise indicated on plate]

FIGURES 1, 2. Alcicornopteris altoonensis Read, n. sp. (p. 19)

Specimens showing the flabeUate nature of the structures. Loc. 3. 1, USNM 40649. 2, USNM 40650.

3. Girtya pennsylvanica Read, n. gen. and n. sp. (p. 21)

A synangium showing general features. Loc. 4, 5. USNM 40651.

4. Rhodea alleghanensis Read, n. sp. (p. 18)

A well-preserved fragment showing general form. Loc. 5. USNM 40691.

5. Rhacopteris latifolia (Arnold) Read, n. comb. (p. 16)

A fragment showing form and venation of the pinnules. Loc. 3. USNM 40666.

6. Rhodea vespertina Read, n. sp. (p. 22)

A large frond fragment showing form of the pinnae and pinnules. Loc. 10-14, 17-21. USNM 40657.
PLATE 17

[All figures natural size unless otherwise Indicated on plate]

FIGUKES 1-4, 6-8. Lagenospermum imparirameum Arnold (p. 25)

Features of the fructifications. Note their cupular and slightly unevenly paired structure. Loc. 11, 13. 

1-4, 6, 7, Reading Museum, Reading Pa.; 8, University of Michigan paleobotanical collection.

5. Calathiops pottsvillensis Read, n. sp. (p. 20)

Specimen showing its seedlike nature and the association with Adiantites ungeri, n. sp. Loc. 1. Reading 

Museum, Reading, Pa.

9. Alcicornopteris anthracitica Read, n. sp. (p. 19)

Specimen showing the angular helicoid branching. Loc. 1, 2. Reading Museum, Reading, Pa.
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE 17

9 8 

LAGENOSPERMUM, CALATHIOPS, AND ALCICORNOPTERIS
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE 18

»~>";5£*

ffifc-fifti, «'-;•--* -M 

iJ^* -S<7 ^C'^ •&M&

RHODE A, RHACOPTERIS, AND LEPIDODENDROPSIS
PLATE 18

[All figures natural sizeunless otherwise indicated on plate]

FIGURE 1. Rhodea tionestana Read, n. sp. (p. 18)

Several pinnae showing form. Loc. 5. USNM 40658.

2, 3. Rhacopteris latifolia (Arnold) Read, n. comb. (p. 16)

2. Associated fructification. Loc. 3. USNM 40667.

3. A pinna. USNM 40668.

4. Lepidodendropsis vandergrachti Jongmans, Gothan, and Darrah (p. 26) 

A large forking branch. Loc. 11-13, 22, 24, 26, 27. USNM 40702.
PLATE 19

[All figures natural size]

FIGURES 1, 2. Lepidodendropsis sigillarioides Jongmans, Gothan, and Darrah (p. 27) Loc. 12, 13, 25, 27. 1, USNM 40669. 2, 

USNM 40670.

3-5. Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis (Meek) Read, n. comb. (p. 26)

Several stem fragments showing the very characteristic bolsters. Loc. 11-14, 17, 18, 21, 24, 25, 27. 3, USNM 

40671. 4, USNM 40672. 5, USNM 40659.
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE 19

LEPIDODENDROPSIS
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 263 PLATE 20

LEPIDODENDROPSIS
PLATE 20

[All figures natural size]

FIGURES 1-3. Lepidodendropsis scobiniformis (Meek) Read, n. comb. (p. 26)

Fragments of stems showing the characteristic leaf bolsters. Loc. 11-14, 17, 18, 21, 24, 25, 27. 1, TJSNM 40692. 

2, USNM 40673. 3, USNM 40674.

4, 5. Lepidodendropsis vandergrachti Jongmans, Gothan, and Darrah (p. 26)

Illustrations showing the relatively broad, short leaf bolsters. Loc. 11-13, 22, 24, 26, 27. 4, USNM 40642. 5, 

USNM 40643.