, 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY · 

GEORGE OTIS SMITH, DmECTOR 

PROFESSIONAL pAPER 84 

THE 

. ·UPPER CRETACEOUS AND E()CENE FLORAS 

OF 

SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA 

BY 

EDWARD WILBER BERRY 

WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

1914 
 .I 
CONTENTS. 

!"age. 

The Upper Cretaceous flora of South CarolinJ. ............ ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 

Introduction ............................ : ............ _._ ........ _................................... 5 

Historical sketch .............................. _ ................. _ ..................... · .......... · ..... _. 5. 

Geology of the Cretaceous deposits of South Carolina ........................... _ ....... _._ .... _ ...... :.. 7 

Lower Cretaceous series ................... _ ............ _ .............. _ . _ . _ .... _·. _ .. · .... _ ........ _ 7 

Upper Cretaceous series ... -........................................................... _. . . . . . . . . . . 7 

Black Creek formation ........................ _ .. .' .................................. _......... 7 

Middendorf arkose member............... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 

Other deposits .. · ............................................... " ........ :, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8: 

Peedee sand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 

Description of the plant localities .................................................... :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 

Upper Cretaceous geologic history of Sounh Carolinq ................................... ,................. 12 

Systematic description of the flora ....................... : ............................................. · 14 

Botanic character of the flom .............................................................. , ....... ·.... 63 

Physical conditions indicated by the flora ....... ~..................................................... 66 

Correlation of the Black Creek formation ............................................... ,.............. 68 

The Upper Cretaceous fion"t of Georgia ............................................................ ·. . . . . . . . . 99· 

Introduction ................................... :. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99· 

Geology of the Cietaceous deposits of Georgia. ~ ...................................... : .. : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 

H.ipley formation ................... ·.............................................................. 100· 

Cusseta sand n1ember........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 

:Middle division............................................................................... 100• 

Providence sand member ..................... : ....... ! ........ : .............. ·. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100· 

Euta'v formation ..••....................... ·_ ..................... .-.................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100• 

Lo,ver eli vision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . J.OO 

Tombigbee sa.nd member ..................................................................... _ 100· 

Plant localities ................................................................ ,.................. 100· 

McBrides Ford .............................................. ·........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 

Broken Arrow Bend ............................... : .................. ."........................ 101 

Chimney Bluff.............................................................................. 101 

Near Buena Vista .•....................... ·.................................................... 102. 

Near Byron ..................................... ·............................................ 102: 

· Systematic description of the flora ............ · .............................................. '........... 103 

Botanic char:.1cter of the flora.......................................................................... 121 

Physical conditions indicated by the flora.............................................................. 122: 

Range of the Mesozoic flora ................... _.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122. 

Correlation of the flom............................................................................... 125· 

Lower division of the Eutaw formation .................................. ·............................. 125. 

:Ripley formation ............................................................. ·....................... 126 

Cusseta sand member......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 126. 

The Middle Eocene flora of Georgia... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 

Introduction ..................... '- .............. · ............... : ................ :-................... 129· 

Geology of the middle Eocene.............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129· 

Systematic description of the flora ................................................. ,.................. 132 

Eocene floras of Europe and North America ................................ , ........ ,................... 147 

Ecologic conditions indicated by the botanic character of the fiom.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15c" 

Bibliography ............................ .'............................................................ 161 

3 
ILLUSTRATIONS. 

PLATE I. Plant-bearing clay lens in the Micld"endorf arkose member of the Black Creek formation.: 

Page. 

A, Near Middendorf, Chesterfield County, S.C.; B, Near Langley, Aiken County, S.C....... 8 

II-XlV. Upper Cretaceous plants from South Carolina ............................................... 73-98 

XV. A, Plant locality at Chimney Bluff, on Chattahoochee River, Ga.; B, Plant locality in the Cusseta 

sand member of the Ripley formation near Buena Vista, Ga................................ 102 

XVI. A, Mangrove swamp along Miami River near Miami, Fla.; R, Habit of growth of mangroves 

along 11iami River ..................................................... :.................. . 160 

XVII-XXIII. Upper Cretaceous plantA from Georgia ................................................... _ 165-178 

XXIV. Upper Cretaceous and Eocene plants from Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 180 

XXV-XXIX. Eocene plants from Georgia ......... , ............•........................................ 181-190 

FIGURE 1. Restoration of Dewalqu.ea smiih?" Berry, from the Tuscaloosa formation of western Alabama .... -..... .41 

2. Restoration of the leaf figured in Pbte XXII ................... :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 

3. Restoration of the leaf figured in Plate XXIII.................................................. 115 

4. Sketch map showing the Cretaceous and Recent distribution of Tumion.......................... 123 

5. Sketch map showing the Cretaceous occurrences of the Araucarie:::e ....... ~........................ 123 

6. Sketch map showing. the existing distribution of the Araucariere................................... 124 

7. Sketch ~ap showing the Cretaceous anci Recent distribution of Cinnamomum..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 

8. Sketch map showing the Cretaceous and Recent distribution of Eucalyptus ........... :............ 125 

9. Diagrammatic geologic-section of Phinizy_Gully................................................... 130 

10. Restoration of Thrinax eocenica Berry........................................................... 136 

11. Sketch map showing the distribution of existing species of Rhizophora ............. ,.............. '159 

12. Sketch map showing the distribution of _Nipa and·Nipadites ................ _..................... 160 

4 
THE UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH 

CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

By EDWARD WILBER BERRY. 

TI-IE UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTI-I CAROLINA. 

INTRODUCTION. 

T4e following report. is the first systematic account of fossil plants from the State of 

South Carolina. It describes a considerable flora, . which clearly demonstrates the Upper 

Cretaceous age of "the deposits in which it is found and which serves to correlate these deposits 

with the Upper Cretaceous of adjacent States both to the north and to the south. 

The present s_tudy should be regarded as preliminary in nature, for it is probable that 

when the Coastal- Plain of the State is exhaustively studied 1nany new localities for fossil plants 

will be .discovered and n1any new species will be added to the Cretaceous flora; not uncommon]y 

Upper Cretaceous floras consist of two or three hundred species. What is already known of 

the flora of the :Middendorf arkose member of the Black Creek formation renders it certain 

that if additional plant-bearing outcrops are. discovered they will yield a la.rge variety of 

beautifully preserved leaf impressions. . 

The writer is under obligations to :Mr. Earle Sloan, formerly State geologist of South Carolina, and to the United States National Museum for various collections; to Mr. T. W. Vaughan, 

of the United States Geological Survey, under whom the work has been prosecuted; and 

especially to Mr. L. W. Stephenson, of the United States Geological Survey, for the care and 

intelligence with which he has collected fossil plants in this .area. 

H:{STORICA.L SKETCH. 

The distinction of definitely recogniung the occurrence of the Cretac~ous in N ortJ:l America 

belongs to Lardner Vanuxem,t at one time professor of chemistry in the College of South Caro- · 

lina, who announced its presence in 1829, althougp. John Finch five yeaJ's earlier had pointed . 

out that part of the "alluvial formation" of Maclure was probably of newer "Secondary" 

age. 2 In the paper announcing Vanuxem's thesis several Cretaceous localities are mentioned 

in South Carolina, including :Mars Bluff on Peedee River .. · A number of :veferences to the Cretaceous of the State are contained in the works of :Morton, Hodge, and others. Lyell visited 

the State in 1841-42 and recognized the Eocene age of certain calcareous rocks which had 

previously been included in the Cretaceous. . · 

At the time of.Lyell's visit, or a little later, geologists were well acquainted with the Ore-· 

'taceous area extending from Cape Fear River in North Carolina to Peedee and Lynches rivers 

in South Carolina, as is witnessed by Henry D. Rogers's address before the Association of 

American Geologists and Naturalists at Washington in 1844.3 All the preceding contributions, 

however,~ as well as the descriptions of Cretaceous -deposits included by Prof. Tuomey in his 

. Geology of South Carolina, refer exclusively to. the fossiliferous marine Cretaceous, which 

nearly coincides with the present Peedee sand. The large area of Lower Cretaceous beds, · 

as well as th~ deposits of most of the Black Creek formation,.including the Middendorf arkose 

1 Vanuxcm, Lardner, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia, vol. 6, 1829, pp. 59-71; Am. Jour. Sci., Ist ser., vol. 16, 1829, pp. 254-256. 

2 Finch, John, Am. Jour. Sci., 1st ser., vol. 7, 18Z4, pp. 31-43. 

s Rogers, H. D., Am. Jour. Sci., 1st ser., vol. 47, ISH, p. 252. 

5 
6 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS .OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

member, were regarded by Tuomey as of Eocene age and are designated on his geologic map 

"Sand hills" and "Red Hill area." 

South Carolina is not· m~ntioned in Prof. Ward's exhaustive paper on the geographic 

distribution of fossil plants, published in 1889; 1 nevertheless, a perusal of the older literature 

shows _that the: earlier geologic workers occasionally encountered vegetable fossils. They 

were content, however, merely to mention the fact or to identify. the fossils with leaves of 

trees in the existing flora which they were thought-to resemble. For example,l\1ichael Tuomey, 

in his admirable report on the geology of South Carolina, 2 speaks of "impressions of leaves, 

in a purplish clay" near· Fort Motte on Congaree River and on tP,e same page mentions 

having encounteredon the road, ·near the head branches of Halfway Swamp; thick beds of sand, containing water,-worn nodules of marl 

and a log of.silici:fied wood, of considerable size. Immediately beneath this is a bed of yellow, tenacious clay, with 

partings of fine sand and scales of mica. Between the laminre of the clay we found very distinct impressions of the 

leaves of the oak, beech, and willow, with their most minute veins preserved. This, and the locality already 

described, are the only ones known where fossil vegetable remains have been found in the Eocene of the United 

States, with the exception of silicified wood and lignite, which are everywhere abundant. • 

This locality is in Orangeburg County and the horizon may possibly represent an Eocene 

leaf-bearing layer instead of the Cretaceous, for the Claiborne Eocene transgresses the Upper 

Cretaceous in northern Orangeburg Courity, and there are no recent records or collections of 

leaf impressions from this area. On page 154 of the same work, and again on page 211, Tuomey 

lists silicified wood, lignite, Quercus leaves, Fagus leaves, and Salix, err9neously classing the 

containing deposits as lower Eocene in age. · 

Lieber in his first annual report 3 gives considerable attention to what he calls the "brown 

coal of the Cheraws." He suggests its economic possibilities and records the "bituminized 

trunk of a tree in a lignite bed," figuring the trunk in his Plate II, figure 8. Lieber also 

regards these Upper Creta9eous beds as of Eocene .age. 

More recently Darton made a brief reconnaissance across the State and in a short paper 

published in 1895 4 records that "plant remains were observed at many points." lie made 

no collections,. however, and mentions no localities, and the remark quoted n1ay be taken 

as one of a general nature. In 1904 Earle Sloan, until recently State geologist of South Caro- .~ 

lina; published a report on the clays of that State that shows a most intimate acquaintance 

with all parts of its Coastal Plain. Fossil leaves are n1entioned from three sections of the 

State, 5 near Aiken, near l\fiddendorf, and at Rocky Point. This report is entirely economic 

in character, and the author merely records the presence of" dicotyledonous leaves" or identifies 

them from their resemblance to those of modern species as the leaves of the "elm, ash, cypress, 

willow, bay, cane, and pine." The containing beds;, however, are correctly identified as of 

Cretaceous age. In °1907 the present writer 6 recorded nine species of characteristic Upper 

Cretaceous plants from Rocky Point, in Sumter County, contained in the collections of the 

geological department of Johns Hopkins University. At that time the original collector was 

not known, but it subsequently developed that the plants had been collected in 1895 by Prof. 

· L. C. Glenn. 

In the spring of 1897 Profs. Ward and Glenn visited South Carolina and made large collections from the Rocky Point locality and a small collection from the locality near Darlington. 

The important localities near Middendorf and in Aiken County had meanwhile .been discovered 

by Earle Sloan, who sent collections from these areas to Prof. Ward. These collections, however, were never studied. In 1906 the writer, in company with L. W. Stephenson, ina.de a 

canoe trip from Cheraw to the mouth of Peedee River, after which l\1r. Stephenson &pent considerable time in the eastern part of the State. In 1907 the writer paid· a brief visit to the . 

Congaree-W ateree area and collected from the Rocky Point locality. In a canoe trip down 

1 Ward, L. F., Eighth Ann. Rept. U.S. Geol. Survey, pt. 2, 1889, pp. 663-960. 

2 Tuomey, Michael, Report on the geology of South Carolina, Columbia, 1848, p. 150. 

s Lieber, 0. M., Report on the survey of South Carolina, 2d edition, 1858, p. 94. 

1 Darton, N.H., Bull. Geol. Soc. America, vol. 7, 1896, p. 517. ' 

G Sloan, Earle, A preliminary report on the clays of South Carolina, ser. 4, Bull. South Carolina Geol. Survey No. 1, 1904, pp. 26, 76, 104. 

6 Berry; E. W., Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ., new ser., No.7, 1907, p. 81. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLOR4 OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 7 

Congaree River during the same year a small collection from the banks of that river was made 

by Profs. B. L. Miller and M. W. Twitchell. In the spring of 1908 Mr. Stephenson spent son1e 

tilne in the State, making collections from the Black Creek fonnation of the easte:r:n part of 

the State as well as from deposits near Middendorf and Langley. Subsequently :Mr. Stephenson and the writer made exten-sive collections from Cretaceous beds near Middendorf and 

· Langley. In 1910 Earle Sloan sent the writer a collection froin Miles Mili ·in Aiken County. 

All these collections have come into the hands of the writer and are the basis of the present 

report. The identifiable mate:rial is deposited in the United States National Museum. 

GEOLOGY OF CRETACEOUS DEPOSITS OF SOUTH CA:JtOLINA. 

The Cretaceous deposits of South Carolina form a belt of varying width extending entirely 

across the State east-northeast and west-southwest. This belt is narrow 'toward the Georgia 

line, being only about 20 n1iles in, width at Savannah River, but widens northeast of Black 

River to nearly 100 miles. Both Lower and Upper Cretaceous deposits are· represented. 

LOWER CRETACEOUS SERIES. 

On the southeastern margin of the crystalline rocks of the Piedn1ont Plateau, at an eleva- ' 

tion of 400 to 500 feet or slightly more, lies a series of white and colored clays, in many places 

pure kaolins, and of arkosic, locally micaceous, coarse or fine sands with clay balls and, toward 

, the base, subangular pebbles. The deposits are in a few localities Hgnitic, but no recognizable 

pla.ut fossils have been collected. 'The beds dip 50 or 60 feet to the nlile toward the southeast 

and have an estimated thickness of 200 to 300 fe~t. They constitute the "Hamburg phase" 

of Sloan, which in the Aiken area. is separated by a local unconformity into two divisions, 

called by Sloan "Lower I-Ian1burg" and "Upper I-Ia1nburg." They appear to be continuous 

with the Patl.L"X:ent ("Cape Fear") formation of Nor_th Carolina and thus to represent the 

basal fonnation of the Poton1ac group of the Maryland-Virginia area. To. the southwest they 

appear to be continuous with the Lower Cretaceous deposits of Georgia, which have been 

erroneously correlated with the Tuscaloosa formation (Upper Cretac~ous) of Alabama by the 

Georgia Geological Survey. According to the evidence afforded by ·poorly preserved plants, 

however, the Lower Cretaceous deposits of Georgia and Alabama appear to be younger than 

the Patl.L"'{ent formation of the type region. ' 

UPPER CRETACEOUS SERlE S. 

BLACK CREEK FORMATION.· 

Midden~orf arkose member.-A somewhat similar series of cross-bedded, varicolored, micaceous, and in 1nany places arkosic sands, containing pebbles, clay balls, and local deposits of 

nearly pure kaolin unconformably overlies the Lower Cretaceous deposits. These beds, which 

are here called :Middendorf arkose member, are between 100 and 200 feet in thickness and 

consist to a large extent of reworked Lower Cretaceous n1aterials. They can be traced interruptedly nearly across the State, being transgressed by the Eocene at several points southwest 

of Lynches River and either replaced by partly contemporaneous deposits of a different character -

or transgressed by later Cretaceous. in the northeastern part of the State.· These beds, which 

constitute the Middendorf forn1ation of Sloan, in places carry a rich and varied fossil flora of 

Upper Cretaceous age.· Along the landward margin of their outcrop their lithologic features are in 

1narked contrast with the characteristiG beds of the Black Creek formation, but farther south-_ 

ward, for example, in the Congaree River valley, the Middendorf member comn1only exhibits· 

rnicaceous, lignitic sandy phases, and dark laminated argillaceous phases exactly sinlilar to 

those of the typical Black Creek but less extensively developed. On the other hand, the 

Blaek . Creek forn1ation as developed in North Carolina contains a great thickness of light . 

and highly colored cross-bedded sands silnilar to those of the :Middendorf member of South 

Carolina, and it there covers the thne interval of the :Middendorf n1ember. The Middendorf 

therefore has been adopted by the Survey as a member of the Black Creek formation . 

• 
8 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Other deposits.-ln part later than the Midd~ndorf member and in part contemporaneous 

with -it is a series of dark laminated clays (shales) with sand partings ana lenses of micaceous 

:fine-grain.ed sands. These clays, which constitute the Black Creek formation of Sloan, are· 

confined to the eastern part of the State, covering the southern half of Marlboro County; the 

northwestern part of Marion County, the northern part of Florence County, nearly all of 

Darlington County; and the southeastern part of Lee County, their areal outcrop being termi- · 

- nated abruptly by the transgression of the Eocene in south-central Lee County. These beds 

are extensively developed in North Carolina, w~ere they attai.n great thickness. The lower 

part of these beds probably represents most, if not all, of the Middendorf sedimentation, as 

well as that of the period intervening between the close of the Middendorf and the beginning 

of the' Peedee. Fossil plants of gener~ and species similar t9 those described from the North 

Carolina area have been collected from a number of localities in Chesterfield, Florenc~, and 

Darlington counties, but the exposures throughout this area are few and poor, owing to the 

flatness of the country, which is uniformly covered with a mantle of Pleistocene in addition 

to patches of Eocene and Miocene deposits. The area occupied ··by these deposits of the Black 

Creek formation in South Carolina has not been very extensively examined for fossil collections 

because there is no reason to believe. that their flora differs in any respect from that found in 

the Black Creek· forD?-ation in the North Carolina area, where the e~osures are more 

plentiful. , 

As previously mentioned, the Middendorf member in the Congaree Valley contains lenses 

of micaceous lignitic sands and dark laminated clays like those of the typical Black Creek, indicating that at times the conditions which led to this great thickness of deposits along the north 

border of South Carolina prevailed farther toward the southwest. Like the Black Creek 

deposits of North Carolina, these beds of South Carolina are in places glauconitic, and pellets 

of amber are widely distributed in them. · 

PEEDEE SAND. 

A series of. compact0 sands, in many places fossiliferous, less commonly calcareous, and 

somewhat glauconitic, conformably 1 overlies the Black Creek formation where it is not transgressed by the Eocene. These sands constitute the Peedee sand, or the "Burches Ferry marls" 

of Sloan. They extend northeasterly into North Carolina. They are typically marine deposits, 

carrying the Belemnitella am(}ricana fauna, and are correlated with the Monmouth formation 

·of the Northern Atlantic Coastal Plain and with the typical Ripley ~f -northeastern Mississippi. 

They are n.ot known to contain -fossil plants in the South Carolina area and are confu1ed to the 

eastern part of the State, where they ar.e widely distributed, though commonly hidden by 

various Tertiary or Pleistocene deposits .. 

DESCRIPTION OF PLANT LOCALITIES. 

To supplement the foregoing brief outline of the Cretaceous as developed in South Carolina, 

a few-words may be devoted to the 11 different exposures where fossil plants have been collected. 

Localities referred to the Middendorf arkose member of the Black Creek formation are 

first considered, after which those in the other deposits of the Black Creek formation, in the 

order of their geographic succession to the southwest, are taken up. 

1. Near Middendorf (Field No. 3.7) .-This locality is near the Seabo.ard Air Line Railway, 

about 2 miles northeast of the town of Middendorf and immediately west of overhead wagon 

bridge 366. It is just south of the Camden wagon road and about 5 miles east of Big Black 

Creek: (See Pl. i, A.) The following section is exposed in the railroad cut: 

Section exposed in railroad cut 2 miles northeast of Middendorf. 

Feet. 

1. Surficial sandy loam, sJ.nd, and clay ..................................................... 4-10 

. 2. Clay lens containing leaves ........................................ :.................... 0-4 

. 3. Cross-bedded arkosic sands, variegated in color ........................................... 4-10 

1 Stephenson records an unconformity, presumably local, in Darlington County (unpublished_ notes). 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONA L PAPER 84 PLATE I 

A . 

B. 

PLANT-BEARING CLAY IN MIDDENDORF ARKOSIC MEMBER, BLACK 

CREEK FORMATION . 

A, Near Middend orf, Chesterfield County, S.C.; B, Near Langley, Aik en County, S.C. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 9 

The leaves are found beneath a ferruginous crust about 3 inches thick, which is local and 

occurs only above the middle portion of the clay lens. They are f6r the most part replacenlents by ferric oxide and make very handsome specimens, the rusty red ·leaf contrasting against 

the background of light-buff kaolin, for the bright red of the freshly collected material fades 

only slightly in drying out. · Toward each end of the cut the Pleistbcene-Middendorf contact 

passes downward and disappears below the level of the track. The Middendorf member in 

this vicinity consists for the most part of sands, with the exception of the one prominent 

·clay lens. 

This is the 1nost prolific locality for fossil plants in South Carolina, having furnished 41 _ 

of the recorded species. Most of these are splendidly preserved.· The following species occur 

at the Middendorf locality : 

Acacia phyllites grevilleoides Berry. 

Andromeda euphorbiophylloides Berry. 

Andromeda novrecresarere Hollick. 

Brachyphyllum macrocarpum Newberry. 

Cresalpinia micldenclorfensis Berry. 

Calycites micldenclorfensis Berry. 

Celastrophyllum crenatum Heer. 

Cinnamomum middendorfensis Berry. 

Citrophyllum aligerum (Lesquereux) Berry .. 

Crotonophyllum pandurreformis.Berry. 

Diospyros primreva Heer. 

Eucalyptus geinitzi (Heer) Heer. 

Eucalyptus wardiana Berry. 

Ficus atavina Heer. 

Ficus celtifolius Berry. 

Ficus crassipes Heer. 

Ficus krausiana Heer. 

Ficus stephensoni Berry. 

Juglans arctica Heer. 

Laurus plutonia Heer. 

Laurophyllum elegans Hollick. 

Laurophyllum nervillosum Hollick. 

Leguminosites micldendorfensis Berry. 

Lycopodium cretaceum Berry. 

Magnolia capellinii Heer? 

Magnolia obtusata Heer.· 

Magnolia tenuifolia Lesquereux? 

Momisia carolinensis Betry. 

Moriconia americana Berry. 

Onoclea inquirenda (Ho,llick) Hollick. 

Pachystima? cretacea Berry. 

Pinus raritanensis Berri. 

Potamogeton middendorfensis Berry. 

Proteoides lancifolius. Heer. 

Proteoicles parvula Berry. 

Quercus pseudowestfalica Berry. 

Salix :flexuosa Newberry. 

Salix lesquereuxii Berry. 

Salix pseudohayei Berry. 

Sequoia reichenbachii (Geinitz) Heer. 

Widdringtonites subtilis Heer. 

By far the most abundant form is ·Sequoia reichenbachii (Geinitz) I-Ieer, of which whole 

leafy branches, many with their cones attached, are present. 

2. Rocky Point (Field No. 3.1).-This locality is one-half mile northeast of Sumter Junction, 

on the Can1den division of the Southern Railway, along the eastern scarp of the Wateree Swamp,. 

about 2! miles east of the river and a short distance east of Beach Creek. The following section 

is exposed: 

Pleistocene: S~ction exposed at Rocky Point. 

Sand, coarse, reddish, argillaceous, more or less cemented, with iron crusts below ........ . 

Pack sand, fine, light gray, stratified, becoming more ferruginous belQw ................. . 

Eocene: 

Clay, brownish, laminated, with partings of light-gray sand ........................... . 

Upper Cretaceous (Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation): 

Sand, coarse, white and yellow, ferruginous, becoming very coarse beiow ............... . 

Clay, lens, brownish, laminated ................................ · .... , ................. . 

Sand, very coarse, ferruginous ....................................................... . 

Similar materials, more or less indurated .............................................. . 

Clay, interlaminated, brownish, and clay ironstone with abundant leaf impressions ...... . 

Sand, coarse, brown ................................................................. · 

Clay, laminated, brown, and clay ironstone crusts .................................... . 

Clay, more massive, weathering to reddish and purple ................................ . 

Sand, light drab, fine, with some clay laminre and a few thin ferruginous crusts .......... . 

Clay, light drab ..•........ i ..........•.......... --- ·-- · · · .'. · · • · •• · · · · · · • · · · · · · · · · · · · · 

The railroad at this point is 115 feet above sea level. 

Feet. 

6 

15-18 

6-8 

5-6 

1 

4-5 

3-4 

2 

2 

3-4 

4-5 

10 

10 
10 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

The following 26 species of fossil plants occur at this locality: 

Andromeda grandifolia Berry. Ficus krausiana Heer. 

Androm0da parhitorii Heer. Hamamelites (?) cordatus Lesquereux. 

Arundo grcenlandica Heer? Heterolepis cretace us Berry. 

Carex clarkii Berry. Illicium watereensis Berry. 

Celastrophyllum elegans Berry. Magnolia capellinii Heer? 

Cinnamomum newberryi Berry. Phragmites pratti Berry. 

Crotonophyllum pandurmformis Berry. Podozamites knowltoni Berry. 

Cunninghamites elegans (Cord~) Encllicher. Proteoides lancifolius Heer. 

Diospyros primmv?- Heer. Protophyllocladus lobatus Berry. 

Diospyros rott1ridifolia Lesq uereux. Quercus pseudowestfalica Berry. 

Eucalyptus geinitzi (Heer) Heer. Quercus sumterensis Berry. 

Ficus atavina Heer. Salix lesquereuxii Berry. 

Ficus crassipes Heer. Widdringtonites subtilis Heer. 

Of these the various species of Ficus are the· most abundant, Ficus crassipes Heer and 

Ficus krausiana Heer being especially common and well preserved. Andromeda grandifolia. 

Berry and Protophyllocladus lobatus Berry are also common, the other specie!" being represented 

by only a few. individuals. This locality stands next to that near Middendorf in the variety 

of forms represented, but a good many of the specimens were in a rather fragmentary condition. 

before entombment. 

3. About 25 miles below Columbia (Field No. 3.3).-The plants from this locality, which is 

on the right bank of Congaree River, ii;l Lexington County, are represented by faint impressions 

in a buff, almost white, micaceous, finely arenaceous, thinly laminated clay, and only the 

following forms, the majority. tentatively identified, are recognizable: 

Cinnamomum newberryi Berry(?). 

Diospyros prim::eva Heer (?). 

Ficus crassipes' Heer. I 

Ficus krausiana Heer (?). 

Salix fiexuosa Newberry(?). 

Salix lesquereuxii Berry (?). 

The two species of Ficus are the most common. Dark larninated lignitic sandy clays 

along Congaree River in this vicinity show the typical lithology of the Black Creek .formation 

farther to the northeast. ' -

4. Near Langley (Field No. 3.8).-This locality is just east of the old Augusta road, 1 milenorth of the town of Langley and one-half mile west of Langley Dam, on Bighorse Creek, in 

Aiken c·ounty, in a shallow gully which has cut into clay of the :Middendorf men1ber to a depth 

of about 8 feet. The materi~l is a massive, nearly white kaolin ("chalk"), and the leaf inipres-

. sions, which are not c01nmon, are replacements by ferric oxide and show as a rich coffee color 

against the ·background .of nearly white clay. (See Pl. I, B.) 

Tlie following 17 species have been identified fron1 this locality: 

Andromeda parlatorii Heer. 

Araucaria·jeffreyi Berry ? 

Celastrophyllum carolinensis Berry. 

Crotonophyllum pandur::eformis Berry. 

Dewalquea smithi Berry. 

Diospyros prim::eva Heer. 

Eucalyptus geinitzi (Heer) Heer. 

Ficus crassipes Heer. 

Ficus stephensoni Berry. 

. . 

Laurus plutonia Heer. 

Leguminosites robiniafolia Berry. 

Myrsine gaudini (Lesquereux) Berry. 

Sa halites carolinensis Berry. 

Salix fiexuosa Newberry. 

Salix lesquereuxii Berry. 

Salix sloani Berry. 

Sapindus morrisoni (Lesquereux MS.) Heer. 

All are common, the Dewalquea, Diospyros, Sabalites, and the species of Salix arici Ficus 

being most common and best preserved. 

4a. Jfiles Mill, (Field No. 3.11).--This locality is in northern Aiken County and has not 

been visited by the writer. The materials and preservation are the same as at the Langley 

locality, and the collection was m~de by Earle Sloan, forn1er State geologist. The following 

species are present in the collection: 

Citrophyllum aligerum Berry? 

Crotonophyllum pandur::eformis Berry. 

Dewalquea smithi Berry. 

Diospyros primmva Heer. 

Quercus pseudowestfalica Berry ? 

Salix lesquereuxii Berry. 

Salix sloani Berry. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 11 

Of these seven species the Dewalquea is by far the n1ost conunon at this locality. The 

Crotonophyllmn is not rn,re, but the others are each represented by only one or t'vo specimens. 

5. About 6 miles below Cheraw (Field No. 3.10).-This locality is in Chesterfield County 

and is represented by characteristic Black Creek materials carrying leaf rmnains, ,not in place, 

but washed upon a river sand bar fr01n son1e undiscovered Black Creek outcrop in the vicinity. 

They could not have been carried far because of their' character and because this point is at the 

exact landward 1nargin of the Black Creek formation. Only one recognizable species, Hedera 

1Jrimordialis Sa porta, is represented. · 

6. About 8 miles east of Darlington (Field No. 3.2).-This exposure, on the west bank of 

Louthers Lake, one-half mile below the ferry, at a spring, ·shows about 18 feet of dark carbonaceous lan1inated clay with 1nicaceous and locally glauconitic sand partings. About 1 

foot frmn the top there is a 1-foot layer of lignitic sand and clay balls, and a foot or two below 

this layer hnperfect leaf rmnains are. plentiful. These include a Phragrnites-like form and a 

lanceolate Ficus suggesting Ficus crassipes I-Ieer, but the materials are too incomplete for 

identification. Arnber in small drops is present at this outcrop. Louthers Lake is an oxbow 

of the Peedee, and the ~hove. exposure is about 6 miles west of the present river channel and 

near the eastern boundary of Darlington County. 

"/. Right bank of Black Creek (Field No. 3.6).-This locality, 1! miles east of Darlington 

and 750 feet south of the' Cashua Ferry road bridge, shows a low exposure of char,acteristic 

Black Creek n1aterials with poor plant remains. The ·only recogruzable forms are Araucaria 

darlingtonensis Berry, Ficus krausiana, and Strobilites anceps Berry, although :Mr. Stephenson 

reported seeds of Cephalotaxospermum, which were not found in the 1naterial sent in, though 

very probably they occur here, as they are found along Black Creek in the vicinity. 

8. Oashua Road (Field No. 3.4).-A low, poor exposure of a light chocolate-colored, poorly 

larninated clay of Black Creek a.gc, containing abundant but much-macerated and rather faint 

leaf impressions appears just northeast of Darlington, near the foot of the slope leading down 

to Swift Creek and about 2 rods south of the road. This locality was visited by Ward. and 

Glenn in 1897, and the small collection 1 made by them at that tin1e was sent to Dr. Arthur 

I-Iollick at the New .york Botanical Garden. The writer examined this collection in New York 

but failed to find any identifiable forms. The collection made by Stephenson in 1908 contains 

the following species: 

Heclera primorclialis Saporta ? 

Laurophyllmn nervillosum Hollick ? 

Magnolia newberryi Berry ? 

Myrica elegans Berry. 

Proteoicles lancifolius Heer ? 

Rhus clarlingtonensis Berry. 

Salix lesquereuxii Berry ? 

The last-1nentioned form is the most abundant represented in the collection. In addition 

to plant fonns indeterminable casts of invertebrates were found. 

9. Right bank of Blnclc 01'eek (Field No. 3.9) .-About 25 feet of dark carbonaceous clays 

interlmninated with yellowish; locally indurated, lignitic sand are exposed about '2 miles below 

Williamsons Bridge in Darlington County. Amber is present, and comminuted plant remains 

are plentiful and well distributed. The plant n1aterial is best preserved within a few feet of 

the base of the section, and the following forms have been recognized: 

Eucalyptus augusta Veleuovsky 

Ficus krausiana Heer. 

Myrica brittoniana Berry. 

10. ·Ashby's place, 3t miles northeast of Florence (Field No. 3.5).-This exposure i::; beside a 

sn1all branch flowing into Black Cre~k. Characteristic Black Creek n1aterials at this point 

yielded the following species: 

AI gites americana Berry. 

Araucaria blaclenensis Berry. 

Cephalotaxosperml!m carolinianum Berry. 

1 'J'ho exact locality of this collection was along a ditch north of tho road, from the same outcrop. 
12 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Lignite is abundant,. and the clays are full of fragments of indeterminable Jeayes of dicotyledons. They also contain obscure pelecypod impressions. The materials are dark, laminated, lignitic clays with micaceous sand partings and locally small clay lenses. They are 

exposed along the branch to a total thickness of 25 or 30 .feet, sep~rated into two nearly equal 

divisions. by an intercalated lens of greenish-gray or yellowish rather fine sand with here and 

there small lenses of dark clay, the sand member being some 20 feet in thickness. Fossil plants 

occur both above and below the sand lens, detached leaves of the Araucaria being recognizable 

most commonly. 

UPPER CRETACEOUS GEOLOGIC HISTORY OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 

~The geologic history of that portion of the Upper Cretaceous of South Carolina which .has 

yielded fossil· plants is not -varied, although it apparently represents a considerable portion of 

Upper Cretaceous time as a whole. The data upon which the following brief sketch is based 

are both physical and biologic, and in order to avoid an1biguity of statement the Middendorf 

arkose' member and the other deposits of the Black Creek formation are accorded more or less 

separate treatment. The deposits of the Middendorf member furnish satisfactory evidence of 

their origin, the method of their deposition, and the attendant physical conditions. I-Iistorically they represent the initial advance of the Upper Cretaceous sea over the coastal lands 

made up of the Lower Cretaceous arkosic sands and kaolin deposits. This. advance was in 

point of time somewhat later than the initial sedimentation of the Tuscaloosa formation of 

Alabama, but was probably slightly earlier than the initial deposits of the typical Black Creek 

sedimentation. 

Middendorf time· was not of great duration, for the deposits are not thick and were for the 

most part formed rapidly, as evinced by the current bedding and coarseness of the sands. 

They represent littoral or beach deposits. combined with delta deposits and with estuarine 

deposits in shallow bays or sounds. Geographically the Qonclitions may be comparable with 

those in Albemarle and Pamlico sounds of eastern North Carolina, or less closely with those in 

the quiet estuaries of Chesapeake Bay, where fine-grained muds are being formed in certain areas 

at the present time.· Topographically, however, the parallel is not so close, for the present-day 

topography is more mature and the relief is slight. Sections drawn across a number of recent 

bays and sounds along the South Atlantic and Gulf coasts show in some degree what must have 

been the topography in South Carolina at the beginning of Middendorf sedimentation, except that 

the modern shores are low. In Middendorf time the Coastal Plain was represented by a comparatively narrow strip of_Lower Cretaceous 1ieposits and the eastern flank of the Piedmont was 

considerably more elevated than it is to-clay, so that the earlier deposits of the :Middendorf, . 

at -least, are more largely sands than the depo"sits now forming. along .the seaward margin of 

the.Coastal Plain. These conditions for the 1'1iclclenclorf member may be most simply illustrated by .the probable history of a single valley. The Lower Cretaceous surface may be 

imagined to represent the emerged land surface b~f?re the depression or warping or other 

process that inaugurated the Upper Cretaceous cycle of deposition as it is known to-clay. Terrestrial aggradation deposits would be laid clown on both valley slopes, and fluviatile or lacustrine deposits would be laid down at some points along its'floor. With the changes in relativ~ 

level the valley would become a bay, estuary, or sound, and the quicke~ecl erosion would 

rapidly build. out deltas or alluvial fans along its western margin. This would segregate the 

coarser sediments, and. the finer pa:r;ticles, as well as a large part of the floating carbonaceous 

matter and nrinute flakes of mica, would be car~iecl beyond the coarser materials along the 

shore an~ ultimately deposited in laminated clays of ~he Black Creek type. A brief study of 

similar physiographic deposits of the present confirms the essential correctness of this supposition. The interaction of forces would surely develop some relief of the surface of the sand 

flats; bars or atolls would be formed fron1 the coarser materials and within the lagoons inclosed 

by them the kaolins would be deposited. That the sea did not have free access to the area is 

shown by the complete abse~ce of evidence of marine life in the :Middendorf member and other 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 13 

early Black Creek sediments. The fact that remains of terrestrial, fluviatile, or estuarine 

animals are ·not found must be attributed to the nature of the sedimentation just outlined. 

The streams were numerous and more or less torrential in character, piling up their sediments 

as a series of alluvial fans which finally merged and were completely united by the sediments 

of the adv~ncing sea. The kaolins were meanwhile deposited in the sheltered basins. Deposits 

of this kind are rarely fossiliferous, as is evinced by the lack of fossils in other analogous series. 

The Lower Cretaceous of the Coastal Plain· outcrops for several hundred miles along the eastern 

J,nargin of the Piedmont, but it contains very few fossil plants, and after several decades of 

' exploration not more than half a dozen scarcely determinable shells and a single fragmentary 

fish have been found in it. -

In tnne the Piednlont river gradients were lessened and river and coastal swamps became 

n1ore numerous. With continued subsidence such barriers as existed, whether sand bars or 

islands comparable to· the North Carolina "banks," were submerged, and the sediments began 

to take on a typical marine character and to consist of laminated sands and clays with some 

glauconite and much vegetable de.bris derived for ·the most part from the coastal swamps. 

Thus sedimentation of the typical Black Creek type commenced considerably earlier toward 

the North Carolina border than to ·the southwest-in fact, there are no traces of such sedinlents in the Aiken area, a condition partly explained by subsequent subsidence in this area 

and by the· profound Eocene overlap. Nevertheless, the much 1nore extensive deposits of 

kaolin in the Aiken area give evidence of longer-continued, comparatively quiet nonmarine 

conditions. · 

The typical Black Creek sedimentation begins a series of deposits which in. their origin, 

character of n1aterials, and contained flora, are. strictly comparable with the :Magothy and 

:Matawan fonnations of the northern Coastal Plain, 'the Black Creek formation of North Carolnla, the E·utaw formation of Georgia, and the upper half of the Tuscaloosa formation of western 

Alabmna. Probably also the physiography of the lands adjacent to the places where these 

seclin1ents. were laid clown was the sanl(;} in its general character. All the facts available point 

to the practical synchroneity of these. deposits. ' . · 

The relief at the beginning of :Middendorf sedimentation was considerable; the Piedmont 

surface, deeply weathered during long ages, had been extensively stripped of the decayed rock 

which formed the Lower Cretaceous deposits and of the deposits representing the subsequent 

erosion interval. This removal was not, however, nearly so extensive as many persons have 

thought. A considerable elevation and erosion interval which follows is represented by the 

Arundel, Patapsco, ·and Raritan formations of the more n~rthern Coastal Plain and by the 

great thiclmess of n1arine sedin1ents of at least the upper part of the Lower-Cretaceous section· 

in the Texas region~ A suosiclence or warping at the close of Raritan time inaugurated the 

South Atlantic cycle of Upper Cretaceous time. 

The dip of the Piedmont surface upon which the Lower Cretaceous rests is between 50 and 

75 feet to the mile, and though the amount of subsequent warping which may have occurred is 

not determinable, these figures, however inadequate, furnish some basis for calculating the 

probable elevation of the Piedn1ont land surface at the comn1encement of the Lower Cretaceous 

epoch. Though the Lower Cretaceous surface suffered considerable erosion before :Middendorf 

time, the beginning of :Middendorf sedimentation indicates a second warping with more or less 

relative subsidence to the eastward and elevation to the westward, so that the general slope 

may have been nearly as great as it was at the beginning of Lower Cretaceous sedimentation 

in this area. 

The flora as well as the physical conditions show that the :Middendorf member and the 

lower part of the typical Black Creek deposits were formed, in part, at le_ast, at practically the 

same time. The :Middendorf, representing locally the initial basement sands, was probably 

formed in part on land, or at the point where the Cretaceous rivers reached sea level, or in the 

sounds or bays which are supposed to have existed. :Meanwhile the typical Black Creek sediments were being deposited seaward. As subsidence continued any barriers which may have 

existed were submerged, especially in the Peeclee area, so that practically the whole sedimentation 
14 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEOHGIA. 

became of the typical Black Creek type and continued long after the close of the deposition 

of the Middendorf member. 

This report does not treat of the subsequent geologic history, which includes the deposition 

of the immediate~y succeeding Peedee sand int<? which the Black Creek formation finally merged 

and the subsequent reworking of the deposits in the gradual withdrawal of the seato its various 

Tertiary and more modern levels. 

SYSTEMATIC DESCRrPTION OF THE FLORA.. 

Phylum THALLOPHYTA. 

'Genus ALG ITE S s'eward. 

ALGITES AMERICANA sp. nov. 

Description.-The thallus is· preserved in the form of dichotomously divided branches 

ranging in width from 2 to 5 millimeters, thin and undulating, but evidently rather coriaceous 

in life, with slightly waved margins. These branches are not preserved for lengths of more 

than a few centimeters, in which ·space they are observed to divide only once or not at all. In 

some specimens they appear to radiate from a common center, but as their proximal parts are 

invariably missing this supposition can not be verified. · 

This species is also present- in the Magothy formation of :Maryland and in the Black Creek 

formation of North Carolina. The Maryland remains are rare and are in the.fo~m of impressions 

along which recent rootlets have commonly penetrated, giving some l?pecimens the appearance 

of having midribs. The North Carolina remains, which are abundant in the Black Creek 

formation at certain localities along Black River, show considerable carbonaceous residuum, 

indicating that in 'life the thallus was of considerable consistency. · 

The name of the genus Algites, to which this forn1 is referred, was proposed by Seward 1

· 

for·.those fossil remains which are in all probability those of algre but which from their nature 

can not be decisively assigned to any established genus: 

Fossil algre are common a·t some. geologic horizons, but their characters are generally ill 

defined, especially when preserved as impressions, so that comparisons with .modern genera 

altogether lack certainty. As pointed out by Seward for the type of this genus, Algites 

valdensis of the English Wealden, these forms suggest various modern genera, such as Chondrus, 

Zonaria, Dictyota, and others. · 

Occurrence.-Bl~ck Creek formation, 3 or 4 miles northeast of Florence (Ashby place), 

Florence County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Phylum PTERIDOPHYTA. 

Order FILICALE S. 

Family POL YPODIACE.lE. 

Genus ONOCLEA Linne. 

0NOCLEA INQUIRENDA (Hollick) Hollick. 

Plate II, figures 7 and 8. . 

Osmunda obergiana Heer, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 3, A bth. 2, 1874, p. 98 (pars), Pl. XXVI, fig. 9d (non figs. 9-9b; 

Pl. XXXII, fig. 7a). 

_Caulinites inquirendus Hollick, Bull. New York Bot. Garden, vol. 3, 1904, p. 406, Pl. LXX, fig. 3. 

Onoclea inquirendo. Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, 

vol. 50, 1907, p. 32, Pl. I, figs. 1-7. 

pescription.-Remains of this form appear in fragments of fertile fronds, not showing 

any of the laminre, which appears to be reduced to short pinnate branches bearing one or more. 

1 Seward, A. C., Weal~en flora, pt. 2, 1894, p. 4. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 15 

spheroidal bodies which are interpreted as sori. These are t~niformly 1.5 millimeters or slightly 

less in diameter. 

This species was originally described by I-Iollick and referred to the genus Caulinites, 

but was subsequently rernoved to the ferns because of its close re~emblance to the modern 

genus Onoclea. Earlier figured forms of the san1e character were associated by I-Ieer with his 

species Osmunda obergiana becaus·e they were found in the same beds with the fronds of this 

species, although they were not fmJnd in organic union with the fronds. ·These. fruits are 

1nuch n1ore like those of the n1odern forms of Onoclea than they are like those of Osrnunda, 

and they are identical with the type form of the species to which the writer. has referred then1. 

The Long Island and :Marthas Vineyard forms have these sori in a single row on each side 

of an axis and smne of the South Carolina specimens seen1 to have a similar arrangement; 

others have then1 definitely in threes, one terminal and two lateral. This latter arrangement 

also prevails exclusively in the Greenland specimens and in sinlilar material from the Magothy 

for1nation of ~1aryland. This v.ariation is of minor importance and is mentioned simply because 

it is believed that the grouping in threes is the normal arrangement and that it has been obscured 

during fossilizntion in the specimens where it is not clear. 

As here understood, this species ranges frmn the Atane. beds of Greenland southward in 

the ~1agothy forn1ation of :Marthas Vineyard, Long Island, and :Maryland, to the locality in 

South Carolina. 

Occurrence.-:Middendorf arkose n1ember of Black Creek formation, near :Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. N ati~nal ~1useurn. 

Order LYCOPODIALES. 

Family LYCOPODIACElE. 

Genus LYCOPODIUM Linne. 

LYCOPODIUM CRETACEUM Berry. 

Plate II, figures 1-6. 

Lycopodium, cretacewn Berry, Am. Jour. Sci., 4th ser., vol. 30, 1910, pp. 275, 276, ~gs. 1-6. 

Description.-These remains consist of fru~tlng spikes, which are common at the }.i.(iddendorf 

locality, 17 specirnens having been collected. Spikes loosely imbricated, of modified foliage leaves 

or bracts. The largest spike, which is nearly complete, is 5 centimeters in length and 5 millimeters 

in diameter, and is probably somewhat flattened, the bulk of the specirnens indicating somewhat snlaller dimensions. Axis stout. Bracts several ranked, peduncled,. with a co'rdate or 

retuse base and an abruptly narrowed acute recurved apex, with an entire margin, each bract 

subtending a large spheroidal sporangium which may possibly be reniform, though in the 

impressions preserved in· the clays of the Middendorf member it appears to be globular. 

Fossil remains of foliage ·resembling that of the modern club .mosses have been frequently 

described, either as Lycopodium or Lycopodites Brongniart, but the majority of such det~rminations lack certainty in that they show neither anatomical nor fruiting characters, so that the 

present species is of great interest as the only post-Paleozoic fossil' known to the writer which 

is referable with absolute certainty to the genus Lycopodium. No remains of foliage, have 

been discovered in these clays which can be correlated with these fruiting spikes. 

Occurrence.-~fiddendorf arkose member cf Black Creek formation, ~ear ~1iddendorf, Chesterfield County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) · 

Oollections.-U. S. National ~1useum. 
16 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Phylum SPERMOPHYTA. 

Class GYMNOSPERMlE. 

Order CYCADALES (?). 

Family CYCADACElE (?). 

Genus PODOZAMITES F. Braun. 

PonoZAMITES ICNOWLTO.NI Berry. 

Plate IV, figure 5. 

Zamites angustijolius Eichwald, Lethma rossica, vol. 2, 1860, p. 39, Pl. II, fig. 7. 

Podozamites angustijolius Schimper, Paleontologie vegetale, vol. 2, 1872, p. 160 (non Schenk). 

Podozamites angustijolius Heer, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 4, Abth. 1, 1876, p. 36, Pls. VII, figs. 8-11, and VIII, figs. 

2e, 5. 

Podozamites angustijolius Heer, idem, Abth. 2, 1876, p. 45, Pl. XXVI, fig. 11. 

Podozamites angustijolius Heer, idem, vol. 5, Abth. 2, 1878, p. 22, Pl. V, figs. 11b, 12. 

Podozamites angustijolius Lesquereux, The Cretaceous and Tertiary floras, 1883, p. 28. 

Podozamites angustijolius Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: .Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 27, 

Pl. I, fig. 4. . . 

Podozamites angustijolius Newberry, The flora of the Amboy clays: .Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896,1 p. 44: 

Pl. XII_I, figs. 1, 3, 4 (non fig. 2). 

Podozamites angustijolius .Moller, Kgl. Svensk. Vetensk. Akad., Handl., vol. 9, 1903, Pl. I, figs. 8-12, 17b. 

Podozamites knowltoni Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 36, 1909, p. 247. 

Podozamites knowltoni Berry, ·idem, vol. 37, 1910, p. 182. 

Descripiion.-Leaflets elongate, linear-lanceolate in outline, falcate in the single nearly 

complete South Carolina specimen, 5 to 15 centimeters in length by 0.6 to 1.3 centimeters in 

greatest width. Base narrowed to a short or obsolete petiole. Apex long pointed. Veins 

straight and parallel, gradually. dying out as they are encroached upon by the narrowing margins, that is, running to the n1argins and not converging appreciably toward the tip. At 4 

centimeters above the base they are 20 in number, and at 2 centimeters below the tip of the 

specimen figured they are 16 in number. · 

Fragments of the leaf tissue preserved show that the leaf was comparatively thick ~nd 

smooth on one surface, presumably the upper, with veins pronrinent on the other surface. 

Epidermis seems to be composed of s1nall cells. :Holes in a single, n1ore or less imperfect row 

between the veins n1ay represent stomata that are apparently confined to the lower (~)surface. 

The outlines of the internal tissue (1nesophyll) show large cells longitudinally elongat~d. This 

species is suggestive of NageiQpsis longifolia Fontaine, of the Lower Cretaceous of :Maryland 

and Virginia, and it ma.y also b(j compared with a variety of so-called species o{ Podozamites 

founded upon d~tached leaflets of doubtful attribution. 

In 1872 Schin1per referred the Zamites angustifolius of Eichwald to the genus Podozamites, 

overlooking the fact that four years ·earli~r Schenk had described and named a Podozamitesangustifolius. The natural impulse would be to dedicate the species here described to Eichwald, but Eichwald has already had a species of Podozamites nained for him: in consequence of 

which the name Podozamites knowltoni has been proposed in honor of Dr. F. H. Knowlton, of 

the United States National :Museum. This species has a wide range, both geologically and 

geographically. It is common in the Jurassic of high latitudes in Russia, Siberia, Bornholm, 

and Spitzbergen, and it is found in the Upper Cretaceous as indistinguishable remains widely 

distributed in America, being common 1n the Dakota sandstone of the West, the Raritan 

formation. of New Jersey, and the Black Creek formation of North Carolina. 

Occurrence.-l\ficldendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, Rocky Point, Sumter 

County.- (Collected by L. W. Stephenson.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National_Museum. - • 

1 Although the date on the title-page of this work is 1895, it was not actually published untill896. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 

Order CONIFERAL~S. 

Family T AXACElE. 

Ge~lUs PROT9PHYLLOCLADUS Berry. 

PROTOPHYLLOCLADUS LOBATUS Berry. 

Plate II, figures 9-13. 

Thinnjeldia sp. nov. Berry, Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ., new ser., No. 7, 1907, p. 81. 

ProtO]Jhyllocladus lobatus Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, voL 38, 1911, p. 403. 

17 

Description.-Leaves (phylloclads) of large size, lanceolate or ov·al in general outline, either 

entire with crenate n1m·gins, rounded apex, and narrowly cuneate base or compound through 

the developn1ent of opposite lateral lobes. A..-xial v~scular strand very stout below; becoming 

very thin and finally disappearing by repeated branching apically. When the leaves are lobate, 

subordinate opposite vascular strands form the axis of the lobes, and these also 'are generally, 

but not invariably; lost ·before reaching the tips of the lobes by giving off inn~n1erable secondary 

branches. :Margins in all specin1ens are rather ren1otely unqulate crenate, and the t.ips are all 

rounded. Secondaries numerous and thin, diverging from the main axis of the phylloclad or 

the axis of the lobes at very acute angles, curving outward, some simple but many dichotonlouslyforked, and a few several times forked. Lobes when ·present are separated by cuneate, 

narrowly rounded sinuses which terminate some distance from the main axis. The largest 

specimen, which is still incon1plete both at the apex and at the base, measures 8 centimeters 

in length and 5 centimeters from tip to tip of the lower,lobes, the entire upper portion measuring about 1.5 centin1eters in width. · 

These remains are superficially like fern fronds, especially in specimens which are compound, and were it not for the presence in the Cretaceous of other phyllocladus -like remains 

with a demonstrated gymnospermous structure (for example, Androvettia) their reference to 

this genus would seem hazardous. The entire specimens are strikingly like some of the forms 

of Pr·Jtophyllocladus subintegrifolius .(Lesquereux) Berry of the Raritan and n1agothy formations, 

or like Protophyllocladus polymorphus (Lesquereux) Berry from higher western American 

horizons, and even the compoun~ specimens have an unlobed apical· portion of comparable 

length which is also sunilar u1 appearance to the two species just mentioned. The compound 

fonns are superficially like Thinrifeldia rhomboidalis Ettingshai1sen/ the type of the genus 

Thinnfeldia, whose systematic position has been the occasion of so Inuch controversy and which 

has been variously regarded as a fern, as a cycad, and as a conifer·. The present species shows 

important differences, however, aside from being much younger, and it is confidently believed 

to be unrelated to the various older :Meso=oic sp~cies of Thinnfeldia which have been described. 

It 1nay also be compared with ·various forms from the Upper· Cretaceous of Dalmatia 

discussed at great length by Kerner, 2 who refers them to the genus Pachypteris, which he 

regards as cycadaceous in nature. 

The present species is believed to be clos~st to Protophyllocladus subintegrifolius, a species 

which is abundant in the Atane beds of Greenland, the Dakota sandstone of Kansas and 

Nebraska, the Raritan formation of New Jersey, and the Magothy formation from ~1arthas 

Vu1eyard to New Jersey, and which commonly assumes a sublobate form. This is especially 

shown in unreported collections made by the writer in the.~1agothy formation of New Jersey. 

The South Cm·olina form is con1mon, mostly as fragmentary specimens, at Rocky Pon1t, to which 

locality it appears to be confined in South Carolina. Regarding the systematic position the 

writer is confident, despite certain criticisms, that Protophyllocladus is referable to the 

Taxacere. The species is also found in the Magothy lormation of Maryland: 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, Rocky Point, Sumter 

County. (Collected by L. C. Glenn, Ward and Glenn, and E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-tJ. S. National Museum; Johns I-Iopkins University. 

1 Ettf:ngshausen, C. von, Abhandl. K.-k. geol. Reiehsanstalt, vol .. 1, pt. 3, No.3, 1852, p. 2, Pl. I, figs. 4-7. 

2 Kerner, F. von, Jahrb. K.-k. geol. Reichsaristalt, vol. 45, 1896, p. 39. . c 
18 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA' AND GEORGIA. 

Genus CEPHALOTAXOSPERMUM Berry. 

CEPHALOTAXOSPERMUM CAROLINIANilli Berry. 

· Plate III, figure 4. · 

Cephalotaxospermum carolinianum Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 37, 1910, p. 187. · 

Description.~Drupaceous fruits, solitary ( ~), sessile or with an extremely short and stout 

peduncle, ovoid, somewhat pointed apically and inclined to become slightly cordate below, 

consisting of an outer· fleshy layer and an inner bony layer, as in the Cycadales and Gingkoales; 

its surface mammillated much as in Podocarpus elongata -but less markedly so. Bony endocarp 

ovate-acuminate, immersed in the apical part of the exocarp. Evidently the drupace~us 

fruit of some Cretaceous member of the Taxace::e which finds its closest homology in the recent 

flora in the fruits of Cephalotaxus and certain species of Podocarpus. These drupes have the 

following dimensions as preserved in a much flattened condition: Length 6 millimeters to 13 

millimeters, averaging about 10 millimeters; breadth 5 millimeters to 10 millimeters, averaging 

about 8 millimeters; thickness about 3 millimeters; ·fruit in life probably almost circular in 

cross section. Peduncle short and stout. or wanting. Stone ovate-acuminate, lying in the apical 

part of the fleshy exocarp with the beaked micropylar en.d reaching almost or quite to the 

apex. As preserved in a much flattened condition in the clays, these fruits terid to split into 

two parts, disclosing the bony· endocarp or merely a cast of its cavity. The fleshy part of 

the fruit is carbonized ~nd fails to show any histological details. There is some evidence, or at 

least a suggestion, in some specimens. of the remains of a micropylar canaL Away from the 

pointed apex the exocarp is 1 to 2 millimeters in thickness, reaching -a thickness ~f 3 millimeters 

at the chalaza! end. · 

These fruits are ve~y abundant ~t certain localities in the Black Creek formation in North. 

Carolina, and have also been collected in the exte:q.sion of this formation near Florence, S. C., 

and in the lower part .of the Eutaw formation in Hale County~ .Ala. 

Fruits referable to the Taxace::e are extremely nire in the fossil state, as are also remains of 

foliage which can be referred with certainty to this family. .Both Tumion and Cephalotaxopsis 

/rom the Lower Cretaceous of Maryland and Virgmia .. ~F~. f:o.~nded upon foliage which seems 

referable with considerable certainty to this family, and the~<~Awe strata in those States abound 

in the foliage referred to the genus N ageiopsis, which seems t~ ~.e, closely related to Podocarpus, 

so that 'there is considerable reason for expecting to find upper Cretaceous representatives of the 

family in this same general region. Heer 1 describes from th~ Pat~ot beds (Senonian) of Green--

land a leafy twig with a large solitary fruit,. which he calls Oephalotaxites insignis, an identification which Solms-Laubach 2 seems to cOnf3A~~r probable. Bertrand 3 has described carbonized 

seeds from the Aachenian of Tournay, B~lgi~W.J.·Pnde:r; the p.ame of Vesquia tournaisii, which he 

considers, because of the arrangement of the vascular bundles, as interm~diate between Tumion 

a11d Cephalotaxus. It certainly seems _to. be. n9_t_ without significance that remains of this sort 

occur at nearly homotaxial horizons in Ameripa, Europe, and Greenland. · 

None of the foregoing, however, are comparable ·with the present forms, although certain 

indefinite -remains desc:r;ibed by Lesquereux. as· Inolepis sp.,4 a~e remotely suggestive of them. 

It is not believed, however, that they are coP.g(;)neric. 

The general features which seem to ·in,dicate a. closer relation with Cephalotaxus than 

with Podocarpus are the absence of the thickened ped.uncle of the latter and the presence in the 

sai:ne beds with these seeds of foliage desm;ib.ed_j)y the writer as Tum.ion carolinianum, 5 which is 

of the same type as that of Cephalotaxus and, may not improbably have been the foliage of the 

tree which bore the very abundant fruits ntt'me{Cephalotaxosp.erm~m. · ' . . . 

1 Heer, Oswald, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 7, 1883, p. 10, Pl. LIII,'fig. f2:--

2 Solms-Laubach, Fossil botany, 1891, p. 61. , ·, 

a Bertrand, C. E., Bull. Soc. bot. France, vol. 30, 1883, p. 293. .. __ 

4 Lesquereux, Leo, in Hayden's Ann. Rept. ·for 1874, 1876, p. 3F, Pltl~~' 1n.f5. 8; The ~re~aceous and 'fertiary floras, 1883, p. 33, Pl. I, .fig. 8. 

~Berry, !E. W., Am. Jour. Sci., 4th ser., vol. 25,1908, pp. 382-3.~/) .fig§. k.¥.·. , _ ' · _ . 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF qOUTH CAROLINA. 19 

_The modern genus Cephalota..""{us Siebold and Zuccarini, with four species·, is confined to 

the China-Japan region, although it seems evident that it was much more widesBread in former 

geologic times, and to it should probably be referred some of the leafy twigs included in the 

genus Ta.."\:ites Brongniart. Fruits of three species of Cephalotaxus, apparently identified correctly, are described by Kinkelin 1 from the upper Pliocene deposits of the :Main Valley in 

Ger1nany. 

Occurrence.-Black Creek formation, 3! miles northeast of Florence (Ashby plac~), Florence County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National :Museum. 

Family ARA UCARIACElE. 

Genus ARA UCARIA Jussieu. 

ARA ucARIA BLADENENSIS Berry. 

Plate III, figures 6 and 7. 

Araucar·ia bladen(msis Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 35, l908, p. 255, Pis. XII, XIII, and XIV, figs. 1-3. 

Description.-Foliage dense; phyllotaxy spiral; leaves ·decurrent, coriaceous, ovatel11nceolate, about 1.6 by 0.8 centimeters, the base rounded,· apex thickened, cuspidate; veins 

immersed, averaging 16 in number, straight, parallel; ston1ata small, in rows on ventral surface. 

Leaves ranging fr01n 1 to 2.8 centimeters in length by 0.5 to 1.2 centimeters in width, averaging 

1.6 by 0.8 centimeters, obovate in outline, with a broad, rou~ded base n~rrowing abruptly and· 

decurrent; the blade .broadest about one-third of the distance from the base, above which poi!lt 

it narrows in a short distance to a thickened cuspidate -tip; phyllotaxy spiral; leaf substance 

represented by a sheet of lignite about 0.5 millimeter thick, in which the veins are immersed. 

These veins average 14 to 16 in number, .although some specimens may have as 1nany as 20. 

They are stout, incurved ·at the· base (forking not observed), bec01ning par~llel and running 

directly upward until they abut against the leaf margin; that is, they are not convergent toward 

the tip of the leaf. Although their megascopic appearance is lifelike, their microscopic structure 

is not preserved. . · 

Fr01n one or two places where the spechnens are in a more argill~ceous n1atrix it has been 

possible to get rather inferior specimens showing the arrangement and outlines 'of the stomata. 

These are b1~oadly ovate in shape with very thin guard cells, at least when viewed on the surface. 

They a:re· arranged in somewhat irregular rows on the ventral surface of the leaf, the number 

of rows between the· two veins being generally four. Aside from these facts no other details 

can be n1ade out. 

This species is most remarkably sin1ilar to the recent Araucaria bidwilli of the Australian 

region. The resemblance is. even· closer than the reproductions indicate, a dried herbarium 

specimen of the latter and a twig of the former when preserved as a brownish impression being 

practicitlly indistinguishable. 

This resemblance in form, habit, and stomatal characters, reenforced by the occurrence of 

characteristic araucarian ,cone scales in the same beds at certain localities, renders the identification reasonably conclusive. 

The n1ost nearly related form seems to be Araucarites ovatus, described by Hollick 2 from the 

"Cliffwood clay'~ of New Jersey. The leaves. of this form 'differ merely by their larger size, 

absence of basal characters, and much less pointed tips; in fact, if the two were found in closer 

association or if in the abundant material of Araucaria bladenensis any specimens had approached 

Araucarites ovatus in size, the writer would be disposed to consider them variants of a single 

species. As the case stands, it seems better to keep them distinct, for the leaves in the materiai 

frmn the southern Coastall>lain are sufficiently and uniformly different to be readily recognized, 

and there is the further possibility th'at the New Jersey species n1ay be more or less closely related 

to. the 1nodern genus Dammara rather than Araucaria. · 

1 Engelhardt, Hermann, and Kinkelin, F., Abhandl. Senckenb. naturf. Gesell., vol. 29, No.3, 1908, p. 194, Pl. XXIII, figs. 9-13. · 

2 Hollick, Arthur, Trans. New York Acad. Sci., vol. 16, 1897, p. 128, Pl. XII, figs. 3a, 4. ' 
20 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND, EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

A European form which must surely be considered as a, nearly related congener of Araucaria 

bladenensis is Saporta's· Araucaria toucasi, described fr01n the Tur~nian of Beausset, near 

Toulon, France.1 This is strikingly similar to the American species in every respect, and is 

likewise closely allied, in appearance at least, to the recent Araucaria bidwilli of Australia. 

Kerner 2 records Pachyphyllum (P~giophyllum) rigidum Sa porta .and Pachyphyllum (Pagiophyllum) araucarinum Saporta fron1 the Cenomanian of Lesina, an island in the Adriatic off the 

·coast of Dalmatia, both being originally Jurass~c species from the French. Corallian of Verdun. 

Both are very similar to the American species and are of about the same .age. The probable 

identity of Cenomanian and Corallian species seems to the writer extren1ely doubtful, and in his 

opinion both Kerner's species should undoubtedly be considered new species or Araucaria, nearly 

related 'to, if not identical with, such Cretaceous forms as Araucaria bladenensis or Araucaria 

toucasi. 

The present species is exceedingly common i~ ap.d characteristic. of the Black Creek formation 

in North Carolina. In South Carolina it is found in the extension of these beds at the single 

locality cited. So far as observed, the leaves are always found detached at this outcrop, indicating a large amount of maceration and trituration. They are, however,·entirely characteristic. 

This speoies has also been found in the upper part of the Tuscaloosa formation· of western 

·Alabama, in the Eutaw formation of western Georgia, and at a somewhat younger horizon near 

Buena Vis.ta, Ga. 

Recently Wieland 8 has described a distinct but comparable species, Araucaria hatcheri, 

fron1 the "Ceratops beds" of Wyoming. 

Occurrence.-Black Creek formation, 3t miles northeast of Florenpe (Ashby place), Florence 

County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson.) · 

Oollections.-V. S. National :Museum. 

An.AUCAH.IA DAR.LINGTONENSIS sp. nov. 

Plate III, figure 1. 

Description.---'-Seed obovate in outline with broadly round,ed apex, straight lateral n1argins, 

and somewhat narrowed rounded base, 1.25 centimeters in length and 0.75 centhneter in width 

across the widest part, 0.50 centimeter wide at base. 

This species is based upon the single detached seed figured, which is undoubtedly that of 

an araucarian conifer. From its size and geologic position it seems· probable that it n1ay be 

·a seed of the cone scales des.cribed as Ara:Ucaria j~ffreyi Berry, whieh in turn are probably the 

·cone scales of the leafy twigs described as Araucaria bladenensis Berry. No other araucarian 

ren1ains are, however, assbciated with this seed at this locality. 

Occurrence.-Black Creek formation, right bank of.Black Creek, 1~ miles east of Darlington, 

Darlington County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson.) · 

Oollections.-U. S. N ational1\1useum. 

ARAUCARIA JEFFREY I Berry ( ~). 

Araucaria jeifreyi Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 35, 1908, p. 258, Pl. XVI. 

Description.-Cone scales decid-uous, rh01nboidal, straight sided, thin n1argined, the apex 

broadly rounded, with long central apical spur; scales divided by transverse furrow into "ligule" 

· a.11d scale proper; single seeded. 

This species was based upon a considerable number of large single-seeded cone scales 

preserved as impressions and associated with Araucaria bladenensisat Big Bend and near the 

Atlantic Coast Line Railroad bridge over Black River, at points 92 and 87 i n1iles above .Newbern 

on Neuse River, and at Parker Landing on Tar River, all localities in the Black Creek-formation 

of North Carolina. The specimens from Tar River differ so.:newhat from the others and 

1 Saporta, G. de, Le monde des plantes, 1879, p. 198, fig. 27. 

2 Kerner, F. von, Jahrb. K.-k. ge:>l. Reichsanstalt, vol. 45, 1896, p. 49, Pl. IV, figs. 1, 3. 

a Wieland, G. R., Bull. Geol. Survey South Dakota No.4, Rept. for 1908, 1910, p. SO, fig. 2. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 21 . 

approximate more nearly the shape of the foliage leaves of Araucaria bladenensis, but the 

scales in general are son1ewhat variable, as indeed they are from different positions on a single. 

1uodern Araucaria cone, and it seems likely that they all belong to one species. 

The scales are rhomboictal, the thin lateral margins straight to the point of greatest width, 

then n1ore or less rounded, produced medially into a long and narrow point. Tlris point is 

1nore than a centi1neter long in two specimens which still lack the terminal portion. In some 

speci1nens the scales are ob"7 :ously divided by a transverse furrow into the scale proper and the 

so-called "ligule." They are all preserved as impressions with fragments of lignite representing. 

the scale subs~ance. Except that they do not appear to have been as thick, they are strictly 

co1nparable with the typical scales of Araucaria bidwilli. In general outline they are also 

comparable with the scales of Araucaria cookii of the Eutacta section of the genus. _ Seeds 

have also been found in the Carolina 1naterial at this level. From the structure as disclosed 

in thp present in1pressions it seems obvious that the scales were single-seeded, as in the moclerh 

genus, and, taken in conjunction with the foliage just described as Araucaria bladenensis, they 

furnish conclusive evidence of the abundant presence in the middle part of the Cretaceous of 

eastern North An1erica of true Araucariem, thus still further increasing the parallel between the 

Iniclclle Cretaceous floras of this country and those of Europe. :Many remains of cones and 

cone scales have been described as species of Araucariem, but it seems scarcely worth while to 

enumerate them here. 

The South Carolina occurrence is based on a single poorly preserved and doubtfully deterIninecl spechnen. This species also occurs in Georgia. 

The Georgia 1naterial is neither abundant nor well preserved, but the identifications are 

unquestionable. A single scale was collected from the Eutaw formation ·at Chimney Bluff on 

Chattahoochee River, where it was associated with the abundant leafy twigs of Araucaria 

bladenensis Berry. A s:lngle entirely characteristic specimen obtained near Byron, Georgia, is 

apparently fr01n a higher horizon in the Cretaceous. ' 

Araucaria jejjreyi is extremely close to a form from the Turonian of Friesen, Bohmnia, 

described and named Araucariajrici by Velenovsky. 1 

Occurrence.-l\i:iddenclorf arkose member of Black Creek formation near Langley, Aiken 

County. (Collected by E. ,V. Berry:) 

Collections.-U. S. National :Museum. 

Family BRACHYPHYLLACElE .. 

Genus BRACHYPHYLL UM Brongniart. 

BnACHYPHYI .. LUM MACROCARPU:M Newberry. 

Plate III, figure 2. 

:Moricon·ia cyclotoxon Debey and Ettingshausen, Heer, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 7, 1883, Pl. LIV, fig. 1c (non Heer's 

other figures). 

Thuites crassus Lesquereux, The Cretaceour:. and Tertiary floras, 1884, p. 32. 

Brachyphyllum crassum Lesquereux, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 10, 1887, p. 34. 

Brachyphyllum crassum Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group, Mon. U. S. Geol. Stuvey, vol. 17,.1892, p. 32, Pl. 

II, fig. 5 (non Tenison-Woods, t883). 

Brachyphyllum nwcrocarpum, Newberry, MSS. name m~ntioned in footnote. The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U.S .. 

Geol. Survey, vol.· 26, 1896, p. 51. 

Brachyphyllum sp., Knowlton, Bull. Geol. Soc. America, vol. 8, 1897, pp. 137, 140. 

Brachyphyllum macrocarpum Knowlton, Bull. U. S. Geol. Survey No. 163, 1900, p. 29, Pl. IV, figs. 5, 6. 

Brachyphyllum. macrocarpum Hollick, Bull. New York Bot. Garden, vol. 3, 1904, p. 406, Pl. VII, figs. 4, 5 . 

.Brachyphyllum macrocarpurh Berry, Bull. Torrey· Bot. Club, vol. 32, 1905, p. 44,. Pl. II, fig. 9. 

Brachyphyllum macrocarpum Berry, idem, vol. 33, 1906, r~ 168, Pl. IX. 

Brachyphyllum macrocarpum Berry, Ann. Rept. Sta~e Geologist, New Jersey, for 1905, 1906, p. 139. 

Brachyphyllum macrocarpum Hollick and Jeffrey, Am. Nattiralist, vol. 40; .1906, p. 200. 

Brachyphyllum macrocarpum Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of sovthern New York and New England: Mon. U.S. Geol .. 

Survey, vol. 50, 1907, p. 44, Pl. III, figs. 9 and 10. 

1 In Fri~, Archiv naturw.Landcsdurchforschuilg Dohmen, vol. 9, No. 1, 1893, p. 129, text fig. 1i7. 
22 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Description.-Stout twigs with club-shaped, primately arranged branches, covered with 

large, thick, rhomboidal squamate, densely ·crowded, appressed leaves, attached by practically 

their whole ventral surface. Phyllotaxy spiral. Leaf surface more or less striated, the strire 

converging toward the obtuse apex. Cones not positively determined. 

Brachyphyllum is chiefly an older :Mesozoic type, but it remains abundant through the 

Lower Cretaceous, two species having been desc~ibed from the Potomac group of Maryland and 

Virginia. It is a waning type in the Upper Cretaceous, where it is represented by the species 

here discussed and by a variety (seep. 106) which peraists as high as the lower Senonian. It is 

widely distributed and is recorded from Long Island, Staten Island, New Jersey, Delaware, 

Maryland, North Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama 1 in the East and from the Dakota sandstone 

of Kansas and tl~e :Montana group of WyO.ming in the West. It is probably represented in the 

Patoot beds of Greenland by the material which Heer erroneously refers to :Moriconia. Though 

it is not recorded from Europe, Velenovsky has described remains from the C~nomanian of Bohemia which appear to 'be identical with the American representatives, referring them to the 

Jurassic genus Echinostrobus of Schimper. 2 Hollick and Jeffrey have recently shown, from 

specimens from Staten Island with structure preserved, that this species is related to the 

subfamily Araucariere. 

This. species is extremely common in the upper part of the Raritan formation at South 

Amboy, N. J .. , and in its eastward ext.ension on Staten Island, but has not been collected from 

any of the plant-bearing horizons of the lower part of the Raritan. Newberry describes large 

con~s which he found associated with these twigs and ~hich he thought were related to them, 

although this seems improbable. The cones are poorly preserved and their affinities can not 

, be made out; They are very different from previously described cones of Brachyphyllum, and 

the work of Hollick and Jeffrey would seem to indicate that the present species had small 

cones. . The cones described by Newberry, though here retained in the synonymy of this species, 

are comparable to the abundant cones from the older Potomac of :Maryland which are referred 

to the form genus Abietites. The single characteristic fragment figured is all that represents 

this species in the South Carolma ·Cretaceous, but as it is common in homotaxial deposits in 

Georgia and Alabama and has also been found in the Black Creek formation of North Carolina 

no uncertainty is attached to theidentifi~ation.of even such meager material. . . 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose. member of Black Creek formation, near :Middentlorf, · 

Chesterfield County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Family PIN ACEZE. 

Genus PIN.US Linne. 

PINUS H.AlUTANENSis. Berry. 

Pinus sp. Newbeny, The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p. 47, PL. IX, figs. 5-8. 

Pinus raritanensis Benoy, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 37, 1910, p. 189. · 

Description.-This species was discovered in the upper part of the Raritan formation of 

South Amboy, N. J. The remains consist otslender leaves in fascicles of threes and of poorly 

preserved winged seeds. Similar remains occur in the Magothy formation of New Jersey and 

in the Black Creek formation of North Carolina. They are too indefinite to have much strati-: 

graphic value and are of slight botanic interest beyond showing the presence of ·a pinelike form 

along the Upper Cretaceous Atlantic coast. In this connection attention should be called to 

structural material of Pinus from the Raritan formation on Staten Island, N. Y., described by 

Hollick and Jeffrey 3 as Pinus triphylla, which may be identical with the present form.,· 

Occurrenc~.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek form:;ttion, 'near :Middendorf; 

Chesterfield County. (Collected by E. W .. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

1 A number of these records are unpublished. _ . . ,. . . 

2 Velenovsky, J., Die Gymnospermen der bohmischen Kreideformation, 1885, p. 16, Pl. VI, figs. 3, 6-8; Kv,etena ceskeho cenomanu, 1889, p. 9, 

Pl. I, figs. 11-19; Pl. II, figs. ,1, 3. . . . . . .. , 

a Mem. New York Bot'. Garden, vol. 3, 1909, p. 1:1, Pls. III, figs. 6 and 7 (?),and XXII, fig. 1. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOU~H CAROLINA. 23 

F~y _TAXODIEACEJE. 

Genus SEQUOIA Endlicher. 

SEQUOIA REICIIENBACIII' (Geinitz) I-Ieer .

1 · 

Plate IV, 'figures 1-4 .. 

A.raucarites reichenbachi Geinitz, Characteristik der Schichten uncl Petrefakten des sii.chs.-bohmischen Kreiclegebirges, 

No. 3, 1842, p. 98, Pl. XXIV, fig. 4. 

Oryptomeria primm11a Corda, in Reuss, Versteinerungen der bohmischen KTeicleformation, Abth. 2, 1846, p. 89, Pl. . 

XLVIII, figs. 1-11. 

Geinitzia cretacea Encllicher, Synopsis coniferarum, 1847, p. 281. 

Seq1wia reichenbachi Heer, Flora fossilis,arctica, vol. 1, 1868, p. 83, PI.. XLIII, figs. ld, 2b, and 5a. 

Seq1wia reichenbachi Heer, idem, vol. 3, 1874, pp. 77, 101, andl26; Pls. XII, figs. 7c and 7d; XX, figs. 1-8; XXVIII, 

fig. 2; XXXIV, fig. 1'; XXXVI, figs. 1-8; and XXXVII, figs. 1 and 2. . 

Seqtwia ?'eichenbachi Lesquereux, The Cretac.eous flor~,__l874, p. 51, Pl. I, figs. 10-lOb. 

Seq<twia ?'eichenbachi Heer, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 6, 'Abth. 2, 1882, p. 52, Pl. XXVIII, fig. 7. 

Seq1wia reichenbachi Fontaine, The Potomac or younger Mesozoic flora: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 15, 1890, p. 243, 

Pls. CXVIII, figs. 1 and 4, and CXIX, figs. 1-5, etc. 

Seq1wia couttsim Hollick, Trans. New York Acacl. Sci., vol. 12,, 1892, p. 30, Pl. I, fig. 5 . 

. Seq·twia reichenbachi Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U. S. Ge.ol. Smvey, vol. 17, 1892, p, 35, Pl. II, 

fig.4. ' 

Seq1wia reichenbachi Hollick, Trans. New York Acad. Sci., vol. 12, 1892, p. 30, Pl. I, fig. 18. 

Seq·ttoia ?'eichenbachi Nathorst, in Felix and Lenk, Beitrage zm Geologie und Paleontologie cler Republik Mexico, 1893, 

pt. 2, no. 1. : 

Seq1wia reichenbachi Newberry, The flora of the Amboy days: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol• 26, 1896, p. 49, Pl. IX, 

fig. 19. ' 

Seq·ttoia reichenbachi Berry, Bull. New York Bot. Garden, vol. 3, 1903, p.-59, Pl. XLVIII, figs. 15-18. 

Seq·twict reiclwnbachi Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol.31, 1904, p. 69, Pl. IV, fig. 8. 

Seq1wia reichenbachi Berry, idem, vol. 32, 1905, p. 44, P.l. I, fig. 3. , 

Seq1wia reichenbachi Knowlton, Bul~. U. S. Geol. Survey, No. 257, 1905, p. 157, Pl. XIV, figs. 3-5. 

Seq1wia reichenbachi Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of sottthern New York and New England: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey,· 

vol. 50, 1907, p. 42, Pls. II,· fig. 40,. and III, figs. ·,1,, 5. 

Seq1wia reichenbachi Knowlton, Smithsonian Misc. Coli.,' quarterly issue, vol. 4, 1907, p. 126, Pl. XII, figs. 7 and 8. 

? Geinitzia reichenbachi Hollick and J~ffrey, Mem. New.Y.ork Bot. Ga,rclen, vol. 3, 1909, p. 38, .Pis. V, figs. 7-10; VIII, 

figs. 3 and 4; XVI, figs. 2-4; XVII, figs. 1-4; XVIII, figs . 1-4. 

Description.-The following description was written by I-Ieer. in 1868: "S. ra1nis elongatis, 

foliis decurrentibus, patentibus, falcato-incur~:i's, rigidis, acuminatis~" 

This species has a recorded range on this continent from the N eocomian of Mexico to the 

Livingston formation of Montana, being very abundant at numerous horizons, and it has likewise been identified from Greenland and Europe. :Many investigators have held that some, 

at least, of these identifications are erroneous, which is probable enough, although the Tertiary 

Sequoia langsdorfii has an almost equally wide range, both geologic and geographic. 

In a remarkable memoir recently published f.[olljck ~nd Jeffrey 2 have described the anatomy 

of some twigs of the Sequoia reichenbachi type fi·om the Raritan formation of Staten Island. 

According to these authors their results indic~~e that these remains are Aritucarian in their 

affinity, a view which has been tentatively suggested by numerous students since the days of 

Geinitz, who referred them to the genus Araucarites. In order to make out a good case these 

authors were under the necessity of finding Araucarian characters in certain associated cone 

scales of the f?equoia typ·e, as these supposedAraucarian tWigs are frequently f~und with Sequoialike cones attached to. them. They refer· tHese con:e ·scales to new genera which they term 

Eugeinitzia and Pseudogeinltzia, although the.t 1evidence for an Araucarian affinity is in the 

writer's opinion extremely slender. n::~ ' · 

As n1ight be expected fron1 their great rangeffossils of the Sequoia reichenbachi type are. of 

slight sh:atigraphic value. Nevertheless, the~ r,eiri:airts· are very··· abunda~t 'at the Magothy.:. 

~cldend?1~~~l~te Tuscaloosa horizon, ~ppar_~~tlm:i~~~t_i?al in. characte~ arid commonly cone:- ····"· ... I Only representative citations, chiefly American, of this widespread and persistent species are given. 

2 Mom. New York Bot. Garden, vol. 3, 1909, p. 38, Pl. Vet seq. ' 
24 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

bearing, the cones being small prolate spheroids consisting of relatively few peltate umbilicate, 

sequoia-like scales. · 

This species is confined to the :Middendorf locality in South Carolina, where it is excessively 

abundant and commonly cone-bearing. ·Sequoia twigs are very resistant to ·maceration and 

are in many places about the last vegetable re:r;nains to disintegrate in marine waters; nevertheless, the excellent preservation at :Middendorf of leafy branches .of large size with cones 

attached indicates quiet water and nearness to place of growth. The species is rare in the 

Raritan formation but common in later Upper Cretaceous outcrops in New Jersey, Delaware, 

Maryland, North Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose n1ember of Black Creek formation, near :Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National :Museum. 

Genus CUNNINGHAMITES Presl. 

CuNNINGHAl\UTES ELEGANS .(Corda)· Endlicher. 

Cunninghamia elegans Corda, in Reuss, Versteinerungen der bohmisehen Kreideformation, pt. 2, 1846, p. 93, Pl. 

XLIX, figs 29-31. 

Cunninghamites elegans (Corda) Endlieher,-Synopsis Coniferarum, 1847, p. 305. 

'Ounninghamites elegans Heer, Die Flora von Moletein in Mahren, 1869, p. 12, Pl.· I, fig. 14. 

Cunninghamites elegans Sehimper, Paleontologie vegetale, vol. 2, 1870, p. 259. 

Cunninghamites squamosus Hosius and Von der .Marek (non Heer), Die Flora der \Vestfalisehen Kreideformatlon1 

Palreontographica,_ vol. 26, 1880, p. 179, PI. XXXVII, figs. 137, 138. 

Cunninghamites squamosus va.r. densijolia Rosins and Von der Marek, idem, figs. 139-141. 

Cunninghamites squamosus var. linearis Hosius and Von der Marek, idem, 1>. 180, fig. 142. 

Cunninghamites elegans Heer, Flora fossilis aretiea, vol. 7, 1883, p. 17, Pl. LIII, .fig. l. 

Ctmninghamia elegans Velenovsky, Die Gymnospermen der bohmisehen Kreideformation, 1885, p. 14, Pl. IV, fig. 5; 

Pl. V, figs. 1, 7; Pl. VI, fig. 5. 

·Cunninghamites elegans Hosius and Von der Marek, Naehtrag, Palreontographiea, vol. 31, 1885, p. 227. 

Cunninghamia elegans Velenovsky, Sitzungsber. K. bohmisehen Gesell., 1886, 1887, p, 634, figs. 1-5. 

Ounninghamia elegans Kerner, Jahrb. IC-k. geol. Reiehsanstalt, vol. 45, 1896, pt. 1, Pl. IV, fig. 4. 

Cunninghamites elegans Newberry, The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U. S. Ge<;>l. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p.· 48, Pl. V. 

~&1~. . 

Cunninghamites elegans Hollick, Trans. New York Acad. Sci., vol. 16, 1897, p. 129, Pl. XI, fig. 2. 

Cunninghamites (?) sp., Knowlton, Dull. U. S. Geol. Survey No. 163, 1900, p. 29, PI. V, fig. 3. 

Cunninghamites elegans (?) Fliche, Bull. Soc. sci. Nancy, 1900, p. 10, Pl. I, fig. 1. 

Cunninghamites elegans Hollick, Bull. New York Bot. Garden, vol. ·2, 1902, p. 402, Pl. XLI, fig. 11. 

Cunninghamites elegans Berry, idem, vol. 3, 1903, p. 64. 

Cunninghamites elegans Zeiller, Annales des mines, March, 1905, p. 15, Pl. VII, fig. 4. 

Cunninghamites elegans Knowlton, Dull. U. S. Geol. Survey No. 257, 1905, p .. 135, Pl. XV, fig. 1. 

Ounninghamites elegans Hollick, Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 50, 1907, p. 41, Pl. III, fig. l. 

Cunninghamites elegans B~rry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 31, 1904, p. 70, PI. III, figs. 7-9, 11. 

Description.-The following is the description by Corda in 1846: 

C. ramis gracilibus teretlbus, pulvinulis foliorumr homboideo-hexagonis, longitudin?-liter carinatis; cicatricibus 

terminalibus oblique-transversis; foliis hamato-arrectis, attenuatis, integerrimus, acutis, medio nervo tenu~ ~implici. 

The type locality for this handsome species was the" Vntern Quader von Massena bei Schlan 

in Bohm." Since its descriptio!). by Corda it has been recorded from a number of European 

and American localities. Abroad it is found from the Cenomanian to the Emscheri~n in Bohemia, 

Moravia, Westphalia, Daln1atia, and Bulgaria. In America it occurs in the Magothy formation 

from ~1arthas Vineyard to New Jersey, ranging northward to the Patoot beds of Greenland. 

In the West it' has ~een found in the Montana group, both in Montana and in Wyoming. Exceptionally large forms of this species are abundant in the upper beds of Black Creek formation of 

North Carolina, and the species is also present at a somewhat higher Upper Cretaceous horizon 

near Byron, Ga. Abroad the species has been ·recorded by Schenk from the Urgonian and by 

Fliche from the Barremian, but the latter identification is probably and the former almost 

certainly incorrect. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 25 

The South Carolina material is scanty and fragmentary. It comes from the Rocky Point 

locality and is queried because the ferruginous replacement renders the identification uncertain. 

The rmnains are those of long, r~ther slender, curved l.eave3 of the Ounninghamites elegans 

type, the single specimen and its counterpart representing the distal portion of a twig about 

the normal size for this species but somewhat smaller than the specimens from the Black Creek 

for.rnation of North Carolina. · 

The genus Cunninghamites was proposed in 1838 by Pre·sl 1 in Sternberg's great work, and 

Ounninghamites oxycedrus 'from the Quader of Niederschoena in Saxony was de.signated the 

type by Brongniart 2 in 1849. Several fossil species of Cunninghanutes have been described, 

and recently structural 1naterial of a cone very close to that of the existing Cunninghamia has 

been described 3 from the 1Jpper Cretaceous of JiLpan. The existing species of Cunninghanua, 

two in nun1ber, inhabit the subtropical uplands of the Orient. 

Occurrence.-:Midclendorf arkose n1en1ber of Black Creek forn1ation, Rocky Point, Sun1ter 

County. (Collected by L. F. Ward and L. C. Glenn.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National ~1:useum. 

Family CUPRESSEACElE. 

Genus WIDDRINGTONITES Endlicher. 

WrDDlUNGTONITES SUBTILIS Heer. 

Pla}e II,· figures 14-17. 

Widdringtonites subtilis fleer, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 3, Abth. 2, 1874, p. 101, Pl. XXVIII, fig. 1, b. 

W·1:ddn:ngtonites S'l.tbtilis fleer, idem, vol. 6, Abth. 2, 1882, P~s. VII, figs. 13 and 1( and XXVIII, fig. 4, b. 

Widdringtonites subtilis Newberry, The flora ofthe Amboy·clays: Mon. U. ·s. Geol. Survey, voi. 26, 1896, p. 57, Pl. X, 

figs. 2-4. · 

Widdringtonites reichii Hollick, Annals New York A:cad~ Sci., vol. 11, 1898, p. 58, Pl. III, fig. 8. 

Widdringtonites .subtilis Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of. southern New York and New England: .Mon. U. S. Geol. 

Survey, vol. 50, 1907, p. 45, Pl. IV, figs. 2-5. 

Widdringtonites reicMi Berry, Johns Hopkins Unlv. Circ., new ser., No.7, p. 81, 1907. 

Widdringtonites subtilis Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 39, 1912, pp. 341-348, Pls. XXIV, XXV. 

Description.--This species was described· from the Atane beds of Greenland by I-Ieer in 

1874. I-Iis m.aterial was, however, extren1ely linuted. Subsequently it was found in consideral)le abundance in the Raritan forn1ation of New J ers'ey and still more recently Hollick has 

recorded it fr01n ~1:arthas Vineyard and Block Islu.nd (Magothy for~nation). It may be questioned 

if some of the coniferous n1aterial desci·ibed by V elenovsky from the Bohenuan Cretaceo~1s 

under othe1~ names should not be compared with the present form. It is even n1ore slender 

than Widdringtonites reichii, with much shorter twigs, which have the appearance of having 

beei1 s01newhat lax in habit. The leaves are usually n1ore elongated, close set, and appressed, 

narrowly lanceolate, strnight and scalelike; they are said by I-Ieer to be son1ewhat spread and 

falcate proxin1ad. Remains of this latter sort occur in the Tuscaloosa formation of Alabama 

and th!) Magothy formation of Maryland. 

Newberry nlm:ttions ·a vague cone about 1 centimeter in diameter as included i~1 the Raritan 

material. The ·writer has not seen this specimen but has found a number of. poorly preserved 

detached cones an1ong the. abundant ren1ains of this species in the Cretaceous bods of South 

Carolina and a number of specilnens with attached cones from the Tuscaloosa forn1ation in 

western Alabama, where tlus species is exceedingly abundant at certain localities. These 

cones are tenninal, roughly spheroidal in outline, and apparently consist of ~our thick scales 

with wide blunt tips and somewhat extended bases. They are closely comparable to the cones 

fron1 the Cretaceous of eastern Europe ascribed to Widdringtonites reichii by Velenovsky and 

Krasser. (See Pl. II, figs. 18 and 19.) These authors refer this form directly to tl~e genus 

1 Sternberg, Kaspar, Flora der Vorwelt, vol. 2, Nos. 7 and 8, 1838, p. 203. 

2 Brongniart, Tableau, 1849, p. 68 .. 

a Stopes and Fujii, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc; London, vol. 201 B, 1910. 
26 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Widdringtonia, and it would seem that the cones attached to the Alabama specimens of Widdringtonites subtilis conclusively demonstrate its relationship with some of the ;modern species 

included in the genus Callitris by Eichler. 

Occurrence.__:_Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near :Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County; Rocky Point, Sumter County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-V. S. National Museum. ' 

Genus MORICONIA Debey and Ettingshausen. 

MoRICONIA AMERICAN A Berry. 

Pl?-te VII, figures 1-4. 

Moriconia cyclotoxon Berry, Bull. New Y9rk Bot. Garden, vol. 3, 1903, p. 65, Pls. XLIII, fig. 4, .and XLVIII, figs. 1-4 

(non Debey and Ettingshausen). 

Moriconia cyclotoxon Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 31, 1904, p. 70; vol. 33, 1906, pp. 165-167. 

Moriconia americana. Berry, idem, vol. 37, 1910, pp. 20, 18G. 

Description.-Leafy twigs, apparently deciduous in habit, bifacial, phylloclad-like, ~onsisting of cyclically arranged reduced leaves. Along the main axis on each flat face of the branch 

these leaves are relatively and closely appressed, with a narrow base and a broad semicircular 

apex. The corresponding lateral pairs of leaves are thin and pointed and transversely compressed. 

In the axis of each of these marginal leaves is a reduced branch flattened in the same plane as the 

main branch, so that the whole arrangement is strictly opposite and distichous. These reduced 

lateral branches have leaves of the same character and arrangement as those of the main branch. 

The bifacial leaves are, however, somewhat smaller and blunter and the marginal leaves are 

. broader and less acute. In a short distance. they become smaller distad, generally not more 

than five or six pairs being required to complete the blunt lateral reduced twigs. The main 

vascular axis is stout ana in some specimens a vascular axis can be made out in the lateral 

branches. The leaves do not show a.J;ly veins. The texture· was apparently coriaceous, but 

from the appearance of the majority of specimens the leaves were thin. No structural material 

or indications of fruits or fruiting characters have been discovered. Tlris species, formerly 

confused with jj{oriconia cyclotox.on of Del?~Y ~nd Ettingshauseri., differs from the latter, whi~h 

is the type and only other known species of the genus, in being mqre phylloclad-like and strictly. 

comparable to a cupressineous genus like Libocedrus. It is also about twice as large, the lateral 

twigs ·are more reduced, and the main axis is invariably leafy.- It differs also in its geologic 

range, the two species not being anywhere contemporaneous in America, although the type in 

Europe extends as high as the later larger form of America. 

Superficially these remains closely resemble.fragments of fern fronds. In-fact, Debey, the 

original discoverer, always insisted that they were ferns ·and I-Ieer described the earliest collected 

and poorly preserved rerfl.ains from Greenland as a' species of Pecopteris. There can be no· 

doubt, however, of their gymnospermous nature. For stratigraphic determinations they are 

one of the most characteristic fossil plants known; ·as the geometrically arranged outlines of the 

leaves is recognizable ·with certainty in the smallest fragment. · 

They are strikingly like ~he curious genus Androvettia, wh'ich was recently described by 

Hollick and Jeffrey 1 and referred· by them to. the Araucariem, although Moriconia has, on the 

· evidence of the foliar characters, been invariably· referred to the Cupressinem. The present 

species is common at the :Middendorf locality in South Carolina ·and is a characteristic postRaritan species in the Atlantic Coastal Plain, having been recorded by the writer from numerous 

localities in the Magothy formation of New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland, and from the 

Black Creek formation in North Caroli.J;la·. Moriconia cyclotoxon, the type of the genus, is 

confined to the ·Raritan· in this country; .. although it is foun'd in both the Atane and Patoot 

beds of western Greenland and came originally from the Senonian of Prussia . 

. Occurrence._:_!1iddendorf arkose ·member of. the. Black Creek formation, near Middendorf; 

Chesterfield County. (Collected by. L·~ w.-.-S-tephenson and·E: W. Berry~) . . -- .. 

Oollections.-V. S. National M~s~\1m_._.. · · ·' ··· 

1 Hollick, Arthur, and Jeffrey, E. C., Mem. New York Bot. Garden, vol. 3, 1909, p. 22, Pl. III, figs. 1-5, etc. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA Q_F SOUTH CAROLINA. 27 

CONIFERlE INCERTlE SEDIS .. 

Genus STROBILITES Lindley and Hutton. 

STJiOBILITES ANCEPS sp. nov. 

Plate III, figure 5. 

Description.-Cone a prolate spheroid in shape, about 3 to 4 centimeters in length by 2.4 

centin1eters in diameter;,made up of spirally arranged, rather thick, flat, obovate scales. The 

condition of preservation of these cones, of which two were collected, is such that their generic 

or even tribal affinity can not be determined; hence they are referred to the comprehensive 

fonn genus Strobilites. They are not of the Sequoia or Widdringtonia type and resemble 

certain cones of the. Pinus more than they do any of the other coniferous genera represented by 

foliage in the South Carolina Cretaceous. They are similar to the much more elongated cones 

fron1 the Lower Cretaceous of the Atlantic Coastal Plain, which have been referred. to the form 

genus Abietites, and are not at all like the assorted conelike re:rp.ains described by Hollick and 

Jeffrey fr01n the Raritan formation as forms of Strobilites. As regards size the South Carolina 

cones are comparable to Strobilites inq_uirendus Hollick from the l\1agothy formation of New 

Jersey, but the preservation of the latter is so poor that the specimens are almost valueless. 

A comparison· which is entitled to some weight may be made with the cones described by 

Ettingshausen fron1 the Upper Cretaceous of Saxony and identified_ as Ounninghamites sternbergii.1 Whatever may be the true botanic affinity of these fossils, they are almost certainly 

cogeneric with those from South Carolina 'vith which they are in close agreement. . 

Occurrence.-:-Black Creek formation, right bank of Black Creek, 1 t miles east of Darlington, 

Darlington County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson.) · · 

Oollections.-U. S. N ationall\1useum. ' 

Genus HETEROLEPIS gen. nov. 

IlETEROLEPIS CRETACEUS sp. nov .. 

Plate III, figure 3. 

Description.-Cone scale of large size, about 3 centimeters in lengtl~, with a stout, w~ody 

axis 5 nlliliineters wide at the base and 1.3 centimeters wide where it expands to form a bosslike, 

slightly umbilicate tip \vhich is evenly rounded, forming a right angle with the axis; in outline 

ahnost circular, with a slightly irregt1iar striated margin, 1.7 centimeters in di~;tmeter. 

' This species is based upon the single s1;ecimen figured, which is so characte~istic that it is 

likely to be a valuable stratigraphic fossil, although its botanic affinity can not be determined. 

It may be cycadaceous or it may belong to a large-coned species comparable with the remains 

com:t;nonly referred to Sequoia or Geinitzia. · · 

Occurrence.-l\fiddenclorf arkose member of Black Creek forn1ation, Rocky Point, Sumter 

County. (Collected by L. C. Glenn.) 

Oollections.-V. S. N atiorial"l\tluseun1. 

Class ANGIOSPERIWE. 

Subclass MONOCOTYLEDONlE. 

Order N AIADALE S. 

~amily N AIADACElE. 

Genus POTAMOGETON Linne. 

PoTAMOGETON l\HDDEND<?RFENSIS sp. nov.· 

Plate IV, fig tire 6. 

Description.-Leaves of small s1ze, -entire, obovate .lanceolate or spatulate in outline, about 

4 centimeters in length by lA5 centimeters in ·greatest width, which is in the. apical. half of the 

leaf. Petiole short and broad. Venation fine, immersed, aerodrome. · 

0 -· 

1 Ettingshausen, C. von, Die Kreideflora von Niederschoena in Sachsen, 1867, p. 12, PC I, figs. 4-6. 
28 U:PPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

This species is based upon the single specimen figured and its counterpart, which may be 

interpreted as the remains of two leave~ in juxtaposition or of a single leaf in which the upper 

and lower cuticle has parted company. The latter appears to be the most reasonable explanation. The species was evidently aquatic, and it is very close to certain modern species in this 

genus. It also suggests the genus Pistia, ofwhich a typical species is common in the Black 

Creek formation of North Carolina. , It is quite distinct from the latter, however, and seems. 

to be an immersed leaf of a Potamogeton in the sum of its characters. · 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose n1ember of Black Creek formation, near :Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County. (Collected by E. vV .. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National :Museum. 

Order POALES. 

Family POACElE. 

Genus ARUNDO Linne. 

ARuNDO GH<ENLANDICA Heer ( ~). 

Plate IV, figure 7. 

Arundo grmnlandica Heer, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 3, Abth. 2, 1874, p. 104, Pl. XXVIII, figs. 8-11. 

Arundo grmnlandica Heer, idem, vol. G, Abth. 2, 1882, p. 57, Pl. XVII, fig. 10. 

Arundo grmnlandica _Heer, idem, vol. 7, 1883, p. 18, Pl. LIV, figs. 1-3. 

Description.-Fragments of long, linear, pointed leaves, about 2.5 centimeters in greatest 

width. Primaries numerous, parallel, fine, about 2.5 millimeters apart, separated by numerous 

very fine parallel secondaries; the central primary apparently somewhat enlarged to form a 

midrib. 

In the Greenland material this species included culms as well as leaf fragments. The 

South Carolina material is queried because it differs from the type in having a midrib, which is 

not, however, :so prominent a feature as the drawings· indicate, having been accentuated by the 

method of preservation, replacement by iron oxide. It may be compared with various described 

fragn1ents of monocotyledonous leaves referred to this genus and to Phragmites and a variety 

of other genera of the Poales. There is the furthe~ possibility tha;t these remains n1ay represent 

fragments of the rays of some palm. They are of slight botanic int~rest but are present in 

well-marked specimens at the Rocky Point locality and n1ay be found to possess considerable 

stratigraphic value. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek fonnation, Rocky Point, Sumter· 

County. (Collected by L. C. Glenn.) . 

Oollections.-L. S. N ationa1 Museun1. 

Genus PHRAGMITE S Trinius. 

PHRAGMITES PRATTII Berry. 

Phragmites sp. Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 34, 1907, p. 190, Pl. XI, fig. 5. 

Phragmites prattii Berry, idem, vol. 37, 1910, p. 191. 

Description.-Parallel-veined, monocotyledonous leaf fragments, indicating grasslike leaves. 

1 centimeter or more in width, having about ten equal parallel veins and a few fine transverse 

veinlets. Leaf substance thin. 

This species is strictly comparable with a large number of fossils that have been referred 

to Phragmites, which must be regarded as purely a form genus for the reception of fragments 

of the leaves of grasses or sedges. The present species, which has been detected at a number 

of localities ill the Black Creek formation of North Carolina, has been collected only at the 

Rocky Pointlocality in South Carolina, wh~re sm~ll fragments are common. It occurs also in 

the basal beds of the ·Eutaw formation along Chattahoochee River. . 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, Rocky Point, SumterCounty. (Collected by L. F. Ward and L. C. Glenn.) 

· Oollections.-U. SJ National Museum. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 

Family CYPERACElE. 

Genus CAREX Linne. 

CAREX CLARKII Berry. 

Carex clarkii Berry, Am. ·Naturalist, vol. 39, 1905, p. 347, fig. 1. 

Carex clarkii Berry, Ann. Rept. State Geologist New Jersey for 1905, 1906, pp. 138-141. · 

Carex clarkii Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 33, 1906, p. 169. 

Carex clarkii Berry, Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ., new ser., 1907, No. 7, p. 81. 

29 

Description.-Leaf fragments, 'the largest being 6 centimeters in length, varying in width 

from 1.5 1nillimeters to 4 1nillimeters, averaging betwe~n 2 millimeters and 3 n1illimeters, slightly 

keeled, becon1ing thicker and narrower proxin1ad. Midrib moderately prominent. Lateral veins, 

which are parallel with it, very fine and scarcely discernible except in the larger' specimens. 

In conlmon with other fossil rmnain~ of grasses and sedges this ~pecies has no botanic 

value except a~ an indication of the presence of plants of these families. It has, however, like 

so many fossils of vague botanic affinities, considerable stratigraphic value, as it is found to 

characterize the :Magothy formation at a large number of outcrops from New Jersey to Maryland. The South Carolina remains are not abundant and are confined to the Rocky Point 

locality. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose nle.mber of Black Creek formation, Rocky Point, Sumter 

County. (Collected by L .. C. Glenn.) ' · 

Oollections.-U. S. National :Musemn. 

Order ,ARECALE S. 

Family PALMlE. 

Genus SABALITE S Sa porta. 

SABALITES CAROLINENSIS sp. nov. 

Plates V and VI. 

Description.-A fan palm with very large flabellate leaves. Rays numerous, keeled 

proxnnad, becomn1g nearly flat distad,· ultimate~y splittn1g 1nore or less. Petiole not preserved n1 any of the collected material, which includes abundant but fragmentary specimens. 

Prnnaries stout and prominent, as· n1uch as 1.2 ~centimeters apart in the largest specimen. 

Secondaries ·usually seven in number between each pair of primaries, with which they are 

approximately parallel; thin, connected by numerous ill-defined cross veinlets. 

This was evidently a very large Sabal-like leaf, of which the largest collected specimens 

are those figured. All the material comes from the single locality near Langley, though very 

s1nall fragn1~nts of what appears to belong to a palm have been detected at several otb.er localities n1 the South Carolina Cretaceous. These may represent this species, but they are too 

unrepresentative to be even tentatively identified with it .. 

The enormous number of existing palrris, which includes co~siderably mo1:e than one 

thousand species, is about equally divided between the oriental and occidental tropics, with 

many n1onotypic genera, showing well the marked effects of geographic distribution and isolation on the formation of species. There are no outlying forms, the highest northern latitude 

reached being about 43° in Europe and the highest southern latitude about 45° in New Zealand. 

Lesquereux writing in 1878 1 records fossil palms in 52° north latitude in both America 

and Europe. Sn1ce then remains have been described from as far north. as 80° (Grinnell Land, 

Spitzbergen),-and two fine species are recorded from the earlier Tertiary of Greenland (latitude 

70°). A variety of Paleozoic reman1s has been referred to the Palmre, these reman1s ranging 

in their botanic affinities .frOin Stigmaria trunks to Cordaitean leaves and fruits. The nature 

of t{le latter was first rightly conjectured by Brongniart in 1828. With the marvelous increase, 

durn1g the last 25 years, in knowledge of the vegetation of the Paleozoic, it can now be positively affu·n1ed that palms are unknown fron1 pre-Mesozoic formations. 

- 1 'l'he Tertiary flora, 1878, p. 109. 
30 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH ·cAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

I 

Stenzel, who has recently monographed 1 th_e fossil palm wood of the world, finds the 

oldest known wood to come from the Turonian of France (one,species), the succeeding Senonian 

terrane yielding six species. At -the _beginning of the Tertiary period the ~pecies became 

numerous. 

_Undoubted remains of palm leaves occur somewhat earlier, the middle part of the 

Cretaceous, in the light of present knowledge, marking the introduction of the type. The 

Cen9manian "of Europe has furnished undoubted palm leaves (upper Cenomanian of Tiefenfurth 

in Silesia), and Stur 2 has described fruit from that horizon in B.ohemia. Fliche has described 

three species in two genera from a similar horizon in France. 3 The Senonian deposits show 

species·in a variety of genera. It is in the Tertiary, however, that palms become greatly devel~ 

oped and widespread, and the. numerous species found on evidence afforded by stems, leaves, 

petioles, fruits, and even flowers are refera~le to a large number of genera (Geonon1a, l\1anicaria, 

Calamopsis, Thrinax, Phcenix, Nipa, Chan1rerops, Oreodoxites, Sabal, Iriartea, Latanites, and 

the like). In this country the earliest known .remains are those sn1all fragments of striated 

leaves, of a rather doubtful nature, which Lesquereux described 4 as Flabellaria minima from 

the Dakota sandstone.5 ' 

The Montana group of Senonian age has furnished Knowlton 6 with the undoubted remains 

of a large palmetto.,.like form (Sabalites)/ and the Laramie formation furnishes a.number of 

species, some of which, represented by both leaves and fruit, continue into the Eocene. 

The present species may be compared with Sabalites magothiensis Berry,8 which is• found 

in the Magothy formation. from Raritan Bay in New Jersey to Severn Rive:r in l\1aryland .. The 

two species are entirely distinct, however, and the ·south Carolina form is much better characterized and represented by more complete material. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Langley, Aiken 

County. (Collected by Earle Sloan, E. W. Berry, and L. W. Stephenson.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum .. 

Subclass DICOTYLEDONlE. 

Order JUGLANDALES. 

Family JUGLANDACElE. 

Genus JUGLANS Linne. 

JuGLANS ARCTICA Heer. 

Plate VIII, figures 1 and 2. 

Juglansarctica Heer, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 6, Abth. 2, 1882, p. 71, Pis. XL, fig. 2; XLI, fig. 4c; XLIJ, figs. 1-3, 

and XLIII, fig. 3. 

Juglans arctica Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: .Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 68, Pis. XIX, 

fig. 3, and XXXIX, fig. 5. 

Juglans arctica Newberry, The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p. 62, Pl. XX, fig. 2. 

Juglans arctica Hollick, Annals New York Acad. Sci., vol. 11, 1898, p. 58, Pl. III, fig. 7. 

Ficus (ltavina Hollick, Trans. New York, Acad. Sci., vol. 11, 1902, p. 103, Pl. IV, fig. 5. 

Juglans arctica Berry, Ann. Rept. State Geologist New Jersey for 1905, 1906, p. 139, Pl. XXI, fig. l. 

Juglans arctica Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 33, 1Q06, p. 170. 

Juglans arctica Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 

50, 1907, p. 54, Pl. I~, figs. 6-8. 

Description.-The following is the description of Heer, written in 1882: I 

I. Nuce ovali, 34 mm. longa, 17 mm. lata; foliis magnis, foliolis ovalibus, basi inrequilateralibus, integerrimis, 

nervo medio valido, nervis secundariis angulo semirecto egredientibus, curvatis. 

1 Beitr. Pal. v. Geol. Oesterr.-Ungarn., 1904, pp. 1-182, Pis. I-XXII. 

2 Verhandl. K.-k. Geol. Reichsanstalt Wien, 1873. 

a Etudes sur I a flore fossile de 1' Argonne, 1896. 

• Cretaceous flora: 1874, p. 56, ~1. XXX, fig. 6. 

5 It is now definitely decided that Hollick's supposed palm, Serenopsis, from the Cretacecus of Long Island, is a Nelumbo. 

e Bull. U.S. Geol. Survey No. 163, 1900, p. 32. 

7 Dawson has also described a Saba! from the Upper Cretaceous at Nanaimo. 

s Torreya, vol. 5, 1905, p. ·32. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 31 

The leaves of this species vary considerably in size and outline, as might be expected in 

this genus. Heer's type material is somewhat imperfect arid some of it is difficult to distinguish 

from some of the forms referred to the same author's Juglans crassipes, althot1gh the latter is 

on the whole a n1uch larger less oblong form with a narrower base. Juglans arctica is oblongovate in outline; with an obtusely pointed apex and a rounded, generally inequilateral base. 

The petiole and midrib are stout. Secondaries numerous, well marked, parallel, camptodrome. 

Size varies in complete specimens fro~ 9 to 15 centimeters in length and from 3 to 6 .centimeters 

in width. . · ' 

A riut and catkins are associated With the leaves at the type locality in the Atane beds of 

Greenland, which confirm their reference .to this genus. A single leaf is recorded from the 

Raritan formation of New Jersey, and the species also occurs in beds of this age, on Staten Island. 

With these exceptions the specie~ is confined to later. horizons, occurring in the Magothy formt;ttion on Marthas Vineyard, Block Island, and in New Jersey, in the. Black Creek formation of 

North Carolina, and in the Middendorf arkose member of the Black Creek formation of South 

Carolina. In. the West this species occurs in the Dakota sandstone of Kansas. Its occurrence 

in South Carolina is based on the basal halves of characteristic inequilateral leaves of rather 

s1nall size. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County, Rocky Point, Sumter County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.:_V. S. National Museum. 

Order MYRICALE S. 

Family. MYRICACEAE. 

Genus MYRICA De Candolle. 

MYRICA BRITTONIANA Berry. 

, Plate VII, figures 17 and 18. 

Myrica heerii Berry, Am. Naturalist, vol. 37, 1903, p. 682,·figs. 7, 8 (non Boulay). 

Myrica brittoniana Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 32, 19~5, p. 46. · 

Description . .:_Leaves elongate-lanceolate in outline~ 13 to 14 centimeters long by 2.7 

centhneters in greatest width, .'Yh.ich is in the middle part of the leaf. Apex elongated,.narrowed, 

bluntly pointed. Base attenu~ted. Margin entire, or entire below and undulate or distantly 

and obtusely toothed. above. T~xture coriaceous. Petiole and midrib fairly stout. Secondaries 

thin, in1mersed, generally obsolete, ~ranching from the midrib at rather large angles, comparatively straight, camptodrom~. · . 

This striking species. was described by ·the writer in 1903 from the Magothy formation of 

New Jersey, to which it has been heretofore confined. Fragmentary leaves are, however, 

present in the deposits along Black <;Jreek in South Carolina. The form is somewhat similar 

to species of the D8!kota sandstone Myrica aspera Lesquer.eux. 1 

Occurrence.-Black 'Creek formation, right bank of Black Creek, 2 miles below Williamson's 

bridge, Florence County, (Collected by L.' W. Stephenson.) 

Oollections.--V. S. National M:useum. 

. ' 

MYRICA ELEGANS Berry. 

Plate IX, figure· 4. 

Myrica eleyans Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 34, 1907, p. 191, Pl. XI, figs. 1-4, 6. 

Description.-Leaves ovate-lanceolate in outline, variable in size, ranging from 3.2 to 9.5 

centimeters in ·length by 1.5 to 3 centimeters in greatest width, which is midway .between the 

apex and the base. Like the living species of :Myrica the margin is variable, ranging from forms 

in which it is rather angularly crenate with an. approach to serrate in some of the teeth, through 

forms in which the crenations become more and more rounded, until the extreme ·of variation 

1 Lesquereux, Leo, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, p. 66, 1892, Pl. II, fig. 11. 
32 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

in this direction shows relatively broad leaves with deeply scalloped subcrenate margins. 

Midrib straight and fairly stout. Secondaries numerous, 5 to 17 pairs, relatively stout and 

prominent on the lower surface of the leaf, subopposite or alternate, equidistant and parallel, 

branching from the midrib at angles of more than 45°, approaching 90° in some specimens. 

They are nearly straight and craspedodrome, running to the marginalteeth. Tertiaries usually 

not seen because of the coarse matrix. Some transverse veinlets are discernible, as well as 

curved branches from the distal part of the secondaries, which run to the subordinate teeth of 

the marginal scallops when these are developed. Apex pointed. Base. cuneate and generally 

with an entire margin. Texture subcoriaceous. 

Thjs species is markedly distinct from any other Cretaceous Myrica. It is very abundant 

in the Bla.ck Creek formation of the upper Cape Fear River in North Carolina, but has only 

been found at Darlington in the South Carolina area, and there in a much macerated condition. 

Although the resemblance is not close, Myrica elegans is more like Myrica prrecox, described 

by Heer from the Patoot beds of Greenland, than it is like any other species with which it has 

been compared. The latter is a smaller leaf with a rounded apex, and the wide marginal 

crenations lack the crenulations of the Carolina· species. 

Occurrence.-Black Creek formation, near Darlington, Darlington County. (Collected by 

L. W. Stephenson.) · 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museu1n. 

Order SALICALES. 

Family SALICACElE. 

Genus SALIX Linne. 

SALIX l<'LEXUOSA New berry. 

Plate,s VII, figures 14-16, and XI, figure 1. 

Salixjlexuosa Newberry, Noteson the later extinct floras of North America: Ann. Lye. Nat. Hist. New York, vol. 9, 

1868, p. 21. 

Salixflexuosa Newberry, Illustrations of Cretaceous and Tertiary plants, 1878, Pl. I, fig. 4. 

Salix protea>jolia linearijolia Lesquereux, The flora of the Dak~ta group: Mon. U. S.'Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 49, 

Pl. LXIV, figs. 1-3. 

Salix protemjoliajlexuosa Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 50, Pl. 

LXIV, figs. 4, 5. . 

Salix protemjoliajlexuosa Hollick, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 21, 1894, p. 50, Pl. CLXXIV, fig. 5. 

Salix protemjoliajlexuosa Hollick, Annals New York Acad. Sci., vol. 11, 1898, p. 59, Pl. IV, fig. 5a. 

Salixjlexuosa Berry, Ann. Rept. State Geologist, New Jersey, for 1905, 1906, p. 145. 

Salixjlexuosa Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, 1906, vol. 33, p. 171. 

Salix protemjoliaflexuosa Berry, Bull. New York Bot. Garden, vol. 3, 1903, p. 67, Pl. XLVIII, fig. 12, Pl. LII, fig. 2. 

Salix protemjolia linearijolia Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U. S. Geol. 

Survey, vol. 50, 1907, p. 52, Pl. VIII, fig. 12. • 

Salix protemjolia .flexuosa Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U. S. Geol. 

Survey, vol. 50, 1907, p. 51, Pis. VIII, figs. 5, 6a, XXXVII, fig. 8b. 

Description.-Leaves narrow, linear-lanceolate in outline, equally pointed at both ends, 

short petioled, ranging from 5 to 10 centimeters in length and from 8 to 13 millimeters in greatest 

width. Margin entire. Midrib stout below, taper.i.~g above, commonly somewhat flexuous. 

Secondaries more or less remote, about ten alternate pairs, branching from the midrib at angles 

varying .from 35° to 45°, camptodrome, of fine caliber, in many specimens often obsolete. 

This species was described by Newberry from the Dakota sandstone in 1868. Lesquereux 

subsequently made it one of the varieties of his Salix proterefolia, although it is obviously 

entitled to independent specific rank. It is of rare occurre~ce in the Raritan formation, where 

it first appears in the uppermost beds at South Amboy, N. J., and is preeminently a species 

which_ characterizes the Magothy and homotaxial horizons to the southward. It is recorded 

in beds of Magothy age from Marthas Vineyard to the Potomac .. It occurs _in the Black Creek 

formation of North Carolina and at a large number of localities in the Tuscaloosa formation in 

the western part of Alabama. 

In South Carolina it has been found in considerable abundance in the Middendorf arkose 

member of the Black Creek formation entirely across the State, and fragments which have been 
·UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROL::_rNA.1.·~ ·-··· .... '.:, 33 

doubtfully identified as this ·species are present well toward the top of the Cretaeeous on 

Congaree River. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County;· near Langley, Aiken County; right bank of Congaree River,. about 25 

miles below Columbia, Lexington County. (Collected by E. W. Berry, L. W. Stephenson; 

B. L. Miller, and M. W. Twitchell.) 

Oollections.-V. S. National Museum. 

SALIX LESQUEREU~n Berry. 

· Plate VII, figures ll-13. 

Salix proterefolia Lesquereux, Am. Jour. Sci., 2d ser., vol. 46,.1868, p. 94 (non Forbes). 

Salix proterefolia Lesquereux, The Cretaceou.s flora, 1874, p. 60, Pl. V, figs: 1-4. 

Salix proterefolia Lesquereux, in Cook and Smock, Report on the clay deposits of Woodbridge, South Amboy~ and-

. other places in New Jersey, 1878, p. 29. 

Salix proterefolia Lesquereux, The Cretaceous and Tertiary floras, 1883, p. 42, Pls. I, figs. 14-16, and XVI, fig. 3. 

Salix proterefolia Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 1i, 1892, p. 49. 

Salix proterefolia longifolia Lesquereux, idem, 1892, p. 50, Pl. LXIV, fig. 9. 

· Salix proterefolia longifolia Bartsch, Bull. Lab. Nat. Hist., Univ. Iowa, vol. 3, 1896. 

Proteoides daphnogenoides Newberry, The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p. 72 (pars),. 

Pl. XXXII, fig. 11. 

Dewalquea groenlandica Newberry, idem, p. 129 (pars), Pl. XLI, fig. 12. 

Salix proterefolia Newberry, idem, p. 66, Pl. XVIII, figs. 3, 4. 

Salix proterefolia Kurtz, Revista Mus. La Plata, 1902, vol. 10, p. 51. 

Salix proterefolia Berry, Ann. Rept: State Geologist, New Jersey, for 1905, 1906, p. 139. 

Salix proterefolia Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 33, 1906, p. 171, Pl. VII, fig. 2. 

Salix proterefolia Berry, idem, vol. 36, 1909, p. 252. 

Description.-Lea'ves ovate-lance'olate in outline, somewhat more acuminate above than 

below, variablQ in size, ranging from 6 to 12 centimeters in length and from 1.1 to 2.2 centiIneters ·in greatest width, which is usually slightly below the middle. Petiole stout, much 

longer than in ·salix flexuosa,. the largest being 1.2 centimeters long. Midrib stout below, 

tapering above. Secondaries numerous, sometimes as ~any as _twenty pairs; they branch from 

the midrib at angles of about 45° and are parallel and camptodrome. · 

This is an exceedingly variable species, as might be expected in a Salix, and Lesquereux 

established several varieties, of which at least one, linearifolia, is referable to Salix flexuosa 

Newberry. Some of Lesquereux's forms are distinguishable with difficulty· from the latter, as 

is well shown by examination of the leaves which he figures on Plate I of his "Cretaceous and 

Tertiary floras." These leaves are, however, larger and somewhat more :robust, of .a thicker 

texture, and broadest near the base, from which they taper upward to an exceedingly acuminate 

tip. In general, Salix lesquereuxii is a relatively much broader, more ovate form with more 

numerous and easily seen secondaries and a longer petiole. 

This species is an exceedingly abundant Cretaceous type in both the East and the West.: 

In the Atlantic Coastal Plain it ranges from the base of the Raritan formatio:q to the top of the 

Tuscaloosa formation and is abundant in the Magothy, Black Creek, and Tuscaloosa formations.· 

In the West it is common in the Dakota sandstone. It is one of the forms recorded by Kurtz 

from the Upper Cretaceous of Argentina, indicating, if the identification is correct, a very considerable migration during the early Upper Cretaceous. 

It is abundant in South Carolina in both the Middendorf member and other deposits of 

the Black Creek formation. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Bl~ck Creek formation, near Middendorf, Chesterfield County, near Langley and Miles Hall, Aike~ County; Rocky Point, Sumter· County; 

right bank of Congaree River, about 25 miles below Columbia, Lexington County. Other· 

deposits of theBlack Creek formation near Darlington, Darlington County; '(Collected by E. W. 

Berry, L. W. Stephenson; B. L. Miller, M. w~ Twitchell, and Earle Sloan.) .. - . 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

8069°-14-3 
34 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA . AND GEORGIA. 

SALIX PSEUDOHA YEI Berry. 

Plate X, figure 8. 

Sa1:ix sp. Newberry, The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p. 68, Pl. XLII, figs. 6-8. 

Salix pseudoliayei Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, 1909, vol. 36, p. 251. . ' 

Description.-Leaves small, relatively short and broad, ovate-lanceolate, uniformly about: 

3 centimeters in length by 1.1 to 1.4 centimeters in greatest width, which is about halfway 

between the apex and base or lower apex acuminat~. Base rounded. Margin entire. Petiole 

short. Midrib slender and slightly curved. Secondaries fine, obscured in some specim~ns, five 

or six pairs, alternate, camptodrome~ branching from the midrib at an angle of about 45 ° and 

curving upward. 

This species is not ui:H::ommon in the Raritan formation ·of. New Jersey, although Prof.: 

Newberry fails to mention the exact localities from ·which he collected it. Later material.has. 

come from the lower part of the Raritan at Milltown, N. J. It has been compared with the 

Dakota .sandstone species,, Salix hayei Lesquereux, and with the Arctic Tertiary Salix rrearui 

· Heer, both of which it resembles in general appearance. The leaf from the Dakota sand~tone~ 

however, is coriaceous, with a coarse venation, blunt apex, and more narrow pointed base, and 

is seen to. be quit~ different from t.he eastern species when careful comparisons are made. 

. The single specimen figured is all that represents this species in the South Carolina 

Cretaceous. It is in every respect identical with the type material from New Jersey. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Bla:ck Creek formation, near Middendorf,· 

Chesterfield County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson and E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

SALIX SLOANI ·sp. nov. 

Plate VIII, figures 10-12. 

Description.-Leaves lanceolate in outline, large and elongated, 13 centimeters or more in 

length.by i.6 to 3 centimeters in greatest width, which is about halfway between the apex and· 

the ·base, the leaf tapering gradually and equally distad and proximad to the narrowly acute 

and extended apex and base~ The margin is entire for a short distance below, above which it 

is beset with short, triangular, generally obtusely pointed, somewhat aquiline teeth,· separated 

by rounded sinuses. Midrib stout. Secondaries very numerous, thin, approximately parallel,· 

branching from the midrib at wide angles, 60° to 70°, at intervals of 2 to 3 .millimeters, extending 

outward with only a slight upward curve to a point near the\ margin and then curving upward 

and extending for a greater or less distance almost parallel with ·the latter, giving off short 

tertiary b:ranches to the marginal teeth. Tertiaries fine, exceedingly numerous, transverse, 

parallel at nearly right angles to the midrib. 

This very striking and exceedingly distinct and characteristic species is not rare at the 

locality near Langley, though few complete leaves are found. It has not been detected elsewhere 

in the. Atlantic Coastal Plain. It is much like certain modern species of Grevillea and othe:.;. 

antipodean ·members of the family Proteacere, but may be compared with a number of. 

existing species of Salix, .as, for example, Salixjluviatilis Nuttall. It is believed to be referable 

with certainty to this genus and is one of the most ancient forms known which show decisive 

characters identical with those of modern willow leaves. The most nearly related fossil species, 

one perfectly distinct, however, is Salix eutawensis Berry/ which has been recorded from the 

::6lack Creek formation in North Carolina and from the Eutaw forma~ion in western Georgia. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Langley and 

Miles Hall, Aiken County.· (Collected by L. W. Stephenson, E. W. Berry, and Earle Sloan.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National ¥useum. · 

1 Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 37, 1910, p. 193, Pl. XXII. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 35 

Order FAGALES. 

Family FAG ACE.lE. 

Genus QUERCUS Linne. 

QuERcus SUMTERENsrs sp. nov. 

Plate X, :figures 9 and 10. 

I 

Description.-Leaves large, linear, acuminate, coriaceous, entire, With a broadly cuner.te 

base. Length about 15 to 16 centimeters. Greatest width 3 centi,meters. Petiole short and 

stout, midrib stout. Secondaries thin, branching from the midrib at angles of 45 ° or more, 

taking a rather straight course almost to the margin and then turning sharply upward. Tertiaries obsolete, as ~re also the secondaries in some specimens. 

Tins species is clearly referable to the willow .or laurel oaks and is markedly distinct· from 

any species llitherto described, although· it resembles in general outline some of the lanceolate· 

Cretaceous species of Ficus. It is not uncommon at the Rocky Point locality, to which it is. 

thus far confined. It is not.' unlike some of the leaves of the modern Quercus rudkini, a hybrid 

of Quercus maryZandica and phellos. · · 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, Rocky Point, Sumter 

County. (Collected by L. F. Ward and L. C. Glenn.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

QUERCUS PSEUDOWESTFALICA' sp. nov. 

Plate IX, figure 5. 

Description.-Lea'ves of medium size, relatively small for this genus, ovate in general 

outline, with an acuminate apex and a cuneate base. Texture coriaceous. Length about 9.5 

centimeters. Greatest width about 4 centimeters near the middle of the leaf. Margin -with 

large serrate teeth separated by broadly rounded sinuses. Midrib stout. Secondaries thin,. 

approximately parallel, about seven subopposite ·pairs, branching from the midrib at angles. 

of about 45°," slightly curved, craspedodrome, ending in the marginal teeth, of which there is. 

one to each secondary. Petiole not preserved. 

This speci~s evidently belongs to the group of the chestnut oaks, not differing materially· 

from certain leaves which may be collected frorri the existing Quercu~ michauxii,· prinus, or· 

prinoides of . eastern North America. Among fossil species it is very similar to some of the· 

varieties of Quercus westjalica figured by Hosius and von der Marek 1 from the Senonian of 

Westphalia, and it is especially close to one of the Boliemian leaves which Velenovsky 2 refers 

to this species. I-Ieer 3 records tlus ·same species from the Atane beds of Greenland, but his. 

specimens are too fragmentary for any great certainty of identification. Another leaf which. 

is very similar is one from Kieslingswalde in. Silesia, which Velenovsky identifies with his. 

Quercus pseudodrymeja, 4 although it is more probably referable to Quercus westjalica. 5 NQ· 

Atlantic Coastal Plain species is closely similar to Quercus pseudowestjalica, although Quercus 

eoprinoides Berry 6 from the Magothy formation in New Jersey is remotely related to it, as iS.. 

also Quercus r(Lritanensis Berry 7 from the Raritan formation of that State~ , 

A form which is closely related to the Carolina species, however, .is Quercus dakotensis 

Lesquereux.8 It :ls of about the same size and outline, but differs in having less prominent. 

teeth and in t.he details of its tertiary venation. · 

1 Palmontographica, vol. 26,1880, p. 161, Pis. XXIX, figs. 52-63; XXX, figs. 64-75. 

2 Velcnovsky, J., Die Flora dcr bohmischcn Kreidcformation, pt. 2, 1883, p. 17, Pl. II, fig. 23. 

a Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 6, Abth. 2,1882, p. 67, Pl. XV, figs. 5-7. 

• Op .. cit., figs. 21, 22. 

~ 6p. cit., pt. ·4, 1885, p. 13, Pl. VII, fig. 10. 

o Berry, ;E. W., Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 31,1904, p. 74, PJ..n;, fig.ll. 

7 Idem, vol. 36, 1909, p. 249. · · 

s Lesquereux, Leo, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U. ·s. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 56, Pl. VII, fig. 4. 
36 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA • 

. Quercus pseudowestjalica has been found in only. the Middendorf member of the Black 

Creek formation of South Carolina. It has also been doubtfully determined from the Black 

Creek formation at Court House Bluff in North Carolina. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County; Rocky Point, Sumter County, and Miles Mill, Aiken County. (Collected 

by E. W. Berry, L. W. Stephenson, and Earle Sloan.) 

,· 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Order URTICALE S. 

Family ULMACElE. 

Genus MOMISIA F. G. Dietric:Q.. 

MOMISIA CAROLINENSIS sp. nov. 

Plate XII, figure 5. 

·: Description.-Leaves entire below, more or less dentately toothed apically, ovate in outline, 

_6:or 7 ·centimeters in length by 2.5 centimeters in greatest width .. Apex narrowed and pointed. 

Base cuneate, not quite equilateral, finally decurrent on the. stout petiole, which is short, 6 or· 7 

·millimeters· in length. , ·Midrib stout below, becoming thin distad. Basal secondaries, constituting the lateral primaries, subopposite, branching from a point at or near the base of the 

midrib at acute angles, long, nearly straight, ascending, camptodrome. .Upper secondaries. 

remote, thin, camptodrome. 

This species of a quasi triple.,.veined l,eaf seems allied to the existing species of Momisia, of 

which no fossil fo;rms are known except a single species from the Eocene of Georgia described 

recently by the writer. Leaves of this character are commonly referred to the· genus Cinnamoll1Ujll.:6.r .·at leas_t to the ·Lauracere, but the botanical affinity of this form seems 'to be with 

certai:g., u.-opi9al Ulmacere. · The existing species of Momisia. number a score or more forms of 

the Ani(:):rriC'ai;r{ tropics. They are dosely related to Celtis and are even made a subgenus of Celtis 

_by E1;1gler.: .·-These leaves differ from the described ·species of Cinnamomum and its allies in 

,their toothed: margins and in· the character of their tertiary venation, and may be considered 

.the Cr~tac~ous r~present~tive of the Claiborne species of Momisia. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose. member of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf, 

Chester:6cld Cqubty .. : (Collected by L. W. Stephenson and E:W. Berry.) 

'.• Oollections.-~U. S. National Museum. · 

Family ARTOCARPACElE. 

Genus FICUS Linne. 

Frcus ATAVINA Heer. 

Plate X, :figure 11. 

Fic:us protogrea Heer, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 3, Abth. 2, 1874, p. 108, Pls. XXIX, :fig. 2b, and XXX, figs. 1-8.- (von 

Ettinsghausen.) 

. Fic:us pr.otogrea Schenk, Palreontographica,.vol. 23, 1875, p. 169, Pl. XXIX, fig. 12. 

·Fic:us atavina Heer, Flora fossilis ar.ctica, vol. 6, Abth. 2, 1882, p. 69, Pis. XI1 figs. 5b, 7b, 8b; XVII, fig. 8b; XIX, 

. . :fig. lb; and XX, figs. 1, 2. . 

Fic:us 'atavina Heer, idem, vol. 7, 1883, p. 26. 

· -Fic:Us.atavina? Lesq'ue~eux, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., .vol. 10, 1887, p. 40. 

Ficus protogrea Hollick, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 21, 1894, p. 51, Pl. CLXXV, fig. 4. 

Fic:us atavina Berrey; BulL Torrey Bot. Club, voL 31, 1904, p. 75, Pis. I, figs. 8, 9, and III, fig. 6. 

Fic:us atavina Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 

50, 1907, p. 58, Pl. X, :figs~ .. 5, 6 (not fig. 4·, w~ich is refe~ab~~ to Juglans elongata). 

Description.-Leaves entire, broadly oblong-lanceolate in outline, "large in size, the South 

Carolip.a leaves measuring about 20 c·entimeters in length by 3.5 centimeters in greatest width, 

which is abo~t.half'f,ay b<3~w.e~:o. .the_ apex a~d. the base. . !\pex and base equally acute. Midrib 
UPPER CRETA0EOUS FLORA-OF SOUTH CAROLINA.· 37 

very stout. · Texture coriaceous. ·Secondaries numerous, parallel, branching from the midrib 

at angles of more than 45 °, camptodrome. Tertiaries rarely seen, forming small four or five 

sided areoles. 

This large fig leaf stands about midway between Ficus krausiana and Ficus crassipes, and 

may possibly represent the somewhat narrower, more elongated leaves of the former species. 

It was described origin_ally from Greenland as Ficus protogcea Jieer, a preoccupied name, and 

was subsequently renamed by its describer .. It has been recorded by Hollick from Marthas 

Vineyard and Long Island, from what are apparently Magothy deposits, and by the writer frorri 

the ~1agothy formation of New Jersey. Lesquereux recorded it from the far West (Utah),but 

the writer has not seen his material and queries the citation, for the species appears to be confined in this hemisph~re, at least, to eastern North America. The range· was possibly extended· 

to Europe, because Schenk identifies it in the Gosau beds of the northern Tyrol. It has not 

heretofore been ·discovered in Alabama or in deposits of the southern Atlantic Coastal Plain. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, Rocky Point, Sumter 

.County; near Middendorf, Chesterfield County. (Collected by L. F. Ward, L. C. Glenn, L. W. 

Stephenson, and E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.~V. S. National Museum. 

Frcus CELTIFOLrus sp. nov 

Plate XII, figure 4. 

Description.-Leaves small,, entire, elliptical-ovate in outline with an obtusely pointed apex 

·and a broadly rounde~ "J?ase. Petiole -short, about 0.6. centimeter in length, relatively stout.: 

Midrib stout. Sec~ndaries stout, remote, three or four pairs, the lower pair opposite, diverting_ 

from the midrib just below its base and functioning as lateral primaries, the balance alter_nate. 

All branch from the midrib at angles of about 45° and are camptodrome some distance from 

~he margin. Tertiaries distinct, the inner transverse, the p~ripheral camptodrome in uniform: 

broad arches. ' 

· This species, which is obviously unlike any previously described. Ficus, is the sole representative of the palmately veined figs foun~ in South Carolina, although the somewhat similar 

.species· Ficus woolsoni Newberry and Ficus ovatifolia Berry occur in either th~ Black· Creek 

formation of North Carolina·or the Tuscaloosa formation· of Alabama. It is especially charac-:-

terized by the prominence of its secondary and tertiary venation, and is very similar to c~rtainmodern species of Celtis with. entire margins, as, for example, Oeltis crassifolia Lamarck, and 

Oeltis reticulata Torrey. It_ is also similar. to a number of Tertiary species of Ficus and not: 

unlike a very much larger undescribed species of Ficus present in clays of the Tuscaloosa formation of western Alabama. · 

' Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose mem1Jer 'of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson and E. W. Berry.) 

· Oollections.-V. S. National Museum·. 

Frcus CRASSIPES (Heer) I-Ieer. 

Plates X, figure 12, and XII, figures 8-10. 

This species is described in the section of this report dealing with the Upper Cretaceous 

flora of Georgia, pages 110-111. ~tis common in South Carolina, especially at the Rocky Point 

locality, from which the figured specimens were collected. It is especially characteristic of 

the post-Raritan and ·pre-Montana horizons of eastern North Ame:r-ica.. , ... 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek forrp.ation, near Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County; near Langley, Aiken County; Rocky Point,·Sumter County; right bank 

of Congaree River about 25 miles below Columbia, Lering.ton :County. (Collected· by E. w~: 

Berry, L. F. Ward, L. C. Glenn, B. L. Miller, and M.-W. Twitchell.) : · · · :· .· .. ·:: 

· Oollections.-V. S. National Musel)m. · ;, ; · .. . . .. : . D 
.38 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Frcus KRAus rAN A Heer. · 

Plate XI, figures 4-7. 

Ficus krausianci Heer, Neue Denkschr. Schw. Gasell., voL 23, 1869, p. 15, Pl. V, figs. 3-6. 

;Ficus beckwithii Lesquereux, The Cretaceous and Tertiary floras, 1883, p. 46, Pis. :x;VI; fig. 5, and XVII, figs. 3 and 4. 

Ficus suspecta Velenovsky, Die Flora der bo)lmischen Kreideformation, pt. 4, 1885, p. 10, Pl. V, figs. 6, 9. 

Ficusatavina Heer.? Hollick, Trans. New York Acad. Sci., vol. 2, 1892, p. 103, Pl. IV, figs. 4, 6. 

Ficus krausiana, Lesquereux, The flora o~ the Dakota group: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 81, Pl. I, fig. 5. 

Ficus beckwithii Lesquereux, idem., vol. 17, 1892, p. 80. · I 

Ficus krausiana Hollick, Bull. Geol. Soc. America, vol. 7, 1895, p. 13. 

Ficus lcrausiana Hollick, Annals New York Acad. Sci., volll, 1898, p. 59, Pl. III, fig. 1. 

Ficus krausiana B3rry, Bull. Torrey·Bot. Club, 1906, vol. 33, p. 172. 

Ficus krausiana Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, 

· vol. 50, 1907, p. 58, Pis. IX, fig. 9, and X, figs. 1-3. · · 

Description.-The following is Heer's d~scription of this species, written in 1869: 

-F. foliis lanceolatis, integerrimus, utrinque attenuatis, nervo medio valido, nervis secundis numerosis, campto~ 

dromis, subtillissimis. 

Leaves of large size, ovate lanceolate in outline, broadest at or below the middle. Apex 

and base acutely pointed, the apex often extended and attenuated. Petiole and midrib stout. 

Secondaries regular, open, thin, ascending, camptodrome, branching from the midrib at angles 

of 45° or more. Texture coriaceous or s:ubcoriaceous. Length about 17 centimeters. Greatest 

width about 4 centimeters. . . 

This species was described byHeer from·Moletein in Moravia (Cenomanian), and it has been 

subsequently identified from a large number of American localities. In the West it occurs 

iri the Dakota sandstone of Kansas and Colorado; in the East it is common from Marthas 

Vineyard an~ Block Island to Alabama and is present between these limits in Maryland, North 

Carolina, and South Carolina. These occurrences are all in beds of the Magothy or homotaxial 

formations, the only uncertajn occurrence being that at Tottenville, Staten Island, where the 

mm;ainic material containing this speci~s may possibly· have been derived from the Raritan, 

although this is considered doubtful. · 

Associated with this species at the type locality in Moravia are similar leaves which were 

oescribed by Prof. Heer as a different species, Ficus· mohliana. These are somewhat larger 

with a more sparse secondary venation. It seems ·probable that these merely represent the 

somewhat larger leaves of Ficus krausiana, but they are not united with it in view of the lack 

of pos1.tive evidence, because Ficus mohliana has priority and this would involve the change of 

name of this well-known type and horizon marker. In both North ·and South Carolina fruits 

are found associated with this species, but whether they are related to it or to some of the 

I other rather numerous species of Ficus which occur at the same localities can not be determined. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member 'of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County ( ~); Rocky Point, Sumter County; right bank of Congaree River, about 

25 miles below Columbia, Lexington County ( ~). Other deposits of the Black Creek formation, 

Black Creek, Florence County. (Collected by L .. F. V:Vard, L. C. Glenn, E. W. Berry, L. W. 

Stephenson, and M. W. Twitchell.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. _ 

Frcus STEPHENSON! Berry. 

Plate XII, figures 1-3. 

Ficus stephensoni Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 37, 1910, p. 194, Pl. XXIII, figs. 2, 3. 

Description.-Leaves ·variable in ·size, ranging from 6 to 18 centimeters in length and from 

2.3 ~o 6.4 centimeters ~n greatest width, broadly lanceolate-ovate, tapering equally from the 

middle toward both ends but more fully rounded at the base an~ more slender toward the tip, 

especially ~n the smaller leaves. Midrib broad. Secondaries very slender, leaving t.he midnb 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA.- 39 

at wide angles which become as great as 90° in some of the larger specimens, very numerous, 

2 to 4 millimeters apart, parallel, almost straight to -the marginal vein, which is well marked and 

about 1 millimeter distant from the margin, with which it is parallel. V einlets largely at right 

angles to the secondaries and not especially well shown. Petiole stout. · 

This is an exceedingly weU-marked species of Ficus and is very close to various existing 

species in form and venation characters, as is well shown by a comparison with the leaves of 

Ficus elastica Roxburg. It is probable, however, that the texture of the fossil species was less 

coriaceou~, for all the larger leaves ·are considerably macerated .. 

It is believed that the larger forms represent the normal size of the leaves in this species and ' 

that the smaller leaves, which occur only in material from South Carolina, represent abortive 

leaves which fell before reaching maturity, as is so common in the modern allied species. 

· Some authors refer leaves 9f this type to the genus Eucalyptus, with which genus the vena-

.tion has much in common. In point of size the Carolina leaves are comparable with those of 

such a species as Eucalyptus latifolia Hollick from Glen Cove, Long Island, but the secondaries 

·;are less regular and only about half as numerous in the latter species, and there seems to be 

little doubt of the propriety of referring the present species to the genus. Ficus.· 

It is very simjlar to a variety of closely related. Upper Cretaceous species of Ficus of the 

.type of the existing Ficus elastica Roxburg and its allies, commonly cultivated as ornamental 

shrubs and trees under the name of "rubb~r plants." The comparable fossil forms include 

Ficus glascoeana Lesquereux,i with which there is a possibility that the present species may be 

identical, as it is very similar. in outline and venation, except. that the figures of the Kansa.S 

leaves (types 478 and 532a, Museum of Comparative Zoology) do not show any marginal vein, 

although Lesquereux mentions one in his description. The latter species has been detected southward along the western shore of the Mississippi embayment in the Woodbine sand of Texas and is 

~f a more coriaceous texture, with more obtuse tip, and with· the secondarief). joining the midrib 

at an angle of 60°. Another very similar species is Ficus atavina Heer, 2 which ranges from the 

Atane and Patoot beds of western Cireenland southward, along the Atlantic Coastal Plain to 

Marthas Vineyard, Glen Cove, Long Island, and Cliffwood, N. J. All the occurrences are 

probably of Magothy age. · 

The· North Carolina leaf has full-rounded basal margins, which are rather straight in Ficus 

atavin.a; its secondaries, which are twice as numerous as in. Ficus atavina, are less ascending. 

The marginal vein is also closer to the margin. Another species, perhaps identical with the 

previous one, is Ficus peruni Velenovsky,3 from the Cretaceous of Bohemia, which differs from 

the North Carolina leaf in the same respects in which Ficus atavina Heer differs. V elenovsky 

points out the great similarity between Ficus peruni and Eucalyptus geinitzii Heer, a similarity 

which is more ~triking in 'the forms he has referred to this species of Eucalyptus than in the 

leaves usually so identified by other paleobotanists. 

Ficus stephensoni was recently described by the writer 4 from ,material collected in the 

Black Creek formation at Court House Bluff on Cape Fear River in North Carolina. It is 

found to be equally abundant in clays of the Middendorf member of the Black Creek formation 

across the State ~f South Carolina, but has not been certainly detected elsewhere in the Atlanti~ 

Coastal Plain, though doubtful' :remains which may represent this species are present in the 

collections from clays of the Tvscaloosa formation of western Alabama .. 

Occurrence~-1\lfiddendorf arkose member of Black ·Creek formation, Middendorf, Chesterfield County; near Langley, Aike~ County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson and E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. · 

1 Lesquereux, Leo, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U. S. Ge~l. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 76, Pl. XIII, figs. 1, 2. 

2 Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 3, Abth. 2, 1874, p. 108, Pls. XXIX, fig. 2b, and XXX, figs. 1-8. 8 Dio Flora der bohmischen Kreideformation, pt. 3,1884, p. 16 (41), Pl. IV (12), figs.1-3. Compare liisflg.-2 with Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, 

vol. 31, 1904, Pl. III, fig. 6. . ' 

4 Loc. cit. 
40 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Order PROTEALES. 

Family PROTEACElE. 

Genus PROTEOIDES Heer. 

PROTEOIDES LANCIFOLIUS fleer. 

Plate X, figure 1. 

Proteoides lancijol1:us Heer, Zur Kreideflora von Quedlinburg, 1871, p. 12, Pl. III, figs. 5, 6. 

Proteoides lancijoz.ius Lesquereux, The Cretaceous and Tertiary floras, 1883, p. 50 . 

.Proteoides lancifolius Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 90, Pl~;i, 

XV, fig. 5, and I, fig. 8. . . 

Description.-Leaves entire, lanceolate, commonly falcate in outline, with a narrowed 

attenuated apex and a narrowed -decurrent base, about 10 centimeters in length by 1.4 centi~ 

meters in greatest width, which is in the basal half of the leaf. Petiole stout. Midrib stout 

below, rapidly narrowing upward. Secondaries very numerous~ approximately parallel, many 

obsolete, branching from the midrib at acute angles of less than 45°. These are connected by 

branches or tertiaries in the irregular manner characteristic of the venation of existing Proteacere .. 

Texture coriaceous. . . · 

This species was origially described from the Cretaceous of Blankenburg, Saxony, by Heer: 

Lesquereux recorded it from the Dakota sandstone and it is not uncommon in the South Carolin~ 

Cretaceous, the latter remains beirig identical with the Dakota sandstone specl.mens and identical 

·w~th the type material except that in some of the leaves of the South Carolina specimens the 

·upper secondaries are depicted as open and camptodrome, subtending a wider angle with the 

midrib, a character different ·from that shown in the lower secondaries of;rtlie\:;ame specimens~ 

All the observed characters are identical with those of various existing genera of the Proteace::B; 

as, for example, the genus Protea. The present. species ~oes not differ to any extent from th.e 

Dakota sandstone species, Proteoides acuta Heer and Proteoides grevillireformis Heer, the latter 

'the type of the genus. The genus Proteoides does not contain many described speci~s and is 

confined to pre-Montana deposits inN orth America, although it ranges upward into theSenoniari 

'of Europe. . . . . . · · · 

Occurrence.-:Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Middendo1~f; 

Chesterfield County; Rocky Point, Sumter County. Other deposits of the Black Creek form·a,..: 

tion, near Darlington, Darlington County. (Collected by E. W. Berry, L. C. Glenn, and 

L .. W. Stephenson.) · · 

. Oollections.-u.· S. N atio:o.al Museum. 

PROTEOIDES PARVULA sp. nov. 

Plate X, figure 5. 

Description.-Leaves of small size, lanceolate in outline, entire, somewhat falcate, with 

equally acute apex and base, 2 centimeters in length by 4.5 millimeters in greatest width; 

which is about halfway between the apex and the base. :Midrib thin, somewhat flexuous.·· 

S~condaries fine, immersed, and mostly obs9lete, numerous, ascending, irregularly anastomosing.' 

This species is one of the smallest which has been referred to this genus, and except for its 

size is very similar to Proteoides Zancifolius Heer, which occurs at the same locality-in fact, it 

may simply be a juvenile form of the latter. This can only be determined by a larger amoun~ 

of comparative material than is available at the present time. 

Occurrence.-MiP,~endorf ~rkose_member of Black Creek formation, .near Middendorf, Chesterfield County. (Collected by L. W. Steph9nson and E. W. Berry.) . 

, Oollections.-TJ. S. National Museum. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 41 

Order RAN ALES. 

Family RANUNCULACE1E (?). 

Genus DEW ALQUEA Sa porta and Marion. 

DEw ALQUEA SMITHI Berry. 

Plate VIII, figures 3-9. 

Dewalqu_ea smithi Berry, Torreya, vol. 10, 1910, p. 36, fig. 1. 

Description.-Leaves palmately decompound, the petiole dividing into three principal 

branches, the angle of divergence varying from 20° to 60° and the two lateral branches forking 

at an acute angle 1 to 2 centimeters above their base. The middle leaflet is lanceolate in out-

. line, being widest in its central part and tapering almost equally to the acute apex and base~ 

Length 7.5 to 16 centimeters. Greatest width 2 to 4 centimeters. Margin entire or serrate, 

usually entire below and serrate in the apical three-fourths, some specimens having large 

.. ·! 

FIGURE I.-Restoration of Dewalquea smithi Derry, from the Tuscaloosa formation of western Alabama. 

aquiline-serrate teeth. Midrib stout. Secondaries regular, subopposite, parallel; about 20 

pairs, branching from the midrib at angles varying from 45° to 70°, generally about 50°, curving 

upward and running to the marginal teeth or camptodrome. The base of the leaflet extends 

downward within 2 or 3 millimeters of the forks of the petiole. Lateral leaflets more or less 

inequilateral, usually somewhat smaller than the middle leaflet. The internaLlateralleaflet is 

lanceolate, the outer lamina starting at or very near the point where the lateral bra~ch of the 

petiole forks. The inner lamina, however, extends downward almost to the base of the lateral 

branch, making the base markedly inequilateral. In general outline and in marginal and 

venation characters it is identical with th:e middle leaflet. The outer lateral leaflet is also 

somewhat inequilateral, but less so than th~ internallateralleafiet, the internal lamina starting 

at or nea.r the fork and its outer lamina extending more or less below the fork. Marginal ~nd 

venation charac.ters as in the outer leaflets. This handsome species, of which a restoration is 

shown in figure 1, is abundantly represented at the locality near Langley, mostly by terminal 
42 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

leaflets, a number of which are reproduced in Plate VIII, figures 3-9. It is common in the 

Tuscaloosa formation at Whites Bluff, on the right bank of Warrior River 309 miles above 

Mobile, Ala., a small collection of fossil plants from this outcrop containing no less than 27 

specimens of this form. Several of t~ese were complete and were sketched at the time they 

were collected, which proved fortunate, as the extremely arenaceous matrix did not withstand 

shipment very well. The museum material, though :considerably broken, shows several entire 

detached leaflets and three or four basal parts of the leaf showing the mode of division of the 

petiole. 

The genus Dewalquea was founded by Saporta and Marion in 1874 1 upon remains from 

·the Senonian of Westphalia communicated by Debey and named by him in manuscript Araliophyllum, and on additional remains collected by those authors from the Paleocene of Gelinden, 

Belgium (marnes heersiennes, etage Thanetien). Three species. were enumerated, Dewalquea 

haldemiana and Dewalquea aquisgranensis from the Westphalian Senonian and Dewalquea 

gelindenensis from the basal Eocene. In the past 35 years several additional species have been 

referred to this genus, including another: species from the German Senonian, Dewalquea insignis, 

described by Hosius and Von der Marek; 2 two species from the Cenomanian of Bohemia, 

Dewalquea coriacea and Dewalquea pentaphylla, described by V elenovsky; 3 two American species 

from, the Dakota sandstone, Dewalquea dakotensis and Dewalquea primordial is, described by 

Lesquereux,4 both of which are fragmentary anci of uncertain relationship; a species from the 

Raritan formation of New Jersey, Dewalquea trifoliata, described by Newberry; 5 and a species 

described by Heer 6 from Greenland, Dewalquea groenlandica, and subsequently recorded fro~ 

Staten Island, New Jersey, North Carolina, and Alabama. 

Hosius and Von der Marek 7 record the Eocene species from the Senonian of Westphalia, but 

, the remains are not of this species, being fragments of Dewalquea haldemiana, which is common 

at that horizon. The European species Dewalg_uea insignis is recorded by Heer 8 both from 

the Atane and Patoot beds of Greenland and by Hollie~ 9

. from the Cretaceous of Staten Island, 

but both of these· determinations are based upon fragments of single leaves and are, in the 

writer's judgment, entirely untrustworthy. Attention should also be called to the possibility 

of Oelastrus arctica IIeer 10 _representing the leaflets of a Dewalquea. This species was described 

from the Patoot beds of Greenland, where it is sparsely represented. It is abundant, however, 

in the upper part of the Raritan formation of New Jersey, but of some scores of specimens 

examined by the writer all were detached and failed to show their habit of growth. 

The botanic relationship of Dewalquea has always remained obscure and no better discussion 

of it is extant than that given bySaporta and Marion,11 who, after comparing these leaves with 

'those of Ampelopsis, Arisrema, Anthurium (Aracere), and other genera, arrive at the conclusion 

that they are prototypes of the tribe Helleborere of the Ranunculacere. 

The present species is markedly dist4lct from the AID;ericanspe9ies of Dewalquea previously 

described, all of which were apparently tripartite. Among the European species it is quite 

similar to the Senonian species Dewalquea insignis Hosius and von der Marek, which is, however, 

entirely distinct. It is also similar to Dewalquea coriacea and Dewalquea pentaphylla described 

by V elenovsky from the· Cenomanian of Bohemia. 

As previously mentioned, this species shows both entire and serrated forms. It is remark-

·able that where this genus has been found in any abundance, two species are usually described, 

t Saporta, G. de, and Marion, A. F., Essai sur 1 etat de la vegetation a l'epoque des mames heersiennes de Gelinden: Mem. cour. et des Sav. 

etrang. Acad. roy. Belgique, vol. 37, p. 55. 1874. 

2 Hosius and Von der Marek, Palreontographica, vol. 26, 1880, p. 172, Pl. XXXII, figs. 111-113; XXXIII, fig. 109; XXXIV, fig. 110; and 

XXXV, fig. 123. 

s Die Flora der bohmischen Kreideformation, pt. 3, 1884, pp. 11, 14, Pis. I, figs. 1-9; II, fig. 2; and VIII, figs. 11, 12. 

4 The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 211, Pl. LIX, figs. 5, 6. Geol. and Nat. Hist. Survey Minnesota, 

vol. 3,·1893, p. 18, Pl. A, fig. 10. 

5 Newberry, J. S., The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p. 129, Pl. XXII, figs. 4-7. 

6 Heer, Oswald, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 6, Abth. 2, 1882, p. 87, Pis. XXIX, figs. 18, 19; XLII, figs. 5, 6; XLIV,·fig. 11. 

1 Op. cit., p. 50. 

sOp. cit., vol. 6, Abth. 2, 1882, p. 86, Pis. XXV, fig. 7; XXXIII, figs. 14-16; idem, ·vol. 7, 1883, p. 37, Pis. LVIII, fig. 3; LXII, fig. 7. 

9 The Cretaceous flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U. ·s. Geol. Survey, vol. 50, 1907, p. 106, Pl. VIII, fig. 24. 

to Op. cit., vol. 7, 1883, p. 40, Pl. LXI, figs. 5d, 5e. 

u Op. cit., pp. 55-61. 
. UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF. SOUTH CAROLINA. 43 

one entire and one with toothed margins. Thus in G~rmany Dewalquea haldemiana is entire, 

whereas Dewalg_uea insignis is toothed, and probably both are th~ lea;ves of the same plant. 

In Bohemia Dewalquea pentaphylla is entire and Dewalquea coriacea is toothed. As for the 

Alabama plant, it is believed that the entire and serrate leaves are specifically identical, for the 

material shows a great many gradations in the size of the teeth and great variability regarding 

the proportion which the entire part of the margin bears to the toothed part on single leaflets. 

OccurTence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Langley and Miles· 

Mill, Aiken County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson, E. W. Berry, and Earle Sloan.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National ~1useum. 

Family MAGNOLIACElE. 

Genus MAGNOLIA Linne·. 

MAGNOLIA CAPELLINII Heer ( ~) . 

. Plate.X, :figure 3. 

This species, which is confined to the Middendorf arkose member of the Black Creek formation in South Carolina, is described in the section of this report dealing with the Upper Cretaceous 

flora of Georgia, pages 112-113. 

OccurTence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County; Rocky Point, Sumter County. (Collected by L. C. Glenn, L. W. Stephenson, and E. W. Berry.) 

Oollection.-U. S. National Museum. 

MAGNOLIA NEWBERRY! Berry (~). 

Magnolia longifolia Hollick, Trans. New York Acad. Sci., vol. 12, 1892, p. 36, Pl. III, :fig. 9. 

Magnolia longijolia Smith, On the geology of the Coastal Plain of Alabama, 1894, p. 348. 

Magnolia longijolia Hollick, Ann.als New York Acad.- Sci., vol. 11, 1898, p. 422; Pl. XXXVII, :fig. 3. 

Magnolia longijolia Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, 

vol. 50, 1907, p. 66, Pl. XX, :figs. 2, 3 (non Sweet, 1826). 

Magnolia longijolia Newberry, The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p. ~6, Pis. LV, 

:figs. 3 and 5, and LVI, :figs. 1-4 .. 

Magnolia newberryi Berry, Bull. Torrey Club, vol. 34, 1907, p. 195, PI. XIII, :fig. 6. 

Description.-Leaves mostly of large size, ovate to 'oblong .in outline, about 20 centimeters 

in.length by 9 to 10 centimeters in width, broadest toward the base. Apex subacute or obtuse. 

Base varying from obtusely rounded, almost truncate, to somewhat· cuneate. Petiole and 

midrib stout. Secondaries comparatively thin and open, about 12 pairs, camptodrome. 

Tertiaries forming four, five, or six sided areoles, quite prominent in some spec~ens. . 

'This is the largest magnolia of the Raritan formation, the leaves of which are said by 

Newberry to reach a length of 30 centimeters or more. It is common at the Woodbridge 

.locality and has also been reported from Staten Island and ~1arthas Vineyard, from the Tuscaloosa 

formation in Alabama, and from the Black Creek formation in North Carolina. In a genera~ 

·way it resembles an immense leaf of Magnolia woodbridgensis, and it also approaches somewhat 

Magnolia longipes, but the petiole is only about one-third the length that it has in the latter 

:species. Its occurrence in the South Carolin·a Cretaceous is based upon doubtfully determined 

material from the locality near Darlington, but it must almost certainly have been a member 

·of the South Carolina flora, for it has been detected in homotaxial deposits both north and south . 

. of this area. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson.) 

OccurTence.-Black Creek formation, near Darlington, D~rlington County. 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 
44 UPPER CRETACEOUS AN:O EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

MAGNOLIA OBTUSATA Heer. 

Magnolia capellinii Beer, Flora Fossilis Arctica, vol. 3, Abth. 2, 1874, Pl. XXXIII, fig. 4 (non other citations of this 

species). 

Magnolia obtusata Beer, idem, vol. 6, Abth. 2, 1882, p. 90, Pis. XV, fig. 12, and XXI, fig. 3. 

Magnolia obtusata Lesquereux, The flora o£ the-Dakota group: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 201, Pl. LX, 

figs. 5, 6. 

Magnolia obtusata Berry, Bull. New York Bot. Garden, vol. 3, 1903, p. 76, Pl. XLVII, fig. 4. 

·Magnolia obtusata Berry, idem, vol. 37, 1910, p. 23. 

Description.-Leaves of variable size, oblong-ovate or obovate in outline, entire, with a 

broadly rounded apex and a narrowed cuneate base, ranging from 7 to 14 centimeters in length 

by 2.4 to 7 centimeters in greatest width, which is above the middle. Petiole and midrib stout. 

Secondaries few in number, ascending, curved, camptodrome. Texture coriacoous. 

This species was described. from the Atane beds of Greenland by Heer, and was based upon 

rather fragmentary material. Subsequently Lesqueremt recorded some fine specimens from the 

Dakota sandstone of Kansas. It is present in the ·Magothy formation from New Jersey to 

Maryland ~nd is also a member of the Tuscaloosa flora in western Alabama. The South Carolina 

specimens are few in number and come from but a single locality. 

· Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County. (Collected by L .. W. Stephenson and E. W. Berry.) 

. Oollections.-.V. S. National Museum.. . 

MAGNOLIA TENUIFOLIA Lesquereux ( ~). 

Plate IX, figures 2 and 3. 

Magnolia tenuifolia Lesquereux, Am Jour. Sci., 2d ser., vol. 46, 1868, p. 100. 

J.lfagnolia tenuifolia Lesquereux, The Cretaceous flora, 1874, p. 92, Pl. XXI, fig. 1. 

Magnolia tenuifolia Lesquereux, The 'flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 198, Pl. 

XXIV, fig.l. .. . 

Magnoliq,tenuifoliaBerry, Bull. NewYor~Bot:Garden, vol. 3,1903, p. 77, Pl. XLVII, fig.10. 

Magnolia tenuifolia Hollick, idem, vol~ 3, 1904; p. 413, Pl. LXX~II, fig. 2 . 

. llfag'(l,oliq:tenuifolia Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 31, 1904, p. 76, Pl. I, fig. 7. 

:Magnolia tenuifolia Berry, idem, vol. 33, 1906, p. 174, Pl. VII, fig. 1. 

Magnolia te~'l!-ifolia Hollick, The Cretaceous ;flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U.S. Geol. S~rveyp 

vol: 50, 1907, p. 64, Pls. XVII, fig. 1; XVIII, figs. 4, 5. . . 

Description.-Leaves la~ge, entire, oblong-ovate in outline, with a very stout petiole and 

-midrib. Length, about· 20 centimeters. Greatest width, which is about halfway between 

the apex and the base, abqut 8 centimeters.· Apex bluntly pointed. Base cuneate, pointed~ 

Secondaries open, .approximately. parallel, inequidistant, camptodrome. · 

The presence . of this species in South Carolina Cretaceous is based upon the doubtfully 

determined fragments figured. ·The ~eaf in life was such·a large one that most of the occurrences 

are based upon mere fragments. It was described originally from the Dakota sandstone and 

has subsequently been recorded from the Magothy. formation on Marthas Vineyard and Long 

Island and in New Jersey and Delaware~ 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black· Creek formation, near M~ddendorf, 

.Chesterfield County. (Collected by L. W; Stephenson and E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-V. S. National Museum .. 

Genus ILLICIUM Linne. 

ILLICIUM: WATEREENSIS sp. nov. 

Plate XIV, figure 8. 

Description.~Leaves entire, lanceolate in outline, with the apex and th~ base. acutely and 

equally pointed. Length about 9.5 centimeters. Gre~test width 1.9 centimeters, in the 

·middle part of the leaf. Midrib narrow but prominent. Secondaries numerous, parallel, 

branching from the midrib at angles of about 45°, campt0drome. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 45' 

This species may be compared with a variety of described species in unr.elated genera, 

as, for example, Nyssa, Daphne, Apocynum, Andromeda~ and various lauraceous genera, but 

it is believed to have more in common with the Ranalian genus Illicium, in which only one 

other Cretaceous species, fllicium deletum Velenovsky/ from the. Cenomanian of Bohemia, is 

known. The latter is very similar to the South Carolina leaf, differing merely in having fewer 

secondaries and more open secondary venation. A number of Tertiary species of Illicium 

are known, and the modern forms, which are seven or eight in number, inhabit the· warmer 

parts of eastern North America and eastern Asia. · · · 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member' of Black Creek formation, Rocky Point, Sumter 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-V. S. National Museum. 

Order .ROSALES. 

Family HAM.AMELIDACEJE. 

Genus HAM.AMELITE S Sa porta. 

HAMAMELITES ~ CORDATUS Lesquereux. 

Plate X, figure 2. 

Hamamelites? cordatus Lesquereux, The Cretaceous and Tertiary floras; 1883, p. 71, Pl. IV, fig. 3. 

Hamamelites? cordatus Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota grou~: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p.139. 

Description.-Leaves large, elliptical in outline. Length about 10 centimeters. Greatest 

width 6 to 7 centimeters; near the middle part of the leaf. Apex unknown. Base cordate. 

Margin undulate to dentate or serrate with shallow teeth. Midrib stout. Secondaries stout, 

numerous, approximately parallel, branching from the midrib at angles of 45° or more, nearly 

straight, at right angles to the secondaries. Texture coriaceous. 

The genus Hamamelites was founded by Saporta in 1865 upon foreign early Tertiary 

material, and to it Lesquereux referred five species from the Dakota sandstone, which exhibited 

a combination of the characters of Hamamelis, Alnus, Viburnum, and oth.er genera. Subsequently one of these was referred to Quercus. All were founded upon rather sparse material, 

particularly Ha'mftmelites? cordatus. Its occurrence in South Carolina is based upon the 

single hnperfect specimen figured, which is very similar to the figured type from the West. It 

shows part of the margin, the characteristic venation, and. half of the typical cordate base. 

That Hamamelis-like forms were present at this time is shown by the presence of wood of this 

type described by Ligni~r in 1.907 as Hamamelidoxylon from the Cenomanian of France. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf .arkose member of Black Creek formation, Rocky Point, Sumter 

County. (Collected by L. C. Glenn.) 

·. Oollections.-V. S. National Museum. 

Family MIMOSACEJE. 

Genus ACACIAPHYLLITES gen. nov. 

ACACIAPHYLLITES GREVILLEOIDES sp. nov. 

Plate IX, figures 9 and 10. 

Description.'-Leaves or leaflets of small size, entire, oblong-elliptical in outline, about 2 

centimeters in lengt~ by 0.5 to 0.65 centimeters in greatest width, which is at the middle part 

of the leaf. Apex and base equally rounded. Petiole very short and relatively stout, about 

1.5 millimeters in length. Midrib thin, very much ~ttenuated distad. Secondaries fine, 

numerous, approximately parallel, branching from the midrib at acute angles; long, ascending, 

apparently camptodrome, connected at irregular intervals by cross branch}ets of the same 

caliber. 

1 Velenovsky, J., Die Flora der bohmischen Kreideformation, pt. 3, 1884, p. 4, Pl. III, fig. 5. 
46. UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAf? OF SOUTH CAROLINA- AND GEORGIA. 

This species is believed to show undoubted characters which ally it" with the· genus Acacia 

and is certainly referable to the families Mimosacere or Cresalpiniacere, although suggesting the 

family Proteacere. It is totally unlike any known fossil American species but resembles certain 

of the Bohemian Cretaceous leaves referred by V elenovsky 1 to Grevillea or Grevilleophyllum, 

although, as has been said, it is here considered leguminous. . 

These smallle~ves are not' uncommon at th~ locality near' Midd~ndorf, to which they are 

confined. Their small size has enabled complete specimens to be preserved, and though they 

are thin they appear to have had a resistant epidermis of thick-walled cells, greatly resembling 

·a number. of typical existing acacias. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black. Creek formation, near Middendor!, 

Chesterfield Cou.p.ty. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson and E. W. Berry.) 

Oolle<;tions.-U. S. National Museum. 

Genus 'ClESALPINIA LilU:te. 

CJESALPINIA MIDDENDORFENSIS sp. nov. 

Plate X, figure 7. 

Description.-Leav~s compound. Leaflets. entire, elliptical in outline, with a broadly 

rounded apex and a slightly broader, rounded, markedly inequilateral base, 1.5 centimeters in 

length by 0.9 centimeter in greatest width, which is at the middle or below. Midrib slender 

and curved in the single complete leaflet collected. Secondaries few and thm, four or five pairs,. 

branching from the midrib at a wide angle, more than 45°, camptodrome .. 

This is a well-marked species, clearly referable to some member of the Cresalpiniacere with 

compound leaves, usage sanctioning the reference of leaflets of this sort to the genus Cresalpinia, 

with the leaflets of which they agree closely. Only two other Cretaceous species are known,· 

both from the Raritan formation in New Jersey. With the smaller-of these, Oresalpinia coolciana 

Hollick, 2 the South Carolina form is closely comparable, but it differs in its more elongate inequi-· 

lateral outline and more numerous secondaries. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member· of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County. (Collected by L. W. StepheRson and E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Genus LEGtfMINOSITES Bowerbank. 

LEGUMINOSITES MIDDENDORFENSIS sp. nov. 

Plate VIII, figure 13. 

Description.-Leaves or leaflets ovate-lanceolate in outline, with a pointed apex and 

rounded base, 3 centimeters in length by 1.4 centimeters in greatest width, which is in the 

middle part of the leaf.. Midrib thin. Secondaries thin, open, five or six pain?, slightly curved, 

ascending at angles of 45 to 50°. ' 

This species is of rare occurrence and vague relationship, although it seems to be most 

closely related to the leguminous leaves usually referred to the form-genus Leguminosites. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson and E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

LEGUMINOSITES ROBINIIFOLIA Berry: 

Plate IX, figure 11. 

Leguminosites robiniijol·ia Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 37, 1910, p. 196. 

Description.:_Leaflets sessile,· ovate to ovate-elliptical in outline. Length about 2.5 

centime.ters~ Greatest width, 1.3 to 1:5 centimeters, at a point slightly n~arer the base than. 

l·Die Flora der bohmischen Kreideformation, pt. 2, 1883, p. 3, Pl. I, figs. 6-10. . 

2 Newberry, J. S., The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U. S. Geol. Surv:ey, vol. 26, 1896, p. 94, Pl. XLII, figs. 49, 50. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUT~ CAROLINA. 47 

the apex. Both the apex and the base are obtusely rounded, the base broadly and the apex 

more narrowly. Midrib fairly stout. Secondaries consist of about five alternate to" opposite 

pairs, slender, regularly curved, and approximately parallel, branching- from the midrib at 

angles of about 45° or slightly more, camptodrome. 

This well-marked species is entirely distinct from previously described forms and is 

remark~bly close to the leaves of the existing Robinia pseudacacia Linne of the eastern United 

States, which fact has led to the specific name chosen for it. It was described recently by the 

writer from material collected from the Black Creek formation at Court House Bluff oil Cape 

Fear River in North Carolina. 

Occurrenc~.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Langley, 'Aiken 

County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson and E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Order GERANIALES. 

Family R UTACElE. 

Genus CITROPHYLLUM Berry. 

CrTROPHYLLUM ALIGERUM (Lesquereux) Berry. 

Ficus aligera Lesquereux, Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 84, Pl. X, figs. 3-6 . 

.Ficus aligera Berry, Ann. Rept. State Geologist~ New Jersey, for 1905, 1906, p. 139. 

Ficus aligera Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 33, 1906, p. 172. 

Citrophyllum aligerum Berry, idem, vol. 36, 1909, p. 258, Pl. XVIIIa, :figs. 1-8. 

Description.-The following description is given in the reference last cited: 

Leaves small, elliptical to ovate or ovate-lanceolate, coriaceous, varying from 2.5 to 6 centimeters in length by 

1.8 to 3.2 centimeters in breadth. Margin entire, occasionally slightly undulate. Apex rounded or obtusely acuminate. 

Base 10unded, sub truncate, or cuneate. Petiole stout, 0. 7 to 2 centimeters in length, conspicuously alate. The 

petiolar wings may be oblong-lanceolate or obovate; together they are frorri 2.5 to 5 millimeters in width, averaging 

about 3.5 millimeters. Midrib stout. Secondaries :fine, more or less obscured by the coriaceous leaf substance, about 

nine alternate pairs, branching from the midrib at angles of from 45 to 50°, parallel, camptodrome. 

These curious leaves (morphologically leaflets) were described by Lesquereux in 1892 from 

the Dakota sandstone as a species of Ficus and compared with Ficus bumelioides Ettingshausen 

and Ficus mudgei Lesquereux, neither whieh has alate petioles and the first has an emarginate 

apex. Subsequently the same leaves were found in the Magothy formation pf New Jersey, 

and only recently a single small leaf was found in the upper part of the Raritan formation of 

South Amboy, N. J. They exhibit considerable variety in outline, but all have exactly the 

same aspect and conspicuous, more or less alate petioles. They appear to be closely related to 

the leaves o~ the :.:nodern genus Citrus. The latter have exactly the same texture and venation,' 

the same variability in outline and marginal undulations, the same stout midrib, and conspicuously alate petioles.. In examining a suite of specimens of the latter and comparing them with 

the fossils the conclusion seems to be irresistible that they are related, and the writer consequently 

referred the fossils to a new genus with a name that emphasized this relationship to the modern 

genus. All the more complete leaves of this species were figured by the writer in 1909, as well 

as some recent Citrus leaves for comparison with them. Possible arguments against the present 

view may be based on the theory that the modern alate' petioles are derived from ancestors 

with compound leaves; in fact, some modern species sti_ll·have trifoliate leaves, and if this were. 

true of the fossils as well it would require considerable rapidity of evolution in the genus previous 

to the middle part of the Cretaceous. The modern leaves abscise from the top of the petiole 

and would be unlikely to occur as fossils with the petiole attached; neither can any indication 

of such an abscission line be made out in the fossils. This is the most difficult argument to 

combat. However, modern ~eaves are sometimes shed in their entirety, and we are justified 

in assuming the occasional fall of leaves before maturity when the abscission luyer of cells had 

not yet become weake~ed. The cause might be violent winds, the passage of large animals 
48 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

like some of the Cretaceous dinosaurs, or weakened conditions resulting from attacks of insects, 

or offungous diseases. The species is also found in the Magothy, Tuscaloosa, and Dakota 

formations. 

The South Carolina occurrence of this species is based upon the incomplete but characteristic leaves and tends to confirm the doubtful identification of this form in the Black Creek 

formation of North Carolina. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near. Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County; Miles Mill, Aiken County. (Collected by E.·w. Berry and Earle Sloan.) 

Oollections.-U. S. N ational1\1useum. . 

Order EUPHORBIALES. 

Family EUPHORBIACE.lE. 

Genus CROTONOPHYLLUM Velenovsky. 

CROTONOPHYLLUM PANDURJEFORMIS sp. nov. 

Plate VII, figures 5-10. 

Description.-Leaves of variable size, entire and ovate-lanceolate or irregular panduriform 

in outline, about 8 to 10 centimeters in length by 3 to 4 centimeters in greatest width, which is 

in the basal half of the leaf. . General outline ovate, separated by a sharp lateral sinus on each, 

side into a broad basal portion with full rounded margins and an upper narrower portion whlch 

is more or less rounded or elongated. Iri some specimens the sinus is wanting on one side; it 

may be wanting on both sides and the leaf be ovate-lanceolate in outline, as it often is in the 

only other known species o{ the genus. Tpis is the habit of a number of specimens from the 

Miles Mill locality. Apex bluntly pointed. Base slightly recurrent to the stout petiole, which 

is of considerable length. Texture coriaceous·. l\1idrib stout. Secondaries numerous, rather 

stout, branching from the midrib at angles of about 45°, parallel, camptodrome below and in 

some specimens also in the apical portion of the leaf, in which ·case they pursue an upwardly 

curved course. In other specimens they are straight in the apical half of the leaf, and their 

ends are connected by a nearly straight marginal vein, which is the continuation of some lower 

secondary; in fact, the regularly camptodrome lower secondaries are parallel with the margin 

· before they finally inosculate. 

These curious leaves are not uncommon in the South Carolina Cretaceous, though they 

are generally incomplete. They are wholly unlike any known American Cretaceous leaves, 

although they suggest the leaf described from the Upper Cretaceous of Vancouver Island by 

Dawson as IAriodendron succedens. 1 In the writer'~ opinion Dawson's leaf is not a Liriodendron, 

but as Dawson's figures are inaccurate, and as the writer has not seen the original material, 

his opinion is not conclusive. The genus Crotonophyllum was proposed by V elenovsky for 

leaves from the Cenomanian of Vyserovic, Bohemia, which are very similar to the present 

species. A single species,. Orotonophyllum cretaceum, 2 was described and compared with the 

existing species of Croton, but as the discussion is in Bohemian the description is not readily 

accessible to English readers. The illustrations, however, are ample and depict a leaf which 

is surely congeneric with the South Carolina fossils. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near 1\liddendorf, Chesterfield County; near Langley and Miles :Mill, Aik~n County; Ro9ky Point, Sumter County. 

(Collected by L. W. Stephenson, E. W. Berry, and Earle Sloan.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum .. 

1 Trans. Roy. Soc. Canada, vol. 11, sec. 4,1894, p. 62, Pl. VIII, fig. 26. 

2 Velenovsky, J., Kvetena ceskeho cenomanu, 1889, p. 20, Pl. V, figs. 4-11. 
UPPER CRETAC~OUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 49 

Order SAPINDALES. 

Family SAPINDACElE. 

Genus •SAPINDUS Linne. 

SAPINDUS MORRISON! I-Ieer. 

Plate IX, figure 6. 

Sapindus morrisoni Heer (Lesquereux MS.), Flora fossilis arctica, 1882, vol. 6, Abth. 2, p. 96, Pls. XL, fig. 1; XLI, 

fig. 3; XLIII, ftgs. 1a, 1b; and XLIV, figs. 7 and 8. 

Sapindus morrisoni Heer, idem, vol. 7, J.883, p. 39, Pl. LXV, fig·. 5. 

Sa7Jindus morrisoni Lesquereux, The Cretaceous and Tertiary floras, 1883, p. 83, Pl. XVI, figs. 1 and 2. 

Sapindus morrisoni Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 158, Pl. 

XXXV, figs. 1 and 2. 

Sapindus morrisoni Hollick, Annals New York Acad. Sci., vol. 11, 1898, p. 422, Pl. XXXVI, fig. 4. 

Sapindus morrisoni Knowlton, Twenty-first Ann. Rept. U. S. Geol. Survey, 1901, p. 317, pt. 7. ' 

Sapindus morrisoni Berry, Bull. New York Bot. Garden, vol. 3, 1903, p. 83, Pl. XLVII, figs. 2 and 3. 

Sa]Jindus morrisoni Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 31, 1904, p. 78. 

Sapindtts morr:isoni Berry, Ann. Rept. State Geologist New Jersey for 1905, 1906, pp. 138 and 139. 

Sapindus morrisoni Hollick, Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 50, 1907, p. 90, Pl. XXXIII, figs. 16-20. 

Description.-Leaves pinnately compound. Leaflets large, subcoriaceous, entire, lanceo-

. late in outline, about 10 to 15 centimeters in length or in a few speCimens larger, by 2 to 3 

centimeters in greatest width. Base cuneate or rounded, generally inequilateral. Midrib stout. 

Secondaries stout, bowed, rather open, approximately parallel, camptodrome. 

These leaflets are usually found detached, as in the few specimens found near Langley, 

S. C., although some· of. the material from the west shows the habit. This species was described 

by Lesquereux and named in allusion to the type locality. As Lesquereux's report on Cretaceous and Tertiary floras was not published promptly, i~ happened that 1-Ieer had meanwhile 

published this species, based on Greenland material and identified by means of some of the 

plates of Lesquereux's work which the latter had sent to him, so that the species must be credited 

to lieer. It occurs at both the Atane and Patoot horizons in Greenland and is a common form 

in the Woodbine sand of Texas, which is regarded as the southern equivalent of the Dakota 

sandstone. I~ the east it is probably confined to post-Raritan deposits, although there is some 

doubt regarding the age of the morainic material on Staten Island from which it h,as been 

recorded by.liollick. It is common in the :Magothy formation of New Jersey, but has not 

heretofore been recorded from the southern Coastal Plain, although it will probably be found 

to be a member of the Tuscaloosa flora when the Alabama collections are thoroughly studied. 

Occurrence.-l\1iddendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Langley, Aiken 

County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson and E. W. Berry.) · 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Family CELASTRACElE. 

Genus PACHYSTIMA Raftnesque. 

p ACHYSTIMA ~ CRETACEA sp. nov~ 

Plate X, figure G. 

Description.-Leaves of small size, oblong or obovate in outline, with a rounded apex and 

a narrowed descending base, about 2 centimeters in length by 3 millimeters in greatest width. 

Texture coriaceous. Petiole short and stout. Midrib stout. Secondaries numerous, fine, 

immersed, ascending. . 

This species is totally unlike any' described fossil forms and closely resembles the leaves of 

the existing species of Pachystima, of which only two are known, one from the East and one 

from the Rocky Mountain area. They are shrubs of dry situations with evergreen, more or 

8069°-14---4 
50 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

less revolute leaves. The writer feels much doubt about this identification, and it is possible 

that this species represents the excessiv:ely narrowed leaves of.Acaciaphyllites grevilleoides Berry 

collected from the same locality. Pachystima is unknown in the fossil state elsewhere except 

for a recently described species from the Miocene of Florissant, Colo. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County~ (Collected by L. W. Stephenson and E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Genus CELASTROPHYLL UM Goeppert. 

CELASTROPHYLLUM ELEGANS Berry. 

Plate XIV, figure 11. 

Celastrophyllum elegans Berry, Bull. New York Bot. Garden, 'vol. 3, 1903, p. 84, Pl. XLIII, fig. 6. 

Celastrophyllum elegans Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 32, 1905, p. 46, Pl. II, fig. 1. · .. 

Description.-Leaves obovate in outline with a broadly rounded apex and cuneate pointed 

base, 6 to 8 centimeters in length by 2 centimeters or slightly more in greatest width, which is 

in the middle part of the leaf. Margin entire below with undulate shallow teeth above. Secon<;laries num~rous, branching at angles of .more than 45°, rather straight, parallel, camptodrome. 

Tlus species. is quite distinct from any other species of Celastrophyllum, although it shows 

s~me points of .similarity with the abundant Ra;ritan and Dakota species. It was described 

hom the Magothy formation of New Jersey; the occurrence in South Carolina being the first 

recgrded outsjd~ of the type area. It is rare in South Carolina and not especially well preserved, 

th~ iuaterial differing from the type in the somewhat more numerous secondaries . 

. Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Cre~k formation, Rocky Point, Sumter 

Qounty ... (Collected by E. W. Berry.)· 

·Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

CELASTROPHYLLUM · CRENATUM Heer. 

!\'':l (~ .. r 

Ce·Za~irophyllum crenatum Heer, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 7, 1883, p. 4i, Pl. LXII, fig. 21. 

Celastrophyllum crenatum Smith, On the geology of the Coastal Plain of Alabama, 1894, p. 348. 

0!'-,lastrophyllum crenatum Newberry, The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p. 99, 

. Pl. :XLVIII, figs. 1-19. 

az~strqphyllum crenatum Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. ,34, 1907, p. 197, Pl. XIII, fig. 5 . . hn · ·. ! ·,. ~ • • .• , , 

.r·D.~scription.-Leaves very variable in size·, 2 to 8 centimeters. in length by 1 to 5 centimeters 

ii). .width, ovate or eliptical in outline, broadly rounded above, narrowed and generally inequilateral below. Margins entire below, coarsely toothed above, with somewhat variable, rounded, 

crenate, or crenato-dentate teeth. A few specimens are entire. throughout and some have a 

markedly inequilateral base. Midrib fairly stout. Secondaries numerous, nine or ten pairs, 

subopposite, branching from the.midrib at angles somewhat in excess of 45°, slightly curved 

upward and parallel, branching near the margin to form festoons from which branches enter 

the marginal teeth. 

This species was described by Heer from the Patoot beds of Greenland and unfortunately 

only a single small leaf was figured. · The Raritan leaves, which are abundant, grade into 

much larger forms that are also present in ·the Black Creek formation of' North Carolina and 

the Tuscaloosa formation of Alabama. 

The species is rare in South Carolina, fragmentary specimens being sparsely represented in 

the Middendorf collections. The genus is characteristic of th~ late Lower Cretaceous and early 

Upper Cretaceous of eastern North America and is not known anywhere from beds of Montana 

or Senonian age. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf, Chesterfield County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson and E. W:Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National :Museum. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 51 . 

CELASTROPHYLLUM CAROLINENSIS sp. nov. 

Plate XIII, figures 1-5. 

Description.-Leaves lanceolate in outline, with a pointed apex and a cuneate base, about 

14 centimeters in length by 2.9 centimeters in greatest width, which is about midway between 

the apex and the base, tapering equally in both directions. Midrib stout, rather flexuous. 

Secondaries numerous, thin, branching fron;:t the midrib at acute angles of 45° or less, curving 

upward, usually carriptodrome, a few craspedodrome in the upper part of the leaf, sending 

tertiary branches into the marginal teeth. Margin entire for a short distance at the base, 

above which it is crenate or biconvex, the teeth large and interspersed with smaller subordinate 

teeth of the same character. Leaf substance thin. 

Tlus striking form. is rather common at the locality near Langley, but all the leaves are. 

much broken, though fragments of all parts of the leaf are present, and fully warrant the 

restoration shown in figure 5 of the plate. 

This species has been compared with a very large amount of existing material in the 

herbaria of the New York Botanical Garden and the United States National Museum. It 

shows analogies with a variety of existing genera, as for example, Cunonia, Clerodendron, 

Symplocos, Ternstromia, Callicarpa, Panax, and other forms, but is believed to find its nearest 

relatives among the Celastracere. It is not close to any described fossil species, although there 

is a general resemblance to a number of the American Cretaceous species of Celastrophyllum. 

There is also a general resemblance to Grevilleophyllum constans 1 and Aralia coriacea, 2 both 

Cenomanian species described by V elenovsky from Bohemia. Leaves of this sort have also 

been referred to Dryandroides (cf. quercinea Velenovsky), Myrica (cf. serrata Velenovsky), 

Quercus, and Fraxinus. · 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Langley, Aiken 

County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson and E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Family ANACARDIACElE. 

Genus RHUS Linne . 

RHUS DARLINGTONENSIS • sp. J?..OV. 

Plate IX, figures 7 and 8. 

Descriptio~.-Leaflets large, broadly ovate in outline, with an obtusely pointed apex 

and a rounded base, about 9 or 10 centimeters in length by 4.5 centimeters in greatest width, 

which is the middle or lower half of the leaf. Texture subcoriaceous. :Margin dentate, crenate, 

or scalloped, with subordinate crenulations. · Midrib straight, fairly stout. Secondaries consisting of about nine subopposite or alternate pairs, branching from the midrib at' obtuse angles 

of about 60°, approximately parallel, slightly curved, craspedodrome, terminating in the main 

marginal teeth and sending short outwardly and downwardly directed branches to the subordinate teeth. Bulk of tertiaries transverse. , 

This large and evidently handsome species is based upon abundant, but very poorly preserved material, the two best specimens being those figured. In general appearance it suggests 

the less elongate and broader leaves of Myrica elegans Berry, but it is a much larger and broader 

leaf with n1ore open secondaries. 

Five Cretaceous species of Rhus have been described, three from the Dakota sandstone and 

two from Europe, one of the latter being also recorded from Glen Cove, Long Island, by Hollick. 

The South Carolina species is very different from all these and is much more modern in appearance, suggesting a nun1ber of Tertiary species of Rhus and closely resembling the larger, less 

1 Velenovsky, J., Die Flora der bohmischen Kreideformation, pt. 2, 1883, p. 3, Pl. I, figs. 6-10. 

2 Idem, pt. 3, 1884, p. 11, Pls. I, figs. 1-9; II, fig. 2. 

. I 
52 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH. CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

elongate leaves of the existing Rhus glabra Linne; in fact, leaves of the latter can be selected 

which, except for the more acute teeth, are exactly like this Cretaceous form. 

Occurrence.-Black Creek fqrmation, near Darlington, Darlington County. (Collected by 

L. W. Stephenson.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Order THYMELEALES. 

Family LAURACElE. 

Genus LAURUS Linne. 

LAURUS PLUTONIA Heer. 

Plates XI, figure 2, and XIII, figure 6. 

Laurus plutonia Heer, Flora. fossilis arctica, vol. 6, Abth. 2, 1882, p. 75, Pis. XIX, figs. 1d, 2-4; XX, figs. 3a, 4-5; 

XXIV, :fig. 6b; XXVIII, figs. 10 and 11; and XLII, :fig. 4b. 

Laurus plutonia Heer, idem, vol. 7, 1883, p. 30, Pis. LVIII, fig. 2, and LXII, fig. 1a. 

Laurus plutonia1Velenovsky, Die Flora der bohmischen Kreideformation, pt. 3, 1884, p. 1, Pl. IV, figs. 2-4. 

Laurus plutonia Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 91, Pis. XIII, 

:figs. 5 and 6, and XXII, fig. 5. 

Laurus plutonia Lesquereux, Geol. and Nat. Hist. Survey Minnesota, vol. 3, pt. 1, 1895, p. 14, Pis. A, fig. 6, a11d B, 

fig. 5. 

Laurus plutonia Newberry, The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p. 85, PI. XVI, 

figs. 10 and 11. • 

Laurus plutonia Hollick, Annals New York Acad. Sci., vol. 11, 1898, p. 60, Pl. IV, figs. 6 and 7 

Laurus plutonia? Gould, Am. Jour. Sci., 4th ser., vol. 5, 1898, p. 175.· 

Laurus plutonia Berry, Bull. New York Bot. Garden, vol. 3, 1903, p. 79, Pl. L, figs. 9-11 

Laurus plutonia Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 31, 1904, p. 77, Pl. III, fig. 1. 

Laurus plutonia Berry, idem, vol. 33, 1906, p. 178. 

Laurus plutonia Berry, Ann. Rept. State Geologist New Jersey for 1905, 1906, pp. 138 and 139. 

Laurus plutonia Hollick, The Cretaceous :flora of southern New York and-New England: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, 

vol. 50, 1907, p. 80, Pls. XXVII, figs. 9 and 11, and XXVIII, figs. 1 and 2. 

Description.-Leaves lanceolate in outline, usually tapering almost equally in both directions 

but some specimens less acute at the base. Length, ·7 to 11 centimeters; greatest width, 1.5 

to 2.5 centimeters. Midrib fairly stout. Petiole slfort and .stout, 6 to 15 millimeters in length. 

Secondaries slender, eight or more alternate pairs, camptodrome. 

This specieswas described by Heer from the Atane beds of Greenland and a large number 

of somewhat variable and fragmentary specimens were figured. Prof. Newberry subsequently recorded specimens from the Raritan formation of New· Jersey' without giving any 

. specific localities. Those figured show leaves which are relatively wider than is usual with 

leaves of this species, but these are comparable with some of Heer's Greenland specimens.1 

Entirely typical leaves occur in the top layer of the Raritan at the Hylton pits in southwestern 

New Jersey. 

8u bsequent to its description by Heer this species was recorded from a very large number 

of Cretaceous plant beds, so that its present range, both geographic and geologic, is rather 

wide. Some of these records the writer believes to be not altogether above question, however, 

among those of which doubt is felt being the identifications of the forms from the Cenomanian 

of Bohemia by V elenovsky. 

It is evidently a rare plant in the Raritan but becomes abundant in immediately succeeding 

floras, being common in that of the Dakota sandstone and in the Magothy formation at a number 

of localities in New Jersey and Maryland. It is a common form in the insular Cretaceous floras 

and also occurs in the South Atlantic Coastal Plain. Supposed fruits are figured by Heer. 2 

In South Carolina this species is represented by typical leaves that are not at all uncommon. · 

lt has not been detected in the North Carolina Cretaceous, although it ranges from the base 

~o the top of the Tuscaloosa formation in Alabama. 

lOp. cit., Yol. 6, Abth. 2, 1882, Pis. XX, figs. 5 and 1~. 2Qp. cit., Pl. XLII, fig . .Jb. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SQUTH CAROLINA. 53 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf~ 

Chesterfield County; near Langley, Aiken County. (Collected by L. W. ·stephenson and E. W. 

Berry.) 

Oollections.-V. S. National Museum. 

LAURUS ATANENSIS nom. nov. 

Plate XIII, figure 7. 

Laurus angusta Heer, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 6, Abtb. 2, 1882, p. 76, Pls. XX, figs. lb and 7, and XLIII fig. lc 

(non Rafinesque). · 

Laurus angusta Heer, idem, vol. 7, 1883, p. 30, Pl. LVII, fig. lb. 

Laurus anJusta Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 93, Pl. XVI, 

fig. 7. ' 

Laurus angusta Hollick, Bull. New York Bot. Garden, vol. 3, 1904, p. 408, Pl. LXX, figs. 10 and 11. 

Laurus angusta Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, 

vol. 50, 1907, p. 81, Pl. XXVII, figs. 11 and 12. 

Description.-Leaves entire, liriear-lanceolate, tapering about equally to the acuminate 

apex and base. Length, 12 centimeters or less; some of Heer's Gr~enland material ranging 

considerably under this dimension. Width, about 1.5 centimeters. Midrib relatively thin. 

Secondaries thin, somewhat widely separated, branching .from the midrib at acute angles, 45° 

or less, nine to twelve alternate pairs, finally ascending along the margin, carnptodrome. 

Tertiaries forming the characteristio areolation of the genus. 

Heer originally compared this species with Laurus plutonia, pointing out that it was more 

linear and acuminate. I-Ie also remarks that it is somewhat smaller, but this generalization 

has been found not to hold good, even for the Greenland material. The primaries are sparser 

and more- ascending than in Laurus plutonia and the more linear form gives the leaf a decidedly 

different aspect. There can be no doubt that the two are perfectly distinct species; naturally 

possessing certain lauraceous characters in common. 

Heer's name for .this species is preoccupied by that given by Rafinesque to an existing 

species, so that a new name is necessary, the one proposed being given in allusion to the type 

locality. · 

Laurus atanensis was described from the Atane beds of Greenland and was subsequently 

recorded from the Patoot beds. Lesquereux identified it from the Dakota sandstone of Kansas· 

and I-Iollick has recorded it from the clays of Northport, Long Island, which are probably of 

l\1agothy age. It has not been detected from the southern Atlanti~ Coastal Plain, although it 

may well be present in the unstudied collections from the Magothy formation of Maryland and 

from the Tuscaloosa formation of Alabama. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, Rocky Point, Sumter 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) · · · 

Oollections.-V. S. National :Museum. 

Genus LAUROPHYLLUM Gpeppert . 

. LAUROPHYLLUM ELEGANS Hollick. 

Plate XII, figure 6. 

Laurus plutonia Hollick, Trans. New York Acad. Sci., vol. 11, 1892, p. 99, Pl. III, figs. 3 and 4. 

Laurus plutonia Hollick, idem, vol. 12, 1893, p. 236, Pl. VI, fig. 1 (non Heer). 

Proteoides daphnogenoides Hollick, Annals New York Acad. Sci., vol. 2, 1898, p. 420, Pl. XXXVI, fig. 2 (non Heer). 

Laurophyllum elegans Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of New York and New England: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 

·50, 1907, p. 81, Pl. XXVII, figs. 1-5. 

Laurophyllum elegans Berry, BulL Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 37, 1910, pp. 26, 198. 

Description.-Leaves elongate-lanceolate, somewhat flexuous, about 12 or 13 centimeters 

in length by about 2 centimeters in greatest width, which is about midway between the apex 

and the base; from this point they narrow gradually apically into an attenuated acup:1inate 1 

usually curved tip, and basally into a long~ narrowly cuneate base. Midrib and petiole stout~ 

Secondaries numerous, usually less close and somewhat. coarser than. in Laurophyllum nervil-
:54 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

losum, branching from the midrib at an acute angle below, which becomes more open above the 

b~se of the leaf; they are usually more curved than in Laurophyllum nervillosum and i:nore 

distinctly camptodrome. Tertiaries transverse throughout. 

These leaves were recorded originally by Hollick as Laurus plutonia Heer and were later 

compared with Laurus angusta Heer, which latter species they resemble more th,an they do the 

former. In outline they are not unlike Laurophyllum angustifolium Newberry, from the Raritan 

formation of Woodbridge, N. J., but differ decidedly in venation. They are also similar but 

quit~ distinct from Laurophyllum nervillosum Hollick,. of the East, and Laurophyllum reticulatum 

Lesquereux, of the Dakota sandstone. 

The type was obtained from transported materials associated with the terminal PJ.Oraine, 

frhrn whi:ch numerous specimens have been collect~d. Those from Tottenville, Staten Island, 

are undoubtedly ofRaritan age, but those from Glen Cove may have come originally from the 

~agot.hy .. formation, although they are probably Raritan. The species is certainly known from 

the upper part of the Raritan at South Amboy, N.J., and is common in the J\1agothy formation 

~f Ma;ryland. It is sparsely represented in the Black Creek formation of North Carolina and is 

no't' uri·common near Middendorf, the. latter specimens being slightly broader and consequently 

having fewer secondaries ascending t~an the type specimens. 

O~cu;.,..ence.-Midd(mdorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near J\1iddendorf, 

Chester:(ield County. (Collected by L. W. Stephen3on and E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.~U. S. National Museum. 

LAUROPHYLLUM NERVILLOSUM Hollick. 1.' 

Plate XII, figure 7. 

Proteoides daphnogenoid,es Hollick, Annals New York Acad. Sci., vol. 2, 1898, p. 420, Pl. XXXVI, figs. 1 and 3 (non 

Heer). 

Laurophyllum nervillosum'Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of southern :rfew York and New England: Mon. U. S. Geol. 

Survey, vol. 50, 1907, p. 82, Pl. XXVII, figs. 6, 7. 

Laurophyllum nervillosum. Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 36, 1909, p. 255. 

Description.-Leaves of. c·omparatively large size, oblong-lanceolate in outline, about 15 

centimeters in length by about 2.5 centimeters in greatest width, which is about midway between 

the apex and the base. Apex acuminate. Base pointed, narrowly cuneate. Midrib stout. 

Secondaries thin, close, parallel, branching from the midrib at angl~s not exceeding and usually 

somewhat less than 45°, ascending, nearly straight or somewhat flexuous, connected by transverse nervilles, branching and inos~ul~ting near the margin, where they merge in the tertiary 

venation. 

This species was described : origina~y from the terminal moraine at Totten ville, Staten 

Island, and undoubtedly represents transported Raritan materials. It is also present in the 

lower part of the Raritan formation at Milltown, N. J., and is not uncommon in the South 

Carolina Cretaceous. It is somewhat like Laurophyllum lanceolatum Newberry, but has a 

markedly different venation and a less lanceolate outline. It is also quite clo_se to Laurophyllum 

elegans Hollick, which is, however, a m<?re. s~ellder lanceolate leaf, having narrowly produced 

apex and base and a somewhat coarser venation, with camptodrome secondaries, less close and 

more curved. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf, Chesterfield County. Black Creek formation, near Darlington, Darlington County. (Collected by 

L. W. Stephenson and E. W. B~rry.). 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Genus CINNAMOMUM Blume.· i 

CrNNAMOMUM NEWBERRYI nom. nov. 

Plate IX, figures 12 and 13. . 

This species is described in the section of this report dealing with the Upper Cretaceous 

flora of Georgia (pp. 11?-118). The South Carolina remains referred to it are f~w and poor, 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 

a1~d include frag~ents of' rather l~rge leaves from Rocky Point and doubtfully determi~ed fragments from the banks ofCongaree River. ' 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, Rocky Point, Sumter 

County; right bank of Congaree River, about 25 miles below Columbia, Lexington County·. 

(Collected by E. W. Berry, B. L. Miller, and M. W. Twitchell.). 

Oollections.-U. S. National ~1useu~. · ; .. : ·, ~ 

.ClN:t{A.~iQ~~~~~··~{n:)~~NDORFEN.SIS sp. nov. 

Plates VIII, figure 14, and IX, figure 1. .... ~ ....... 

Description.-Leaves lance~laie ~~ o~tline, somewhat widened toward the acute'. qas~ .. 

Length 8 to 10 centimeters; greatest width, 1. 7 to 2.4 centimeters in the basal half of the Teaf, 

the margins narrowing gradually upward to produce the very much extended, acutely pointed 

apex. Primaries three, from the top of the petiole,· the midrib being slightly· the more promi:.. 

nent. Angles of divergence acute, 20° to 25 °. The lateral primaries assiune a course app~oXi:.. 

mately parallel to the midrib about half way between the latter and the margins and extei;td 

well into the tip of the leaf, finally joining a short, upwardly curving secondary from the ·~1d~ 

rib. Tertiaries numerous, transverse, nearly straight, and parallel. From the extreme''"ba.se 

on either side a marginal vein extend~ upward from one-third to one-half the distance to the ~pex, joining the· ends of the transverse tertiaries which.· ext~nd. outward from the lateral 

primaries, above which upwardly curved camptodrome secondaries are given off. Texture . . . ~ ~ ,_ . . . ' ' . 

conaceous. 

This is an exceedingly well-marked and .handsome species, entirely distinct fron1 any 

Cretaceous forms hitherto described. It is a typical Cinnamomum in all its characteristics, 

although it may be compared with a variety of tropical genera such as Leucosyke and Zizyphus. 

It bears ~orne resemblance to the Bohemia~ Cenomamian forms described by V~J~D.:?.Y.~kf.l .Dt§l 

Oocculus cinnamomeus and is strikingly like certain existing Oriental species of CW,:r;l.,amp~um, 

as, for example, Oinnamomum chinense Blume or Oinnamomum albifiorum Rees. It 'is, also. close 

to various Tertiary species referred to this genus. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near ... ~~~~e~~or{, 

Chesterfield County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson and E. W. Berry~) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Order MYRTALES. 

Family MYRTACElE. 

Genus EUCALYPTUS L'Heritier. 

EucALYPTUS ANGUSTA Velenovsky . 

. Plate XIV, figure 2. 

t. ·' -. . . ~." •. · .... 

Eucalyptus angusta Velenovsky, Die Flora der bohmischen Kreideformation, pt. 4,. 1885,p. 3, Pl. III, figs_. 2-12. 

Eucalyptus angusta Velenovsky, Kvetena ceskeho cenomanu, 1889, p. 21, Pl. VI, fig. J. 

? Eucalyptus angusta Sa porta, Flore fossile du Portugal, 1894, p. 207, Pl. XXXVI, fig. 12. 

Eucalyptus angusta Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 36, 1909, p. 260, Pl. XVIII, fig. 5. ...'' 

Description.-The f.o~~nving is Velenovsky's. ~escription of this interesting species.: 

Blatte:r lineal, schmallineallanzettlich, in der Mitte oder in der unteren Halite am breitesten, ganzandig, vorne 

in eine sehr lange Spjtze vorgezogen 11-nd mit einem harten Dorn beendet. Der Primarnerv gerade, ziemlich stark, 

zur Spitze hin verdi.i~mt. Die Sec~ndarnervenahlrich, unter spitzen Winkeln entspringend, am Rande.dur~i1.einen 

Saumne'rv untereinander verbunden. Der Blattsteil gerade, etwa 1 em. lang, stark. · · ·• · · 

This species is exceedingly common at a number of ,localities in the Perucer-s~hlchten: of 

Bohemia (Cenomanian),,· wher~ Velenovsky subsequently fou'nd fruit-bearing twig~ whl~h .. h~ 

described nnd figured iri 1889 and which, it would seem, conclusively establish the botanic 

relations of these leaves. · · . · . · ... · .. 1' I~'~'!... {).:.. 

1 Velenovsky, J., :J)ie l!'lom der bohmischen Kreideformation, pt. ~,1885, p. 4 (65); Pl:.:VII( (31), figs. 16-21. .•t.~ .... t,f.:\ •. :~t 
56 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND ~OCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Subsequently Sa porta recorded this species ·from the Albian beds of Portugal; the 

latter material is, however, rather incomplete and open to ·question. Recent collections in our 

Atlantic Coastal Plain show that this species was present in considerable abundance on this 

side of .the Atlantic at the same time that it flourished in Europe. It has been collected from 

the upper part of the Raritan formation at South Amboy, N.J., where it is common, and from 

the Black Creek formation of South Carolina, where it is associated with Araucaria bladenensis 

Berry just as it is in Georgia. It may be somewhat more fully characterized as follows: Leaves 

alternate or ~attered, mostly elongated, linear-lanceolate, many falcate, 4.5 to 15 centimeters. 

in length by 5 to 13.5 millimeters in width, with an attenuated acute tip and a narrowly cuneate 

base decliiring to the short and stout petiole. Midrib moderately stout below, becoming 

attenuated above. Secondaries very numerous, fine,· and close,. about 1 millimeter apart, 

parallel, rather straight; they branch from the midrib at ac1:1te angles of about 30° or slightly 

less and run with slight curvature to · join the well-marked but fine marginal hem, which 

shows in all the Am~rican material and in most of the illustrations of the foreign material. 

In all respects this is one of the most characteristica1ly Eucalyptus-like species of the 

many which have· been ident~ed as such; and its totality of characters, combined with the 

presence of attached fruits in the Bohemian material, which are not unlike some of those of 

modern forms, renders the identification very satisfactory. . 

Occurrence.-Black Creek formation, right bank of Black Creek, below Williamson's bridge, 

Florence County. (Collected by L. 1,V. Stephenson·.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

EucALYPTUS GEINITZI (Heer) Heer. 

Plates XIII, figlires 8-12, and XIV, figure 1. 

Myrtophyllum geinitzi Heer, Flora von Moletein, 1872, p. 22, PL XI, fig. 3, 4. 

Myrtophyllum geinitzi Heer, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 3, Abth. 2, 1874, p. 116, Pl. XXXII, figs. 14-17. 

·Eucalyptus geinitzi Heer, idem, vol. 6, Abth. 2, 1882, p. 93, Pis. XIX, fig. ic, and IV, fig. 1, 13. 

Eucalyptus geinitzi Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 138, Pl. 

XXXVII, fig. 20. 

Myrtophyllum warderi Lesquereux, idem, 1892, p. 136, Pl. LIII, p. 53, fig. 10. 

Eucalyptus? angustijolia Newberry, The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p. 111, 

Pl. XXXII, figs. 1, 6, and 7 (non Desvaux 1822). 

Eucalyptus geinitzi Newberry, idem, 1896, p. 110, Pl. XXXII, figs. 2 and 12 (non :figs. 15, 16j. 

Eucalyptus geinitzi Hollick, Annals New York Acad. Sci., vol. 11, 1898, p. 60, Pl. IV, figs. 1-3. 

Eucalyptus geinitzi Berry, Bull. New York Bot. Garden, vol. 3, 1903, p. 87, Pl. LIII, fig. 3. 

Eucalyptus? angustijolia Hollick, idem, vol. 3, 1904, p. 408, Pl. LX:X; :figs. 8 and 9. 

Eucalyptus geinitzi Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 31, 1904, p. 78, pl. IV, fig. 5. 

Eucalyptus geinitzi Berry, idem, vol. 33, 1906, p. 180. 

Eucalyptus geinitzi Berry, idem, vol. 34, 1907, p. 201, Pl. XV, fig. 4. 

Eucalyptus geinitzi Berry, Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ., new ser., No.7, 1907, p. 81. 

Eucalyptus geinitzi Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, 

vol. 50, 1907, p. 96, Pl. XXX:V, figs. 1-8, 10-12. 

Myrtophyllum warderi Hollick, i4em, p. 97, Pl.·XXXV, fig. 13. 

Eucalyptus angustijolia Hollick, idem, 1907, p. 95, Pl.· XXXV, figs. 9, 14, and 15. 

Description.-Leaves lanceolate in ou-tline, broadest near the middle and almost equally 

tapering-in both directions to the acute apex and base. 'There is considerable variation in size, 

the South Carolina leaves averaging about 15 centimeters in length by 2.2 centimeters in 

. greatest width. The petiole is very stout, as is the prominent midrib, which leaves a sharp 

groove in impressions of the lower surface of the leaf. Se.condaries numerous, thin, branching 

fro in the midrib at acute angles, about 45 °, and running with only a slight curvature to the 

marginal vein, which is either almost straight ·when the secondaries are close set, or more or 

less bowed when the secondaries are some·little distance apart, as they are in many specimens. 

This species has an especially wide range. It was described originally from the Cenomanian 

of Moravia, and has since been .record.ed from a number of other European localities, from 

the Atane, beds of Greenland and the Dakota sandstone of the West, and from Marthas Vineyard. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 57 

to Alabama along the Atlantic Coast. The South Carolina material is abundant and charact.eristic, and.is certainly identical with the type, whatever may be thought of some of the leaves 

which have been identified with this species. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose· member of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County; near Langley, .Aiken County; Rocky Point, Sumter County. (Collected 

by L. W. Stephenson and E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

EucALYPTUS WARDIANA Berry 0). 

Plate XIV, figures 3 and 4. 

Eucalyptus? dubia Berry, Bull. New York Bot. Garden, vol. 3, 1903, p. 87, Pl. LII, fig. 1 (non Ettingshausen). 

Eucalyptus wardiana Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 32, 1905, p. 47. 

Eucalyptus wardiana Berry, idem, vol. 33, 1906, p. 180. 

Eucalyptus wardiana Berry, Ann. Rept. State Geologist New Jersey for 1905, 1906, pp. 138, 139, and 141. 

Description.-Leaves entire, \linear-lanceolate in outline, with an acute apex and cuneate 

base, about 10 or 12 centimeters in length by 1 to 1.6 centimeters in greatest width. Petiole 

stout, of considerable length. Midrib stout. Secondaries numerous, approximately straight 

and parallel, branching from the midrib at angles of 45° to 50°, their ends connected by a 

marginal vein, which is straight and close to the margin, with which it is parallel. This species 

was originally described "by the writer from New Jersey, and is found to a characteristic species 

of the Magothy formation in that State as well as in Delaware and Maryland. It is v~ry similar 

to the upper Raritan species, Eucalyptus linearifolia Berry (Eucalyptus nervosa Newberry), 

, and probably the forms from the Tuscaloosa formation of Alabama correlated by Ward with 

the latter species are referable to this species. The South Carolina remains agree with the 

type material from New Jersey better than is indicated by the figures, for the type figures are 

not accurate. · 

This species may also be compared with the contemporaneous Eucalyptus angusta V elenovsky, which is, however, a smaller, falcate, less linear leaf with still more numerous and more 

ascenqing secondaries. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, Ecar Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson and E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Order UMBELLALES. 

Family ARALIACE.lE. 

Genus HEDERA Linne. 

llEDERA PRIMORDIALIS Saporta. 

Hedera primordialis Saporta, Le monde des plantes, 1879, p. 200, figs. 29, 1 and 2. 

Hedera primordialis VelenovskY., Die Flora der bohmischen Kreideformation, pt. 1, 1882, p. 19, Pis. VIII, fig. 7; IX, 

figs. 4 and 5; and X,. figs. 3 and 4. 

Hedera primordialis Newberry, The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey,vol. 26, 1896, p. 113, Pis. XIX, 

figs. 1 and 9 and XXXVII, figs. 1-7. 

Hedera p'rimordialis Berry, Bull. Torrey. Bot. Club, 1907, vol. 34, p. 201, Pl. XVI. 

Description.-Leaves elliptical, reniform or cordate in outline, very variable in size and 

shape. Length 3 to 12 centimeters, width ?.2 to 12 centimeters, generally broader than long. 

Apex rounded or obtusely pointed, in some specimens slightly emarginate. Margin somewhat 

irregular but entire. Base varies from truncate to deeply cordate. Petiole long and stout, 

generally not preserved. Venation palmate from the top of the petiole. Primaries range in 

number from three to seven, usually five or seven, of which the midrib is the stoutest, especially 

in the smaller leaves. The lowest pair of primaries, which are approximately parallel with 

the basal margins of the leaf, are smaller in size than the others and should be regarded as 

secondaries. The primaries are then normally five in number, curved and camptodrome. 
58 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

This species was figured by Saporta in 1879 from the Cenomanian of Bohemia and described 

three years later by Velenovsky from the same horizon. Heer identified rather fragmentary 

remains from the Atane beds of Gre.enland with this species, which is also abundant in the 

Raritan formation of Woodbridge, N. J., and in the Black Creek formation of North Carolina. It varies greatly in size and appearance, some of the smaller specimens from abroad 

suggesting the genus Cercis, whereas the smaller Raritan leaves suggest somewhat the genus 

Ficus. Of these variable specimens the writer is disposed to consider as typical those shown in 

Velenovsky's Plate X, figure 4, and Saporta's figure 2, as well as various Woodbridge specimens, 

which are, however, mostly incomplete. 

This is a remarkably widespread species, and is better characterized where it does occur 

than is usual in cosmopolitan types. Although the modern representation of this genus is 

reduced to two species in Europe and northern Africa and a third in Japan, it seems to have 

been a more or less prominent type in the Cretaceous and Tertiary floras of the globe. In addition to the present species, which has the wide range previously mentioned, 8 or 10 additional 

Cretaceous species, mostly American, are known. The Eocene, both of America and Europe, · 

furnis?-es six or eight species, the Oligocene of Europe and the Arctic regions one or two species, 

and the Miocene and Pliocene two or three additional. The modern Old World Hedera helix 

Linne is recorded from the Pleistocene (Interglacial) of England, Italy, and the Paris basin, 

and one of the upper Miocene species appears also to have survived into.the Italian Pleistocene. 

Although so abundant in our Cretaceous flOTas, it is not a native plant in the existing flora of 

North America. · 

Occurrence.-Black Creek formation, Peedee River, about 6 miles 2below Cheraw, Chesterfield County; near Darlington, Darlington County. (Collected by ... E. W. Berry and L. W. 

Stephenson.) 

. Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Order ERICALES. 

Family ERICACElE. 

Genus .ANDROMEDA Linne. 

ANDROMEDA NOV JECJESAREJE Hollick. 

Plate XIV, figures 5 and 6. 

Andromeda novrecalcarere Smith, On the geology of the Coastal Plain of Alabama, 1894, p. 348. 

Andromeda novrecresarere Hollick, in Newberry, The flora of the Amboy cl~ys: Mon. U. S. ·Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, 

p. 121, Pl. XLII, figs. 9-12, 28-31. 

Andromeda novrecresarere Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 33, 1906, p. 181. 

Andromeda novrecresarere' Berry, idem, vol. 34, 1907, p. 204. 

Description.-Leaves small, thick, and entire, with stout petioles and midribs and obscure 

secondary venation, which is immersed in the thick lamina. Length 2.5 to 5' centimeters. 

' Width varies from 0.9 to 1.3 centimeters. Venation where visible shows numerous parallel, 

camptodrome, relatively long and thin secondaries which branch from the midrib at an acute 

angle. Though the majority of these leaves are equally acuminate at both ends, there is 

a great deal of variation in this respect, and a considerable number of specimens which are 

relatively broader, especially in the upper half, exhibit a well-marked tendency toward an 

obtusely rounded apex, in which the termination of the midrib shows as a small mucronate 

point. The base in these forms gradually narrows to the stout petiole. The variations in 

outline of this species are well shown in the· figures reproduced in Newberry's monograph, the 

specimens from the southern Coastal Plain seeming to have .more commonly than those from 

New Jersey an obtusely rounded apex. · · 

In the Raritan formation this species is only known with certainty from the uppermost 

beds at South Amboy, N.J. It becomes more abundant in the overlying Magothy formation, 

occurring from New Jersey to Maryland in beds of t~is age. Farther south it is found ·as one 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 59 

of the typical fossils of the Black Creek formation in North Carolina, being a prominent but 

never abundant element in the dark lignitic laminated clays of the upper beds, associated with 

Araucaria, Cunninghamites, Pistia, and other genera, and with a marine fauna. 

It also occurs in clays of the Middendorf member of the Black Creek formation of South 

Carolina and in the Tuscaloosa formation of Alabama, anq was one of the few leaves which 

successfu1y resisted maceration in the shallow shoreward deposits known as the Cusseta sand 

member of the Ripley formation of Georgia, occurring at Buena Vista in association with 

Araucaria bladenensis just as it does along Black River in North Carol.illa. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson and E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

ANDROMEDA GRANDIFOLIA Berry~ 

Plate XIV, :figure 10 . 

. Andromeda latijolia Smith, On the geology of the Coastal Plain in Alabama, 1894, p. 348. 

Andromeda latijolia Newberry, The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p. 120, Pla. 

XXXIII, :figs. 6-8, 10 (non :fig. 9); XXXIV, :figs. 6-11; and XXXVI,.:fig~ 10 (non 'Vright). 

Andromeda latijolia Hollick, Bull. New York )3ot. Garden, vol. 3, 1904, p. 416, Pl. LXXIX, :fig. 3. 

Andromeda latijolia Hollick, The ·cretaceous flora. of southern New York and New England: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, 

vol. 50, 1907, p. 100, Pl. XXXIX, :fig. 1. . 

Andromeda gmndifolia Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 34, 1907, p. 204, Pl. XV, :fig. 3. 

Description.-Leaves thick and coriaceous, varying considerably in size and shape. From 

4 to 20 centimeters in length by 1.5 to 7 centimeters in width. Ovate-lanceolate in outline, 

with an entire, usually somewhat undulate or 'unsymmetrical margin. )\..pex obtusely pointed 

or in some specimens rounded. Base somewhat wedge-shaped. Midrib and petiole very stout. 

Secondaries relatively few, six to eight pairs, stout and flexuous, branching from the midrib 

at an acute angle and sweeping upward in long curves, eventually inosculating to complete 

the strictly camptodrome venation. 

This species occurs from the lower part of the Raritan formation of New Jersey to the top 

of the eastern leaf-bearing Cretaceous. It is a not uncommon fossil in the Magothy formation, 

the Black Creek formation of North Carolina, and the Tuscaloosa formation of Alabama. It 

is larger, relatively broader, and less regular than Andromeda parlatorii Heer, the two leaves 

figured on Plate XIV showing the average sha,Pe, with a length of about 10 centimeters and a 

width of about 5 centimeters. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of the Black Creek formation, Rocky Point1 

Sumter County. (Collected by L. F. Ward and L. C. Glenn.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. · 

ANDROMEDA EUPHORBIOPHYLLOIDE'S sp .. nov. 

Plate XIV, :figure 7. 

Description.-Leaves small, entire, obovate-lanceolate, with a broadly rounded apex and 

a narrowed cuneate base, about 5.3 centimeters in length by 1.25 centimeters in greatest width, 

which is in the apical half of the leaf. Petiole short and stout. Midrib stout. Secondaries 

n~erous, approximately parallel, thin, branching from the midrib at acute angles, long, 

ascending, camptodrome. Te~ture coriaceous. · 

This species in its size, outline, and venation is referable to the genus Andromeda, greatly 

resembling some of the obovate leaves of the. c~:mtemporaneous Andromeda novceccesarece Hollick, 

differing in its more elo:qgate form and straighter, more produced base. It also resembles some 

of the leaves of the Dakota sandstone referred by Lesquereux 1 to his species Eugenia p~mceva 

but is more oblanceolate, with less full margins and straighter secondaries. It also resembles, 

especially in its general.form, certain curious leaves described by Saporta from the Cenomanian 

1 The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, 'vol. 17, 1899, p. 137, Pl. LIII, fig. 7. 
60 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND· EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

of Portugal 1 and from the Turonian of France,2 which are made the basis of a new genus, 

Euphorbiophyllum, and referred to the family Euphorbiacem .. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of ;Black Creek formation, near :Middendorf, 

. Chesterlield County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson and E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

ANDROMEDA PARLATORII .Heer. 

Andromeda parlatorii Heer, Phyllites cretacees du Nebraska, 1866, p. 18, Pl. I, fig. 5. 

Prunus? parlatorii Lesquereux, Am. Jour. Sci., 2d ser., vol. 46, 1868, p. 102. 

Leucothoe parlatorii Schimper, Paleontologie vegetale, vol. 3, 1874, p. ll. 

Andromeda parlatorii Heer, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 3, Abth. 2, 1874, p. i12, Pl. XXXII, figs. 1 and 2 . 

.Andromeda parlatorii Lesquereux, The Cretaceous flora, 1874, p. 88, Pls. XXIII, figs. 6 and 7, and XXVIII, fig. 15. 

Andromeda parlatorii Heer, idem, vol. 6, Abth. 2, 1882, p.79, Pls. XXI, figs. 1b and 11, and XLII, fig. 4c . 

.Andromeda parlatorii Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 115, Pis. 

XIX, fig. 1, and LII, fig. 6. 

Andromeda parlatorii Smith, On the geology of the Coastal Plain of Alabama, 1894, p. 348. 

Andromeda parlatorii Newberry, The flora of t.he Amboy clays: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p. 120, Pls. 

XXXI, figs. 1-7, and XXXIII, figs. 1, 2, 4, and 5. 

Andromedaparlatorii Hollick, Annals New York Acad. Sci., vol. ll, 1898, p. 420, Pl. XXXVII, figs. 1-4 .. 

Andromeda parlatorii Berry, Bull. New York Bot. Garden, vol. 3, 1903, p. 97, Pl. L, figs. 1-4. 

Andromeda parlatorii Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 31, 1904, p. 79, Pl. I, figs. 1 and 2 . 

.Andromeda parlatorii Berry, idem, vol. 33, 1906, p. 181. 

.Andromeda parlatorii Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, 

vol. 50, 1907, p. 101, Pl. XXXIX, figs. 2-5. 

Andromeda parlatorii Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 34, 1907, p. 203, Pl. XV, fig. 2. 

Andro"!"eda parlatorii Berry, Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ., new ser., No. 7, 1907, p. 81. 

Description.-Leaves ovate-lanceolate in outline, with a long and gra~ually ·narrowed apex 

and a broad, somewhat rounded, but finally cuneate or slightly decurrent base. Petiole and 

midrib stout. Length about 10 to 12 centimeters. Width about 3 centimeters in the lower 

half of the ·leaf. Secondaries numerous, rather thin,. subparallel, branching from the midrib 

at acute angles,, long and ascending, at length camptodrome. Tertiaries mostly straight 

transverse. There is considerable variation in the size of these leaves and in the angie which 

the secondaries form with the midrib and consequently in their length and degree of curvature. 

Some of the specimens are ni.uch like the small leaves of Andromeda grandifolia Berry, but are 

not so slender nor so attenuated apically as the normal leaves of that species. 

This species was first described by Heer in one of the earliest published accounts of the 

. flora of the Dakota sandstone, and it has sip.ce been found to have a wide geographic range. 

It is one of the commonest fossils in the Dakota sandstone, having been recorded from Minnesota, 

Kansas, .and Nebraska. In eastern North America it is recorded from the Atane beds of 

Greenland, the Raritan formation of .New Jersey, the Magothy formation of Marthas Vineyard, 

New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland, the Black Creekformation of North Carolin·a, and the 

Tuscaloosa formation of western Alabama. ' 

In South Carolina this species has . not been found in any abundance, a fact explained 

entirely by accidents of preservation. 

The genus Andromeda of Linne P,as been much segregated by subsequent taxonomists, 

and tp.is tendency to segregation is reflected in Schimper's proposal to refer this species to the 

genus Leucothoe. However, the more comprehensive name has obvious advantages for the 

paleobotanist where it is impossible -to discriminate between the various ericaceous genera 

with any degree of accuracy. · 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Lo:ngley, Aiken 

County; Rocky Point, Sumter County 0). (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

1 Saporta, G. de, Flore fossile du Portugal, 1894, p. 218, Pl. XXXIX, fig. 23. 

2 Saporta, 0. de, Evolution des Phamlrogames, vol. 2, 1885, p. 117, fig. 125 C. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. '61 

Order PRIMUL"ALE S. 

Family MYRSINACElE. 

Genus MYRSINE Linne. 

MYRSINE GAUDINI (Lesquereux) Berry. 

Plate XIV, figure 9. 

Myrsinites ? gaudini' Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 115, Pl. 

LII, fig. 4. 

Myrsine elongata Hollick, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 21, 1894, p. 54, Pl. CLXXVII, fig. 2. 

Myrsine elongata Newberry, The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p. 122, Pl. XXII, 

figs. 1-3. 

Myrsine elongata Hollick, Annals New York Acad. Sci., vol. 11, 1898, p. 420, Pl. XXXVIII, figs. 3, 4b, and 4c. 

Myrsine elongata Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, 

vol. 50, 1907, p. 102, Pls. VIII, fig. 1b, and XXXIX, figs. 13 and 14. 

Myrsine gaudini Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot: Club, vol. 36, 1909, p. 262. 

Description.-Leaves oblanceolate .or elongate-obovate in outline, 5.5 to 7 centimeters in 

length by 1.9 to 2.5 centimeters in greatest width. :Margins entire. Apex obtusely rounded. 

Base somewhat elongated, narrowly cuneate. Petiole present, stout. Midrib stout below, 

abruptly diminishing in caliber. Secondaries numerous, eight to ten pairs, alternate, branching 

from the midrib at angles of 40° to 45 °, camptodrome. When the tertiary venation is distinctly 

preserved, the venation is more typical of the genus than when only the secondaries are partly 

visible. · 

This species is well distributed in the Raritan formation and has been recorded also from 

Long Island and Staten Island. The identification of Myrsinites? gaudini Lesquereux with 

the eastern forms, with which it is obviously identical, extends the range eastward from Kansas 

to Long Island. It may be readily distinguished from the other species of Myrsine by its 

relatively narrow, elongated form. It is present in the Black Cre.ek formation of North Carolina and the Tuscaloosa formation of Alabama. It is not abundant in the South Carolina Cretaceous, being present only in Aiken County. The figured specimen is typical and extremely 

close to the type, being a trifle more elongated, as are also the leaves of this species from the 

northern Atlantic Coastal Plain. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Langley,. Aiken 

County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson and E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Order EBEN ALES. 

Family EBEN ACElE. 

Genus DIOSPYROS Linne. 

DrosPYROS PRIMJEV A I-Ieer. 

Plates XI, figure 3, and XIV, figures 12 and 13. 

Diospyros primmva Heer, Phyllites,cretacees du Nebras.Ka,.1866, p. 19, Pl. I; figs.·6 and 7 . 

.Diospyros primmva Heer, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 6, Al;>th. 2, 1882, p. 80, Pl. XVIII, fig. 11 . 

.Diospyros primmva Heer, idem, vol. 7, 1883, p. 3,1, Pl. LXI, figs. 5a, 5b, and 5c. 

Diospyros primmva Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 109, Pl. 

XX, figs. 1-3 . 

.Diospyros primmva Smith, On the geology of the Coastal Plain of Alabama, 1894, p. 348. 

Diospyros primmva Newberry, The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1~_96, p. 124, Pl. XXX, 

figs. 1-5. 

Diospyros primmva Knowlton, Twenty-first Ann. Rept. U. S. Geol. Survey, pt. 7, 1901, p. 317, Pl. XXXIX, fig. 3 . 

.Dios.pyros primmva Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 32, 1905, p. 46, Pl. II. 

Diospyros primmva Berry, idem, vol. 34, 1907-, p. 204. ' 

Diospyros primmva Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey 

vol. 50, 1907, p. 103, Pl. XL, figs. 2 and 11. 
62 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA•. 

Description.-Leaves oblong-ovate in outline, variable according .to ·age, ranging from 3 to 

15 centimeters in length by 1.3 to 5 centimeters in greatest width, which is in the middle part 

of the leaf. Apex acute or obtuse. Base cuneate. Margins entire. Petioles rather lon.g and 

very stout. Midrib also stout.· Secondaries branching from the midrib usually at acute angles, 

subopposite or alternate, parallel, camptodrome. Tertiaries forming polygonal areoles, whose 

relative prominence is one of the features of this species. 

This species, which is quite suggestive of the modern Diospyros virginiana Linne, was 

described by Heer from the Dakota sandstone of Nebraska nearly half a century ago. It has 

proved to be a most wide-ranging form, having been identified at both the Atane and Patoot 

horizons in Greenland; from various localities within the Dakota sandstone, and its probable 

southern equivalent the Woodbine sand of Texas; and, besides the fragments from Marthas 

Vineyard and Long Island, which are of questionable identity, it is common in either the Raritan or Magothy or homotaxial formations from New Jersey to Alabama. It has been recorded 

from the Cenomanian of Saxony and the Turonian of Bohemia. 

Its most marked character is the prominence of its tertiary areolation. This species is 

common at all leaf-bearing horizons in the South·Carolina Cretaceous deposits, and the material 

gathered near Langley is notable for the large number of small leaves associated with those of. 

. normal size. These conform to the type in all respects except that they are more slender and 

acuminate, a feature to be expected in the small leaves of Diospyros, and it is believed that 

they are not distinct from -the type. Two of these small leaves are figured, the normal-sized 

leaves having been amply illustrated by Newberry. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf, Chesterfield County; near Langley, Aiken County; Rocky Point, Sumter County; right bank of 

Congaree River, about 25 miles below Columbia, Lexington County ( n. (Collected by L. W. 

Stephenson, 'E. W. Berry, Earle Sloan, B. L. Miller, and M. W. Twitchell.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

DrosPYROS ROTUNDIFOLIA Lesquereux. 

Plate XIV, :figure 14. 

Diospyros rotundifolia Lesquereux, The Cretaceous flora, 1874, p. 89, Pl. XXX, :fig. L 

Diospyros rotundijolia Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. ll2, Pl. 

XVII, figs. 8-ll. 

Dio$pyros rotundifolia Berry, Ann. Rept. State Geologist, New Jersey, for 1905, 1906, p. 139. 

Diospyros rotundijolia Berry, Bull. TorreY. Bot. Club, vol. 33, 1906, p. 181. 

Description.-Leaves entire, of various sizes, 4 to 10 centimeters in length by 2 to 7 centimeters in greatest width, which is in the middle part of the leaf. Outline broadly oval or 

elliptical. Apex broadly rounded. Base similar or somewhat narrowed and pointed. Petiole 

and midrib stout. Secondaries, six or seven pairs, branching from th(3 midrib at angles of 50°. 

to 60°, arched, camptodrome. Texture subcoriaceous. Venation less prominent than in 

Diospyros primceva Heer. 

This species is. a characteristic ·element in the post-Raritan flora of the Atlantic Coastal 

Plain, although at times liable to be confused with Myrsine borealis Heer· or with some of the. 

smaller, more orbicular, entire leaves of Populus. The venation is markedly different, however. 

It was originally described from the Dakota sandstone of Kansas and is common in the, 

Magothy-formation in New Jersey, Delaware, and Maryland. It has also been recorded from 

the Tuscaloosa formation in western Alabama. In South Carolina it bas been found only at. 

the Rocky Point locality. The material, tho·ugh complete, has the venation mostly opposite,. 

and it is possible that it may represent some orbicular legumin~:ms leaflet instead of this species, 

with which, however, it agrees admirably. · 

Occurrence.-,-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, Rocky Point, Sumter 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Collections.-D. S. National Museum. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 

DICOTYLEDONlE INCERTlE SEDIS. 

·Genus CALYCITES Auct. 

0ALYCITES MIDDENDORFENSIS sp. ilOV. 

Plate X, figure 4. 

63 

Description.-Calyx-like organism, with a small central disk or receptacle from_ which 

radiate five linear, apically rounded, ~quidistant sepals', ·measuring 1.1 centimeters in diameter 

from tip to tip. Sepais slightly narrowed proximal, 1 millimeter or a fraction more in width. 

Remains of this sort are commonly referred to the form genus Calycites, as the botanic 

affmity of but few specimens can be determined. A. considerable number of species of Calycites 

have been described, coming from the Raritan, Magothy, and Dakota formations. It. may be 

questioned whether forms like those described from the Magothy of Marthas Vineyard and 

Long Island by I-Iollick should not receive some other riames, for they hardly represent calices, 

but are obviously fruits comparable with certain modern Dipterocarpace::e or Hippocrateace::e. 

The present species is based on the single complete specimen figured. 

Occurrence.-Middendorf arkose member of Black Creek formation, near Middendorf, 

Chesterfield County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Collections.-D. S. National Museum. 

BOTANIC CHARACTER OF THE FLORA. 

The Cretaceous flora of South Carolina as ·made known in the present contribution consists 

of 76 spec~es, distributed among 49 genera in 36 families and 26 orders. There are represented 

1 member of the phylum Thallophyta, 2 of the Pteridophyta, and 73 Spermatophyta, including 14 Gymnospermoo (1 Cycadales and 13 Coniferales) and 59 A.ngiosperm::e (5 Monocotyledonoo 

and 54 Dicotyledon::e). The largest orders are the Urticales, Ranales, Thymeleales, and Sapindales, each of which has 6 species. 

The largest single genus is Ficus, which is represented by 5 species, and this genus is also 

the most abundant individually. The genera Salix, Magnolia, and Andromeda have 4 species 

each; Araucaria, Celastrophyllum, and Eucalyptus. have 3 each; and the· following genera are 

represented by 2 species each: Myrica, Quercus, Proteoides, Legumiilosites, Laurus, Laurophyllum, Cinnamomum, and Diospyros. 

Fossil plants are very unequally represented at the 11 localities enumerated, the locality 

near Middendorf furnishing 42 species, whereas the locality on Black Creek below Williamsons 

Bridge (3.9) ·has furnished no positively identified forms. The bulk of the described species 

have come from the Middendorf arkose member of the Black Creek formation, identifiable 

remains being uncommon in· other deposits of the Black Creek form.ation, although lignites, 

fragmentary leaves, ~nd comminuted vegetable matter are universally distributed throughout 

the typical Black Creek deposits and are relatively rare in the ~ddendorf member. This 

condition is due to a certain extent to the distribution of vegetation. on the near-by land and 

more largely to what may be termed the accidents of preservation &nd is paralleled by the 

distribution of the plants in the Black Creek formation of North Carolina, where most of the 

forms come from the single favorably situated locality at Courthouse Bluff on Cape Fear River. 

In the more distinctly marine sedimentation, more remote .f~om the shore or from Cretaceous 

islands, the plant remains were much macerated and triturated before entombment. For/· 

this reason a better idea of the flora as a whole and of the accompanying physical conditions 

can be obtained from the :Middendorf flora; of .which the general botanic bearing is equally 

applicable to the typical Black Creek flora, although the latter indicates somewhat different 

ecologic grouping and considerably different conditions of deposition.· 

After a brief statement of the character of the South Carolina Cretaceous flora as a whole, 

an effort will be made to picture the. environmental factors-ecologic, topographic, climatic, and 

edaphic-which may legitimately be deduced from the plant· assemblages found· fossil in the 

l\1iddendorf member and the typical Black Creek deposits. 
\ . 

64 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

The flora as a whole furnishes a single thallophyte, which is represented by poorly preserved 

remains of a dichotomously branched thallus of undetermined 'botanic affinity. It is confined 

to the Black Creek formation in South Carolina, but occurs rather more abundantly at the 

same horizon in North Carolina and also in the Magothy flora of Maryland; it indicates marine 

sedimentation. . 

The Pteridophyta are represented by one species each of Onoclea and Lycopodium, and 

strangely enough both are fruit-bearing specimens, the Lycopodi.um closely resembling the existing members of the genus and heretofore not being certainly known from the Mesozoic. The 

botanic affinity of the Onoclea is not conclusively determinable, althqugh the remains represent 

a type found also in the Magothy formation and in the Upper Cretaceous of Greenland. 

The Cycadales are represented by a single ·species of Podozamites, which is confined to 

the Middendorf member in South Carolina, but which occurs in the Black Creek formation of 

North Carolina, northward to New Jersey, in the Dakota sandstone of the West, and in Europe. 

The remains are detached leaflets of the type usually referred -to Podozamites, although the · 

botanic affinity of many of these leaflets is not fully established. · 

The Coniferales are well represented. The Taxacere are recognized by the Cephalotaxuslike fruits which are so common in the Black Creek formation of North Carolina and which occur 

also in the upper part of the Tuspaloosa formation of Alabama. The other member of this 

family is referable to the curious fernlike genus Protophyllocladus, a characteristic Upper 

Cretaceous type wid~ly distributed in North America. The species is new but occurs also in the 

Magothy formation of Maryland. · 

The Araucariacere, abundant in the Mesozoic though antipodean in existing flora, have 

three species of typical araucarias-one based on foliage, another on cone scales, and the third 

on seeds-but it is quite probable that all may belong to a single botanic species. The other 

family in this order, the Brachyphyllacere, is represented by the characteristic and widely 

distributed Brachyphyllum macrocarpum Newberry, which ranges from the Raritan to the 

Montana and which is the last survivor of a common older Mesozoic 'type of plant. 

The Pinacere are represented by a species of Pinus of modern aspect and by the charac-

, teristic remains of the wide-ranging and widely distributed Sequoia reichenbachi (Geinitz) 

Heer, a species whose Raritan representative Hollick and Jeffrey propose to refer to the Araucariacere, although it may be noted that their argument is inconclusive. Furthermore, it seems 

probable that all of the forms referred to this species may not be identical. The modern oriental 

genus Cunninghamia is doubtfully represented by a species of Cunninghamites, which is quite 

widely distributed and. which ranges from the Cenomanian to the Senonian abroad and probably 

as widely in this country. The genus Moriconia is abundantly represented in the Middendorf 

member, its most southerly known occurrence. From this region it ranges northward, a closely 

allied species occurring both in Greenland and in Europe. 

The Cupresseacere are certainly represented by Widdringtonites subtilis Heer, a form which 

ranges from the Atane .beds of Greenland southward along the Atlantic coast to Alabama. 

Rather characteristic, apparently four-valved cones of the Widdringtonia (Callitris) type are 

associated with the foliage in clays of the Middendorf member. In the Tuscaloosa formation of 

· western Alabama this species is very common and has furnished a number of specimens with the 

cones attached to the leafy twigs of this type, so that the· botanic affinity of. this species 

seems .to be established beyond dispute. In addition to the foregoing forms of more or less 

certain botanic relationship a cone is described from the Black Creek formation and a cone 

scale from the Middendorf member, both of unknown affinity. 

The Monocotyledonre have furnished five species, a Potamogeton, an Arundo, a Phragmites, 

and a Carex, waterside types whose occurrence as.fossils are easily explained, as well as fragmentary remains of a large palmetto-like fan palm, Sabalites,one of the earliest known occurrences 

of a plant of this type. Palms appear simultaneously in the early part of the Upper Cretaceous 

in both Europe and America, and before its close they appear to have become numerous and 

diversified as well as widely distributed. 

Of the Dicotyledonre, the amentiferous families are represented by nine species.. The 

Juglandales have a species of Juglans which ranges from Greenland to Georgia. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 65 

The Myricales have two characteristic species of Myrica, a genus of considerable importance 

in Upper Cretaceous floras everyw~ere anq in more recent floras as well. The willows have 

four species, one peculiar to the Middendorf member and three widely distributed in beds of 

this or nearly the same age. The oaks have furnished two species, both clearly defined. It 

is singular that the oaks appear ,in such abundance both in this country and Europe soon after 

the dawn of the Upper Cretaceous. They afford one of the marks of post-Raritan floras in 

'the Atlantic Coastal Plain. 

The Urticales form one of the most abundant orders in the South Carolina Cretaceous-in 

point of numbers of individual specimens easily the most abundant. A single doubtful species 

is referred to the modern warm-temperate genus Momisia, which, except for a,species recently 

described by the writer from the Eocene of Georgia, is unknown in the fossil state. The figs 

number five species, including four species with lanceolate leaves and pinnate venation and one 

species with shorter and broader leaves and palmate venation. One of the lanceolate figs, 

Ficus stephensoni, is new, although it occurs in North Carolina; the others are all well known 

and large forms of wide distribution. They are exceedingly abundant in South Carolina; both 

Ficus crassipes Heer and Ficus kr(Lusiana Heer occur at four localities at least and are very 

common at certain of these, particularly in the clay ironstones at Rocky Point. One of the 

few contrasts to be noted in tracing this Upper Cretaceous flora southward from Greenland is 

the tendency shown by a number of forms toward the development of prolonged attenuated 

tips. This is prominently shown in these species of Ficus, both here and in the Tuscaloosa 

flora of Alabama, and it has been interpreted as indicating a heavier rainfall and more humid 

climate than in higher latitudes. This peculiarity is not confined to the genus Ficus, but is 

shared by a number of other genera belonging to these floras. · 

Of the Proteales, the Proteacere, at present largely and almost exclusively developed in the 

Southern Hemisphere, are represented by two species of Proteoides, so called from the:ir close 

8frmity with the modern species of Protea. Many botanists, notably in England, have ques-. 

. tioned such identifications, especially as made by Ettingshausen and others in. studies of the 

Tertiary floras of Europe. Most of these identifications have a large element of certainty, 

·however, and are paralleled and confirmed by the similar Cretaceous range and modern restriction 

of a large number of unrelated genera. The present place is unsuitable for controversial matter, 

but the writer will say that rather extensive distributional studies have served in a large measure 

to confirm the presence in the Cretaceous floras of North America of species of Proteacere, 

Myrtacere, and other types. 

The order Ranales, which at the present time has received such undue prominence through 

the phylogenetic speculations of Wieland and Arber, is represented by six species-a Dewalquea 

of remarkable and striking appearance, common to the Middendorf member a:o.d to the Tuscaloosa 

formation of Alabama; a new species of Illicium; and four well-known species of Magnolia, 

two of which range northward as far as Greenland and three southward into Alabama. Magnolias 

are common everywhere in Upper Cretaceous floras from Greenland to Alabama. 

The order Rosales has no very definite or remarkable representatives in the South Carolina 

Cretaceous. A form doubtfully identified as Hamamelites occurs at Rocky Point, and two 

leaflets are referred to Leguminosites, one as a Cresalpinia, and one as an Aca:cia-like form. 

The order Geraniales, though poorly represented, contains two remarkable forms, a Citrophyllum very close to the modern genus Citrus, which ranges northward as far as New Jersey, 

and Crotonophyllum, a genus allied to the modern genus Croton of the Euphorbiacere. Crotonophyllum is rather common in the Middendorf member, the only other species of the genus 

being a Cenomanian form from Bohemia. 

The order Sapindales is a large one, represented by six species-one a Sapindus, one a 

form doubtfully referred to the genus Pachystima, one a large Rhus, and three species of, , 

Celastrophyllum. The last genus becomes abundant at the close of the Lower Cretaceous, 

with seven species in the Patapsco formation. There are no less than nine species in the Raritan 

formation, but this number is reduced to two in the Magothy, two in the Black Creek, and three 

in the Middendorf member. Celastrophyllum is unrepresented in the Montana flora of the West. 

8069°-14-5 
66 UPPER CRETAQEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

The order Thymeleales also includes six species, of which two are well-known species of 

Laurus, two are species of Laurophyllum confined to this horizon in the Atlantic Coastal Plain, 

and two are species of Cinnamomum, one being the widespread Oinnamomum newberryi Berry 

and the other new. 

The order Myrtales has three species of Eucalyptus, all close to modern species. This is 

particularly true of Eucalyptus angusta V elenovsky, which is also associated with typicalEucalyptus fruits in the Cep.omanian of Europe. 

The order Umbellales is represented by a single species of Hedera, a form of wide distribution. 

The Araliacere, so common in homotaxial American floras, have not been detected in either the 

Middendorf member or other deposits of the Black Creek formation in South Carolina, though 

a single .Aralia is found in the Black Creek formation of North Carolina and several species 

appear in the Tuscaloosa and Magothy formations. 

The order Ericales has four species of Andromeda, one ri.ew and the other three widespread 

in deposits of this or nearly the same age in the Atlantic Coastal Plain. 

The Primulales are represented by a single rather widespread species of Myrsine and the 

Ebenales by two species of Diospyros, one the relatively large-leaved Diospyros primceva of 

Heer, which ranges from Greenland to Alabama in eastern North America and from Kansas and 

Nebraska to Texas in the interior, and which is exceedingly common in the South Carolina 

Cretaceous; and the ot~er the less common Diospyros rotundijolia Lesquereux of th(:) Dakota 

sandstone and the Magothy formation. These leaves are certainly· allied to the modern 

Diospyros and are associated in the Raritan formation of Maryland with characteristic fruit 

calices scarcely distinguishable from those of certain modern species. 

PHYSICAL CONDITIONS INDICATED BY THE FLORA.. 

An effort to picture accurately the environment of a fossil flora is beset with unusual 

difficulties, as may be readily imagined, and these difficulties increase in geometric ratio to the 

time that has elapsed since it existed in life. Furthermore, the science of plant ecology is so 

recent in development that the data with which to compare fossil floras are very inadequate. 

Particularly is this true of the existing floras of the tropical and· subtropical zones with which 

the Cretaceous flora is most naturally compared. The strand flora of the tropics is fairly 

well known, but of inland and upland floras over wide areas practically no information is 

available, although the Philippine Forest Service has made a most laudable beginning in this 

direction. 

For this reason the discussion which follows probably merits more or less criticism, 

especially of the statements where the writer has endeavored to particularize. An effort has 

been made, however, to avoid purely specula6ve points, and it is ·believed that the more general 

statements regarding climate and other conditions of growth will stand, whatever may be 

the fate of the details. · 

As has been shown, the sediments and their contained floras indieate shallow seas and a 

considerable elevation and relief of the Piedmont area. River gradients were high and the 

streams numerous and more or less torrential in character. In the early part of the period 

coastal sounds or bays were present, but these were subsequently submerged and the coast 

line appears not to have been subsequently broken by any large reentrants, although part of 

the strand flora was probably a swamp flora and swamps were also present in the lower courses 

of the streams, especially in the later half of the period. With regard to the climatic conditions 

the Cretaceous floras are to a certain extent unlike those of later periods and are so far removed 

from the present that no very precise conclusions are possible. It is safe to a~sume that the 

climate was mild, howe~er, for the plant grouping clearly shows this. Seasonal changes were 

not strongly marked, as is shown by the lack of periodic alterations (growth rings) in the petri- ' 

fied and lignitized woods. These have not been critically studied, nor are they included in 

the systematic account of the flora, but they have been examined suffieiently to corroborate the 

foregoing statement. That the climate was no~ tropical in character may be assumed from 

the manner in which this flora preserves its integrity when traced northward over many 

degrees of latitude. It is essentially a unit from Alaba.ma to New Jersey, and preserves even 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 67 

in its far northern occurrence on the west coast of Greenland-though differences are perceptible-a facies remarkably similar. Even in Greenland this flora. has nearly as many species 

which in modern floras a.re customarily associated with the warmer temperate and subtropical 

zones as in its most southerly occurrence. We may confidently assert that frosts were unknown. 

The trees were not all evergreen, although some were, and.the leaves, from the manner in which 

they are found fossil, were apparently shed at maturity and not seasonally. It is believed 

that insolation, or the pseudoxerophytism .of swamp habitats, rather than any approach to 

aridity, explains the presence of numerous coriaceous-leafed forms, such as the four species 

of Andromeda, and the abundance of Leguminosre and of gymnosperms, many of them having 

reduced leaves like Brachyphyllum, Moriconia and Widdringtonites, or developing· phylloclads 

as in the Protophyllocladus of the Middendorf member or Androvettia of the homotaX.ial beds 

of the Black Creek formation in North Carolina a.nd the Eutaw formation in Georgia. 

Sequoitl in the existing flora thrives only in a belt fed by the moisture-laden winds from the 

Pacific. As a fossil it is excessively abundant in the l\1iddendorf member and, in ft,1.ct, in all 

post-Raritan deposits of the Atlantjc Coastal Plain Cretaceous which fur~ish any flora. That. 

the Cretaceous rainfall was plentiful may be inferred not only from the species of plants pre-· 

served, but also from the formation of dripping points on various leaves, this feature being espe-· 

cially emphasized in the Tuscaloosa flora of Alabama. Judged by the facts of the present-day 

geographic distribution of plants, the flora as a whole presents an antipodean facies with its; 

species of Eucalyptus and Proteoides and its abundant Araucariacere, but t}lis is only another 

way of en1phasizing its l\1esozoic character, for the abundant evidence at our command shows 

that all these types were 'practically cosmopolitan in the Mesozoic. Anot~er feature which 

appears strange to modern plant geographers is the· curious mingling of forms which in the exist-

-ing flora are to a greater or less extent climatically segregated. Willows and walnuts growing 

with figs, eucalyptus, laurels, and araucarias would indeed be anomalous in the present flora, 

but these and similar associations are familiar enough in fossil floras, not only during the 

l\1esozoic but well into the Cenozoic. 

Even though no close comparisons with modern ecologic· groups are possible, it would seem 

that if the Upper Cretaceous flora were existing at the present time it would be included by 

ecologic botanists under that son1ewhat elastic head. which Schimper calls "temperate rain 

forests." In no other modern plant associations do we find that· commingling of temperate 

and tropical types that we find in certain present-day teinperate ra.in forests, as, for exanlple, 

those of southern Chile, southern Japan, Australia, and New Zealand. In the last-named 

locality Aralia, Laurus, Cinnmnomwn, Magnolia, and Sterculia are associated with Quercus,. 

Fagus, Gleichenia, Dryopteris, and Dicksonia. In some respects th.e flora of New Zealand i~ 

1nore tropical in its facies and n1ore like our eastern Upper Cretaceous floras than any other· 

now existing. In New Zealand conifers are abundant and include forms with reduced leaves. 

like Libocedrus and Dacrydiu1n, as well as forms with broad leaves like Dammara, Pod~carpus,. 

and Phyllocladus. Dicotyledonre are numerous and varied, including between 100 and 150· 

species, among which forms of Myrtacere, Lauracere, and Proteacere, with coriaceous leaves, arepronlinent. The undergrowth is rich in tree ferns and various genera of Araliacere. 

When this n1odern flora is compared element for element with th.e Coastal Plain Cretaceousflora 1nany differences naturally become apparent; nevertheless, the resen1blance between thetwo is remarkable. In the Upper Cretaceous flora of the Coastal Plain the narrow or scale-· 

leafed conifers are represented by Sequoia, :Moriconia, Brachyphyllum, and Widdringtoilites. 

Dammara represents the broad-leafed araucarias; Androvettia and Protophyllocladus representthe 1nodern Phyllochich1s. The Dicotyledonre are numerous and varied; ten1perate and tropical types are 1nixed, and there are numerous coriaceous forms belonging to a number of thesame fan1ilies as in the New Zealand flora. Aralias are common in both floras. 

That the physical conditions approxin1ated the foregoing outline is further indicated by 

the presence of many plants which normally grow in streams with considerable flow or along 

stream n1argins. There is an aquatic species, Potamogeton middendorfensis, which it is hard to· 

im~gine growing at sea level in the latitude of South Carolina during the Upper Cretaceous. 

There are two large-leafed grasses (Arundo and Phragmites) and a sedge, all strongly n1esophytie ' I . 
68 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF ~OUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

types; four' species of willow; and four thick-leafed laurels and two Cinnamomums, whose 

existing descendants flourish in humid localities, as do those of the numerous figs and magnolias. 

The figs are very abundant indiVidually in the Middendorf member, especially at localities like 

that at Rocky Point. They are for the most part lanceolate-leafed forms and have developed 

to a greater or less extent long attenuated tips that are absent in the same species toward the 

northern limit of their range. These tips are· comm,only known as dripping points an~ are 

understood to indicate a considerable rainfall. They are· especially noticeable in the South 

Carolina representatives of Ficus crassipes Heer. It is believed that these figs found their 

optimum co.nditions in the coastal swamps and extended from them up the riyer v~lleys to the 

argphitheaters toward the heads of streams, though they were not confined to such situations, 

as is proved by their wide geographic distribution at this time. In similar situations grew the 

broad-leafed gymnosperms, the palms, the· entire-leafed Quercus sumterensis,. and the various 

species of Proteoides, Illicium, Eucalyptus, Diospyros, Cinnamomum, Citrophyllum, Laurus, 

and Magnolia. The flora of the typical Black Creek deposits of South Carolina is so scanty, 

embracing only 17 species, that it does not in itself furnish ad~quate data for an attempt to 

picture its environment. When supplemented by the Black Creek flora of North Carolina 

somewhat more data are proviqed, but still the material is insufficient for the purposes mentioned. The occurrence of obscure remains of a marine alga, present also in North Carolina and 

in the Magothy of :Maryland, may be noted as indicative of the presence of the sea or at least 

of brackish water. Lignite and amber are common, also the remain~ of Araucaria, Cephalotaxuslike fruits, Eucalyptus, Ficus, Myrica, and similar forms. The flora is mixed, including upland 

types which must have made perhaps very considerable river journeys before fossilization . 

. Strand and swamp plants are also present, and coriaceous forms predominate, owing to their 

survival in agitated waters which destroyed the more delicate plant remains. The character 

of the fossils is a clear indication that the bays or sounds, which had been present in at least a 

part of the area during ~1:iddendorf time, had disappeared, and the Coastal Plain lacked large 

estuaries which usually afford such admirable means for fossilization. We may therefore infer 

that the coast line was unbroken, or that if there were estuary plant beds they have been 

destroyed by the erosion of the landward margin of the deposits or are not exposed at the 

present time. The differences in the flora between the early Middendorf and late Black Creek 

were prob11bly not "considerable, and physical conditions were not very dissimilar. The land 

had .approached sea level and the ground water would be nearer the surface. The climate 

probably underwent no appreciable change, and the rainfall and humidity were still ample,' 

although the writer is inclined to think that the rainfall was somewhat diminished. The natural 

radiation of the individual species in the floras doubtless caused great changes in distribution, 

and other changes were doubtless due to the fact that the area was in the direct line of migration between the north and the south, but sufficient data to. illustrate these various changes 

have not yet been accumulated. 

CORRELATION OF THE BLACK CREEK FORMATION. 

In considering the correlation of the Middendorf member and the other Black Creek deposits 

the first question to be decided is the relation which they bear to each other. Though the writer's 

position on this point may be inferred from what has gone before, a few comments are ne.cessar.J, 

as at first sight the floras apparently show considerable differences. 

Of the 76 species described in the foregoing pages, 62 come from the Middendorf member 

and 17 from the other deposits of the Black Creek formation. Of these 76 species the following 

are described as new: 

Acaciaphyllites grevilleoides. 

Algites americana. 

Andromeda euphorbiophylloides. 

Araucaria darlingtonensis. 

Calycites middendorfensis. 

Celastrophyllum carolinenl:lis. 

Cinnamomum middendorfensis. 

Crotonophyllum pandurreformis. 

Ficus celtifolius. 

Heterolepis cretaceus. 

Illicium watereensis. 

Leguminosites middendorfensis. 

Lycopodium cretaceum. 

Momisia carolinensis. 

Pachystima? cretacea. 

Potamogeton middendorfensis. 
Proteoides parvula. 

Protophyllocladus lobatus. 

Quercus sumterensis. 

Quercus pseudowestfalica. 

UPPER . CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLINA. 

Rhus darlingtonensis. 

Sabalites carolinensis. 

Salix sloani. 

Strobilites anceps. 

69 

Although these new species are of slight value in exact correlation, their evidence is entirely 

in accord with that deduced from .the remainder of the flora. The bulk are from the :Middendorf 

member, only Algites americana, Araucaria darlingtonensis, Rhus darlingtonensis, and Strobilites 

anceps coming from the other Black Creek deposits. Extensive collections from all parts 

of the Coastal Plain are undergoing elaboration by the writer, who, since the original description in manuscript, has identified Algites americana from the Black Creek formation of North 

Carolina and from the Magothy formation of Maryland, and Protophyllocladus lobatus from 

the Mft,gothy of Maryland. Araucaria darlingtone'nsis has been shown to be closely allied to 

the other Black Creek araucarias, and Andromeda euphorbiophylloides, in all probability, occurs 

on the border between the Tuscaloosa and the Eutaw in Hale County, Ala. Quercus pseudowestjalica is now known to occur in the Black Creek formation of North Carolina, and the 

Sabalites is seen t9 be close to Sabalites magothiensis Berry from the Magothy formation of 

the northern Coastal Plain from New Jersey to Maryland. The genera Crotonophyllum and 

Illicium are most closely related to species described from the Cenomanian of Bohemia. None 

of the genera occur in the Montana flora of the west except Ficus and Salix, genera present 

from the Raritan to the Recent. · 

Only the following species are common to the Middendorf member and other deposits 

of the Black Creek formation in the South Carolina area: 

Ficus krausiana Beer. 

Laurophyllum nervillosum Hollick. j 

Proteoides lancifolius Beer. 

Salix lesquereuxii Berry. 

Although this seems a very small common element, all the forms are typical of this stage 

of the Cretaceous, and all except Proteoides are especially characteristic of the Magothy, Black 

Creek, and Tuscaloosa floras. The identity of the Middendorf and other Black Creek floras is 

greatly strengthened when comparisons are n1ade with the latter flora as developed in the 

North Carolina area, the result showing 27 species common to the -two formations. 

The following Middendorf species which have not b,een found in the other Black Creek 

deposits of South Carolina occur in beds of Black Creek age in North Carolina: 

Andromeda grandifolia Berry. 

Andromeda novrecresarere Hollick. 

Andromeda parlatorii Beer. 

Araucaria jeffreyi Berry. 

Brachyphyllum macrocarpum Newberry. 

Celastrophyllum crenatum Heer. 

Cinnamomum newberryi Berry. 

Citrophyllum aligerum (Lesquereux) Berry. 

Cunninghamites elegans (Corda) Endlicher. 

. Diospyros primreva Beer. 

Eucalyptus geinitzi (Heer) Beer. 

Ficus crassipes Beer. 

Ficus krausiana Heer. 

Ficus stephensoni Berry. 

J uglan~ arctica Heer. 

Laurophyllum elegans Hollick. 

Leguminosites robinifolia Berry. 

Magnolia capellinii Heer. 

Moriconia americana Berry. 

Myrsine gaudini (Lesquereux) Berry. 

Phragmites pratti Berry. 

Pinus raritan en sis Berry. 

Podozamites knowltoni Berry . 

Quercus pseudowestfalica Berry. 

Salix flexuosa Newberry. · 

Salix lesquereuxii Berry. 

Sequoia reichenbachii (Geinitz) Heer. 

The following species occur in the Middendorf member but have not been detected ir1 the 

other Black Creek deposits, either in North or South Carolina: 

Acaciaphyllites grevilleoides Berry. 

Andromeda euphorbiophylloides Berry. 

Arundo groonlandica Heer. 

Cresalpinia middendorfensis Berry. 

Calycites middendorfensis Berry. 

Carex clarkii Berry. 

Celastrophyllum carolinensis Berry. 

Celastrophyllum elegans Berry. 

Cinnamomum middendorfensis Berry. 

Crotonophyllum pandurreformis Berry. 

Dewalquea smithi Berry. 

Diospyros rotundifolia Lesquereux. 

Eucalyptus wardiana Berry. 

Ficus atavina Heer. 

Ficus celtifolius Berry. 

Hamamelites? cordatus Lesquereux. 

Heterolepis. cretaceus Berry. 

Illicium watereensis Berry. 

Laurophyllum nervillosum Hollick. 

Lauru's atanensis Berry. 
70 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Laurus plutonia Heer. 

Leguminosites middendorfensis Berry. 

Lycopodium cretaceum Berry. 

Magnolia tenuifolia Lesquereux. 

Magnolia obtusata Heer. 

Momisia carolinensis Berry. 

Onoclea inquirenda (Hollick) Hollick. 

Pachystima? cretacea Berry. 

Proteoides parvula Berry. . 

Protophyllocladus lobatus Berry. 

Potamogeton middendorfensis Berry. 

Quercus sumterensis Berry. 

Sabalites carolinensis Berry. 

Salix pseudohayei Berry. 

Salix sloani Berry. 

Sapindus morrisoni Heer. 

Widdringtonites subtilis Heer. 

These include 17 new species thus far confined to the Middendorf· member and without 

value in close correlation. Of the remaining 21 species with a wider distribution 4 occur in the 

Raritan of New Jersey, 6 in the Tuscaloosa form.~tion, the large number of 15 in the' Magothy 

formation, 8 in the Dakota sandstone, and 9 in the Greenland Cretaceous. This illustrates very 

well the remarkable unity of this flora from Greenland to Alabama, and also indicates conclusively 

the practical synchroneity between the Middendorf member al;ld the other deposits of the Black 

Creek formation of South Carolina. · 

A similar relationship is shown by the following list of North Carolina Black Creek species 

which have not been detected in either the Middendorf member or the other Black Creek deposits 

in the South Carolina area: 

Acerates amboyense Berry. 

Androvettia carolinensis Berry. 

Araucaria clarki Berry. 

Celastrophy Hum und ulatum Newberry. 

Cinnamomum heerii Lesquereux. 

Cornophyllum sp. 

Cycadinoc~rpus circularis N e\vberry. 

Dammara borealis Heer. 

Dewalquea groenlandica Heer. 

Eucalyptus attenuata Newberry. 

Eucalyptus linearifolia Berry. 

Ficus ovatifolia Berry. 

Ficus daphnogenoides (Heer) Berry. 

G leditsiophy llum triacanthoides Ber.ry. 

Kalmia brittoniana Hollick? 

Liriodendron dubium Berry. 

Liriodendron cf. primoovum Newberry. 

Malapoenna horrellensis Berry. 

Myrica cliffwoodensis Berry. . 

Myrsine borealis Heer. 

PhasEmlites formus Lesquereux. 

' Pisonia cretacea Berry. 

Pistia nordenskioldi (Heer) Berry.· 

Plan era cretace a Berry. 

Pterospermites carolinensis Berry. 

Pterospermites crednerafolia Berry. 

Quercus pratti Berry. · 

Salix newberryana Hollick. 

Salix eutawensis Berry. 

Sassafras acutilobum Lesquereux. 

, Sequoia heterophylla Velenovsky. 

Sequoia minor. V elenovsky. . 

Tumion carolinian urn Berry. 

I-I ere again the speCies which are not confined to North Carolina are mingled in other 

bomotaxial deposits, such as those of the Magothy formation of the North Atlantic Coastal 

Plain or the Tuscaloosa formation of Alabama, with the previously enumerated forms not common to the described floras of the two States. 

The conclusipn seems incontrovertible that in correlation the Middendorf member and the 

typical Black Creek may be considered as a unit, arid that within the State they confirm the 

field observations that the stratigraphic sequence comprises initial Middendor{ sedimentation 

of short duration, contemporaneous Middendorf and typical Black Creek sedimentation, especially when the Peedee and Aiken areas are compared, and finally typical Black Creek sedimentation only for a considerable period.· When the flora as a whole is compared with outside 

.areas it is brought out that 32 of the species in the Black Creek formation of North Carolina are 

-of admitted identity in South Carolina and that 26 species occur either in the Tuscaloosa for-

.mation of Alabama or the Eutaw formation of Georgia. It seems to the writer that the, syn-

,chroneity between these beds and the upper part of the Alabama Tuscaloosa and the lower 

portion of the Eutaw must be admitted, for the close similarity in their floral characteristics' 

is corroborated by similar lithologic characters. It is believed, however, that the lower pnrt 

-of the Tuscaloosa of western Alabama is older than any Upper Cretaceous of the eastern 

Gulf or Atlantic Coastal Plain as far north as the New Jersey-Maryland area, where the uppermost Raritan is to be considered contemporaneous with it, the rest of the Raritan formation 

being still older. With the Magothy flora of the J;lorthem Coastal·Plain, the Middendorf :aora 

·has 35 species in common, or about 50. per cent of its total flora. That the two floras are 

essentially a unit seems certain. In the New: Jersey area the Magothy flora is confined to 
.UPPEH CRETACEOUS FLORA OF SOUTH CAROLI~.\. · 71 

the transitional beds·lyiJ:lg above the Raritan formation and at the base of the marine series of 

deposits, whereas in the southern and Gulf coastal plains similar fossil plants occur in lenses 

or in beds interstratified with marine fossiliferous beds. This shows that the southern representative of the Magothy flora was contemporaneous with the southern representative of the 

Matawan fauna and makes it pr<;>bable that the Magothy flora in the New Jersey-Maryland area 

persisted through Matawan time,. The Matawan formation has yielded only one or two fossil 

plants-a Ficus in the clays of Woodbury, N. J., and a Dammara in Marylaad-and in both 

areas these sp~cies occur in the Magothy formation also. 

The Black Creek flora contains 17 species found in the Atane beds of Greenland and 9 · 

found in the Patoot beds. In the Cenomanian of Europe 9 of its species are found, in the florally 

unfossiliferous Turonian 1 species, and in the Senonian 4 species. 

The eastern Cretaceous floras above the Raritan, possibly including those of the uppermost Raritan, correspond with the flora usually kri.own as that of the Dakota sandstone. The 

rocks containing them are conformably overlain by deposits carrying a marine fauna but very 

few fossil plants. There are 23 species common to the South Carolina Cretaceous and the 

' Dakota sandstone. The Black Creek formation of North Carolina, out of a total of 66 species, 

has 20 species in common with the Dakota. The Montana gr~oup flora is entirely unlike the 

eastern Cretaceous floras, having scarcely a single element in comm0n. Certain stages in the 

evolution of the eastern Cretaceous flora can be made out, though in general the forms have a 

wide stratigraphic range. This is paralleled, however, by an almost equally wide stratigraphic 

range of the faunas. . , · · 

To render intelligible to a wider circle· of readers the results of the present discussion the 

probable European equivalents of these floras should be indicated, although it is admitted that 

attempted exact correlations between geologic formations on opposite sides of the Atlantic 

must always be more or less untrustworthy. . 

In Europe there are available for comparison abundant Cenomanian floras in Portugal, 

France, Germany, and especially in eastern Europe (Bohemia, Dalmatia, and other regions). 

The Turonian of Em·ope, on the other hand, is for the most part lacking in fossil plants, which 

become abundant again in the Senonian of Prussia, Saxony, and Bohemia. Our Dakota flora 

has always been considered Cenomanian; most paleozoologists have considered the Benton as 

Turonian (a view that is widely accepted in this country at the present time); and the Montana 

group has been uniformly considered as representing part of the Senonian. '.Dhe ·Atlantic 

Cretaceous floras have been considered Cenomanian, and the associated and overlying faunas 

Senonian (exclusive of the Rancocas and Manasquan faunas of New Jersey, which have been 

justly considered Danian by Clark and others). , 

In the writer's opinion no Cenomanian floras are known in America, unless ·the Ra.titan 

flora and that of the Washita group of the Texas and southern Arkansas ·area represent that 

stage of European geology, a11d the post-Raritan floras of the ~ast 1 are for the most part of 

Turonian age, as is also the major part, at least, of the Dakota flora of the West. 2 

The occurrence and range of the species of the South Carolina Cretaceous which 'form the 

partial basis of the foregoing discussion are fully set forth in the accompanying tables: 

Approximate equivalents of the plant-bearing Cretaceous deposits of South Carolina. 

Sonth Carolina. 

Marine Cretaceous 

(no known flora). 

r r k 

North Carolina. 

Marine Cretaceous 

(no known flora). 

Black Creek. 

Westem Alabama. 

Marine'Cretaceous 

(no known flora). 

Eutaw. 

'l'uscaloosa. 

New Jersey-Maryland. 

Marine Cretaceous . (no known flora). 

Matawan . (Marine, with no known 

flora). 

Magothy. 

Europe. 

Emscherian. 

Turonian . 

----------------------------------------------- ·--------------------------------------------- . ............................................. !-------

Hiatus. 

Lower Cretaceous 

(no known flom). 

Hiatus. 

Lower Cretat:'eous 

(no known nora). 

Hiatus. 

. Carboniferous. 

Raritan. 

Lower Cretaceous, Triassic, or crystalline rocks. 

1 With the exception of the meager floras in the Ripley formation and its equivalents. 

2 Some paleontologists consider the Coa~tal Plain plant-bearing formations to be lower Senonian. 

Cenomanian. 
72 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Distribution of Upper Cretaceous plants in South Carolina and their range elsewhere. 

Black Creek formation of South Carolina. h h ~ 'C .,; I· ~ ~ § .s ~ ~ li ~ ~ 

~ ~ El e z ..., ..., ~ 

~ E! 0 

Middendorf arkose ~ ~ ~ ~ §~ -~ ~ ~ 

member. b.O ~ ~ 

~ gs gs ~ :s z.e z.e ~ b.O ~. 0.,; §~ ~ ~ ~ c5 .s ~ ~r~ .§~~ I>< ,0 ~~ 

~s ~ Q,) ... ~ 

~~ p.. ~ ~:§ ~ .;..>. 8 ~ -.:: "' .5a t-1+> t' .§2 E-< 

l~ o'C ~ 

A s:l $::e § 'C~ ::l ... Os;:l ::l p.. p.. 0 ..: ~ 0 

~~ s~ ....,., 0~ ...,~ 

~ 8 0 'C ~ s "' §~ ~ s:l ~~ 0..., ~- ::l ~ ~ .!:=; 'C~ ~ § 0 8 0 ~0 .s p.; ~ §~ 

~ ~ "' @ C) ~ 

~ ~ ~ 'C ~ ~ 0 ,$ .£~ '-~ ~ ~ ~ 'C 

:s 0 ~ e ~ .s s:l "§ p., ~ §~ §~ 

~ ~ u ~ p.; § ~ 0 0 .s ~ ~ 

~ e u ~ 0 ,0 ~ § h 1:: h j ,.., '; ~ 8 -~ "§ "' b.O gs ~ ::l ,0 =E ~ ~ '8 0 ~ B ~ b.O 0 <:.> ~ ~ g g ~ 0 C) s:l § "' ~ 0 ai Q 0 s:l 0 

~ G) P:i "' ~ ~ "' ~ ::l ::l ~ ~ 0 ::l ~ 

~ p.< u ~ P=l u z <: ~ ::a ~ E-< A ::a -< u E-< 00 

- - - - - - -------- --- - - --- - - - - - -- Algites americana ................................................................ X .... X X ................................... . Onoclea inquirenda.......................... X· . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X ...........• Lycopodium cretaceum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X ........................... . Podozamites knowltoni...................... . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X ................... . 

6~~~~~~lo~~~e~~J~~~;1illiari~-.:::::::::: :::: -~- :::: :::: :::::::: ··7· :::: :::: ·x· :::: -~- ·x· ·x· :::: :::: :::::::::::: :::: :::: :::: 

Araucaria bladenensis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . X X X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ? .•.• 

E~!fE:§~~:~~:~:~~: :::::: ~: :::: :: ·~· :::::::: :~: :::::::::::: :~ ~: g· ~: :::::::: ~: ::::::: -:;: :::::::: 

Sequoia reichenbachi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X X X X . . . . X X X X X X 

Cunninghamiteselegans .......................... X .................................... X X X ............ X X X X X 

~;~~~~~t~~!:fc~~~~~s:::::::::::·::::::::::: ~ -~-' :::: :::: :::: :::: :::: :::: :::: :::: -~- ~ ·x· :::: -~- :::: :::: :::: :::: -~- :::: :::: 

Strobilites anceps .......•....................................... t •••• X ........................................................... . Heterolepis cretaceus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X ............................................................... · ................ . Potamogeton middendorfensis................ X ................................................................................... . Arundo grcenlandica ............................. X ................................................................ X ........... . 

6'::eafci~~if_r~~~~-.::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::: ~ :::: :::: :::::::: :::: :::: :::: :::: :::: ·x· -~- -~- :::: :::: :::: :::::::: :::: :::: :::: 

Sabalites carolinensis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X .............. : . ....................................................... . 

~!~f:Si~l~~~~~~:~:~~:~~:~~~~:~::::::::::::l:~: :::: :::: :::: :::: :::: :::: :~: :~: :::: :~: -~- g :~: :::: :::~ :~: :::: :~: :::: :::: :::: 

Salix flexuosa ............................... ·1 X . . . . X X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X X X X . . . . X ................... . Salixlesquereuxii. ........................... X X X X X ........ X ........ X X X X ........ X ................... . 

!~!~c~~e~~~~::e~;i~~:::::::::::::::::::::::::l:~: :~: :::: :~: :~: :::::::::::::::: :::: :~: :::::::: :::::::::::::::: :::::::: :::: :::: :::: 

a~~:s~~~~~~~~:::g~~~~:.-.·_·_·_::::::::::::::: ~ -~- :::: :::: -~- :::: :::: :::: :::: :::: :::: :::: -~- :::: :::: :::: :::::::: :::: :::: :::: :::: 

Ficus atavina.................... •. . . . . . . . . . . X X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . X . . . . X .... 

~F!l:~c~u~s~kr~~a~uiisfvian:a~:_:_·_. ·_.:_: __ :_:._·_:_:._·_:._·_:_:_: ._·_: ._~._-_: ._· ._· ._· ._·_: _: :_ :_ ~x . x .. x .. x. :::: :::: :::: :::: :::: :::: :::: . x .. x. :::: . x· :::: . x. :::: . x. :::: :::: :::: 

X X ............ x .... x ........ X x .... x .... x ........ x X--·· 

Ficus stephensoni. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . • • . X ................................... . Proteoides lancifolius .......... ,.............. X X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X 

5~tgeJ~i\i;: :::::: :: : .~. :~ :::: :~- -~ :::::::: :~: :::::::::::: :~ ~: .~: :~ :::: :~: :::: :~ :::::::::::: 

Magnolia obtusata............................ X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . X . . . . X . . . . X ........... . 

tt~~r~~a~:~:~~~~~s<?·:::.::::::::::::::::::: -~- ·x· :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: -~- :::::::::::::::: -~- :::::::::::::::::::: 

Hamamelites (?) cordatus.................... . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . X ................... . 

i1l~~i~~¥:HEEH ~- :::: + > t:// ::~~ ~:~~ :~:: t: E :~: :~~~ :} :::: D :~~: :::~ / ::~·~:::~ ~~~:S!s!~a~!t::~~~~~~:·:·:·::::::::::: -~- :~: :::: -~- :~: :::::::::::::::::::::::: :~: :::::::: :~: :~: :~: :::: :~: :::::::::::: 

Celastrophyllum elegans .......................... X .................................... X ....................................... . Celastrophyllum crena tum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X X . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . X ........... . Celastrophyllumcarolinensis................. . . ... . . . . . . . . X ....................................................................... . Rhus darlingtonensis.... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X ....................................................... . Laurus plntonia.............................. X . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X . . . . . . . . X X X . . . . X X ....... . Laurus atanensis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X · . . . . X ........... . Laurophyllum elegans........................ X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X X ................................... . Laurophyllum nervillosum ................... X ........................ X ........ X ........................................... . 

g~~::g:~:~~'d~:~1~rrensis::::::::::::::: ·x· -~- -~- :::: :::::::: :::: :::::::: :::: -~- -~- -~- -~- -~- -~- -~- :::: -~- .. 1 .. :::: :::: 

~~~~~~~~:~i~~t-::::::::::::::::::::::::: ·x· ·x· :::: ·x· :::: :::: :::: :::: -~- :::: ~ ·x· ~ -~- ·x· ·x· ·x· :::: ·x· ~ ·x· :::: ~~a:~~~:i~~~t:rs~-~~~-.:::::::::::::::::::: -~- :::: :::: :::: :::: ·x· :::: ·x· ::·:: :::: ·x· -~- ·x· :::: -~- :::: :::: :::: ·x· ·x· :::: :::: 

Andromeda novrecresarere.................... X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X X . . . . X X ....................... . Andromeda grandifolia....................... . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X X . . . . X ........................... . 

~~~~;~~~ir!~~~~~~-~~~~:o:i~~:·:·:::::::::::: :~: :::: :::: -~- :::: ·:::: :::: :::::::: :::: -~- -~- -~- :::: -~- :::: :~: :::: :~: :::: :::: :::: 

Dmspyros primreva ...... ~................... X X X X X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X X . . . . X X X . . . . X X X ... . Diospr,ros rotundifolia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . X . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . Calyc1tes middendorfensis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X ................................................................................... . 
PLATE II. 

73 
PLATE II. 

Page. 

FIGURES 1-6. Lycopodium cretaceum Berry, Middendorf_. __ . __ ._: ...... _ ...... _ .... ___ .. _._ .... _ .... _ .. _.... 15 

1. Large fruit spike. 

2. Smaller fruit spike, X 5. 

3~ A single scale, X 10. 

4. Diagrammatic ventral view of sp6rophyll, X 10. 

5, 6. Diagrammatic view of sporophyll in median longitudinal section, X 10. 

FIGURES 7, 8. Onoclea inquirenda (Hollick) Hollick, :Middendorf............................................. 14 

FIGURES 9-13. Protophyllocladus lobatus Berry, Rocky Point ................. _._ ................... _........ 17 

FIGURES 14-17 .. Widdringtonites subtilis Heer, Middendorf.._._ ..... _ ...................... __ ........ _ .. _.__ 25 

14, 15. Cones. 

16. Twig. 

17. Twig enlarged. 

FIGURES 18, 19. Widdringtonites reichii (Ettingshausen) Heer. Cone-bearing twigs from the Cenomanian of 

Dalmatia, introduced for comparison. 

74 

All the specimens except those shown in figures 18 and l9 are from the Middendorf arkose 

member of the Black Creek formation. 

I. 
PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE II 

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

6 

4 

2 10 

1 d 

3 

9 

7 

14 

15 

8 

12 

17 

18 

UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANTS FROM SOUTH CAROLINA. 
PLATE III. 

, I 
PLATE III. 

Page. 

FIGURE l. Araucaria darlingtonensis Berry, near Darlington.................................................. 20 

FIGURE 2. Brachyphyllum macrocarpum Newberry, Middendorf. ..... ,...................................... 21 

FIGURE 3. Heterolepis cretaceus Berry, Rocky Point. ............................... _._ ..... _ .............. _ 27 

FIGURE 4. Cepha.lotaxospermum carolinianum Berry, near Florence .. ~ .......................... _............ 18 

FIGURE 5. Strobilitl}s anceps Berry, near Darlington...................................................... . . . 27 

FIGURES 6, 7. Detached ]eaves of Araucaria bladenensis Berry, near Florence ............................. -.-. 19J 

The specimens shown in figures 2 and 3 are from the Middendorf arkose member of the Black 

Creek formation. Those shown in figures 1, 4, 5, 6, and 7 are from other beds in the Black 

Creek formation. · 

76 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE Ill 

Q -

1 

' 

~ ~ 4 

2 

3 5 

6 

• 

7 

UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANTS FROM SOUTH CAROLINA. 
PLATE IV. 

77 
PLATE IV. 

FIGURES 1-4. Sequoia reichenbachi (Geinitz) Heer, Middendorf. ............................................ . 

l. Cone-bearing twigs. 

2-4. Twigs showing variations in size and appearance. 

FIGURE 5. Podozamites knowltoni Berry, Rocky Point .............................................. 0 •••••••• 

FIGURE 6. Pota.mogeton middendorjens?:s Berry, Middendorf. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ••• 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

FIGURE 7. Arundo gmmlandica Heer (?),Rocky Point .................................... 0 ••••••••••••••••• 

All the specimens are from the Middendorf arkose member of the 'Black Creek formation. 

78 

Page. 

23 

16 

27 

28 
u.s. GEOLOGICAL S URVEY 

4 

PROFESSIONAL PA PER 84 PLATE IV 

5 

7~~· --

~ ------- M CAROLINA. SOUTH 

UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANTS FRO 
PLATE. V. 

79 
' , 

PLATE V. 

Page. 

Sabalites carolinensis Berry, showing broad rays. From Middendorf arkose member of the Black Creek formation, near Langley ......... ~ ..... _______ ..... _ ....... _ ..... _ ........... _. _ .................... _ . . . . . . . . 29 

80 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE V 

UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANT FROM SOUTH CAROLINA. 
PLAT·E VI. . : .. ,' 

.. 

.. · .. ~ 

81 
PLATE VI. 

Page. 

Sabalites carolinensis Berry, showing keeled and narrowed rays near point of insertion on the rachis. From 

Middendorf arkose member of the Black Creek formation, near Langley................................ 29 

82 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE VI 

UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANT FROM SOUTH CAROLINA. 
PLATE VII. 

83 
PLATE VII. 

Page. 

FIGURES 1-4 .. Moriconia americana Berry, Middendorf. .. _ ......... _. ___ . _____ . _. ____ ..... ____ . _. _ .... __ . _ 26 

FIGURES 5-10. Crotonophyllum pandurmjormis Berry ... __ . _ . _ . _ . _ . __ .. _ ..... ___ . ___ ... _ . _ ... _______ . ___ . _ . _ 48 

5. Rocky Point. 

6-8. Langley. 

9-10. Middendorf. 

FIGURES 11-13. Sali:t lesquereuxii Berry.~ .. __ .. ~ .. __ .. ~ ............ __ ............. _ ...... ____ ........... _ 33 

11. Middendorf. 

12. Rocky Point. 

13. Langley. 

FIGURES 14-16. Salixjlexuosa Newberry, Middendorf. __ ..... _._. ___ .. __ ... ___ ................... _ ........ _ 32 

FIGURES 17, 18. Myrica brittoniana Berry, Black Creek ............... ; ....................... _............. 31 

84 

All the specimens except those shown in figures 17 and 18 are from the Middendorf arkose 

member of the Black Creek formation. The specimens shown in figures 17 and 18 are from other 

beds in the Black Creek formation. · 
PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE VII 

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

4 

5 

1 

10 

11 

14 

7 

17 8 13 12 15 16 

UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANTS FROM SOUTH CAROLINA. 
' 

PLATE VIII. 

. 85 
PLATE VIII. 

Page. 

FIGURES 1, 2. Juglans arctica Heer, Rocky Point.' ................................................. :. . . . . . 30 

FIGURES 3-9. DewalqUfa smithi Berry, near Langley ......... __ . _ .... ____ . _ .. _____ . _______________ ... _____ · 41 

FIGURES 10-12. Salix sloani Berry, near Langley ........................ _______ .. _. __ ._ ... _____ .... ________ 34 

FIGURE 13. Leguminosites middendorjensis Berry, Middendorf ............. __ ........ : ........... __ ....... _.. 46 

FIGURE 14. Oinnamomum middendorjensis Berry, Middend~rf. ..... _ ............................ _ .. : ..... _. _ 55 

All the specimens are from the Middendorf arkose member of the Black Creek formation. 

86 

,. 
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

1 

13 

' 

\ 

12 

4 

6 

10 

11 

/i~ 

I'' 

/,I ·" 

i 1 I I:\ 

I 0 \ 

I, I 

' 'I 

\ \ , I 

14 

3 

5 

8 

PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE VIII 

) 

\ 

J 

\ 

\ 

' 

1 

2 

\ 

9 

UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANTS FROM SOUTH CAROLINA. 
PLATE IX. 

87 
Page. 

FIGURE 1. Cinnamomurr_~- middendorfensis Berry, Middendorf................................................. 55 

FIGURES 2, 3. Magnolia tenuifolia Lesquereux (?),Middendorf............................................... 44 

FIGURE 4. Myrica elegans Berry, near Darlington ........................... ·................................ 31 

FIGURE 5. Quercus pseudowesifalica Berry, Rocky Point .... ~ ................................... -:............ 35 

FIGURE 6. Sapindus morrisoni Heer, near Langley ................ · ... · ........................ ~ .......... :.. 49 

FIGURES 7, ·s. Rhus darlingtonensis Berry, near Darlington................................................... 51 

FIGURES 9,.10. Acaciaphyllites grevilleoides Berry, Middendorf................................................ 45 

FIGuim'll. Leguminosites robiniifolia Berry, Langley ................. :...................................... 46 

FIGURES 12, 13. Cinnamomum newbmyi Berry, Rocky Point ............................................ ·.·.. 54 

·ss 

. All the specimens except those shown in figures 4, 7, and 8 are from the Middendorf arkose 

member of the Black Creek formation. The specimens shown in figures 4, 7, and 8 are from 

other beds of the Black Creek formation. 
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE IX 

2 

1 

8 4 

7 

6 

10 

9 

12 13 

11 

UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANTS FROM SOUTH CAROLINA. 
'' 

PLATE X. 

89 
PLATE X. 

Page. 

FIGURE 1. Proteoides lancijolius Heer, Middendorf ........................................... _ .......... _... 40 

FIGURE 2. Hamamelites? cordatus Lesqu~reux, Rocky Point ... ·............................................. 45 

FIGURE 3. Magnolia capellinii Heer (?),Rocky Point .............. _ ... _ ..................... __ .............. 43 

FIGURE 4. Calycites 'lnidde'lfdorjensis Berry, Middendorf. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 

FIGURE 5. Proteoides parvula Be1Ty, Middendorf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 

FIGURE 6. Pachystima? cretacea Berry, Middendorf......................................................... 49 

FIGURE 7. Cmsalpinia middendorjensis Berry, Middendorf... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 

FIGURE 8. Salix pseudohayei Berry, Middendorf............................................................ 34 

FIGURES 9, 10. Quercus sumterensis Berry, Rocky Point..................................................... 35 

FIGURE 11. Ficus atavina Heer, Rocky Point.............................................................. 36 

FIGURE 12. Ficus_crassipes Heer, Rocky Point............................................................. 37 

All the specime~s are from the Middendorf arkose member of the Black Creek formation. 

90 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

4 

6 

3 

1 

5 

9 10 

' l 

I 

~ I 

I 

.,..,..;. 

PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE X 

7 

11 12 

UPPER CRETACEOU S PLANTS FROM SOUTH CAROLINA. 
I • 

I ' 

PLATE XI. 

91 
\ 

PLATE ·x:r. 

Page. 

FIGURE l. Satixjt~xuosa Newberry, Langley .•....................... -.-. _................................. 32 

FIGURE 2. Laurus plutonia Heer, Langley .......... ~ .......... '....... _ .. _..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . 52 

FIGURE 3. Diospyros prim::eva Heer, Langley.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 

FIGURES 4-7. Ficus krausiana Heer, Rocky Point................................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . .. 38 

·All the specimens are from the Middendorf arkose member of the Black Creek formation. 

92 
PROFESSION AL PAPE.R 84 PLATE. XI 

U.S. GE.OLOGICAL SURVE.Y 

2 

1 

3 

6 

4. 

UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANTS FROM SOUTH CAROLINA. 
PLATE XII. 

93 
PLATE XII. 

FIGURES 1-3. Ficus stephensoni Berry .................................... . 

1, 3. Langley. 

2. Middendorf. 

Page. 

38 

FIGURE 4. Ficus celtifolius Berry, Middendorf .... · ........ ·.................................................. 37 

FIGURE 5. Momisia carolinensis Berry, Middendorf.......................................................... 36 

FIGURE 6. Laurophyllum elegans Hollick, Middendorf.......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 

FIGURE 7. Laurophyllum nervillosum Hollick, Middendorf. ........................... _ . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 

FwuRES 8-10. Ficus crassipes Heer, Rocky Point......................................................... 37 

All the specimens are from the Middendorf arkose member of the Black Creek formation. 

94 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE XII 

2 

10 

8 ~ .. 

6 7 

UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANTS FROM SOUTH CAROLINA. 
PLATE XIII. 

95 
PLATE XIII. 

Page. 

FIGURES 1-5. Celastrophyllum carolinensis Berry........................................................... 51 

1-4. Middendorf. 

5. Restoration. 

FIGURE 6. LaJ.rus plutonia Heer, Middendorf............................................................... 52 

FIGURE 7. Laurus atanensis Berry, Rocky Point ........................................ ." . ."................ 53 

FIGURES 8-12. Eucalyptus geinitzi (Heer) Heer............................................................ 56 

8, 10, 11, 12. Middendorf. 

9. Rocky Point. 

All the specimens are from the Middendorf arkose member of the Black Creek formation. 

96 

--
PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE XIII 

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

\ 

\\ 

\ 

'· 

2 4 

6 

1 

10 

7 9 5 

UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANTS FROM SOUTH CAROLINA. 
PLATE XIV. 

97 
PLATE XIV. 

FIGURE 1. Eucalyptus geinitzi (Heer) H~er, Rocky Point. ...................... : ...................... _ ... . 

FIGURE 2. Eucalyptus angusta Velenovsky, Black Creek .............................................. _._ .. 

FIGURES 3, 4. Eucalyptus wardiana Berry(?), Middendorf. ................................................. . 

FIGURES 5, 6. Andromeda nov::ecmsarem Hollick, Middendorf. ........ : ........ ~ ................... , ........ _· 

FIGURE 7. Andromeda euphorbiophylloides Berry, Mi~dendorf ............................................... . 

FIGURE 8. Illicium watereensis Berry, Rocky Point' ....... ~ ......... ~_·_ .................................... . 

FIGURE 9. Myrsine gaudini (Lesquereux) Berry, Langley .......................... _ ............... _ ... _ .... . 

FIGURE 10. Andromeda grandifolia Berry, Rocky Point .................................................... . 

FIGURE 11. CelaStrophyllum elegans Berry, Rocky Point ................................................... . 

FIGURES 12, 13. Diospyros primmva Heer, Langley ........................... , ............................ . 

FIGURE H. Diospyros rotundifolia Lesquereux, Rocky Point ............................................... . 

98 

All the specimens except- that shown in figure 2 are from the Middendorf arkose member 

of the Black Creek formation. The specimen shown in figure 2 is from another ·part of the 

Black Creek formation. 

Page. 

56 

55 

57 

58 

59 

44 

61 

59 

50 

61 

62 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE XIV 

6 

12 

2 

4 

5 

1 

11 

9 

8 7 13 14 

UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANTS FROM SOUTH CAROLINA. 
. THE UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF GEORGIA. 

INTRODUCTION. 

Up to the time of the present study no fossil plants had been specifically recorded from the 

Coastal Plain of Georgia, although S. W. McCallie mentions several Eocene plant localities and 

one of Cretaceous age in his report on the underground waters of' Georgia/ and one of the 

localities which has furnished materials for the following notes is ·mentioned by Otto Veatch in 

his recent report on the clay deposits of Georgia. 2 In 1894 D. W. Langdon recorded leaffrag:;-

nlents in the Cretaceous at Chimney Bluff on Chattahoochee River, 3 and in a recent note on 

this flora the writer 4 lists a number of the for;ms found in the Georgia Cretaceous and discusses 

briefly the botanic and ecologic conditions which they indicate. 

Both Lower and Upper Cretaceous rocks are present in ·Georgia. The Lower Cretaceous 

sands and clays form a belt of varying width extending across the State along the eastern border 

of the Piedmont Plateau from Augusta to Columbus and appear to be continuous with the 

so-called "IIamburg beds" of South Carolina. They are probably to be correlated with the 

Patuxent ("Cape Fear") formation of North Carolina, which in turn is correlated with the 

Patuxent formation of :Maryland and Virginia, rather than with the younger Tuscaloosa formation of western Alabama, as has been done by Veatch/ for L. W. Stephenson has shoWn 

that the Tuscaloosa overlies them unconformably in the area of their mqst western outcrop, 

a short distance west of :Montgomery, Ala. 

The Upper Cretaceous formations of Georgia have been recently studied by Mr. Stephenson, 

who has in preparation a detailed report on the geology, and they will not be considered in 

detail in the present contribution. A brief statement is, however, necessary, and the· writer 

is under obligations to Mr. Stephenson for furnishing data, especially regarding the plant 

localities near Buena Vista and Byron. These localities have not been· visited by the writer, 

who is fanriliar only with the Cretaceous of the Chattahoochee River section and of an area 

near Columbus, Ga. 

GEOLOGY OF THE UPPER CRETACEOUS DEPOSITS OF GEORGIA. 

Deposits of Upper Cretaceous age in Georgia are confined to a triangular area lying west 

of Ocmulgee River and are transgressed east of that point by the Eocene. The relatively · 

narrow base of this triangle is formed by Chattahoochee River, and the apex points somewhat 

north of east. These Upper Cretaceous deposits represent the Eutaw and Ripley.formations, 

and each formation is subdivided on more or less well-marked lithologic grounds into the following divisions: 

Ripley formation. 

Providence sand member. 

Middle division (" Renfroes marl" of Veatch). 

Cusseta sand member. 

Eutaw formation. 

Tombigbee sand member. 

Lower division. 

1 Bull. Georgia Geol. Survey No. 15, 1908, pp. 36, 336, 347. -

2 Bull. Georgia Gcol. Survey No. 18, 1909, p. 88. 

s Langdon, D. W., Report on the geology of the Coastal Plain of,Alabama, 1894, p. 440. 

4 Berry, E. W., Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 37, 1910, pp. 503-511, figs. 1, 2. 

• 99 
100 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND .EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

RIPLEY FORMATION. 

Ousseia sand member.-The Cusseta member is typically developed in southeastern Chattahoochee County, Il:ear the town of Cusseta, where it consists of noncalcareous, rather micaceous, mostly unconsolidated quartz sands with local lenses of laminated c~ays and more extensive lenses of dark, massively bedded clays. It loses its distinctive character to the west along 

Chattahoochee River, where it is more or .less glauconitic and fossiliferous, and to the northeast, where it merges with the underlying and overlying Upper Cretaceous sands. Beds believed 

to represent this horizon are fossiliferous along the Chattahoochee and contain plant fossils near 

Buena Vista and near Byron. 

Middle di,vision.-The middle part of the Ripley formation consists essentially of massive, 

micaceous, calcareous, and in many places glauconitic sand with calcareous nodules and dark, 

argillaceous, pyritiferous, lignitic sands and clays, the sands predominating. These deposits 

preserve their identity more or less completely from Chattahoochee River eastward across 

Stewart, Marion, and Schley counties, merging in Macon· County with the underlying and over-

-lying Cretaceous sands. They carry an abundant marine fauna, and beds of this age across 

_ the border in Alabama have yielded a small flora markedly different in character fron1 that 

described in the following pages. 

Providence sand member.-The Providence sand consists essentially of variegated, more or 

less- cross-bedded sands which pass gradually into the underlying middle division of the Ripley 

('' Ren!roes marl" of Veatch), with the representatives of which they merge toward the east. 

They are unfossiliferous and hence without interest in the present co~nection. · 

EUTAW FORMATION. 

Lower division.-The part of the Eutaw formation in the Georgia area which underlies ~he 

Tombigbee memher consists predo~antly of sands, coarse toward the. landward margin, and 

ebewhere in m~ny places calcareous and locally . argillaceous and more or less glauconitic. 

Lenses of dark laminated clay are not uncommon a~d contain many large teredo-bored logs. 

Silicified wood is common in the sands'. At certain localities molluscan remains are not uncommon, and the clay lenses ordinarily carry vegetable matter. Along Chattahoochee River the 

sands of the lower division of the Eutaw are in places semilithified by the deyelopment of several 

courses of nodules cemented by carbonate of lime. Eastward the deposits pass into unconsolidated, cross-bedded, ferruginous, and unfossiliferous sands. 

The areal extent of these lower deposits is ·not great. They underlie the northern part of 

Chattaho9chee and Marion counties, a small part of southern Muscogee County, and western 

Taylor County, beyond which they are not separable from the similar unconsolidated sands 

which chara<;terize the overlying Upper Cretaceous deposits. They contain a fairly representative flora both in their basal and upper portions. 

Tombigbee sand member.-The Georgia representative of the Tombigbee sand member of 

the Eutaw formation of Mississippi and Alabama is distinctive in character only along Chattahoochee River and for a few miles to the northeast, where it consists of more or less calcareous 

clays which are locally lignitic and of more or less argillaceous sands· with thin layers of cal-

. careous nodules. Eastward it can not be traced beyond Marion County, where it becomes 

more sandy a~d is indistinguishable from the adfacent deposits of _the Eutaw formation and 

from the overlying Cusseta sarid member of _the Ripley formation. It contains marine invertebrates but has failed to yield any :recognizable plant remains. 

' PLANT LOCALITmS. 

Determinable fossil plants have been collected in the Upper Cretaceous of Georgia from 

five different localities, each of which will be briefly described . 

• 
'1 

UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF GEORGIA. 101 

MCBRIDES FORD.· 

The locality at McBrides Ford is on the left bank of Upatoi Creek in Chattahoochee County,. 

about 10 miles southeast of Columbus, Ga. _ 

The lower Eutaw deposits, which are above the ford, rest with a marked unconformity 

on Lower Cretaceous clays. At the base they show fine gravel, grading upward into coarse ' · 

cross-bedded sands· with clay laminre. At one point abou_t 10 feet above low water a small 

lens of dark-drab clay, not more than 12 or 15 inches in thickness and pinching out laterally 

within a few feet, furnished the plant remains listed from this locality. Two large leaves of 

Manihotites were lying close ·together and possibly were derived from the same plant. ·Similar 

small lenses of clay along the low bank of the creek showed traces of leaves and much comnlinuted vegetable matter but nothing recognizable. 

The species identified from this locality only a few feet above the base of the formation 

and near its landward margin are: 

Andromeda cretace a. Lesq uereux? 

Andromeda wardiana Lesquereux. 

Androvet6a elegans Berry. 

Aralia eutawensis Berry. 

Brachyphyllum macrocarpum formosum Berry. 

Cinnamomum heerii Lesqu_ereux? 

(}jnnamomum newberryi Berry. 

Eucalyptus augusta Velenovsky. 

Ficus ovatifolia Berry. 

J uglans arctica Heer? 

Magnolia boulayana Lesquereux. 

Magnolia capellinii Heer. 

:M:an:ihotites georgiana Berry. 

.Menispermites variabilis Berry. 

Paliurus upatoiensis Berry. 

Salix :flexuosa Newberry. 

Sequoia reichenbachi (Geinitz) Heer. 

-Tumion carolinianum Berry? 

Zizyph us laurifolius Berry. 

The Sequoia and Androvettia are the most abundant forms. In addition to the plants in 

the list several species of dicotyledons represented by unidentifiable fragments and a specimen 

of an undeterminable fern of the Asplenium type were collected; 

BROKEN ARROW BEND. 

' 

The locality at Broken Arrow Bend includes. outcrops on both banks of Chattahoochee 

River about 13 miles below Columbus. The one farthest up the river, on the Alabama bank, 

contains marine invertebrates; the other, on the left bank, about 100 yards farther downstream, in Chattahoochee County, Ga., shows a much mor~ extensive section and includes 

the fossil plants enumerated below. At the hase of the bluff in places the much-eroded 

surface of the Lower Cretaceous rises to a height of about 5 feet. Overlying this are coarse 

cross-bedded sands of the lower Eutaw with gravel, much lignite, and a few small lenses of 

dark "shaly" clay about a foot in thickness and 10 to 15 feet in diameter, carrying poor leaf 

impressions and considerable comminuted vegetable matter. · 

The identifiable species are: 

Malapoenna horrellensis Berry? 

Phragmites pratti Berry. 

Salix eutawensis Berry. I 

Salix flexuosa Newberry. · 

Sequoia _reichenbachi. (Geinitz) .Heer. 

An un~eterminable leaf of Ficus was also found here. The Sequoia is characteristic and 

is the most abundant type. Next iri abundance is .Salix eutawensis, the leaves of which are, 

however, usually much broken. · 

CHIMNEY BLUFF: 

The locality at Chimney Bluff is on the left bank of Chattahoochee River about 22 miles 

below Columbus, in Chattahoochee County. (See Pl. XV, A.) 

At this point the Eutaw shows about 25 feet of irregularly bedded, laminated and crossbedded, very lignitic, pyritiferous sand and clay, with small lenses of dark-drab clay carrying 

• plant remains, the whole overlain by a lens of fine gray sand about 10 to 15 feet thick, above 
102 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

which, without unconformity, are about 50 feet of yellowish or greenish very argillaceous sands 

which carry casts of marine invertebrates and which are believed to represent the Tombigbee 

sand. 

The identifiable plants, which are from a layer near .the top of the lower division of the 

Eutaw, are as follows: 

Araucaria bladenensi.s Berry. 

Araucaria jeffreyi Berry. 

Ficus crassipes Heer. 

Ficus krausiana Heer. 

Salix :flexuosa Newberry. 

Salix lesquereuxii Berry. 

Sequoia reichenbachi (Geinitz) Heer. 

At this locality the Sequoia is rare and the commonest plant is Araucaria bladenensis, 

represented for tpe most part by macerated twigs and detached leaves, though better preserved 

twigs of considerable size are not uncommon. The lower part of the exposure is remarkable 

for its lignite. Large teredo-bored logs, some of them 2 to 3 feet in diameter, are not uncommon, 

and pellets of fossil resin (amber) are also present. In view of the persistent association of this 

fossil resin with Araucaria remains from North Carolina southward it seems probable that not 

all Upper Cretaceous ambers are derived from species of Pinus, though this, as shown by 

Hollick and Jeffrey, is the source of the amber from Staten Island, N. Y. · ,...., .. ()'/ 

Leaf impressions were discovered at this locality in 1888 by the late D. W. Langdon, of 

the Alabama Geological Survey, who mentioned their occurrence in several publications, but 

no collections were made until the wr~ter's visit in 1909. { 

LOCALITY NEAR BUENA VISTA. 

The fossil plants from the locality near Buena Vista (see Pl. XV, B) were collected by 

L. W. Stephenson in a gully along the Buena Vista-Tazewell road about 6 miles northeast of 

Buena Vista, in Marion County, in deposits referred by him to the Cusseta sand member of 

the Ripley formation. The species identified are the following: 

Andromeda novaecmsa.rem Hollick. 

Araucaria bladenensis Berry. 

Doryanthites cretacea Berry. I 

Eucalyptus augusta Velenovsky. 

Ficus georgiana Berry. 

Manihotites georgiana Berry. 

The leaf impressions are scattered and poor, perhaps the most abundant form being the Doryanthites. The Araucaria is represented by detached leaves, and all of the remains show evidence 

of trituration. · 

LOCALITY NEAR BYRON. 

The lomility about It miles northeast of Byron, in Houston County, 'is in a cut of the.Central of Georgia Railway on the north side of the track The plants were collected by L. W. 

Stephenson and are referred by him to the Cusseta sand member. · The· materials in this area 

are predominantly coarse, cross-bedded, rather incoherent arkosic sands with local clay lenses 

of small extent. The leaf remains from this point are· contained in· a massive dark-drab clay· 

which carries much comminuted vegetable matter and grades both horizontally and vertically 

into laminat~d clay with fine sand partings. The .plants are few and poor and include the 

following recognizable ·forms: 

Araucaria jeffreyi Berry. 

Cunninghamites elsgans (Corda) Endlicher. 

Dryopterites stephensoni Berry. . ., 

The Cunninghamites is the commonest form but is very poorly preserved. The collection also 

contains undeterminable fragments of dicotyledonous leaves. 

~-·1:7 ···. 

I'· 

''\, 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE XV 

A. PLANT LOCALITY AT CHIMNEY BLUFF, CHATTAHOOCHEE 

RIVER, GA. 

B. PLANT LOCALITY IN THE CUSSETA SAND MEMBER OF THE RIPLEY 

FORMATION NEAR BUENA VISTA, GA. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF GEORGIA. 103 

SYSTEMATIC DESCRIPTION OF ·THE FLORA. 

Phylwn PTERIDOPHYTA. 

Order FILICALES. 

Family POL YPODIACElE. 

<:lenus DRYOPTERITES Berry. 

DRYOPTERITES STEPHENSON! sp. nov. 

Plate XVII, figures 1 and 2. 

Description.-Fronds bipinnate ·or possibly tripinnate. Pinnules thick in. texture, ovate to 

lanceolate in outline, ascending, merging toward the apex of the pinnre,. A single vein enters 

each pinnule, branching from the rachis at an extremely acute angle and immediately breaking 

up into three branches, the upper as a rule remaining simple and running to the upper margjn, · 

the lower.generally forking once and runn~ng to the lower lateral margin, and the middle dividing 

four or five times to form the main vascular system of the pinnule. The distal branches commonly remain silnple and the proximal generally fork mice. 

This species is based upon the specimen figured and its counterpart. It is quite distinct 

from any ferns previously known from the American Upper Cretaceous but suggests various 

forms previously described, for example, the fern ren1ains described by Debey and Ettingshausen from Aachen (Emscherian), on the· Prussian border, a.s Pteridolemma gymnorachis. 1 

Other forms which show a superficial resemblance to the one under consideration are those 

described by Kerner from Lesina, Dalmatia (Cenomanian), as various species 'of Pachypteris.2 

Still other fern remains described as Sphenopteris grevillioides Heer, 3 Grevillea tenera 

Velenovsky,4 and Tliyrsopteris grevillioides I-Iollick, 5 which range from the Kome beds (Barremian) 

of Greenland to the Upper Cretaceous of Marthas Vineyard (Magothy formation), are suggestive 

of the Georgia fern in general aspect but are seen to differ both in outline and venation when 

careful comparisons are instituted. The modern genus Dryopteris of Adanson (Aspidium 

Swartz) has more than 1,000 species of wide geographic distribution in the existing flora. 

Fossil species have been described from the Lower Cretaceous upward. 6 The Upper Cretaceous 

records include Dryopteris oerstedi (I-Ieer) Knowlton from the Atane and Patoot beds of 

Greenland 7 and Dryopteris kennerleyi (Newberry) Knowlton from Vancouver Island, neither 

of which appears to be closely related to the Georgia plant. 

Occurrence.-Cusseta sand member of the Ripley formation, cut on Ce.ntral of -Georgia 

Railway, 1! miles northeast of Byron, I-Iouston County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson.) 

Oollections.~U. S. National Museum. 

Phylwn SPERMOPHYTA. 

Class GYMNOSPERM;lE. 

Order CONIFERALES. 

Genus ANDROVETTIA Hollick and Jeffrey. 

ANDROVETTIA ELEGANS sp. nov.. 

· Plate XVIII, figures 1-10. 

Description.-These remains consist of bifacialleafy twigs arranged in a distichous and 

apparently opposite manner on naked stems, very fernlike in general aspect. These phylloclad1 Denkschr. K. Akad. Wiss. Wien, vol. 17, 1859, p. 234, Pl. VII, figs. 21, 22. 

3 Jahrb. K.-k. geol. Reichsanstalt, vol. 45, 1895, pp. 39 et seq. 

a Heer, Oswald, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 3; :Abth. 2, 1874, p. 34, Pl. XI, figs. 10 and 11. 

• Velenovsky, J., Die Flora derbohmischen Kreideformation, pt. 4, 1885, p·. 11, Pl. VII, figs. 9, 14, and 16. . . 

~Hollick, Arthur, The. Cretaceous flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 50, 1907, p .. 31, Pl. r, figs. 1o-13. 

o 'fhese were set apart from the modern genus as the genus Dryopterites by the writer in 1911. · 

7 The form identified as this species from the Patapsco formation of Virgina is Cladophlebis broumiana. 
104 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EO.CENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

like-lateral twigs are not simple shoots but reduced branches of a higher· order, for they are made 

up of regularly alternating leaves and reduced leaf-bearing lateral twigs in the axils of these 

leaves. Phyllotaxy and arrangement of twigs are apparently cyclic throughout, but much 

masked by reduction, especiallj oOf those leaves on the flat surfaces. The lateral leaves are 

opposite, stout, falcate, pointed, and markedly decurrent, with a single immersed stout leaf 

trace; proximally they coalesce with their fellows. The leaves on the upper and lower surfaces 

are apparent on magnification as bluntly rounded scales along the middle of the phylloclad. 

Between each successive lateral leaf there is a rounded toothed lobe about twice as long as the 

leaves which represent a vestigial axillary branch. These lobes show vestiges of several leaves, 

not only by the marginal teeth but also by the lines of adhesion, which can be traced for greater 

or less distances inward. The vascular system of these reduced lateral twigs can not be made 

out satisfactorily. Each shows a single once-forkedstrand, the two forks running to the tips 

of the red\}cad ·basal leaves of the twig. Whether this represents all that is left of the vascular 

-system of these twigs can not be made out. In the more reduced Androvettia carolinensis Berry 

these twigs are usually represented by a single rounded lobe which contains but one once-forked 

strand like that in the Georgia materiaL 

Distally some specimens show clusters of small terete twigs in the axils of lateral leaves of 

the main shoots. These twigs are covei-ed with sniall, ovate, appressed leaves. Similar objects 

are present in some of the material of Androvettia statenensis from Kreischerville, Staten Island, 

each of which springs fro1;11 the axil of a normal leaf of the axillary shoot and is doubtfully 

interpreted as a male ainent. This may be the nature of these remarkable objects, although 

no traces o~ P.Ollen or pollen sacs can be made out in microscopic preparations of the Georgia 

fossil. They -can hardly represent anything but aments or a most curious type of dimorphic 

, foliage. The illustrations show typical' specimens of the normal and dimorphic type, natural 

size ~nd also enlarged 4 diameters, as well as the apical. part of one of the lateral twigs of the 

normal type enlarged 45 diameters. 

This remarkable genus was erected by Hollick and Jeffrey 1 for the reception of a single 

species discovered I:ecently in the upper part of the Raritan formation near Kreischerv-ille, 

Staten Island, and the describers content themseives with a very good account of this species 

and refrain from framing a generic diagnosis. This laudable conservatism is abundantly justified. 

by the writer's discovery of two aqditional species which can not be generically separated from 

the Staten Islan<;i species and which furnish_ a number of additional characters that serve to 

isolate this genus. · 

These remains are all entirely fernlike in superficial appearance, uniformly coriaceous in 

texture, and by the details. of their external characters and internal structure are indubitable 

gymnosperms of the order Coniferales. Their positive reference to the Araucarinere by Hollick 

and Jeffrey will undoubtedly be questioned by many ~tudents. 

Androvettia carolinensis is not com.Inon and is confined· to a single locality on Tar -River 

!n North Carolina and to a recently discovered locality at about the same horizon near Iuka 

in northeastern Mississippi. It evidently had a wide range, and its scarcity in the fossil state 

may possibly be due to its habit&t having been remote from the areas of sedimentation. What 

makes this theory seem plausible is the fact that although the remains are extremely coriaceous 

they are much broken both in North Car<;>lina and Mississippi, as if they had been in the water 

a long time, and 1 possibly they were brought down fro:r;n the upland by streams. The Georgia 

material is more abundant, but is also confined to a single known locality. The lateral 'leaves 

along the edges of phylloclad-like twigs ~re markedly opposite and well developed and· the 

scale leaves on its flat surfaces are less reduced than in Androvettia statenensis or Androvettia 

carolinensis. -The lateral twigs are strictly opposite as in the course of the vascular bundles, 

which consist of a regular alternation of opposite simple bundles and dichotomously forked 

bundles. As. the anatomy· of these forms has not yet been studied the reader is referred to 

1 Mem. New York Bot. Garden, vol:a, 1909, p. 22. 
• 

UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF GEORGIA. 105 

I-Iollick and Jeffrey's memoir cited above, in which the histology of the Staten Island form is 

discussed. 

Androvettia seems clearly distinct from Phyllocladus, and it is probably equally distinct 

from the various species of Protophyllocladus which have been recorded from the Raritan and 

later Cretaceous formations of North America. It seems equally distinct from Thinnfeldia but 

may prove to be related to Moriconia--:-in fact, the reduced lateral twigs are very suggestive of 

the similar twigs of Moriconia americana Berry, especially the forms of this species collected 

by the writer from clays in the Middendorf arkose n1emb~.r of the Black Creek formation of 

South Carolina. The compariso~ of Androvettia with the Lower Cretaceous species Otenopteria 

insignis, Zamiopsis insignis, Thinnfeldia marylandicum, and Plantaginopsis marylandica by 

I-Iollick and Jeffrey is in the writer's opinion singularly unhappy. The last is a monocotyledon 

and the others either ferns or cycads, not even remotely related to the forms under discussion. 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, McBrides Ford, Chattahoochee 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Collections.-D. S. Nn,tional Museun1. 

Genus ARA: UCARIA .Tussieu. 

ARA UCARIA BLADENENsrs Berry. 

Plate XIX, figures 1 and 2. 

Araucaria bladenensis Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 35, 1908, p. 255, Pls. XII; XIII; and XIV, figs. 1-3. 

This forn1 is described in the section of this report dealing with the Upper Cretaceous flora 

of South Carolina (pp. 19-20). · 

This species, which is so exceedingly common in and characteristic of the Black Creek 

forn1ation in theN orth Carolina area, and which is .also found in the continuation of these beds 

in South Carolina, occurs in abundance in the lower part of the Eutaw of western Alabama. ~ 

In Georgia it is represented at Buena Vista by detached but entirely characteristic leaves 

which are extremely rare. It is more common at Chimney Bluff, where both the detached 

leaves and the leafy twigs, often of considerable size, are abundant. The presence at the 

latter locality of a characteristic cone scale of Araucaria jeffreyi suggests the probability of 

the two being referable to the same species. 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, Chimney Bluff, Chattahoochee County. 

(Collected by E. W. Berry.) Cusseta sand member of the Ripley formation, near Buena Vista, 

Marion Comity. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

AnA UCARIA JEFFREYI Berry. 

Araucariaje.f!reyi Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 35, 1908, p. 258, Pl. XVI.. 

This species is describeq in the section of this report dealii1g with the Upper Creta~eous 

flora of South Carolina (pp. 20-21). 

The Georgia material is neither abundant nor wen· preserved, but the identifications are 

unquestionable. A single scale was collected at Chimney Bluff, on Chattahoochee River, where 

it was associated with the abundant leafy twigs of Araucaria bladenensis, and, as mentioned 

under the discussion of that species·, it- renders probable the view that these cone scales and 

twigs were borne by the same Upper Cretaceous trees. A single specimen, entirely ~haracteristic, was also obtained at the locality near Byron. 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, Chimney Bluff, Chattahoochee County. 

(Collected by E. W. Berry.) Cusseta sand m.ember of the Ripley formation, cut on Central of 

Georgia Railway, 1! miles northeast of Byron, Houston County. (Collected by L. W." 

Stephenson.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 
106 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Genus BRACHYPHYLLUM Brongniart. 

, BRACHY.PHYLLUM MACROCARPUM FORMOSUM Berry. 

Brachyphyllum macrocarpum Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 37, 1910, p. 183. 

Brachyphyllum macrocarpum Berry, idem, vol. 38, 1911, p. 420 (non Newberry, 1896). 

Brachyphyllum macrocarpumjormosum Berry, idem, vol. 39, 1912, p. 392, Pl. XXX. 

Description.-Slender elongated twigs, pinnately branched, covered witl{ medium-sized, 

crowded, appressed leaves, spirally arranged.· Leaves bluntly pointed, relatively Slll,ooth, 

thick. 

In the consideration of the various specimens that have been referred to Brachyphyllum 

macrocarpum Newberry a very considerable variation within certain fixed limits is at once 

obvious. This variation is usually one of size, but the more slender specimens are more 

elongated and ~moother. This has been frequently noted by the writer and is commented upon 

in print by F. H. Knowlton/ who in discussing the later forms (from Wyoming) suggests 

that the·species on the verge of extinction became smaller in its proportions., 

In studying the mat.erial from the South Atlantic and Gulf States a constant difference in 

size was noticed by the writer. ·This, may reflect a slight difference in climatic conditions, and all 

of the forms may be interpreted as the variations of a single species. In fact, one of Newberry's 

figures 2 of a Raritan .specimen is approximately the same size as the forms from the :Montana 

group of the West and is associated with the normal, stout, club-shaped type. That the variety 

has no particular stratigraphic significance is indicated by its abundance at -a horizon as old as 

the basal part of the Tuscaloosa formation in Alabama and its presence in the Woodbine sand 

of Texas. In general, however, it occurs at later and more southern horizons than the ·type. 

This might be ascribed to the fact that only the slender and more elongated terminal twigs are 

preserved a.t these localities, but ·such an explanation is regarded as improbable, /for the same 

:reasoning sh,ould hold good for the areas where only the thicker twigs have been found. 

The remains are generally much macerated and broken. The general proportions are 

decidedly different f:rom the parent type.· The leaves are slightly smaller and .smoother and 

somewhat more elongated in their relative proportions and lack the apical papillre and the conyergent strire. The new variety is much more graceful than the type in appearance and in,its 

general aspect· suggests the Lower Cretaceous genus Arthrotaxopsis. The most closely allied 

·form appears to be one from the Albian of Portugal, described by Saporta 3 as Brachyphyllum 

obesiforme elongatum; There is also considerable resemblance to Brachyphyllum crassicaule 

Fontaine of the Patapsco formation in Maryland and Virginia. Remains of this new variety 

are associated with the type in Maryland; they are abp.n~ant throughout the Tuscaloosa of 

Alabama, ranging upward into the basal part of the Eutaw formation in both Alabama and 

western Georgia. · 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, McBrides Ford, Chattahoochee 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Genus CUNNINGHAMITES Presl. 

CuNNINGHAMITES ELEGANS (Cord.a) Endlicher. 

This species is described in the section ·of this rep~rt dealing with. the Upper Cretaceous 

flora of South.Carolina (pp. 24-25). 

The Georgia specimens are from the locaLity :near Byron, and though not nearly so large 

as the exceptional remains of this species from North Carolina, where many of the leaves are 

6 centimeters o·r more in length, they are entirely typical, and with the a.ssociated cone scale 

· 1 Bull. U.S. Geol. Survey No. 163,1900, p. 29, Pl. IV, figs. 5 and 6. 

?. The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U. S. Gl:lol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p. 51, Pl. VII, figs. 1-7. (See fig. 7.) 

a Saporta, G. de, Flore fossile du Portugal, 1894, p. 176, Pl. XXXI, fig. 14.· 

• 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF GEORGIA. 107 

of Araucaria jeffreyi serve admirably to indicate the probable horizon of the materials found 

near Byron, which are rather ambiguous lithologically and entirely ·unfossiliferous except for 

the three species of plants collected by Stephenson. 

Occurrence.-Cusseta sand member of the Ripley formation, cut on Central of Georgia 

Railway 1-} miles northeast of Byron, Houston County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Genus SEQUOIA Endlicher. 

SEQUOIA REICHENBACH! (Geinit'z) Heer. 

This species is desc~ibed in the section of this report dealing with the Upper Cretaceous 

flora of South Carolina (pp. 23-24). · 

Twigs of this species are rare at the Chimney Bluff locality but typical and co1nn1on at 

McBrides Ford and Broken Arrow Bend. In this connection it is worthy of comment that 

Sequoia twigs are about the _last fragments in floating vegetable debris· to disintegrate, and 

their r01uains are frequently found in deposits in which the associated vegetation is reduced to 

an unrecognizable m~ss, as is so common in typically marine deposits. 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, Chimney Bluff, McBrides Ford, 

Broken Arrow Bend, Chattahoochee County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National ~1useum. 

Genus TUMION Ra~esque. 

TUMro:N CAROLINIANUM: Berry ( ~). 

Tumion carolinianum Berry, Am. Jou~. Sci., 4th ser., vol. 35, 1908, p. 383, figs. 1-3. 

Description.-The following description is quoted fron1 the work cited above: 

Leaves flat, somewhat rigid, linear-lanceolate, gradually tapering to a slender point from the broad but slightly 

contracted decurrent base, 25 to 30 millimeters long and up to 3 millimeters in greatest width, averaging somewhat 

more than 2 millimeters, arranged in a rather close spiral and apparently not distichous in habit. Mid vein absent, 

but in strong transmitted light a darker, i. e., more opaque, central band gradually dying out and presumably of 

vascular tissue is seen in the basal third of the leaf; this is not a surficial feature, however, since both the dorsal and 

ventral surfaces are unmarked centrally. II1 strong transmitted light the two stomatal bands characteristic of the 

modern species are fairly well shown after the leaves have been appropriately treated to reduce their opacity. These 

bands are narrow and their inner margin is just about one-fourth of the distance across the leaf, i.e., they are slightly 

nearer the margin than the median axis; they are confined to the lower surface and die out apically, becoming well 

marked proximally, and are ·made out with difficulty in the upper half of. the leaf. The stomata are confined to the 

surface of these bands and are without orderly arrangement, usually not more than four in a transverse direction. 

These stomata are of medium size and strictly comparable with those of the existing American tumions with which 

comparisons have been made; the guard cells are slender and their ori~ntation with respect to the l.eaf axis is indefinite, 

with apparently a prevailing tendency in the material examined to a position at right angles instead of one parallel 

with this axis, as in the case in the living material seen. · · ,, · 

The presence of this species in Georgia is based upon three poorly preserved .specimens 

fro1n McBrides Ford that can not be identified with certainty. The leaves seem to be thicker 

than in the Carolina specin1ens; and though some of them show traces of the stoni.atal bands,· 

always difficult to make out in material of this sort, others show suggestions of a midrib. It 

is believed, however, that this appearance is due to a slight keel developed in the basal part of 

the leaves, or to the method of preservation, for some of the leaves,show longitudinal striations 

which would be explained in the same n1anner. · ' 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw. fonnation, :McBrides Ford, Chattahoochee 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National ~1useum. 
108 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA· AND GEORGIA. 

Class ANGIOSPER:MlE. 

Subclass :MONOCOTYLEDON lE. 

Genus DORYANTHITES gen. nov: 

DORY ANTHITES CRETACEA sp. nov. 

Plate XVII, figure 3. 

Description.~Leaves as preserved linear, pre$Uinably .lanceolate above and sheathing 

below, 4.5 to 6 centimeters in .width and preserved without any diminution in width for· a 

length of 50 centimeters. Texture very coriaceous.. Margins entire. Veins simple and parallel, 

immersed, consider&bly less than 1 millimeter apart. Leaves alike on both surfaces. In 

the hollows between the veins occur rows of small stomata with the guard cells all oriented in a· 

·direction parallel with the veins and equally numerous on both surfaces of the leaf. Leaf surface 

under the ill.icroscope .appears finely striated parallel with the veins. 

· These curious remains, which call to, mind the leaves of the Paleozoic Cordaites or some 

modern giant bromeliad, are not uncommon in the Upper Cretaceous. They were first discovered by the writer at Rockfish Creek, N.C., and were subsequently found 92 miles above Newbern, N. C., on Neuse River, both of which localities are in the Black Creek formation, and it 

is f-rom the North Carolina specimens t4at the stomatal characters ·are described. Recently 

this same form was discovered in consid~rable abundance in the lower part of the Eutaw 

near Havana, Ala., and they are the most abundant fossils at the Georgia locality near Buena 

Vista. 

Referring to the similarly appearing remains previously described it may be noted that 

_MiqueP in 1853 described'under the heading Phyllitce monocotylei two ~orts of parallel-veined 

leaf fragments from tP.e Upper Cretaceous of Aachen. The first 2 he calls Yuccites ~ and 

the second, which suggests the fossil,s under discussion, he designates "Palma vel Yuccites 1" 

From the Valanginian of Portugal Ileer 3 describes what he calls Bambusium latifolium., 

which is also suggestive of the Ame;rican material. · 

Krasser 4 describes remains somewhat similar in appearance from the Cretaceous (Cenomanian) of l\1oravia as Typhceloipum cretaceum-. These are .somewhat smaller than the 

American forms and show transverse veinlets which are absent in the latter. 

Smaller, but otherwise comparable Lower and Uppe~ Cretaceous forms were named·Eolirion 

by Schenk,5 and similar older :Mesozoic forms· are commonly referred to the form genus Yuccites.6 

Perhaps the most similar fossils known are those referred to the genus Krannera 7 and fully 

described by Velenovsky, who does not, however, arrive at any satisfactory conclusion regarding 

·their relationship, although he thinks they are cycadaceous. lt seems undesirable to refer the 

G~orgia material to Yuccites, for though they are similar. to the more ancient remains so na.med, 

it is entirely improbable that they are congeneric with the Triassic type on which this genu~ 

was founded and such an identification would consequently be very Inisleading. Until the 

existing tropical Monocotyledonre are more abundantly represented in our larger herbaria or 

more complete and decisive Cretaceous material is discovered the botanic affinity of these 

anomalous forms must remain undetermined. The name chosen indicates superficial resemblance and does not imply actual relationship with the modern genus Doryanthes of the 

order Liliales. 

Little reliance can be placed upon similarity of appearance in dealing with· fr~gmentary 

remains of this sort and the foregoing are mentioned merely as indicating the presence of undetermined monocotyledons of large size in the Cretaceous floras of the world. 

I Verh. Geol. ka:1rt. Nederl., vol. 1, 1853, pp. 33-56, Pls. I-VII. 

2Jdem, Pl. I, fig. 3. 

a Contributions a la fl.ore fossile du Portug::tl, 1881, p. 22, Pl. XIX, figs. 1-.'3. 

4 Beitrage zur Kenntniss der fossilen Kreidefl.ora von Kunstadt: Beitr. Pal. n. Geol. Oester.-Ungarns, vol.10.1896, p. 127 (15), Pl. XII (II), fig. 4-

6 Palreontograpbica, vol. 19, 1869, p. 20. · 

o Schimper, W. P., and Mougeot, A., Monographie des plantes fossiles du gres bigarre de Ia chaine des Vosges, 1844, p. _42. 

7 Velenovsky, J., Die Gymn:>sp~rmen bohmischen Kreideformation, pt. 4, 1885, p. 1. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF GEORGIA. 109 

Occurrence.-Cusseta sa.nd mern ber of the Ripley formation, near Buena Vista, Marion 

County. (Collected. by L. W. Stephenson.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Genus PHRAGMITES Trinius. 

PHRAGl\HTES P&ATTII Rerry. 

This species is described in the section of this report dealing with the Upper Cretaceous 

flora of South Carolina (p. 28). 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, Broken Arrow Bend, Chattahoochee 

County. (Collected by E: W. Berry.) 

Oollection.-U. S. National Museum. 

Subclass DICOTYLEDONlE. 

Order JUGLANDALES. 

Family JUGLANDACElE. 

Genus JUGLANS Linne. 

JuGLANS ARCTICA Heer ~ 

This form is described In the section of this report dealing with the Upper Cretaceous flora 

of South Carolina (p. 30). Its Georgia occurrence, which is the most southerly known, is 

based on a fragment which, as far as it goes, is characteristic and indicates the remark~ble 

range of this species from 32° to 70° north latitude. · 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, McBrides Ford, Chattahoochee 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Order· SALICALE S. 

Family SALICACElE. 

Genus SALIX Linne. 

SALIX FLEXUOSA New berry. 

This form is described in -the section of this report dealing with the Upper Cretaceous flora 

of South Carolina (pp. 32-33). In Georgia; though not especially abundant, characteristic. leaves 

of this species are found from the base to the top of the Eutaw deposits which underlie the 

Ton1bigbee sand member. _ 

Occurrence.___:Lower division of the Eutaw formation, McBrides Ford, Chimney Bluff, 

Broken Arrow Bend, Chattahoochee County. (Collected by.E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

SALIX LESQUEREUXII Berry. 

This species is described in the section of this !eport dealing with the Upper Cretaceous 

flora of South Carolina (p. 33). ':fhe Georgia remains were obtained near the top of the 

lower division of the Eutaw formation at Chimney Bluff on Chattahoochee River and are 

entirely typical. 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw. formation, Chimney Bluff, ChattahoochJ}e 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

· Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

SALIX EUTAWENSIS Berry. 

Pl~te XIX, figure 3 . 

. Salix eutawensis Berry, ~ull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 37, 1910, p. 193, Pl. XXII, figs. 1-11. 

Description.-Leaves lanceolate in outline, somewhat falcate in some specimens, variable 

in size, from 5 to 12 centimeters in length and fr9m 0.5 to 2.3 centimeters in greatest width, 
110 UPPER CRETACEOUS .AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

which is in the basal half of the leaf. Base lanceolate. Apex gradually narrowed to the 

attenuate tip. Margin entire for a short distance proximally, above which it is very finely dentate,_even in the largest leaves collected. Petiole short and fairly stout. Midrib fairly stout, 

becoming thin in the apical part of the leaf, inclined to be curved or somewhat flexuous. Secondaries very fille and numerous, branching from the midrib at acute angles and curving upward, 

becoming in their terminal portions approximately parallel with the margin, sendlng short 

curved tertiaries to the marginal teeth and from secondary to secondary. · . 

This species is aht~ndant at the upper Tar River localities but. has, not. been detected at 

any other localities in the Bla:ck Creek formation of North Carolina. It is common in the lower 

division of the Eutaw formation at Broken Arrow Bend on Chattahoochee River in Georgia, 

from which place the type material was collected. The Georgia material is more fragmentary 

than that from North Carolina but withstands drying out much better, the North Carolina 

material being preserved in a loose carbonaceous sandy clay which ft;1rnishes very poor museum 

specimens. 

This typical willow leaf is quite modern in appearance, suggesting the existing Salix nigra 

Marsh, Salix fluviatilis Nuttall, or the Mexican Salix bonplandiana H. B. K., and is entirely 

distinct from any Cretaceous willows hitherto described. It approaches Salix newberryana 

Hollick 1 somewhat in general appearance but is much more elongate-lanceolate in outline and 

ranges to a much smaller size, besides showing other distinctive features. It also resembles I 

certain European Tertiary willows, as, for example, $alix denticulata, lavateri, and varians. 

Certain fruits found associated with these leaves inN orth Carolina a:re believed_ to belong to the 

same species. 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, Broken Arrow Bend, Chattahoochee 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Order URTICALES. 

Family MORACEm. 

Genus FICUS Linne. 

Fro us KRAus rAN A Heer. 

Plate XIX, figure 4. 

This species is described in the section ·of this report dealing with the Upper Cretaceous 

flora of South Carolina (p. 38). The Georgia material is somewhat more slender than the 

abundant material frQm South Carolin~ but agrees well with the type forms. _ 

It is one of the most characteristic post-Raritan and pre-Ripley fossils in the Coastal 

Plain, the Georgia occurrence carrying it to a point within a few feet of the Tombigbee sand 

horizon on Chattahoochee River. 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the ·Eutaw formation; Chimney Bluff, Chattahoochee 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.~U. S. National Museum. 

Fro us CRASSIPES (Heer) Heer. 

Proteoides crassipes Heer, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 3, Abth. 2, 1874, p. 110, Pl. XXXI, figs. 6-8~. 

Ficus crassipes Heer, idem, vol. 6, A,bth. 2, 1882, p.' 70, Pls. XVII, fig. 9a, and XXIV, figs. 1, 2. 

Ficus crassipes Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 79, Pl. XIII, fig. 3. 

Ficus crassipes Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 33, 1906, p. 172. 

Description.-The following description was written by Heer ill 1882: 

F. foliis coriaceis, lineari-lanceolatis, basi cuneatim attenuatis, integerrimis, nervo medio crasso, nervis secondariis 

obsoletis, petiolo longo-valido. -

The leaves of this species as they occur in the southern Coastal Plain are narrowly lanceolate 

with gradually narrowed apex and base, about 15 centimeters in length by 2.5 centimeters in 

1 Hollick, Arthur, in Newberry, J. S., T~3 flora of Amboy clay: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p. 68, Pl. XIV, figs. 2-7. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF GEORGU. 111 

greatest width, and resemble Ficus atavina Heer in outline but are relatively narrower. The 

texture is coriaceous and the midrib and petiole are extraordinarily stout in many .specimens. 

The secondary venation when seen i~ of the usual camptodrome type with relatively long, 

ascending, curved secondaries. 

This species was described originally from the Atane beds of-western Greenland, the first 

rather fragmentary specimens collected having suggested the genus Proteoides. It was subse-

. quently recorded from the Dakota sandstone of Kansas by Lesquereux. In the Atlantic Coastal 

Plain it is found in the l\1agothy and Black Creek formations, including the Middendorf member 

of the latter, and it is especially common in clays of the Tuscaloosa formation of Alabama. 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, Chimney Bluff, Chattahoochee 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

. Oollections.-U. s.· National Museum. 

Frcus GEORGIANA sp. ,nov. 

Plate XX, figure L 

Description.-Leaf ovate-lanceolate in outline, gradually tapering to an acute point. 

Proximately the leaf is broadly and abruptly rounded to a point within 2 to 3 mil~imeters of the 

Inidri.b, thence decurring as a narrow wing 1 millimeter or less in width and preserved for a distance of 1 centiineter. Length, about 17 centimeters. Greatest width, which is near the base of 

the leaf, 4.5 centimeters. Midrib fairly stout. l\1argin entire. Secondaries thin, parallel, and 

nun1erous, branching from .the midrib at angles of about 50° and curving upward distally, 

ca1nptodrome. ' · 

This species suggests Ficus beclcwithii Lesquereux of the Dakota sandstone and Ficus · 

lc'rausiana I-Ieer, which is abundant in the Upper Cretaceous of America from l\1ar~has Vineyard 

to Alaba1na ·and which occurs also in the Dakota sandstone and at the type locality in the 

Cenomanian of Europe, Moletein, Moravia. The Georgia plant is perfectly distinct from these 

species, however, the most conspicuous difference being its broadly round~d base. 

Occurrence.-Cusseta sand member of the Ripley formation, near Buena Vista, l\1arion -

County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Frcus OVATIFOLIA Berry. 

Plate XIX, figures 5-7. 

Ficus ovata Newberry, The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p. 70, PI. XXIV, figs. 1-3 

(non Don, 1802-3). 

Ficus ovatifolia Berry, Bull. TorreyBot:Club, vol. 36, 1909, p. 253. 

Description.-Leaves ovate in outline, extended above into a narrow, usually pointed apex. 

Length 8 to 12 centimeters. Greatest width, which is in the basal part of the leaf, 4 to 

7 centimeters. Base broadly rounded and in many speciinens slightly decurrent. Margins 

entire. Primaries, three from the base, the midrib somewhat stouter than the lateral primaries. 

Secondaries camptodrome. 

This species is closely ·allied to the Raritan species Ficus woolsoni Newberry/ differing 

primarily in its greater elongation and in the tendency of the former to a cordate outline. · 

The Georgia Cretaceous furnishes three species of pinnately veined lanceolate fig leaves, 

the present· species alone representing that other important section of Ficus with broader leaves 

and pahnate venation. Ficus ovatifolia was described originally from the Raritan formation 

of New Jersey. It is present in the Black Creek formation of North Carolina and yery probably 

in the Tuscaloosa formation of Alabama .. · The Georgia representatives are not rare at the 

McBrides Ford locality. One of them (Pl. XIX, fig. 6) shows an unusual variation in the 

character 9f the apex, which in this speciinen is diagonally retuse. 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, McBrides Ford, Chattahoochee 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.). 

Oollections.-U. S. National :Museum. 

1 Newberry, J. S., 'I'he flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26,1896, p. 70; Pis. XX, fig. 3; XXIII, figs.l-6. 
112 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Order RANALES . 

. Family MAGNOLIACEJE._ 

Genus MAGNOLIA Linne. 

MAGNOLIA BOULAYANA Lesquereux. 

Plate XX; figure 5. 

Magnolia boulayana Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 202, Pl. LX, 

fig. 2. 

Magnolia glaucoides Hollick, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 21, 1894, p. 60, Pl. CLXXV, :figs. 1 and 7. 

Magnolia glaucoides Smith, On the ge·ology of the Coastal Plain of Alabama, 1894, p. 348. 

Magnolia glaucoides Newberry, The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26; 1896, p. 74, Pl. LVII, 

figs. 1-4. 

Magnolia b'oulayana Knowlton, Twenty-first Ann. Rept. U. S. Geol. Survey,-pt. 3, 1901, p. 318. 

Magnolia glaucoides Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, 

vol. 50, 1907, p. 67, Pls. XIX, fig. 6; XX, fig. 6. 

Magnolia boulayana Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 36, 1909;- p. 254. 

Magnolia botdayana Berry,.idem, vol. 37, 1910, p. 23. 

Description.-Leaves narrowly elliptical in outline, unusually uniform in size and shape, 

8.5 to 13 centimeters in length and 3.5 to 4.5 centimeters in width. Apex usually bluntly 

rounded, in some specimens acute. Base matching the apex·. Petiole fairly stout, 3 to 4 centimeters in length. Midrib_ fairly stout. Secondaries slender, many obsolete, about 11 parrs, 

equidistant, parallel, camptodrome, branching from the midrib at- an angle of about 40°. Tertiaries, when s~en, transverse. Texture coriaceous. 

This species was described originally from the Dakota sandstone of Kansas. Subsequently 

Newberry described the Raritan remains, which are abundant at the Woodridge, N.J., locality, 

as a new species, Magnolia glaucoides, and it has been kept distinct by Hollick, who recognized; 

however, its practical identity with the form from the Dakota sandstone. There can be no 

question but that they belong. to the ~arne species, and it seems probable that JJ1agnolia vaningeni described by Hollick 1 should be referred to the same species. 

In addition to the localities already g1entioned this species 'is found on Marthas Vineyard 

and Long Island, also in the Tuscaloosa formation of Alabama, and in the Woodbine sand of 

· Texas. The Georgia occurrence is based upon the admirable specimen figured, and _forms a 

link in the chain which serves to connect the eastern and Dakota sandstone floras through the 

Gulf area. · · 

Occurr~nce.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, McBrides Ford, Chattahoochee 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

MAGNOLIA CAPELLINII Heer. 

Plate XX, :figu:re 6. 

Magnolia capellinii Heer, Phyllites cretacees du Nebraska, 1866, p. 21, Pl. III, figs. 5 and 6. 

Magnolia capellinii Heer, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 3, Abth. 2, 1874, p. 115, Pl. XXXIII, figs. 1-4. 

Magnolia capellinii Heer, idem, vol. 6, Abth.~2, 1882, p. 90, l>ls. XXIV, figs. 3-5; XXV, figs. 1-3; and XLV, fig. 1. 

Magnolia capellinii Velenovsky, Die Flora der bohmischen Kreideformation, pt. 2, 1883,.p. 20, Pl. VII, figs. 8 and 9. 

Magnolia capellinii Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon, U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 203, Pl. 

LXVI, fig. 1. . 

Magnolia capellinii Hollick, Trans. New York Acad. Sci., vol. 12, 1893, p. 234, Pl. VI, fig. 6, 

Magnolia capellinii Dawson, Trans. Roy. Soc. Canada, 1st ser., vol. 11, sec. 4, 1894, p. 63, Pls. Xi, fig. 49, and XIII, 

fig. 49a. 

Magnolia capellinii Hollick, Bull. Geol. Soc. America, vol. 7, 1895, p. 13. . 

Magnolia capellinii Hollick, Bull. New York Bot. Garden, vol. 3, 1904, p. 413, Pl. LXXVIII, fig. 3. 

Magnolia capellinii Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 31, 1904, p. 76, Pl. III, fig. 3. 

Magnolia capellinii Berry, Ann. ~ept. State Geologist 1;-rew Jersey for 1905, 1906, p. 138. 

Magnolia capellinii Hollick,The Cretaceous flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U.S. ~eol. Survey, 

vol. 50, 1907, p. 63, Pl. XVII, figs: 3 and 4. · 

Magnolia capellinii· Berry, B'ull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 34, 1907, p. 19J), Pl. XII, figs. 4 and 5. 

1 Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 21,1894, p. 61, Pl. CLXXV, fig.!'. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF GEORGIA. 113 

Descriptio,.-II.eer's original description, written in 1866, is as follows: 

M. foliis coriaceis, late ovalibus, integerrimis, nervis secundariis angulo acuto egredientibus, cu_rvatis camptodromk · 

These leaves vary considerably in size, averaging about 13 centimeters in length by 7 

centilneters in width. Outline broadly ovate, the base and apex generally equally pointed, 

although a few specimens have a somewhat obtuse apex. The texture is coriaceous or sub.:. 

coriaceous. :Midrib and petiole stout. Secondaries, usually se.ven or eight ~lternate or ~ubopposite pail·s, at regular intervals, approximately parallel, camptodrome. · . 

This widespread speci~s in some o( its forms very closely approaches the iess narrow and 

apically extended forms of },fagnolia speciosa I-Ieer .. Ordinarily, howeve-r, the latter species may 

be readily detected by its relatively narrower form with prod:uced apex and decurrent base. 

This species was described originally from the Dakota sandstone by I-Ieer and has been 

detected at a large number of localities of homotaxial age in both the Greenland Cretaceous and 

in that of the Pacific Coast. In the Atlantic Coastal Plain it characterizes the Magothy formation and is present in the Black Creek formation of North Carolina and the Tuscaloosa formation of Alabama. It was doubtfully recorded from the Raritan formation of ~ew Jersey by 

Lesquereux in 1878, but it has never been detected in the abundant collections of Raritan plants 

studied either by Newberry or the writer and is not at present admitted to be a member of the 

Raritan flora. The Georgia occurrence is based on the specimen fig:ured, ·a broadly· ovate 

leaf, about 13.5 centimeters in length by 6.5 centimeters in width, of coriaceous texture, which 

is poorly preserved in the sandy clay at McBrides Ford.- It approaches some of the forms 

of },fagnolia speciosa "in appearance, and perhaps it may b~ more intimately related to the 

latter species, which is very abundant in the Tuscaloosa formation. In either case the stratigraphic conclusions which may be dra"':n from the material are identical. 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, :McBrides Ford, Chattahoochee 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry). 

Collections.-D. S. Nationri1 J\1useum. 

Genus MENISPERMITES Lesquereux. 

J\1ENISPERMITES VARIABILIS sp. nov. 

Plate XXI, figures 1-4. 

Description.-Leaves of n1edium size, trilobate, but variable in shape. · Length about 9 or 

10 centilneters. Greatest width, which is from tip· to . tip of the laterally directed lobes, as 

1nuch as 16 centimeters in one specin1en. Lobes broad and separated by wide shallow sinuses. 

J\1argin entire but in some specin1ens scalloped, the scallops rounded and nearly equilateral, 

separated by acute sinuses. Base peltate, broadly rounded as in Aspidiophyllum or with a 

cordate sinus which does not, however, reach the top of the petiole. Primaries stout, three or 

four in number, palmately divergent from the peltate base, three of them generally equal in 

caliber. Secondaries slender and numerous, some apparently camptodrome and others 

craspedodron1e. 

Tlus peculiar species was apparently inequilateral and variable in outline, but unfortunately 

no c01nplete specimens were collected, though the ren1airis are not uncmnmon. They are 

n1arkedly distinct from any Cretaceous forms hitherto described and add another curious 

element to the remarkable assemblage found in the lower division of the Eutaw formation of 

Georgia, which include~? the gigantic specimens of Manihotites and the no less curious Androvettia 

and Doryanthites. 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, McBrides Ford, Chattahoochee 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

8069°-14-8 
11.4." UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUT:a: ,CARQ~INA AND GEORGIA. 

Order EUPHORBIALES. 

Family EUPHORBIACElE. 

Genu.&. :MANIHOTITES Berry. 

MANIHOTITES GEORGIANA Berry. 

Plates XXII, XXIII; and XXIV, figures 4 and 5. 

Manihotites georgiana Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 37, p. 507, figs. l.and 2, 1910. 

Description.-Leaves of extraordinarily large size, .36 to 48 centimeters across, palmately 

and deeply lobate, the main lobes dichotomously sublobate. Base missing, probably peltate. 

Margins entire, more or less undulate. Texture coriaceous. Venation coarse. Five or six 

stout primaries diverge at acute angles from the top of the petiole and fork dichotomously · 

about 5 or 6 centimeters above their base at angles of 30° to 50°. These branches may again 

fork dichotomously in a distance of 4 to 6 centimeters, or may not give off any branches, or 

the,branches may be clearly subsidiary in size and run to the apex of a subordinate lobe. There 

are a sparse number of relatively fine secondaries, which diverge at angles of about 45° or more 

and are apparently camptodrome. In each of the large specimens a straight vein of secondary 

·size runs directly to the base of a single main sinus. It is possible that tlus vein diverges along 

the margin in a vein which forms a marginal hem, as in the sinuses of lobed sassafras leaves, 

but such a vein can not be made out~ although at one point there is such a ma~ginal vein connected with the mdin venation by straight transverse tertiaries. Deep and narrow but rounded 

sinuses approach within 3 to 5 centimeters of the base and divide the leaf into five or more 

major lobes; these are subdivided by more or less deep sinuses of a similar character into 

inequilateral, ovate lanceolate, obtusely pointed subordinate lobes. 

It seems probable from the manner in which the e'xtreme base is torn away in the two 

nearly complete specimens collected that this base was peltate and comparable to those leaves 

of the modern Manihot, Podophyllum, Jatropha, and similar forms, which are inequilaterally 

peltate. There was considerable variability in the lobation, as is clearly shown by these two 

nearly complete leaves, which were found. close together in the small leaf-bearing clay lens at 

McBrides Ford. It seema decidedly probable that these two leaves were from a single plant, 

for it is very unlikely that two separate leaves of the same degree of preservation would have 

found their way out in the Cretaceous sea and have come to rest within a few inches of each 

other in this very restricted clay lens, which was not over a few feet in diameter and some miles 

from the Cretaceous shore. One leaf has the ·margins broadly rounded and each main lobe 

divided into two nearly equal subordinate lobes; in the other leaf these subordinate lobes are 

subdivided in a like manner and some of these are again sublobate. 

Remains of these curious leaves were first encountered at the plant locality near Buena 

Vista, where they. occur in a very fragmentary !'tate, the most. complete spe.cimens being the 

counterparts figured in Plate L"{IV, figures 4 and 5. A very small fragment which is identical 

with or closely related to ·these forms had been previously collected from the Black Creek 

formation along Neuse River in N ortli Carolina but had not been recognized. Though these 

leaves differ in important particulars, notably in having the primaries arranged palmately and 

the lamina in the forks of the veins less abbreviated, they are-simiiar to an·d possibly congeneric 

with Fontainea grandifolia, described by Newberry 1 from the Raritan formation in New Jersey. 

The i~complete nature of the material upon which this species and genus was based makes any 

detailed comparisons impossible. In the New Jersey species the entire lamina is cut out in the 

sinuses for a distance of several centim~ters. · 

In discussing the New Jersey plants Newberry 2 compared them with Haliserites reichii, 3 

reproducing Sternberg's figure. This plant came from the. Cretaceous greensand of Nieder8choena, Saxony (Cenomanian), and w.as discovered by Reich, who named it Fucoides dicho1 'rhe flora of the Amboy clays~ Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p. 96, Pl. XLV, figs. 1-4~ 

~ Op. cit., p. 96, Pl. xr,v, fig. 5. 

a Sternberg, Flora der Vorwelt, vol. 2, 1R33, p. 34, Pl. XXIV, fig. 7. 
UPPER.CRETACEOUS FLORA OF GEORGIA. 115 

tomus. Sternberg referred it to Haliserites because of its fancied r~semblance to a recent alga, 

Haliseris polypodoides Agardh. Though much smaller than the American species of Fontainea, 

the Saxon plant is hardly a seaweed, and is closely comparable ·with the 1\_merican genus.1 , 

A similar form, more nearly the size of Fontainea, is figured by Bronn 2 and retained in 

Haliseri tes, although Rossmassier and Cotta referred 

it to Chiropteris. Sclumper8 refers it to Delesseria, 

comparing it with the 

modern Delesseria ruscifolia Agardh, as well as 

with I-Ialiseris, and n1ore 

recently Rothpletz 4 has 

recognized its angiospermous affinities and renained it Phyllites re~chi. 

Still another similar plant 

is one described by V elenovsky from the Cenomanian of Bohemia as Aralia 

.furcata5 and compared with 

the modern genera ~ atro- FIGURE 2.-Restoration of the leaf of Manihotites georgiana figured in Plate XXII. {One-eleventh 

pha, Vitex, Cussonia, and . natural size.) 

like fonns. It is hardly an Aralia, and is very similar to the forms previously mentioned~ 

It might be added that Newberry compared his fossils with the legumii:wus generaHymenrea 

and Ba~hinia and regarded the genus Sapindopsis from the Lower Cretaceous of Maryland and 

Virginia as related to the Raritan plant. These are, however, entirely distinct and unrelated. 

· A number of modern 

genera have leaves more or 

less suggestive of this Upper 

Cretaceous species, for example, Podophyllum, J atropha,. Cecropia, _and various 

tropical Araliacere. The 

fossils .have been carefully 

compared with these and 

with a number of other 

modern genera. . They are 

closest, however, to certain 

modern species of Manihot, · 

and it is believed . that the 

remarkably variable leaves 

of the latter furnish a 

satisfactory clue to the 

relationship of this CretaFrGunE 3.-Restoration of the leaf of Menihotites georgiana figured in Plate XXIII. (One-fifteenth CeO US form, for no other 

natural size.) 1 comparab e modern genus 

shows similar wavy n1argins and inequilateral rounded lobes. The venation is also very similar. 

Figures 2 and 3 show reduced restorations of the fossil leaves figured on Plates XXII and L~IIL 

I Rothpletz in 1896 recognized the dicotyledonous nature of this species and reimmed it Phyllite.~ reichi. (Zeitschr. Deutsch. ge.ol. Gesell., vol. 48, p. 904.) 

2 Leth::ca geognostica, Pl. XXVIII, fig. 1. · · 

a Paloontologie veget:ale, vol. 1, 1869, p: liS. 

• Zeitschr. Deutsch. geol. Gesell., vol. 48, 189(), p. 904. 

oDie Flora der bohmischen.Kreideformation, pt. 3, 1884, p. 13, Pl. IV,.fig. 1 (Aralia ele.gans). 
116 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

The modern species of J\{anihot Adanson number between 80 and 100 and are nearly all 

endemic in tropical South America, the great majority occurring in Brazil, which has more than 

70 species. There are one or two species in Argentina, and the remaining species occur in Peru 

and Guiana and northward through Central America into Mexico. According to Tracy 1 the 

various cultivatedavarieties of Manihot (cassava), though natives of the Tropics, can be grown 

where the growing season lasts 10 or 11 months, as in parts of the Gulf States. Light frost, 

however, and even continued cool weather entirely stop growth. Even in the Tropics the 

best growt4 is made in coastal regions, so that if the present fossil species is assumed to have 

required a similar habitat it would serve to corroborate the ecologic evidence furnished by the 

other members of the Georgia Upper Cretaceous flora. 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, McBrides Ford, Chattahoochee 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollection.-U. S. National Museun1. 

Order RHAMN ALES. 

Family RHAMN ACEJE. 

,Genus PALIUR"8S Linne. 

PALfURUS UPATOIENSIS sp. nov. 

Plate XXI, figures 5 and 6. . 

Description.-Leaves small, obovate, 3 to 4 centimeters in length by 1.3 to 1.6 centimeters in 

greatest width, which is about halfway between the apex and the base. Apex broadly and 

evenly rounded. Base narrowly decurrent. Margin entire. Primaries three in number from 

the extreme base, about equal in caliber, aerodrome. Secondaries not made out. Texture 

rather coriaceous. ' 

This species is clearly distinct from any previously described Cretaceous forms, although 

it resembles somewhat Paliurus obovatus Lesquereux, of the Dakota sandstone of the West and 

Paliurus populijolius Berry of the Magothy formation of New Jersey. In outline these leaves 

are not unlike some of the less orbicular leaves of Pistia found in the Black Creek formation of 

North Carolina, but the venation is of a differe!lt character and the broad sheathing base found 

in Pistia is wanting. 

Occurrence.-Lowe·r division of the Eutaw formation, :McBrides Ford, Chattahoochee 

County. - (Collected by E. W. Berry.) ·. 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Genus ZIZYPHUS Linne. 

ZrzYPHUS J.AURIFOLIUS sp. nov. 

Plate XXI, figure 7. 

Description.-Leaves lanceolate,· 9 to 10 centimeters in length by about· 2 centimeters in 

greatest width, about equally pointed at the apex and the base. Margin entire. Primaries 

three in number from the extreme base, the midrib being the stoutest. Secondaries for the 

most part not seen, though a few, acutely branching and camptodrome, from the outside of the 

lateral primaries can be made out. , 

This species. is entirely distinct from any heretofore described from the Cretaceous, although 

it resembles somewhat Zizyphus cliffwoodensis Berry from the Magothy formation of New 

Jersey. 

Occurrence.-Lower o division of the Eutaw formation, l\1cBrides Ford, Chattahoochee 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

1 Tracy, F. M., Farmers' Bull. No. 167, U.S. Dept. Agr., 1903. 
~ 

UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF GEORGIA. 117 

Order THYMELEALE S. 

Family LA URACElE. 

Genus_ CINN AMOMUM Blume. 

CINNAMOMUM NEWBERRY! nom. noV. 

Pia te XXI, figures 9-11. 

Cinnamomum sezannense Heer, Flora fossilis arctica, vol. 6, Abth. 2, 1882, p. 77, Pls. XIX, fig. 8, and XXXIII, figs. 

11 and 12 (non \Vatelet). _ · _ 

Cinnamomum sezannense·Heer, idem, vol. 7, 1883, p. 30, Pl. LXI, fig. la (non Watelet). 

Cinnamomum, sezannense Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U.S .. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 107, 

Pl. XII, fig. 7 (non fig. 6, which is a leaf of Cinnamomum membranaceum (Lesquereux) Hollick). 

CinnamomU?n sezannense Dawson, T.rans. Roy. Soc. Canada, 1st ser., vol. 11, sec. 4, 1894, p. 64, PI. XIII, fig. 58 (non 

Watelet). 

Cinnammnum sezannense Hollick, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 21, 1894, p. 53, Pl. CLXXX, figs. 5 and 7 (non Watelet). 

Cinnamomum intermediu?n Smith, On the geology of the Coastal Plain of Alabama, 1894, p. 348 (nomen nudum). 

Cinnamomum intermediurn Newberry, The flora of the Amboy clays: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 26, 1896, p. '89, 

Pl. XXIX, figs. 1-8 and 10 (non Ettingshausen). 

Cinnamomum sezannense Penhallow, Trans. Roy. Soc. Canada, 2d ser., vol. 8, sec. 4, 1902, p. 46 (non Watelet). 

Cinnamomurn sezannense Hollick, Fifty-fifth Ann. Rept. N.Y. State Mus. for 1901, 1903, p. r50. 

Oinnamornurn intermediurn Berry, Rep~. State Geologist, New Jersey, for 1905, 1906, p. 139, Pl. XX, figs. 2-6 (non 

Ettingshausen). 

Cinnamornum interrnediurn Berry, BulL Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 33, 1906, p. 179, Pl. VII, figs. 3 and 4 (non Ettingshausen). 

Cinnarnomurn interrnedium Hollick, The Cretaceous flora of southern New York and New England: Mon. U. S.- Geol. 

Survey, vol. 50, 1907, p. 74, Pls. XXIX, fig. 7, and XXX, figs. 1 and 2 (non Ettingshausen). 

Cinnanwrnurn intermediurn Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 37, 1910, p. 27 (non Ettingshausen). 

Description.-The name of this important American Cretaceous species is unfortunately 

preoccupied, as it was used in 1887, nine years before Newberry's work.appeared, by the late 

Bar011 Ettingshausen 1 for an early Tertiary sp_ecies from New Zealand. A new name is therefore 

necessary, and- the writer feels that none can be more appropriate than one which honors the 

memory of one of America's·pioneer paleobotanists. 

Leaves subcoriaceous, lanceolate to ovate-lanceolate i'n outline, varying greatly in size 

and consequently in appearance. Apex short, pointed or more or less narrowly extended. 

Base broad, narrowed to the petiole. Primaries three, usually. suprabasilar. ~his species is 

· prin1arily distinguished fro1n Oinnamomum heerii Lesquereux by its relatively narrower form 

and acute base. The Georgia 1naterial is not uncommon, b~t is for the _most part extremely 

fragmentary. The single complete leaf is of the short type like that shown in Newberry's 

figure 10/ or like the leaves fron1 the Arctic and from the Dakota sandstone which have usually 

been referred to Oinnamomum sezannense W atelet. That they are not in the slightest degree 

related to this European basal Eocene type may be readily seen by a comparison of the American 

Cretaceous Inaterial with the figures of the true Oinnamomum sezannense as given by w atelet, 

Saporta, and others.2 · 

The present species, as here revised according to the foregoing citations, has a remarkable . 

range in the earlier half or the Upper Cretaceous. The Raritan formation of New Jersey is 

tho oldest .horizon from which it is known. Above the Haritan horizon it occurs ip the Atane 

and Patoot beds of Greenland, in the Magothy formation from Long Island to :Maryland, in 

the Black Creek formation of North Carolina, in the :Middendorf member of the Black Creek 

of South Carolina, in the Tuscaloosa formation of Alabama, where, it is especially abundant 

at certain localities, and in the Dakota sandstone of Kansas. It appears to be present in 

the Upper Cretaceous of the Pacific coast on Vancouver Island, and is probably represented 

in the Texas r01nains of Cinnamomum recorded by l{nowlton 3 from the Woodbine sand ~ 

1 Dcnkschr. K. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Math.-nat. Kl., vol. 53, 1887, p. 166, Pl. IV, figs. 20-22. 

2 Watelet, A., Description des plantes fossiles bassin de Paris, 1866, Pl. L, fig. 2. Sa porta, G. de, Flore fossile de Sezanne, 1865, Pl. VIII, 

flg. 5; Vegetation a l'epoqne des marnes heersiennes de Gelinden, 1873, Pl. VI, figs. 5, 6; Revision de la flora heersienne de Gelinden, 1878, Pl. IX, 

figs. 2-6. Friedrich, P. A., Ueitrii.ge zur Kenntniss der Tertii.i.rflora der Provinz Sachsen, 1883, Pl. I, fig. 5. 

a Hill, H.. '1'., 'J'wenty-first Ann. Rept. U.S. Geol. Survey, pt. 7, 1901, p. 317. 
118 UPPER CRETACEOUS -AND EOCENE FLORAS _QF :SOUTH. CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Cooke County, Tex. Although not· known from Europe the forms from the Cenomanian of 

Bohemia which V elenovsky describes as Aralia daphnophyllum • are very simila:r:_ to t];lis American 

species. 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation; McBrides Ford, Chattahoochee 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

CINN AMOMUM. HEERII Lesq uereux ~ 

Plate XXI, figure 8. 

Cinnamomum heerii·Lesquereux,. ft..m. Jour. Sci., 2d ser., vol. 27, 1859, p. 361. . 

(/innamomum·heerii I.,esquereux, Trans. Am. Philos. Soc., vol. 13, 1869, p. 431, Pl. XXIII, fig. J2. 

Cinnamomum heerii I-esquere1,1x, The Cretaceous flora, 1874, p. 84, Pl. XXVIII, fig. 11. 

Daphnogene heerii Lesquereux, Ann. Rept. U. S. Geol. and Geog. Survey Terr. for 1874, 1876, p. 343. 

Cinnamomum heerii Lesquereux, 'the Cretaceous and Tertiary floras, 1883, p. 54. ' 

.Cinnamomum heerii Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U. S. 9-eol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 105, Pl. 

XV, fig. 1. 

.Cinnamomum heerii Newberry, 'The later extinCt floras of North America: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 35, J898, 

. p. 100, Pl. XVII, figs. 1-3. 

Cinnamomum heerii Knowlton, in Hill, Twenty-first Ann. Rept. U. S. Geol. Survey, pt. 7, 1901, p. 318, Pl. XXXIX, 

fig. 5. ,. ' 

_Cinnamomum heerii K~rtz, Revista Mus. La Plata, v~l. 10, 190~,,p. 52. 

Cinnamomum heerii Berry, Ann. Rept. State Geologist New Jersey for 1905, 1906, p. 139. 

Cinnamomum heerii Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 33, 1906, p. 179. · 

Cinnamom'um heerii Berry, idem, vol. 34, 1907, p. 200, Pl. XIII, figs. 2 and 3. 

Cinnamomum heerii Hollick, The Cretaceous flora ~f~ou~h,ern New York and New England: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, 

vol. 50, 1907, p. 75, Pl. XXX, figs. 5 and 6. 

, Description.-Leaves coriaceous, entire, ovate in outline, more or less attenuated apically. · 

Base broadly rounded. Primaries three, stou·t, supra basilar. Secondaries camptodrome. 

·. · The exact status of this species is made out with difficulty. In typical specimens it is 

'clearly distinct from· Oinnamomum Newberryi Berry in its more regular outline and vena.:. 

· tlon, proader form, more rounded base, and stouter supra basilar primaries. Other remains 

have been referred to Oinnamomum heerii which are not typical in some of these distinctive 

.characters, and the well-known variation of the leaves of Cinnamomum renders a satisfactory 

·solution of the problem difficult. This species was. doubtfully 'recorded from the Raritan 

formation by Lesquereux in 1878, but it has not been detected at this horizon either by Newberry or by the writer and is not admitted as a member of the Raritan flora. It does, however, 

characterize the somewhat younger beds represented in the west by the Dakota sandstone and 

theW oodbine sand and in the Coastal Plain by the Magothy formation of the north and the Black 

Creek and Tuscaloosa formations of the south. In the Georgia area it is represented by fragments showi~g the coriaceous texture, broad base, and supra basilar primaries of the species .. 

It occurs at McBrides Ford. 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, McBrides Ford, Chattahoochee 

County. · (Collecte~ by E. W. Berry.) 

· Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Genus MALAPOENN A A dans on. 

MALAPOENNA HORRELLENSIS Berry. 

Malapeonna horrellensis Berry, Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 37, 1910, p. 198, Pl. XXIV, figs·. 1-9. 

Description.:__The following d~scription is given in the work cited above: 

Leaves ovate-lanceolate, about 8 centimeters long by 2.5 centimeters in, greatest width; broadest at the evenly 

rounded or slightly acute base, narrowing gradually upward, the apex narrow and extended but obtusely pointed. 

Leaf substance thin but persistent, evidently coriaceous in life, as these leaves occur abundantly.at a locality where 

all the vegetable rl'lmains except the resistant Araucaria, Cunninghamites, and Pistia were evidently thoroughly macerated before ,e~t~nibment. Secondaries four to six pairs, subopposite, curved upward, c.amptodrome, branching 

frorri the midrib at an acute angle, the lowest pair branching from the top of th.e yetiole .and extending upwar~ halfway 

1 Velenovsky, J., Die Flora der bohmischen Kreideform.ation, pt. I, 1882, p. 23, Pls. V, figs. 5--8,10; VI, figs. i-5. 
UPPER: CRE'.I;'AQ;EOU_~: F~OR~. _qF . GE(:)RGJl\. 119 

to the apex or farther, giving the leaf a triple-veined appearance. Perhaps they should .be termed lateral primaries, 

although they 'are much finer than the fairly sto\it ·midrib·. The n~xt'pair of secondaries' branch at. a less acute angle, 

a considerable distance above the base, one--third to one-h~lf the distance to the apex. Tertiary venation typically 

lauraceous. · 

. This species is markedly distinct· from the species of lauraceoqs le.aves hitherto descri_bed 

in its rounded base, the only genus of this family with such a character being Cinnamo.mum. 

The present species may possibly be confused with Oinnamomum heerii when only the. basal 

part of the leaf is found, but the general proportions and characters of the whole leaf are 

perf~ctly distinct. . 

It is common at severaflocalities in the'upper beds of the Black Creek formation in North 

Carolina and is· represented in. the coll~ctions from the Eutaw formation of Alabama by 

several forins as yet unstudied. The Georgia occurrence is based on fragmentary material 

from Broken Arrow Bend on Chattahoochee River. · 

The genus Malapoenna has more than one hU.n.dred e~isting species, chiefly of the Oriental 

tropics,· and is -well represented in the fossil state from the Dakota and M;agothy forn1ations 

upward. It is espedally well represented in the Paleocene of Europe and in the Shoshone 

group of America. Of the two species in the Dakota sandst~ne of the West, one occurs iri the 

Tuscaloosa formation at Cottondale, Ala., and the other in the l\1agothy forniation of New 

Jersey. . 

Occurrence.-Lower ·division of the Eut·aw formation, Broken Arrow Bend, Chattahoochee 

. County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museun1. 

Order UMBELLALES. 

Family .ARALIACElE. 

Genus ARALIA Linne .. 

ARALIA EUTAWENSIS sp. nov. 

~late X~, figure 7. 

Description.-Leaves relatively small in size, palmately quinquelobate. Length about 8 · 

centimeters. Greatest width 8 to 9 centimeters across the basal lobes, which are directed laterally; tho other three lobes are directed upward. Margin entire. Lobes obtusely pointed, inclined to be parallel sided, divided not quite halfway to the base, the upper two sinuses narrow, 

tho lateral sinuses more open and obtusely rounded. Base slightly decurrent. Primaries five 

in number, diverging from the bas~ or just above it, equal in caliber, and ·slightly flexuous in 

their course. Secondaries not made out. 

This species greatly resembles the leaves from the l\1agothy formation of New Jersey and 

fr01n the Black Creek formation of North Carolina, which have been identified with Aralia 

newberryi Berry of the Raritan formation. In fact, a careful study of a considerable series of 

these forms will probably result in uniting these Mago.thy and Black Creek fA.rms with the 

present species as distinct from the Raritan species. 

· Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, McBrides Ford, ChattahoocheeCounty. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-U. S. National Museum. 

Order MYRTALES. 

Family MYRTACElE. 

Genus EUCALYPTUS L'Heritier. , 

. EucALYPTUS ANGUSTA Veleno~sky. 

Plate XX, figures 2-4. 

This species is described in the section of the report dealing with the Upper. Cretaceous 

flora of Sou.tlfCarolina (pp. 55-56). · The Georgia occurrences include well-marked remains from 
120 UPPER C,RETACEOUS .AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Buena Vista, which are here figured, and more fragmentary but entirely typic~l material from 

McBrides Ford. 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, McBrides Ford, Chattahoochee 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) Cusseta sand' member of the Ripley formation, Buena 

Vista, Marion County. (Collected by L. W. Stephenson.) " 

Oolle~tions.-U. S. National Museum. 

Order ERICALES. 

Family ERICACElE. 

Genus ANDROMEDA Linne. 

ANDROMEDA NOV 1EC1ESARE~ Hollick. 

Plate XXIV, figure 1. 

This species is described in the section of this report dealing with the Upper Cretaceous 

flora of South Carolina (pp. 58-59). It was one of the few species whose leaves successfully 

resisted maceration in the shallow shoreward deposits known as the Cusseta sand member of 

the Ripley formation of Georgia. It occurs at Buena Vista in association with Arau.caria · 

bladenensis. 

Occurrence.-Cusseta sand member of the Ripley formation, Buena Vista, Marion County. 

(Collected by L. W. Stephenson.) 

Oollections.-V. S. National Museum .. 

ANDROMEDA CRETACEA Lesquereux ~ 

Plate XXIV, figure 2. 

Andromeda cretacea Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, .1892, p. 117, 

Pls. XVII, figs. 17 and 18, and XXIV, fig. 5. 

Description.-Leaf sn1all, thin, lanceolate, acuminate, with a thin midrib. Length about 

3.5 centimeters. Greatest width about 7.5 millimeters, about halfway between the apex and 

the base. Secondaries not seen in the Georgia material. In the type material from Kansas 

they are parallel, nearly equidistant, much curved near the margins, camptodrome. 

This species was based upon rather fragmentary material from the Dakota sandstone of 

Ellsworth County, Kans., and the Georgia material, which is referred with some hesitation to 

·this species, is about as poor as the type material. · It has not heretofore been collected outside 

the type locality, although similar forms which are probably of this species are present in the 

writer's colleGtions from the Tuscaloosa formation of western Alabama. 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, McBrides Ford, Chattahoochee 

County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollections.-V. S. National Museum·. 

ANDROMEDA w ARDIAN A Lesq uereux. 

Plate XXIV, figure 3. 

Andromeda wardiana Lesquereux, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17, 1892, p. 119t 

Pl. LXIV, fig. 17. 

· Description.-Leaf elliptical.in outline, entire. Apex and base equally narrowed but the · 

apex bluntly rounded. Length 5.3 centimeters. Greatest width, which is halfway between 

the apex and the base, 2.3 centimeters. Midrib "thin. Secondaries not made out. In the ·type 

they are thin, diverging at an angle of about 40° and camptodrome. 

The type. material came from the Dakota sandstone of Ellsworth County: Kans. The 

Georgia material shows a leaf which is a trifle larger but which in its general proportions and 

outline is iClentical with the western form, and there can be no doubt of the.ir identity. 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF GEORGIA~ 121 

It is quite possible, in fact probable, that this species is not distinct from Andromeda 

tenuinervis Lesquereux,t which, if the form referred to it by Hollick 2 is correctly identified, 

approaches it closely in size. The two differ somewhat in texture and in the degree of acuteness 

of the apex, but whether these features are of specific-value or not is an 'open question. 

Occurrence.-Lower division of the Eutaw formation, McBrides Ford, Chattahoochee 

County.- (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Collections.-U. S. National Museun:i. 

; BOTANIC CHARACTER OF THE FLORA. 

The Cretaceous flora of Georgia as disclosed by the collections studied is relatively small, 

mnbracing only 32 determinable species. That it presents but a meager picture of the actual 

plant covering of the adjacent land is obvious in many ways. It need only be contrasted. 

with the abundant floras of near-by more or less homotaxial deposits, such as the Tuscaloosa 

formation of northwestern Alabama or the Middendorf arkose member of the Black Creek 

formation to the northeast in South Carolina, to emphasize the disparity in the number of 

specific forms. Tlll.s is 'Qelieved to be due not to any relative paucity in the contemporaneous · 

vegetation of the Cretaceous Piedmont area of Georgia, but to the chaJ:acter of the sediments 

and the opportunities 'they afforded for preservation of leaf remains. All the Upper Cretaceous 

deposits of Georgia are marine in character·, and though some, like the Cusseta .and Providence 

sand n1embers of the Ripley forma_tion, ·were evidently deposited in shallow water near shore, 

current or wave action see1ns to have been comparatively violent. Thus the vegetable debris 

which was floatec\_into the Cretaceous sea was much triturated before entomb1nent or thoroughly 

oxidized in the loose matrix: afterwards. That such debris was present in the water is evident 

wherever local lenses of clay were laid down in quieter waters. It is from such relatively 

insignificant lenses that all the flora now available is derived, and the character of these 

rmnains, both as to their cond~tion of preservation an~ with regard to the forms represented, 

fully substantiates the preceding statements .. The areas in.which these deposits merged into 

their estuarine or fluviatile phases, and in which plant fossils were probably better preserved, 

have been entirely destroyed by subsequent erosion, as might be expected, or else the Cretaceous 

shore line was an almost continuous sand beach without any of the considerable reentrants 

which usually play so prominent a part in preserving the records of ancient floras. The most 

prolific Cretaceous plant l<;>cality in Georgia is that at Mc~rides Ford, near the landward margin 

of the Eutaw formation, and here the total number of recogpizable forms is only 19. (See 

p. 101.) 

Though these are not all forms whose existing· representatives belong to the strand flora 

or to that which. flourished in _immedia.te proximity to the coast, it is no'ticeable that nearly all 

are forms with coriaceous foliage, like the conifers, of which there are four species, and like the 

species of Andromeda, Ficus, Eucalyptus, and Magnolia. Furthermore the types represented 

which may be regarded as inland forms are species that probably inhabited stream bottoms. 

These are not abundant in individual!? and are usually much macerated and broken. 

The next locality in point of abundance of forms is that at Chimney Bluff, where small 

lenses of clay at the top of the Eutawformation, comparable in. size with those at the preceding 

locality near the base of the formation, have yielded seven species, three of which are conifers, 

t~vo willows, and two coriaceous fig leaves. The six species recorded from near Buena Vista, 

the five.species from Broken Arrow Bend, and the three species from the locality near Byron 

are also of these types. Tllis kind of a flora, which ~ght perhaps be termed unrepresents.tive, 

renders exact correlations difficult and makes satisfactory comparisons possible only with such 

floras as those preserved in the typically marine beds of the Black Creek formation 'of the 

Carolinas or with the upper Tuscaloosa and Eutaw floras of Alabama. In the absence of later 

records in tllis area it is impossible to surmise, for example, how many- of the elements found 

in the lower Tuscaloosa of Alabama survived as late as the Cusseta sand member of the Ripley 

1 Lesquereux, Leo, Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 17,1892, p. 116, Pl. XXXVIII, fig. 7. 

2 Hollick, Arthur, Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 50,1906, p. 102, Pl. XXXIX, fig. 7. 
122 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH Q..t\ROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

formation and how many had become extinct.· The uniformity of the Eastern Cretaceous 

floras from t~e Magothy of New Jersey to the Tuscaloosa of Alabama, over a distance of 900 

:miles or more in a northeast-southwest direction, indicates strongly tl;lat many of these types 

were present in the Georgia flora, for the small representation of plants found in the overlying 

middle division of the -Ripley formation is entirely different in character. This condition is 

similar to that exhibited by the differences of certain western interior floras, such as those of the 

Colorado and Montana groups. _ 

As previ?':sl~ mentioned, th? Georg~a Cret~ceous flora n~mbers 32 sp~cies, distri_buted 

among 16 fannlies In 14 orders. A single fern, a species of Dryopterites of the family Polypodiacere, 

'is recorded from one locality. Its modern representatives are so varied, num~rous, and widespread that it furnishes no satisfactory· data for climatic or other physical speculations. The 

conifers are represented by 7 species, the majority apparently belonging to the subfamily 

Araucariere, although the relatively primitive Taxacere are represented by a species of Tumion. 

The Monocotyledonre are represented by two forms of little significance, although one appears 

to be most closely allied with certain modern tropical forms. The Dicotyledonre number 22, 

and include in addition to the remarkable genus Manihotites a scattering of forms. There are 

four species of Ficus, three of which have coriaceous lanceolate leaves, and three species of willow, 

probably, _like the modern willows, mesophytic river-bank types. There are three species of 

Andromeda which doubtless owe their preservation to their small coriaceous leaves, and two 

species each of Magnolia and Cinnamomum.. The genera Juglans, Menispermites, Paliurus, 

Zizyphus, Malapoenna, Aralia, and Eucalyptus are each represented by a single species, those 

species belonging to Menispermites, Paliurus, and Zizyphus being new to science. 

As the botanical facies shown by this flora is due largely to the resistant character of the 

foliage preserved, combined with what are usually ternied the accidents of preservatiqn, little 

is to be gained by any comment on the relative abundance of some types or ~he absence of others. 

PHYSICAL CONDITIONS INDICATED BY THE FLORA. 

The physical conditions that bore upon the Upper Cretac_eous flora of Georgia were prob ... 

ably substantially the same as those already described as existing in South Carolina .. (See 

.pp. 67-68.) 

The climate was· probably mild and without _frost, the humidity was high, and the rainfall 

was abundant and p~obably distributed somewhat uniformly throughout the ye~r. 

RANGE OF rq.HE MESOZOIC FLORA. 

To· illustrate some of the feat\ues of Mesozoic plant distribution and the relative and 

apparently progressive restriction in range which has _taken place in comparatively recent 

times, the writer has introduced the accompanying sketch maps (figs. 4-8), which show in a 

generalized way the range in the existing flora of the genera Cinnamomum, Eucalyptus, Araucaria, and Tumion. When the known occurrences of these genera during the Cretaqeous are 

plotted on maps of the world several very important and interesting features are brought out, 

· and additional data derived from other forms, such as the Magnoliacere, Proteacere, and Actinostrobere are entirely in accord with the conclusions reached in this way. 

In a general way there has been a restriction of a number of these Mesozoic types or their 

descendants to th_e Southern Hemisphere, where they have become isolated in one or in both 

of the continental land masses which project southward from the almost circumpolar land mass 

of the Northern Heniispher~.· That this· restriction is more in the. nature of a segregation by 

the extinction of intermediate li:p.ks in the chain of distribution rather than an actual migration 

.~way from hostile or toward optimum conditions for growth and reproduction is well shown 

by the cosmopolitanism of most fossil floras, particularly those of the ;Mesozoic. The present 

distribution of Tumion, Taxodium, Sequoia, Sassafras, and Liriodendron is corrobor~tive of 

_this generaliza.tiOI1,. for_ the itsolatio.:n., by _extinction, of these ge_nera. and Qf_ many others .that 

might be mentioned, has left their modern representatives in {avorable areas, not in the 
UPPER CRETACEOUS.: FLORA OF GEORGIA. :'123 

FIGURE 4.-Sketch map showing the Cretaceous (e) and Recent (0) ·distribution of Tumion. 

FIGURE 5.-Sketch map ~howing the Cretaceous occurrence~ of the Araucariere. 
124 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

FIGURE 6.-Sketch map showing the existing distribution of the Araucariere. 

FIGURE 7.-Sketch map showing the Cretaceous (0) and Recent (shaded) distribution of Cinnamomum. The Recent limits should have been 

extended to include India. 
UPPER CUETACEOUS FLORA OF GEORGIA. 125 

southern continents, but north of the equator._ Tumion, for example, has one species at a single 

locality in Florida, another in California, and two or three others in China and Japan. The 

once cosn1opolitan Taxodium has a single eastern American species at the present day and a 

climatically stranded form in Mexico. Sequoia, once of world-wide distribution has the two 

well-lmown species of the Pacific Ooast States. Sassafras is now reduced to a single eastern 

American species, and Liriodendron ·to a single Americ~n species and another in eastern Asia, 

though both these genera as well as Taxodium continued to be prominent elements of the 

cosmopolitan flora as late at the Pliocene. 

FIGURE 8:--Sketch map showing the Cretaceous (0) and Recent (shaded) distribution of Eucalyptus. 

CORRELATION OF THE FLORA. 

LOWER DIVISION OF THE EUTAW FORMATION. 

1'he fossil plants from the lower division of the Eutaw formation represent the following 

27 species: 

Andromeda cretacea Lesquereux? 

Andromeda wardiana Lesquereux. 

Audrovettia elegans Berry. 

Aralia eutaweusi13 Berry. 

Araucaria bladeuensis Berry. 

Araucaria j effreyi Berry. 

Brachyphyllum rt;tacrocarpum formosum Berry. 

Cinnamomum .heerii Lesq uereux ? 

Cinnamommn newberryi Berry. 

Eucalyptus augusta Velenovsky. 

Ficus crassipes Heer. 

Ficus krausiana fleer. 

Ficus ovatifolia Berry. 

J uglans arctica Heer ? 

Magnolia boulayana Lesquereux. 

Magnolia. capellinii Heer. 

Malapoenna horrellensis Berry. 

Manihotites georgiana Berry. 

Menispermites variab.il.is Berry. 

Paliurus l.tpatoiensis Berry. 

Phragmites pratti Berry. 

Salix eutawensis Berry. 

Salix fl.exuosa Newberry. 

Salix lesquereuxi Berry. 

Sequoia reichenbachi (Geinitz) Heer. 

Tumion carolinianum Berry? 

Zizyphus laurifolius Berry. 

These species are very unequally represented at the three localities within the Eutaw 

formation where fossil plants have been found, 19. coming from McBrides Ford, near the base 

of the formation, though only 5 were collected from Broken Arrow Bend, also near the base of 

the forn1ation, and 7 fro~ Chimney Bluff, near the top of the formation. The only species 
126 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

present at more than one locality are Salix flexuosa and Sequoia reichenbachi, \vhich are present 

at all three. It is believed, however, that these featpres are due almost entirely. to accidents 

of preservation, as 20 of the 27 species occur at earlier horizons either in Alabama or along the 

Atlantic Coastal Plain and 8 occur at later . horizons in Georgia or elsewhere. Of these 27 

species the new species of Aralia, Menispermites, Paliurus, ,and Zizyphus are confined to the 

Eutaw of Georg1a and hence are of little value in correlat\on. Nevertheless they furnish some 

evidence of value, for the Aralia is closely allied to a species of the Magothy formation, and 

although Menispermites is represented by a single species, and Paliurus and Zizyphus are notpresent in any of the floras of the :Montana group, all three are common in earlier floras, both in 

the Coastal Plain and in the Dakota sandstone of the West." Nine species occur in strata as 

old as the Raritan, 14 are found in the -Magothy formation of the northern Coastal Plain, 7 

occur in the Middendorf member of the Black Creek formation of South Carolina, 19 are found . 

in the· typical Black Creek deposits of North and South Carolina, and 11 have been recognized 

in the Tuscaloosa formation of Alabama. 

Con1parisons with floras more ren1ote geographically indicate that 14 of the Georgia species 

are found in the flora of the Dakota sandsto:pe, whereas only 2 occur in the flora of the :Montana 

group, one of these two species being Sequoia reichenbachi, a form which possesses little or no 

stratigraphic value becau·se it occurs from the base to the summit of the Cretaceous. Five · 

· species. are common to the Atane beds of Greenland and three to the Patoot beds of the same 

area, one of these three also being Sequoia reichenbachi. Five species are common to the Ceno- . 

manian and three to the Turonian of Europe, but .the· only ones common to the Senonian of 

Europe are Ounninghamites elegans and Sequoia reichenbachi. 

The preceding statements render any extended discussion superfluous. It is clear that 

the flora of the Eutaw formation of Georgia is of approximately the same age as the MagothyMatawan flora of the northern Coastal Plain and the Black Creek flora of the Carolinas. It has· 

much in common with the more extensive Tuscaloosa flora of western Alabama, but is probably 

younger than the bulk of the Tuscaloosa flora or that found in the Middendorf arkose member 

of the Black Creek formation. 

RIPLEY FORMATION. 

CUSSETA SAND MEMBER. 

The Cusseta sand has furnished fossil plants at only two localities-one near Buena Vista, 

in Marion County, and the other near Byron, in IIouston County. These plants are few in 

number and are poorly preserved .. 

The following species, six in all, have been recognized from the locality near Buena Vista: 

Andromeda novrecresar~re Hollick. I Eucalyptus angusta Velenovsky. 

Araucaria bladenensis Berry. Ficus georgiana Berry. 

Doryanthites cretacea Berry. Manihotites georgiana Berry. 

Three of the foregoing species occur in the underlying Eutaw formation, and all but the 

Ficus, which is new, are found in the Black Creek formation of North and South Carolina. The 

Androtneda is a characteristic species of the Black Creek formation and is one of the type, 

fossils of the Magothy format~on of the northern Coastal Plain, although it makes its earliest 

appearance in the Raritan formation, as does also the Eucalyptus. None of the six genera. 

except Ficus are represented in the flora of -the Montana group, and the latter is represented by 

very different species. It seems clear, then, that the Cusseta sand is pre-J\{ontana in age and 

that it falls-within the same general paleobotanic limits that include the J\1agothy-Matawan, 

typical Black Creek, Middendorf, and upper Tuscaloosa floras of the East· and the flora of a 

part of the Dakota sandstone of the West. 

The deposits near Byron seem to lack for the most part any physical or faunal data for 

accurate correlation; in fact, these extensive interbedded sands and clays constitute landward 

Cretaceous deposits which may represent the wi1ole cf the Upper Cretaceous section along 

Chattahoochee River or in western Afabama) so that the following comments must be understood 
UPPER CRETACEOUS FLORA OF GEORGIA. 127 

to apply only to the horizon yielding the fossil plants, which, according to Stephenson, is referred 

to the Cusseta1nember. These plants number but three species-Dryopterites stephe,nso.ni Berry, 

Ounninghamites elegans (Corda) Endlicher, and Araucaria jeffreyi Berty, the first-named form 

being new to science. · 

As Dryopterites occurs in the Lower Cretaceous, Dryopteris-like forms are found in postCretaceous floras down to the present titne, and Dryopteris (Aspidium) is ~o-day a widespread 

and dominant genus of ferns, the Georgia species, which -is unlike any of the described .forms, 

is of no value in correlation. Of the other two forms, Ounninghamitcs elegans has a rather wide 

geographic range, occu.rring both in this country and abroad, and its geolcgic range is also 

considerable. In Europe it ranges from the Cenomanian. to the Senonian, inclusive, and in 

this country it has a parallel range, from the Magothy flora of the East to the :Montana flora of 

the West. It has been recorded from Lower Cretaceous horizons in Europe, but thes~ determinations are believed to be erroneous. The nearest geographic occurrence to that in Georgia 

is that of the upper part of the Black Creek formation of .North Carolina; hence the conclusion 

that the exposures near Byron are not older t~an those of the Black Creek and. not younger 

than those of the :Montana group appears to be firmly established. 

The remaining species, Araucaria jeffreyi, is not a widespread for:t;n, and its intimate 

association with Araucaria bladenensis in the Eutaw formation at Chimney Bluff, Ga., and in 

the Black Creek formation of North Carolina indicates that it may represent cone scales of the 

latter species. Taken alone, Araucaria jeffreyi points to the sa1:11e conclusion regarding the age 

of the deposits near Byron as does the distribution of Araucaria bladenensis, but the latter 

furnishes more definite dattt. 

Araucaria bladenensis is one of the most abundant and typical forms of the Black Creek 

forll.\ation in North and South Carolina, ranging from its base to its summit. It has also been 

found in the Cusset~ sand member of the Ripley formation near Buena Vista, in the Eutaw 

form~tion just below the Tombigbee sand member at Chimney Bluff, and in the base of the 

Eutaw formation in western Alabama. A closely allied or identical form occurs in theMagothy 

of Maryland and New Jersey, and a similarly allied form has been described from the Turonian 

of :France and Bohemia. Though the lower limit of the species is settled, therefore, with 

some degree of certainty, its upper limi_t remains vague. It is not found above the horizon 

represented by the pl~nt beq.s near Buena Vista, which are placed in the Cusseta sand.· This 

fact is not so important, howeyer, as it would at first appear, for the floras from the later 

Cretaceous in the eastern United States are. extremely meager. IIowever, as nothing in any 

way ailied to it has been discovered in the abundant floras of Montana- or later Cretaceous 

age in the West, the evidence points to its pre-Mont'ana age. 

Nothing has been said in the foregoing pages of the probable European equivalents of these 

floras-a most fascinating as well as a mo~t difficult problem. It is well not to be dogmatic 

until the associated fat1nas are critically studied, and even then a close parallelism between 

areas as remote as the opposite shores of the Atlantic is hJl,rdly to be expected.· Nevertheless, 

the sequence of events in both the Lower and the Upper Cretaceous furnishes certain broad 

similarities, and some correlations, though . they are necessarily approximate, appear to be 

justified. 

In the European Upper Cretaceous section Cenomanian floras appear in Portugal, France, 

Germany, Bohemia, Dalmatia, and elsewhere. The Turonian has few fossil plants, the largest, 

floras being those of Bohemia and southern France, which have perhaps a score of species. The 

En1scherian furnishes a more representative flora, principally from Germany, Bohemia, the 

Tyrol, and other scattered localities ·in Austria. As regards the classic· American Upper Cretaceous section of Meek and :Hayden, it has been customary to correlate the Dakota sandstone 

with the Cenomania.n, the Colorado group with the Turonian, and the Montana group with the 

Senonittn. In a study of the northern Coastal Plain 'the writer bas found good grounds for 

·considering .the Raritan formation to represent part cf the Cenomanian. 1 The Magotby has 

also been referred at various times to this epoch, the Matawan to the Turonian, and the Mon1 Berry, E. W., Jour. Geology, voL 1~, l!Jl~, pp. 252-258. 
128 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE· FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

mouth to the Senonian. More recently Weller has suggested that the Magothy and the Matawan 

are also to be correlated with the Senonian. The writer does not purpose to discuss the faunal 

evidence in this connection, for others are better qualified to do that work. It becomes, however, 

a paleobotanic question, for in the Black Creek formation of North Carolina the Matawan 

fauna is found associated with the Magothy flora, as indeed it is to a considerable extent in the 

Magothy formation in the New Jersey area. In a recent discussion of the correlation of the Black 

Creek formation of North Carolina, Clark 1 has correlated it with the combined Magothy and 

Matawan formations of New Jersey and has suggested that it may represent the European 

Turonian, the lower limit of the Senonian equivalents in the eastern United States being marked 

by the introduction of the Belemnitella americana fauna. 

The floral evidence is entirely favorable to this interpretation,. which would involve 

consideration of the Dakota sandstone and the overlying Benton as of Turonian age. There 

can be no question in the mind of anyone competent to judge the evidence that these eastern 

floras from Georgia northward are closely allied to the Dakota flora and markedly distinct from 

any described floras of the Montana group. The accompanying table of distribution shows the 

occurrences ~f fossil plants in Georgia and their range elsewhere, and furnishes a graphic summary 

of the preceding discussion. · 

Distribution of Upper Cretaceous plants in Georgia and their range elsewhere. 

Georgia localities. :::: ~ ~~~ 

~ ..., Q) s ,g:§ ~ 

., .e z.e z.e Q) .& .e ~8 §~ ~ :::: [$ § § a) 

:::: ~~j c:r§ Sci! Q) Q)~,.; i:t ~ p. 

~ o- ... o 8 ~ 0 a) a) 0 ~~ ..... >-, 

.SZ:S "' . §·3 ... ... :til ....... 8"' ·t:r p;~ e e ::l g. p. 

'E !l:i <llC(l .... ..,a:> ~ 8 > s~ §~ ~g ... a ~ ~:s ::l· .... 0 0 .... 0 ~.e ::l .sz., o"' §~ ::l ::l 

~ ~ "' d '"'o 00 a:>oo 

"'~ so.& "' "' ~ f;l;l ~ g 0 .sz..., ._..., e"' Q) iJlfl ls "0 

~ ~a:> >-. !;. §~ >-.>-> 0~ ~ .s ,-g Q) 'g ::l ,0 tf .~~ :g Q)~ Q) 

~ ~ ..QQ) "' 0 ,0 .sa:> ,0 ..., ~ ·a .§ :.::~ b~ ~..Q <e "0 

~ § 0 s § ~ 0 ~ :.;; 0..., 

~ 0 g .E 0 8 0 .... a Q) Q) ~h ~h ..:9~ 0 

~ "' ~ ::l ~ 

~ ~ z z ~ ~ ~z 8 ::: A ~ ~ Q) 8 Q) 

u 00 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - --- -

~~~~~;C:t;\~s :~~1a~~~~~~.i: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~::::::: ~:::: ~: ~: : ~ ~ ~: ::::::::::::: . X. : : : : :: :: : ::: . ~. : :: : :::: : :: : :::: :::: :::: ::: : : :: : :::: ::: : : : : : :::: 

Araucaria bladenensis.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X . . . . . . . . X X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ? ...• Araucaria jeffreyi. .. . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . .. . .. .. . . . .. .. . .. .. . .. .. .. .. X .. .. X .. .. . . .. X .. .. .. .. .. .. . . .. .. . . .. .. .. . . ? ...• 

~~fufel~w~;~:~~~~~~~~-~-~~~~~~~~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: -~- :::: :::: :::: ·x· :::: ~ ·x· -~- -~- :::: ~ :::: .. x. ·x· ·x· ·xsequoia reichenbachi.. ............................................... x· X X ........ X X X X .... X X X X X X X 

Tumion carolinian urn (?). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X ................................... . 

J~~~~;0r~l{fr&lf~~~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::·: :~: ~~: :::: :~: :::: :~: -~- E :::: :::: :~: :::: :~: :::: :::: :::: :::: 

SalLxfiexuosa ............................................... , ......... X X X ........ X X X X .... X · ....................... . Salix lesquereuxii........................................... ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X ........ ,X X X . . . . . . . . X ............. :; ........ . Salix eutawensis ................................. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X ................................... . 

ii~~H~~&~:_:_::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::: .~. :~: :::::::: -~- -~- -~- :::: -~- :::: :~: :::: :~: :~: :::: 

Ficus ovatifolia...................................................... X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X X X .. -............................. . Magnolia boulayana.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X X . . . . X X X ....................... . 

~:g~~!~~~f~~iab'iliS.":::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ·~ :::: :::: :::: :::: :::: -~- -~- -~- :::: -~~ :::: -~- :::: -~- :::: :::: 

Manihotites georgiana................................................ X . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . .. . X ................................... . Paliurus upatoiensis ................................................. X .............................................................. .. Zizyphus laurifolius.................................................. X ............................................................... . Cinnamomum newberryi ........... '................................. X .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . X X X X X X . . .. X X ? ...... .. Cinnamomum heerii (?).............................................. X . . .. . . .. .. . . .. .. .. .. X X X X X ...................... .. Malapoenna horrellensis.............................................. . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X ................................... . Araliaeutawensis .................................................... X ............................................................... . 

!~~~~rE!l;~~~~~:;s~iere:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: -~- :::: :::: ~ :::: ~ ·x· ~ ·x· ·x· :::: :::: :::: :::: -~- :::: :::: 1~~~~~~~:~:~~~:~~~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~ ::::1:::: :::: :::: :::::::: :::: ·x- :::: ~ :::: :::: :::: :::: :::: :::: 

1 Clark, W. B., Bull,. Geol. Soc. America, vol. 20 (1908), 1910, pp. 653,654. 
THE MIDDLE EOCENE FLORA OF GEORGIA. 

INTRODUCTION. 

This paper gives a preliminary account of a small flora collected from the middle E.ocene 

of Georgia. . This flora, though containing only a few species, is of exceptional interest in the 

biologic problems which it suggests and is likely to prove of considerable geologic value in the 

study of the Gulf Eocene, the fossil plants of which are to a large extent unknown to science. 

No fossil plants have previously been described from. any of the formations of the Coastal 

Plain in the State of Georgia, although plant remains are present in both the Cretaceous and 

the Tertiary rocks. The only published records of Tertiary plants from this area known to 

the writer r~fer to two of the localitie~ described in the following pages. . 

From the Fiske property McCallie/ on the authority of F. H. Knowlton, re·cently enumerated: "A palm near to the living Sabal adansoni, Castanea resembling Castanea dentata, 

Quercus sp ~' Fjcus sp. ~" -

From the locality south of Macon on the Macon-Marion public road, the same author 2 

mentions "several species of fossil leaves." None of these collections, however, has previously. 

·received critical study, and in fact no definite floral remains have ever been recorded from 

deposits of Claiborne age anywhere throughout the territory in which it outcrops. Fossil 

plants are said to occur in the Claiborne of Alab~ma at two localities, but so far as the writer 

can ascertain no collections have ever been made from either of these. At the classic type 

locality at Claiborne Landing on Alabama River, near the top of the celebrated "Claiborne 

sands," there is, according to Smith and Langdon,S a lens of laminated gray clay with leaf· 

impressions, and bands of lignite are said also to oc_cur in these same beds. Langdon 4 also 

records lignitic sandy clays full of fossil leaves on Conecuh River, in southern Alabama. 

The upper formation (Y egua or "Cockfield") of the Claiborne group in the southern 

Arkansas and northern Louisiana area is said by both Harris and Veatch to contain numerous 

plant-bearing and lignitic beds. It seems certain that when the Claiborne deposits of the 

Mississippi embayment .are studied in greater detail a considerable flora will be discovered. 

GEOLOGY OF THE MIDDLE EOCENE . 

• 

The Claiborne group ~f Georgia reaches its greatest exposed development in a belt extending 

from Savannah River on the northeast to Ocmulgee River on the southwest. Beyond the 

Ocmulgee it is deeply buried by the transgression of the Vicksburg and Jackson formations 

and is exposed only along Chattahoochee River south of Fort Gaines 5 and along Flint River, 

where Veatch and Stephenson-have discovered Claiborne fossils at Penny Bluff, west of Americus. 

This northeastern belt is 10 to 30 miles in width, and is the only area of interest in the present 

connection, because it contains the only known Eocene plants in the State. The materials consist of heavy beds of sand, in many places indurated and pebble-bearing, extensive lenses of porous 

laminated clays with some local limestones and marls, and in some· places lignitic deposits. 

In general the clays represent deposition in the early part of Georgia Claiborne time. 6 They 

are light in color but are in many places· iron-stained .. They are laminated or thinly bedded 

with films of fine light sand, and commonly contain impure calcareous nodules and thin layers 

of soft limestone of small areal extent.· These clays are more or less continuous from Augusta 

southwestward to Twiggs and Bibb counties. Immediately above the clays, and replacing 

1 McCallie, S. W., Underground waters of Georgia: Bull. Gaol. Survey Georgia No. 15, 1908, p. 336. 

2 Idem, p. 347. 

a Report on the geology of the Coastal Plain of Alabama, 1894, pp. 126, 129. 

4 Idem, p. 387. · 

G McCallie, S. W., op. cit., p. 33. 

e The Georgia Claiborne, in the light of later studies of the fossil plan~s collected in Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, appears to represent 

the upper Claiborne of the complete Gulf section. 

8069°-14-9 129 
130 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

them in some areas, are heavy beds of iron-stained sands, which are in many places salicified 

and fossiliferous, and which show very commonly toward their upper limits phases of sandy 

fossiliferous marl, as at Shell Bluff, in Burke County. 

The thickness of the ClaiboFne group in Georgia is placed between 300 and 500 feet, -divided 

into Barnewell sand above and the l\1cBean formation below. The fossil plants co_me from the 

basal part (Congaree clay ll!ember) of the McBean form,ation. 

The Claiborne in Georgia generally rests with marked unconformity upon the Cretaceous, 

locally transgressing those rocks and resting on the eroded surface of the crystalline rocks of' 

the piedmont. It is overlain by the Vicksburg a:r;td Jackson formations or by the surficial 

deposits of the· Lafayette~ and later formations. Most of the fossil plants enumerated in the 

following pages were collected in the vicinity of Grovetown, in Columbia County, 15 miles 

west of Augusta on the Georgia Railroad. The Claiborne deposits in this region occupy a preClaiborne estuary deeply eroded in the underlying Cretaceous s-urface, outcropping as a narrow 

tongue only 2 or 3 miles in Width and extending to the northwest from 'the main body of the 

Claiborne deposits in Richmond County a distance of about 18 miles. 

The stratigraphic. relations are well illustrated by the diagrammatic section (fig. 9) of the 

plant-bearing horizon in Phinizy Gully. This gully extends in an approximately east-west 

<;lirection about 1 mile east of the Grovetown railroad station and was formerly used by the 

Augusta-Wrightsboro wagon road, long since abandoned. The east-west line in the figure 

marks the bed of the gully. The Eocene clay is laminated with fine sand partings and local 

w layers of comminuted ligFIGURE 9.-Diagrammatic geologic section of Phinizy Gully. 

nite, and , contains scattered leaf impressions 

and casts of Modiolus and 

small Pelecypoda. Most 

of the leaf impressions, 

which are nowhere abundant, carry only sufficient 

carbonaceous matter to form a very light tan· impression, which furnishes beautiful specimens of good lasting qualities, their preservation being endangered only by the usually great 

shrinkage of the clay in drying. 

Eastward up the gully, some 50 or 60 feet beyond the plant locality, appear abruptly the.-

light-colored coarse gravelly arkosic sands of the Lower 9retaceous. These become argillaceous. 

in their upper part and rise 10 .to 15 feet above the Eocene surface, and depo'sits of beth ages 

are overlain in the sides of the gully .by a thin covering of .Pleistocene and Recent deposits, the 

whole furnishing an1exceptionally fine example in small compass of an erosional unconformity. 

T-he plant locality known as the Fiske property contains several small pits, the principal 

opening being just east of the Grovetown railroad station along the Georgia Railroad .. It was 

formerly worked and the product marketed a_s a fuller's earth, but it has been idle for some time. 

At the time of the writer's visit the sides.had .slumped a great deal and the pit was full of w~ter. 

The laminated clay appears again along the railroad in a low cut a short distance north of the 

station, where it contains unidentifiable fragments of leaves. About I! miles southwest of 

Grovetown station and one-half mile west of the railroad t:r;-ack recent erosion exposes the 

laminated clays. At this locality indistinct invertebrate impressions and fragments of Acrostichum, too poor to be worth collecting, were observed. That remains of the vegetation of the 

Claiborne ·are not everywhere uncommon is shown at a locality 3! miles south of Grovetown, 

known as the Chapman lignite mine. At this locality about 10 feet of black, compact, earthy 

lignite, filled with trunks. and limbs· of trees, is exposed beneath pinkish clays and coarse Eocene 

. sands.-· The base of the lignite is not exposed and its thickness or horizontal extent is unknown. 

It is by far the largest known'lignitic deposit iri the State, reminding the observer of the Upper 

Cretaceous and Eocene lignite beds of the' far West or those of the Wilcox group in the Mississippi embayment. Spec~ ens of" wood fro in these deposits were found, when prepared for 

microscopic examination, to have undergone too much decay before entombment to permit 
MIDDLE EOCENE FLORA OF. GEORGIA. 131 

of identification except to the extent that they were dicotyledonous-a fact worthy of comment, 

for in the recent coal work in th~ western lignitic areas it has been found th~t the recogniz-able 

lignites are nearly all of coniferous origin, although the enormous number of dicotyledonous 

leaf impressions in the surrounding clays effectually testify to the· ~bundance of this class of 

plants during the formation of the lignite beds. 

Two other plant localities remain to be mentioned. One is represented by a· single speci .. 

nu}n obtained in digging a·well near Poplar Church; 13! miles west of Sandersville, :in Washington 

County. The second is on the Macon-Marion public road, 10 miles south of Macon, in Twiggs 

County, at the old Thorpe place.· Here there is an exposure of nearly 100 feet of the "fuller's 

earth," overlain by 50 feet of red argillaceous sand; The clay is less thinly bedded at this 

locality, but the thin seams of comminuted leaves are exactly like those seen at Phinizy Gully, 

and the identifiable leaf remains are scattered irregularly in the same way but are less common. 

The Claiborne deposits near :Hephzibah, in Richmond County, contain fragments of leaves 

and numerous impressions of twigs and small stems, but the writer was unable to identify 

anything at this locality. It was also impossible to identify any of the poorly preserved leaf 

impressions of a small collection made recently by Otto Veatch, of the Geological Survey of 

Georgia, on the· Fort Gaines-Edison public road, 2! ·miles east of Fort Gaines, in Clay County. 

The species identified from all the known plant-bearing Claiborne outcrops in Georgia are 

1:>rought together in the following table: · 

Distribution oj the Claiborne flora in Georgia. 

Fiske property Phinizy Gully' 10 miles south 

Grovetown. ' neato~~ve- of Macon. Poplar Church. 

~~;!fl;]g~~!~!~~~-:: "::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: : :::::: ~::::::: ....... ~ ....... ::::::: ~::::::: : :::: :: :::: :: ::: ~~~~0:~~:~~~~~~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~ ~ \) :::::::::::::::: 

Ficus claibornensis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X ............... . Malapoorma sp........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X ............... . 

~~~~1~o:rt:~g~t~~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ....... ~....... ~ X ...............• Pisonia claibornonsis........................................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X ..... • "(i) .. · · · ·. :::::::::::::::: Pistiaclaiborncnsis ................................... '.. ....... .. .. .. . .. .. ... .. . X ...............................................• 

~~~~f~E~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~: ~ ~:: ~::::::: ~: :::.::: ... :: ... ~ ·.:: ~::::: ~ ~::: ::::::: ~:: ::::: ....... ~ ....... ::::::: ~::::::: ::: :~: :~::::::: 'l'hrinax eocouica ....................................... 1 • • • . • • . . . . . . • . • • • . • • • • • X · · · · · · · X · · · · · · · : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : -~ 

A considerable fauna is listed from the various outcrops by McCallie, 1 the determinations 

being by Vaughan and Dall. Invertebrates have qeen found closely associated with. the plant 

remains at several points. The smaller figured specim~n of Thrinax contains several impressions 

of Modiolus and small pelecypod.shells, arid one of the best specimens of Acrostichum is partly 

hidden by a Modiolus valve. The colle.ctions from the Fiske property include the following 

invertebrates: 2 

Turb.inella (Psilocochlis) mccalliei Dall. 

Calyptrea aperta Solander. 

Nucula magnifica Conrad. 

N ucula ovula Lea. 

Leda, 2 sp. 

Ostrea sp. 

Modiolus texanus Gabb. 

Modiolus alabamiensis Aldrich? 

Cytherea ovata var. greggi Harris. 

Balanus sp. 

' From the plant locality on the Macon-Marion public road the following invertebrates are 

recorded: 3 • . · 

N ucula ovula Lea. 

Crassatellites protexta Conrad. 

Diplodonta sp. 

1 McCallie, S. W ., op. cit., pp. 336-348. SJdem,.p .. 336 (identified by Vaughan). 3Jdem, p. 347 (identified by Vaughan). 
132 UPPER CRETACEOUS AN'll J!}OCENE .FLORAS OF SOUTH C_AROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

From the well near .Poplar Church which furnished a leaf .of Rhizophora eocenica the following invertebrates a;re recorded: 1 · 

N ucula ovula Lea. 

Glycymeris trigonella Conrad. 

Ostrea alabamiensis Lea. 

Modiolus aff. texanus Gabb. 

As already stated, the Claiborne .has a very considerable areal extent outside the region 

considered in this report; in fact it is· one of .the most extensively developed groups of marine 

beds in the Coastal Plain and is certainly the most extensive post.;..Cretaceous group, for it has 

a known extension from the· Rio Grande on the south to the Carolinas and probably to M:~ryland on the north. Its extremely fossiliferous character early attracted attention, and a study 

of collections of invertebrate remains from- a locaJ development of beds of this age at Claiborne 

Landing on Alabama River enabled Conrad in 1835 to prove the presence of Eocene beds in the 

Gulf Coastal Plain. The name Claiborne as at present understood is applied to a larger unit 

as a group term. Plant remains are present in some of the more argillaceous members at the 

type locality on Alabama :River, but these ·have never been .collected. The comparison of this 

flora with that of the Georgia Eocene would prove a most interesting .and valuable study. 

The shore line was not stationary during Claiborne time, for considerable oscillation is 

indicated in the change from mar~e to estuarine sedimentation in the_ :Mississippi embayment 

region. The Eocene Gulf Stream was no doubt a large factor in the northward extension of the 

southern flora which occurs at Grovetown. With the recession of the sea as Eocene time 

progressed and the . emergence of the Florida area in the Miocene, this warm current· would 

be deflected somewhat to the east. Considerable evidence has been set forth by Dall, and 

more recently by Vaughan, for the existence of a cooler inshore current in the middle Miocene. 

With· regard to the existence of land to . the southward little is known. The vertebrate 

paleontologists, notably Osborn, insist on a late Cretaceous or early Eocene land connection 

' with South America to account for the mammalian fauna of the N otostylops beds of Patagonia 

and the presence of Edentata-Dasypoda in the North American middle Eocene. Corroborative 

evidence is furnished by the appearance of the· flora of the Dakota sandstone in Argentina, 

although this land connection is vigorously denied by other students. 

In any event, the .Georgia Eocene flora need not be supposed to have migrated from e.qua-

·.torial South America. It undoubtedly flourished during the wbple of the Tertiary all along 

the then-existing coast from the Mexico-Central America region to the Georgia occurrence. 

SYSTEMATIC DESCRIPTION OF THE FLORA. 

Phylum THALLOPHYTA. 

Order PYRENOMYCETES. 

Genus SPHlERITES Unger. 

SPHJERITES CLAIBORNENSIS sp. nov. 

Plate XXIV, figure 6. 

Description.-Perithecia small and numerous, arranged in eleyated rings 1 to01.5 millimeters 

in diameter on the upper surface of the leaves of Ficus. 

·Large numbers of fungi of this sor~ have beer{ described by European paleobotanists, chiefly 

from Tertiary horizons, and referred to the genera Sphreria Haller or Sphrerites Unger. They 

possess little biologic interest except in so far as they indicate. the presence of this class of plants 

ill various bygone floras, and American paleobotanists have usually ignored them entirely~ 

The present species is similar to Sphrerites myricre (Lesquereu~) Meschinelli,Z from the 

Green River formation of Wyoming, a form which occurs on leaves of a species of Myrica, and 

1 McCallie, S. W., op. cit., p. 343 (identified by Vaughan). 2 Lesquereux, Leo, The Tertiary flora; 1878, p. 34, Pl. I, fig. 4. 
MIDDLE EOCENE FLORA OF GEORGIA. 133 

to Sphrerites nervisequus Fritel,t from the Sparnacian of the Paris Basin, a type, somewhat 

smaller than the Georgia form, which occurs on the-leaves of a species of Lauracere. 

Occurrence.-Congaree clay member of McB~~n format~on ·(of Claiborne group),: Fiske 

property, Grovetown, Columbia County, 10 miles south of Macon, Twiggs County. (Collected 

by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollection.-U. S. National Museum. 

Phylum PTERIDOPHYTA. 

Order FILICALE S. 

Family POLYPODIACElE. 

Genus ACROSTICHUM Linne. 

AcROSTICHUM GEORGIANUM sp. nov. 

Plate XXVII, figure 1. 

Description.-Frond large, pinnate ( ~). Pinnre thin but coriaceous·, oblong-lanceolate, 

inequilateral, with an entire undulating margin, an obtusely rounded apex, and a narrowed ( n 

base, about 2.5 centimeters in width and of unknown length, presumably about 10 to 12 centiIneters. The pinnre may have been considerably larger than is here indicated, for all the 

collected material is fragmentary and in some of the fragments the thiri.. stiff edges are folded 

over, indicating a possible greater width. Midveins stout. Lateral veins numerous, 1 millimeter or less apart, very fine intricately anastomosing, branching from the midvein at acute 

angles, the angle dependent on their situation in the· basal or apical part of the pinna. The 

basal veins subtend angles of about 60°; those in the apex approach a position almost parallel 

with the midvein; and the intermediate qnes branch at a very acut·e angle and immediately 

diverge outward, their general direction being about 50° from that of the midvein. Areolation 

of slightly elongated, 5 or 6 sided meshes. . 

What appear to be fragments of the fertile pinnre of this species occur at the locality 10 

miles south of Macon, but they are too uncertain to be even tentatively identified as such and 

are .not included among the occurrences of this species listed herewith. Nevertheless the 

fragrnents are so suggestive of this species that, if sterile pinnre had been found at the same 

locality, the writer would not hesitate to class them as fragments of fertile pinnre. 

This handsome species is unfortunately based on fragments, the largest being that figured. 

There are eight such specimens from the Phinizy Gully locality, one partly concealed by a valve 

of Modiolus. Still sma.ller fragments showing the characteristic areolation were noticed at 

other outcrops in the vicinity of Grovetown. 

The species is closely related to Acrostichum hesperium Newberry, 2 of the Green River 

formation of Wyoming, differing from it in being somewhat more slender in haqit and in having 

straighter midveins and less elongate, finer areolation. There is no evidence of the coalescence 

of the terminal pinnre, a feature which serves to distinguish Newberry's species from all other 

described fossil species of Acrostichum: _ 

A similar form is the European Acrostichum ( Ohrysodium) lanzreanum Gardner and Ettingshausen, 3 described at length by Gardner and common in the Lutetian and Bartonian of southern 

England. What appear to be identical remains are reported froin the Ligurian of Dalmatia 

and southern Franch, from the Tongrian of France and Italy, al).d more doubtfully from the 

Ypresian of France. . Another species .is reported by Sa porta from the Aquitanian of south6rn 

France, and Squinabol reports two additional sp-ecies from .the Tongrian of Liguria, Italy. 

Another American species of Upper Cretaceous or lower Eocene age was described in 1902 

by I-Iollick 4 from Colorado. In this connection mention should also be made of a fern from 

1 Fritel, P. H., Mem. Soc. geol. France, vol. 40, 1910, p. 13, Pl. I, fig. 14. 

D Newberry, J. S., The later extinct floras of North America: Mon. U. S. Geol. Survey, vol. 35,'1898, p. 6, Pl. LXI, figs. 2-5. 

a British Eocene flora, pt. 1, 1879, p. 26, Pls. I and II, figs. 1-4. 

4 'I'orreya, vol. 2, 1902, p. 146, Pl.·IV, figs. 3-6. 
l-.34 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH QAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Sand Creek, Colo., described by L()squereux 1 as Gymnogramma gardneri, whiqh both Gardner 

and Saporta are inclined to consider an Acrostichum. This fern is of Upper Cretacqous or 

basal Eocene age. . ' 

The modern species of Acrostichum are swamp forms. They are few 1n number and include, 

in addition to-several unimportant species of the Lesser Antilles and West IndiEs, the widespread 

tropical fern, Acrostichum ( Ohrysodium) aureum Linne, a common coastal species of mangrove 

and nipa swamps and similar situations, more particularly on the dryer and less saline soils, 

which ranges in America from Bermuda a~d peninsular Florida to Brazil, in Africa from Guinea 

to.Natal and. the Mascarene and Seychelles islands, and in the Orient from southern China and 

Polynesia .to northern Australia. It is remarkable that this cosmopolitan modern genus should 

appear about the sai:ne time in America ·and Europe and display a number of closely allied 

forms at widespread localities in both the Eocene and Oligocene, and yet not be detected at any 

of the numerous· outcrops of later Miocene or Pliocene plant-bearing deposits. Undoubtedly 

this sou.thward retreat from latitude 51° north is to be explained by changing physical 

conditions, chief among which were lessening humidity and lowering temperature .. 

Occurrence.-Congaree clay member of McBean formation (of Claiborne group),' Phinizy 

Gully, Columbia County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollection.-U. S. National Museum. 

Phylum ·SPERMATOPHYTA. 

Class ANGIOSPERM.lE. · 

Subclass MONOCOTYLEDON.lE. 

Order POALES. 

Family POACE.lE. 

Genus ARUNDO Linne. 

ARUNDO PSEUDOGOEPPERTI sp. nov. 

Plate XXIV, figure 7. 

Arundo goeppertir Munster, .in Lesquereux, Ann. Rept. U. S. Geol. and Geog. Survey\ Terr., 1871, suppl., p. 5. 

4rundo goepperti? Munster, in Lesquereux, The Tertiary flora, 1878, p. 86, Pl. VIII, figs. 3-5. 

Description.-Lesquereux in 1871 and again in 1878 referred several fragments of leaves 

and striated stems of grasslike form found in the Green River formation to the well-known 

European species Arundo goepperti. These. fragments agree. fairly well with the European 

material, but when it is considered that remains of this kind have little to distinguish them 

specifically, and that these American forms are so far removed geographically from the type.· 

.forms and occur at a horizon invariably of considerably greater age, the propriety of considering them distinct is obvious. . 

_ A nun;tber of fragments from Phinizy Gully are referred to this species, one of the best, 

although not the largest, being figured. The 'most that can be said of their botanic relationship 

is that they represent large marsh grasses analogous, if not intimately related, to the modern 

genus Arundo, to which they are referred as a matter of convenience and long standing usage 

rather than because of any very definite proof of this relationship. · 

· In his elaboration of the Green River flora Lesquereux has described· an additional but 

similar species, Arundo reperta,Z and other remains which he refers to Phragmites. It is quite 

possible that some of these ·remains, especially those named Arundo reperta, are referable to 

the present species. 

The modern species of Arundo, which number about six, are distributed throughout the 

-warmer countfie:;; of the world. This species and the original Arundo goepperti are usually 

. ·compared with the modern Arundo donax Linne, which is indigenous to the Mediterranean 

region and which grows in wet places. 

1 The Tertiary flora, 1878, p. 58, Pl. iv, fig. 2. 2 The Tertiary flora, 1878, p. 87, Pl. VIII, figs. 6-8. 
MIDDLE EOCENE FLORA OF GEORGIA. 1'35 

Occurrence.-Congaree clay member of McBean formation (of Claiborne group), Phinizy 

Gully, Columbia County, 10 n1iles south of- Macon, Twiggs County. (Collected by E. W. 

Berry.) 

Oollection.-V. S. National :Museum. 

Order NAIADALES. 

Family N AIADACE.lE. 

Genus POT AMOGETON Linne. 

PoTAl\fOGETON 1\fEGAPHYLLUS sp. nov. 

Plate XXVII, figure 2. 

Description.-Leaf ovate-lanceolate in outline, 8 or 9 centimeters in length by 3.6 centimeters 

·in greatest width, which is in: the basal half of the leaf. Apex not seen, but the 1nargins converge 

' abruptly apically, so that it ·was rather obtusely or acutely pointed.· Base rounded. Veins 

nun1erous, about 1 millimeter apart, unbranched, aerodrome. Midrib not differentiated. 

Transverse veinlets not visible. Texture apparently thin and firm. 

The present species resembles a number of fossil forms of undetermined botanic affinity 

such as Smilacina ?'ackiana Pilar/ of the later Tertiary of Europe.· It comes closest, however, 

to the leaves fr01n Trocadero in the Eocene of the Paris basin (Lutetian), referred by. Sa porta 2 

to the genus Ottelia Pers (Hydrocharitacere), but described originally as a species of Potamogeton 

by both Brongniart 3 and vV atelet 4 and referred by Bureau to the genus Monochoria of the 

Pontederiacere. _ · 

Between 30 ·and 40 fossil species have been referred to this genus, none of which appear to 

be identical with the Georgia form. They range in age from the Arctic Senonian through the 

Eocene, Oligocene, Miocene, and Pliocene to the Pleistocene, several still existing species being 

recorded from the latter, both in this country and abroad. 

The modern species nvmber more than 60 and occur both in the tropics and in the temperate zone, with a larger representation in the latter. The species generally have a wide, 

mn,ny a cosmopolitan range,' a single species commonly. extending over a great many degrees 

of latitude; for example, Potamogeton perfoliatus Linne extends over more than 20 degrees 

of latitude in America, from Newfoundland and B~itish Columbia to Florida and California, and 

also occurs in Europe and Asia. It is an interesting- fact that all the wide-ranging species 

extend into both comparatively high and low latitudes, whereas species of more restricted 

range, such as Potamogeton fioridanus· Small and Potamogeton curtissii Morong, of Florida, are 

cOininonly confined to warmer regions. 

This condition may be taken to indicate either that species confined to low latitudes in 

the existing flora, or their immediate ancestors in more ancient floras, had originally a much 

wider range than now, or that the modern ,wide-ranging species have greatly extended their 

range in recent times. The writer inclines to accept the latter supposition, although it is well 

known that the majority of aquatics, both ~nimal and plant, are little influenced even by rather 

wide differences in latitude. 

A fossil species of about the. same size as the Claiborne species but with a more open venation has been described by. Heer f1'om the Tertiary of Spitzenbergen as Potamogeton nordenskioldi.5 Both this form and the Georgia species probably represent floating, not emerged or 

submerged, leaves. 

Occurrence.-Congaree clay member of McBean formation (of Claiborne group), Phinizy 

Gully, Columbia County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollection~-V. S. National Museun1. 

1 Pilar, A. G., Flora fossilis susedana, 1883, p. 13, Pl. III, fig. 8. 

2 Le monde des plantes, 1879, p. 227, f. 45. 

a Tableau, 1849, p. 115. 

4 Description des plantes fossiles du bassin de Paris, 1866, p. 86, Pl. XXIII, fig. 1. 

5 ~'lora fossilis arctica, vol. 1, 1868, p. 157, Pl. XXX, figs. 1b, 5c, 5d, and 6-8. 
136 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA. AND GEORGIA. 

Order ARECALE S. 

Family ARECACE.lE (PALM.lE). 

Genus THRINAX Linne. 

THRINAX' EOCENICA sp. nov. 

Plates XXV and XXVI, figure 3. 

Description.-Leaves orbicular in outline, of relatively small or ~edium size, indicating 

in the· collected material a diameter ranging from 36 to 60 centimeters or more._ Many-cleft, . 

FIGURE 10.-Restoration of Thrinax eocenica Berry. (About one-sixteenth natural size.) 

the numerous rays carinate, much crowded at the obtusely rounded end of the rachis, tw:o 

cleft distad. Rachis considerably flattened, smooth, entirely unarmed, 1 centimeter wide in 

the single preserved specimen of one of the smaller leaves. Ligule free, erect, concave, inconspicuous .. Segments 25 in number on a small complete specimen; larger fragments showing 

about two-thirds of a leaf contain 31 rays, indicating. that the. complete leaf was made up of 

about 45 segments. The basal rays on each side are somewhat reduced in size and entirely free, 

and a:p. the rays become separated about two-thirds of th.e distance from their base. Primary 

veips prominent. Intermediate veins very fine, five· on each side, something less than a millimeter apart, with very fine veiulets between them. (Se~ fig. 10.) 
MIDDLE EOCENE FLORA OF GEORGIA. 137 

Fossil palm leaves present few characters for successful comparison with existing genera; 

hence the numerous fossil species of such genera as Flabellaria, Sabalites, and Geonomites. 

The Georgia material is for the most part fragmentary; the greater the size of leaves that floated 

into the Claiborne sea the more fragmentary the preserved material. These fragments ure 

very common at the Phinizy Gully locality. The two figured specimens, by far the best 

obtained, are from the Fiske property at Grovetown. The larger is an impression; the smaller, 

a most beautiful specimen, has the leaf substance preserved and shows the upper surface of the 

frond. This locality was flooded at the time of the writer's visit and the workings abandoned, 

but laborers reported that palm leaves were frequently encountered and that some of them 

reached a diameter of 3 or 4 feet. The present collections, though they leave much to be 

desired, are in the sum of their characters clearly referable to the genus Thrinax, a determination 

which the writer made after a careful comparison of the fossil leaves with those of various 

existing palms in the National Herbarium and in the New York Botanical Garden, and which 

was in1n1ediately suggested by Dr. N.·L. Britton when the photographs of these specimens were 

submitted to him. · · · 

The present species is clearly distinct from all the palms described by Lesquereux or 

Newberry·~rom the West, and little is to be gained by more detailed comparison. It is equally 

distinct from the homotaxial E'uropean palm material, the only· material which suggests any 

relationship being the leaves from the Ligurian of Dalma.tia referred by Ettingshausen 1 to 

Flabellaria· raphifolia (Sternberg) E'ttingshausen. It differs, according to the illustrations 

given by this author of the same species in his Haring flora, in having a long acumen. 

In the modern flora Thrina.."< has nine or ten species in the West Indies and Antilles, three 

of the species being found on the Florida Keys. 

Occurrence.-Congaree clay_ member of :McBean formation (of Claiborne group), Fiske 

property, Grovetown, Columbia County (collected· by S. W. McCallie); Phjnizy Gully (collected 

hy E'. W. Berry). 

Collection.-U. S. National Museun1. 

Order ARALE S. 

Family ARACElE. 

Genus PISTIA Linne. 

PrsTIA CLAIBORNENsrs sp. nov. 

Plate XXV~, figures 1 and 2. 

Description.-Leaves broadly obovate with a retuse apex giving them an obcordate outline; 

2.5 ·centimeters in length by 2.5 centimeters in greatest breadth. Base broadly cuneate, 

descending to the wide petiole. Apex with a shallow, broadly rounded sinus. Venation 

indistinct, fasciculate, forming irregular polygonal meshes by repeated cross branching. There 

are indications in the fossil of intumescence and inflation in the basal half of the leaf exactly 

comparable to conditions found in t4e existing species. 

This species is the first to be discovered in the Tertiary, and only three Cretaceous species 

are known. It is clearly-distinct from any previously described fossils, but resembles somewhat 

certain leaves of Pistia corrugata Lesquereux from the. Montana group, differing from this 

species in the degree of apical retuseness. It differs in the same respect from the leaves of the 

existing species seen by the writer, although the older leaves of the latter tend to a truncate _ 

for1n and are often slightly retuse. 

In size, outline, and venation this E'ocene species is not very different from the modern 

Pistia stratiotes Linne, in which species Engler (Die nati.irlichen Pflanzenfamilien) has united 

all the living representatives of the genus. The result of Engler's classification makes this a 

somewhat variable and widely .distributed species, in general confined to the tropical and 

subtropical zones. In this country it is found frol!l Florida to Texas. It occurs in the West 

1 Denkschr. K. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Math.-nat. Kl., vol. 8, 1855, p.l2, Pis. III, fig. 4; XIV, fig.l. 
138 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Indies, and sout_hward through Mexico and Central America to Paraguay and Argentina. In 

Africa it occurs from Natal to Senegambia and Nubia, and also in Madagascar and the 1Vfas·carene 

Islands. In Asia it appears throughout the East Indies and northward to the Philippines. . 

Few fossil forms have been referred to this genus. Hosius .and Von der :Marek 1 described 

in 1880 a form which they called Pistites loriformis from the Lower Senonian of Westphalia, 

but this is probably cycadean, as Schimper suggested.2 Lesqueteux 3 in 1876 named a remarkably well-preserved form from. Point of Rocks, Wyo., Pistia corrugata, and later fully described 

and illustrated it,4 his specimens including leaves of various sizes and rootlets. This fossil 

comes from beds belonging to the Montana group (Senonian), which are of about the same age 

as the French beds froin which the only other species, Pistia mazelii, was known. This specie 

was mentioned and :figured from the lignites of Fuveau (Provence), France, by Sa porta and 

Marion,5 but has never been adequately described·. 

Recently the writer showed 6 Heer's Ohondrophyllum nordenskioldi, described from the Atane . 

beds of Greenland, to be a true Pistia and to be exceedingly abundant in the Black Creek 

formation of North Carolina, which is of Colorado (Turonian) age. 

_It is significant ~s showing the real imperfection of the geologic record, even of the European 

Tertiary, that this widespread modern type ranged over at least two continents during the Upper 

Cretaceous and presumably had a still wider range in Cenozoic times, ·an9, yet not a single 

specimen has. ever before come to light at any of the thousands of localities where plant beds of 

the latter age have. been exploited. · · 

Occurrence.-Congaree clay member of McBean formation (of Claiborne group), Fiske 

property, Grovetown, Columbia County. 

Oollections.-U.· S. National Museum. 

Subclass DICOTYLEDONlE. 

Order FAG4-LES. 

' Family FAGACElE. 

Genus CASTANEA Adanson. 

CASTANEA CLAIBORNENSIS sp. nov. 

Plate XXVIII, figures 1 and 2. 

Description.-Leaves oblong-lanceolate in outline, of a thin, firm texture, about 18 or 19 

centimeters in length by 4.5 centimeters in greatest width, which is about halfwt).y between the 

apex and the base. Apex . acuminate ( ~). Base cuneate, acute. Margin coarsely serrate, 

with sharp ascending teeth becoming less marked proxlmad, the margin finally entire toward 

the base of the leaf. _Petiole and midrib stout. · Secondaries of medium size, numerous, regular, 

parallel, and alternate, craspedodrome; they branch fr)m the midrib at angles of about 40° 

and curve slightly upward, terminating in the marginal teeth. The tertiary venatioJ;l, which 

consists of numerous close-set and nearly straight transverse veins, constitutes about the only 

feature in which these leaves differ from those of our n1odern American chestnut Oasta.nea 

dentata (Marsh) Borkhausen. 

The genus Castanea is represented by a fairly large number of fossil species, one doubtful 

form occurring as early as the Senonian of Europe. In addition the genus Dryophyllum Debey, 

often considere·d as in part ·ancestral to Castanea and forming a link between the latter genus 

and Quercus, has a number of species in the Upper Cretaceous and "Paleocene." 

Species of Castanea are found in the Eocene deposits in Montana, ·oregon, Canada, 

Alaska, Greenland, France, Italy, and England. There are' a number of _species in the 

1 Palooontographica, vol. 2G, 1880, p. 182, Pl. XXXVIII, figs. 151,"152. 

2 Zittel's Handbuch, 1890, p. 378. 

a Ann. Rept. U.S. Geol. and Geog. Survey Terr., 1874, p. 299. 

4 Tertiary flora, 1883, p. 103, Pl. LXI, figs, 1, 3-7, and 9-11. 

6 L'evolution du regne vegetale, Phanerogames, vol. 2, 1885, p. 37, figs. ll4c and 114d. 

6 Berry, E. W., Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 37, 1910, p. 189, Pl. XXI, figs.l-15. 
MIDDLE EOCENE FLORA OF GEORGIA. 139 . . 

.European Oligocene and in the Miocene of Japan, Europe, and America, the latter including some 

fro1n New Jersey on the east coast and from Qregon on the west coast. No less than eight 

:species have been described from the European Pliocene. These are all very similar and are 

·variously combined and segregated by different authors. They at least indicate the abundance 

·Of the chestnut in southern Eurasia during preglacial times. 

The common modern chestnut of Europe (Castanea vulgaris) is recorded from interglacial 

beds in northern Italy and France and the modern chinquapin (Castanea pumila) is recorded 

from the A1nerican Pleistocene in Kentucky and West Virginia. 

Starkie Gardner comments on the incongruity of Castanea being a 1nember of the warm 

temperate or subtropical Eocene flora and expresses the belief that these supposed chestnuts 

are really referable to the tropical genus Godoya Ruiz and Pavon (Ochnacere). After a careful 

·COmparison of the various fossil species with the foliage of this modern genus the writer is strongly 

·of the opinion that Gardner's comparison has no actual basi'3. A review of the possible evidence 

bearing on the supposed incongruity of Castanea associated with various tropical and sqbtropical 

,genera indicates that the modern species of chestnut number five, including Castanea vulgaris 

Lamarck of southern Europe, another species in eastern Asia, and three species in America. 

()f the latter, Castanea nana Muhlenberg is found in the sand hills and barrens of Georgia and 

Florida to Louisiana. Castanea dentata (¥arsh) Borkhausen is found on rich, noncalcareous 

soils fron1 Maine and Ontario to Michigan, Tennessee, Georgia, and Alaba1na. In the latter 

, .State it occurs as far south as Tuscaloosa County, where the n1ean annual temperature is about 

·63° F., as against 42° for Maine and about the san1e for Ontario, Canada. The limits are 21° 

.apart, and ind~cate a very wide actual range of ten1perature. 

We find that the allied genus Castano psis Spach, which Prantl 1 makes a section of Castanea, 

.although it appears to be a little nearer Quercus than Castanea, has something like 25 species,· 

n1ostly of southeastern Asia and trapical India, with one western An1erican species which ranges 

·from southwestern Washington to southern California. Th(:} closely allied genus Quercus, 

though primarily a temperate type, has many strictly tropical species. These various considerations effectually• dispose of any criticism of the presence of Castanea associated ,with 

·Thrinax, Acrostichum, Pisonia, and similar forms in the Eocene of Gc;orgia. 

Occurrence.-Congaree clay member of ~icBean formation (of Claiborne group), Fiske prop-

-erty, Grovetown, Columbia County. (Collected by S. W. McCallie.) · 

Collection.-U. S. National Museun1. 

Order URTICALES. 

Family ULMACElE. 

Genus MOMISIA F. G. Dietrich. 

MoMrsrA AMERICANA sp. nov. 

Plate XXVII, figure 13. 

Description.-Leaf ovate in outline, 6 to _7centirneters in length by 2.6 centimeters in greatest 

width, which is in the lower half of the leaf. Apex not preserved, presumably acute. Base 

obtusely pointed. Margin entire as far as seen; there is a possibility, however, that it was 

:sparsely toothed apically. Primaries, three from the top of the petiole, the midrib the stoutest, 

.all slender. 

This species is unfortunately based on the single incomplete specimen figured. It is much 

like the leave~ ordinarily referred to the gen':Is Cinnamomum, of which three or four European 

·species have been recognized at innumerable horizons from the Eocene to the Pliocene and 

at a large number of localities both in this country .and abroad. Some of these are indisputable 

·cilmanlonlurns, as is attested by well-preserved fruiting specimens; others find their only 

relation to that genus in the palmately triveined character. The present species, though it 

.may represent a Cinnan1omun1, has seemed to the writer to be more closely related to the 

1 Engler, A., and Prantl, K., Die natiirlichen Pflanzenfamilien, pt. 3, 1894. 
140 UPPER. CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

illmacere, resembling certain South Am·erican species of Celtis, such as Celtis iguanens (Jacquin) 

Sargent of Bulivia. · It more closely resembles, however, Momisia ac·uleata (Swartz) Klotsch, 

a widespread sp~cies of tropical America and the West Indies which reaches its northern 

limits in the valley of the Rio Grande and on the Florida. keys. 

The genus Momisia has not previously been recorded in a fossil state. In the living flora 

it has upward of a score of species confined to tropical America. Engler 1 reduces it to a 

subgenus of Celtis, but there is little doubt that it should be accorded generic rank. 

Occurrence.~Congaree clay member of McBean formation (of Claiborne group). Phinizy 

Gully, Columbia County. (Collected by·E. W. Berry.) 

·Oollection.-U. S. National Museum. 

Family MORACE~ or ARTOCARPACE~. 

Genus FICUS Linne. 

FICUS CLAIBORNENSIS sp. nov. 

Plates XXIV, figure 6, and XXVII, figures 3 and 4. 

Description.~Leaves oblong-lanceolate -in outline," about 12 centimeters in length by 3.5. 

centimeters in greatest width, which is about halfway between the apex and the base. Apex 

acute. Base equally acute and somewhat decurrent on the extremely stout petiole, which is 

about 3 centimeters in length and fully 3 millimeters in dian1eter; the petiole is notably curved 

in one specimen. :Midrib apparently equally stout below, beconung tmnner above; not well 

seen because all the collected material shows only the upper surface of the leaves. The texture 

was evidently coriaceous, much like that in the leaves of the coinmonly cultivated rubber plant, 

and the venation is made out with difficulty. The secondaries are numerous, t:tlln, and parallel, 

as in lanceolate fig leaves of the Ficus elastica type. The younger l~aves are much less elongated, 

being ovate-lanceolate in outline as shown in Plate L~IV, figure 6. ·This specimen is 8 centimeters in length by 3 centimeters in maximum width, and the surface is dotted with the leaf ' 

spots caused by a species of Sphrerites. This fig is the most abundantly represented fossil at 

the locality 10 miles south of Macon. 

Among the 600 or more described living species of Ficus which range over- the warmer 

regions of .the whole world, and among 300, more or les~, fossil species known, which range 

from the Cretaceous to the ~leistocene, it would be possible to mention many whose foliage 

greatly resembles that of the present species, but it is hardly worth while to do more than point 

out that a number of modern tropical American species have foliage very ·close to this Eocene 

form. Various modern species of Ficus have been shown to owe their distribution to fruiteating birds, and this may well have been the means by which the present sp·ecies migrated 

along the Claiborne co~st. · 

Occurrence.-Congaree clay member of McBean formation (of Claiborne group), Fiske 

property, Grovetown, Columbia County (collected by S. W. McCallie); 10 miles south of Macon, 

Twiggs County (collected by E. W. Berry). 

Oollection.-U. S. National :Museum. 

Order CHENOPODIALE S. 

·Family NYCTAGINACE~. 

Genus PISONIA Linne. 

PrSONIA CLAIBORNENSIS s'p. nov. 

Plate XXVIII, figure 3. 

D~scription.-Leaf ovate, 1.5 centimeters in length by 0.8 centimeter in greatest width, 

which is a little more than halfway between the base and the apex. Apex obtusely pointed. 

Base cuneate, slightly more produced and more pointed than the apex. Margin entire. Petiole 

1 Die natiirlichen Pflanzenfamilien, pt. 3, 1894. 
MIDDLE EOCENE FLORA OF GEORGIA. 141 

missing. ¥J.drib rather stout in a leaf so small. Secondaries few, branching from the midrib 

at an acute angle, 45° or slightly less, and curving upward, camptodrome. Leaf substance thin 

but apparently coriaceous. 

This species, except for its smaller size, is very similar to Pisonia eocenica, described by 

Ettingshausen from the Eocene or lower Oligocene of the Tyrol. 1 Among living species it 

resembles Pisonia jloridana Britton of the "Florida keys, which is, however, somewhat more 

rounded apically, giving its leaves a more obovate outline .. The fossil is identical in every 

particular with the smaller leaves of the modem Central American species Pisonia macranthocarpa Donnell Smith. Inasn1uch as the fossil species is based upon the single specimen · 

figured it is in1possible to tell whether the specimen collected is below the average size for the 

species or not. Presumably the leaves did not grow more than 50 per cent larger than the 

one figured. In Pisonia macranthocarpa the leaves vary considerably in size, some being 

larger thttn the fossil and others only one-third its size. :Many are almost identical in size. 

Several n1odern species are probably dispersed through the agency of ocean currents, and 

the same n1eans of distribution n1ay have been adopted by Pisonia Claibornensis, for many of 

its associates seem to have been sin1ilarly adapted for sea voyages. · 

~1embers of the genus are not rare in the fossil state. The oldest recorded species is bas~d 

on leaves described by Velenovsky from the ·Chlomeker sandstone near Leipa, Bohemia, as 

Pisonia atavia. 2 These are of Upper Cretaceous and probably Senonian age; and if collected _ 

at a homotaxial horizon in this country would be referred·to the genus Persoonia Swartz.3 No 

other Cretaceous leaves have been referred to Pisonia, 4 althol,lgh Lesquereux referred the only 

American species ever described, Pisonia racemosa, 5 to the Laran1ie. The material came from 

the "Black Buttes beds" of Wyoming, whose exact age has never been settled, although it may 

be basal Eocene. This species, which was based both on leaves and on fruiting specimens, had 

somewhat larger, more rounded leav:es, and more ascending secondaries than the Georgia fossiL 

Five species recorded fron1 the. European Tertiary have the following djstribution: 

Pisonia laneijolia Heer, Flora Tertiaria Helvetire, vol. 2, 1856, p. 75, Pl. LXXXVIII, fig. 4; Tortonian of Switzerland. 

Pisonia ovata Ludwig, Palreontographica, vol. 8, 1859, p. 107, Pl. XLIV, figs. 1 and 2; Oligocene of Hesse. 

Pisonia bilinica Ettingshausen, Die fossile Flora des Tertiar-Beckens von Bilin, pt. 1, 1867, p. 89, Pl. XXIX, figs. 2 

and 4; Miocene of Bohemia. · · · 

Pisonia radobojana Ettingshausen, Beitrage zur Kenntniss der fossile Flora von Radoboj, 1870, p. 877; Sarmatian of 

Croatia (leaves and fruit). . · 

Pisonia eocenica Ettingshausen, previously mentioned; leaves and fruit in the lignites of Haring in the Tyrol. These 

beds are referred to the Ligurian by Gumbel and Friedrich, to the Stampian by De Lapparent, and to the Sannoisian by Douxami and Marty. The same species has been identified in the Oligocene of Saxony, Styria, 

Dalmatia, and Switzerland, and in the Miocene of Styria and Carniola. Massalongo records it from the Messinian 

of Italy. 

The modern species of Pisonia are numerous and occur in the ~ropics of both hemispheres. 

They are largely developed in Central and tropical South America and several species appear 

in the West Indies and Antilles. Heimerl 6 divides the genus into six sections, some of which 

should undoubtedly be given generic rank; in fact, Britton 7 ·proposes to form from the West 

Indian, Bahaman, and Antillean species the genus Torrubia Velloso (Fl. Flum., 1825, p. 139), 

restricting Pisoni a to vines to correspond with the type species Pisonia aculeata Linne. 

Foreign usage and geologic considerations, which are even n1ore important, make it 

inadvisable to follow too closely the innovations of systematists dealing only with existing flora; 

and especially where use of one or another name for closely related genera is in question, it is 

believed that a son1ewhat conservative course is the mor~ desirable. The .present species is 

therefore referred to Pisonia. 

1 Dio tortiiiro Flom von Hiiring in Tirol: Ab~andl. K.-k. geol. Reichsanstalt, vol. 2, Abth. 3, 1853, p. 43, Pl. XI, figs. 1-22. 

2 Dio Flora bohmischen Krcideformation, pt. 4, 188.5, p. 6, Pl. VIII, ~gs. 13 and 14. 

a Cf.Persoonia lesquereuxii Kno\\;lton, The flora of the Dakota group: Mon. U. ,s. Geo.l. Survey, Yol. 17, 1892, p. 89, Pl. XX, figs. 1{}--12. 

• The writer has recently described (Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 37, 1910, p. 191) a well-characterized Cretaceous species of Pisunia from the 

Black Creek formation or North Carolina, and the genus has also been found to be represented at various Tertiary horizons in the Mississippi em 

bayment area. 

6 ~L'he 'l'ortiary flora, 1878, p. 209, Pl. XXXV, fig. 4. 

e Engler, A., and Prantl, K., Naturlichen Pflanzonfamilien, vol. 3, Abth. 1, 1889. 

1 Bull. Torrey B:>t. Club, vol. 31, 1904, pp. Gll-615. 
142 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Occ~rrence.-Congaree, clay member of McBean formation (of Claiborne grouP.), Phinizy 

Gully, Columbia County; 10 miles south of ~1acon, Twiggs County. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

· Oollection.-V. S. National :Museum. ' · 

Order ROSALES. 

Family MIMOS.ACE.lE. 

Genus MIMOSITES. 

MrMOSITES GEORGIANUS sp. nov. 

Plate XXVII, figures 5-9. 

Description.-Leaflets of small size, ovate-lanceolate in outline, somewhat inequilateral, 

sessile, ranging from 2 to 3.8 centimeters in length and from 0.5 to 0.8 centimeter in maximum 

width, wlpch may be in the apical or basal portion of the leaf or halfway between. 4-pex 

'rounded or obtusely-pointed. Base somewhat rounded or cuneate and pointed. Some of the 

leaves are perfectly symmetrical, others are somewhat extended apically, and still others 

have the base slightly extended. Margins entire. Midrib fairly stout below, thin above. 

Venation not seen. 

These small leaflets are common at the Phinizy" Gully locality but rare.at the other Claiborne 

outcrops. They are almost identical with the leaflets of various modern Mimosacere. The 

fossil species of Mimosites are numerous and many species are contained in undescribed collections from the Wilcox group in the Mississippi embayinent area. · 

Occurrence.-Congaree clay member of,McBean formation (of Claiborne group). Phinizy · 

Gully, Columbia County, Ga. (collected by E. W. Berry); Grovetown (collected by T. W. 

Vaughan); 10 miles south of Macon, Twiggs County (collected by E. W. Berry). 

Oollection.-V. S. National Museum. 

Order SAPINDALE S. 

Family DO DON .lEACE.lE. 

Genus DODON.lEA Linne. 

Do noN lEA vrscosornEs sp. nov. 

Plate XXVIII, figures 4-8. 

_ Description.-Leaves somewhat variable in shape, obovate in general outline, ranging 

from 4 to 7.5 centimeters in length by· 1 to ,2 centimeters in greatest width, which is usually 

above the center of the leaf. Sessile or ne~rly so. Apex rounded, in many specimens broadly; 

base extended, more or less narrowly cuneate with straight sides. Texture coriaceous.- :Midrib 

medium, becoming attenuated apically. Secondaries slender, commonly obscure, particularly 

· in impressions of the upper surface of the leaves; 6-to 10 pairs, indifferently opposite, subopposite, 

and alternate, camptodrome; they branch from the midrib at angles which may be as small as 

12° or as large as 70°, the basal ones becoming very ascending in specimens in which the base is 

much produced; the normal-angle of divergence is about 45°. The basal secondaries branch 

near the base of the leaf and take a nearly straight ascending course parallel with the leaf margin 

. and 1 to 2 millimeters from it, connecting almost a third of the length of the leaf from the base 

with a short o.utwardly and downwardly directed branch from the secondary next above. The 

other secondaries are placed at regular "intervals and· are more or less straight halfway to the· 

margin, at which point they curve upward in a wide arch to joint an outwardly directed branch 

from the next sqcceeding secondary; beyond this they form a series of very small arches paraller 

with the· margin and of a caliber which might well be termed tertiary. Tertiaries s,traight; 

lateral, or transverse in direction. Areolation fine, four or five sided. 

This sp_ecies is one of the commonest forms found in the Georgia Eocene, and apparently 

will prove a useful type fossil for this horizon, as it occurs at all the localities where fossil 

plauts have been ·observed in the Claiborne of Georgia .. The collection contains 10 specimens. 
MIDDLE EOCENE FLORA OF GEORGIA. 143 

frmn the locality south of b'Iacon, a large number from Phinizy Gully, and several on the reverse 

of one of the figured specimens of Thrinax from the Fiske property at Grov_etown. Fragments 

of these leaves were also observed at other localities in the vicinity of Grovetown, where they 

were too poorly preserved to warrant being collected. 

About 1.5 fossil species of Dodonrea have been described, and alL are European but one, 

which·is based on a rather doubtful fruit from Florissant, Colo., that is probably an Ulmus.1 

Seven of these· 1.5 species are Oligocene, embracing both lea-yes and ch~~acteristic fruits and 

recorded from Styria, Prussia, France, Tyrol, and Switzerland. Seven are Miocene, including 

both leaves and fruit and coming· from Baden, Croatia, Switzerland,· Prussia, and Bohemia. 

Of these European forms Dodonrea vetusta Heer, 2 from the Aquitanian of Switzerland, and 

Dodonrea prisca Weber, 3 from the Aquitanian of Rhenish Prussia, are quite similar to the Georgia 

species and clearly represent the same type of leaf, although they show marked specific differences. It seems probable that some of the leaves from the American Eocene and the European Gypse (Ligurian) commonly referred to the willow oaks, represent Dodonrea. 'For 

example, Saporta describes two species of Dodonrea fruits from. St. Zacharie, France, but no 

leaves, although the late Eocene and early Oligocene have furnished a number of suggestive 

l~aves of this genus which have been usually referred to Quercus. 

In the modern flora there are about 50 species of Dodonrea, more than 40 of these being 

Austtalian. A single species is found in the I-Iawaiian Islands and another in Madagascar. 

The Claiborne form closely resen:{bles the mdoern Dodonrea viscosa "Linne, which is found in 

peninsular Florida and on the keys, as well as in the oriental and occidental tropics, and which 

ranges as far north as Bermuda (latitude 32°), where it frequents the inner edges of the sand 

·dunes. It is a small sapindaceous tree of the "beach j'ungle" and is one of the prominent forms 

in the tropical plant association named by Schimper the Barringtonia formation. It is protected from the strong isolation by varnished leaves with a thick epidermis and reduced stomata. 

Like many other strand plants, it is distributed largely through the agency of ocean currents. 

As is true of numerous other late Cretaceous and Tertiary dicotyledonous genera, the 

former world-wide range of Dodonrea has given place to modern massing of its species in a single 

region in the southern hemisphere with only a few ~utlying and scattered species in other 

regions, to witness its former cosmopolitanism. 

Occurrence.-:-Congaree clay member of :McBean formation (of Claiborne group). Phinizy 

Gully, Columbia County 0(collected by E. "'\V. Berry); Grovetown, Columbia County (collected 

by S. W. :McCallie and T. W. Vaughan); 10 miles south of Macon on :Macon-Marion public road, 

Twiggs County (collected by S. W. J\1cCallie and E. W. Berry). 

Oollection.-U. S. National Museu1n. 

Family SAPINDACElE. 

Genus SAPINDUS Linne. 

SAPINDUS GEORGIANA sp. nov. 

Plate XXVII, .figures 11 and 12. 

Description.-Leaflets small, lanceolate, falcate, 4 to 5.5 eentimeters in length' by 0.-5 to 0.9 

eentimeters in greatest width, which is in the eentral part of the leaf. Apex and base both 

acuminate. Margin entire. Midrib stout below, beeoming thin abo~e. Secondaries, six to 

eight alternate pairs, branching from the midrib at an acute angle and curving upward, camptodrome, very fine and made out with difficulty. 

There fl.re more than 5Q fossil species of Sapindus, ranging from the Cenomanian of America, 

Europe, and Greenland through the various Tertiary horizons to the Pleistocene. Among 

these species are three which approach the Georgia ::;pecies-Sapindus affinis Newberry, Sapindus 

angustifolius Lesquereux, and Sapindus stellaricefolia, L~squereux. Sapindus affinis Newberry,4 

- ' 1 Losquereux, Leo, 'l'he Cretaceous and Tertiary floras, 1883, p. 182, Pl. XXXVI, fig. 5. 

2 Flora 'l'or.tiaria Helvetim, vol. 3, 1859, p. 64, Pl. CXXI, figs. 13, 14. 

a Wobor, C. 0., Palmontographica, vol. 2,1852, p. 85, Pl. V, fig. 8. . 

• Newberry, J. S., The later extinct floras of North America: Mon. U.S. Geol. Survey, vol. 35,1898, p. 116, Pls. XXX, fig. 1, and XL, fig. 2. 
144 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS- OF--SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

though perfectly distinct, in its smaller leaflets somewhat resembles the broader forms from 

Georgia. Sapindus angustifolius Lesquereux,t a Florissant, Colo., species which has been 

identified (prpbably erroneously) in the "Eolignitic" of Kentucky and Louisiana by Lesquereux 

and Hollick, respectively, is a1so very similar to the broader Gedrgia lea.ves. Finally, Sapindus 

stellarirefolius Lesquereux,2 from Florissant, very closely· approaches the Georgia species. It 

is, however, somewhat smaller, although it preserves the same general outlines, and according 

to Cockerell is not of Green River age, as suggested by Lesquereux, but of late Miocene, which 

. serves to emphasize its specific distinctness. 

The modern species of Sapindus number al:>out 10; they inhabit warm temperate and 

tropical Asia and America. At least four species are found within the limits of the United 

States, and it would not be difficult to select leaflets from the common Sapindus marginatus 

Willdenow from the same area as the fossil species which would approach it very closely. The 

fossil is, however, more nearly related in all probability to Sapindus saponaria Linne, a common 

West Indian and South American tree·which reaches the Florida keys and which has become a 

widespread member of the littoral flora through the ·agency of ocean currents. · I-Iemsley 

records an instance of seeds of this species· which were washed ashore on the south coast of 

Bermuda, germinating after their ocean voyage of about 900 miles 0). 

A number pf additional comparisons may be suggested, as, for example, with the leaves, so 

· common in the. Oligocene of Europe, which are referred to the Australian myrtaceous genus 

Callistemon R. Brown and to· Callistemophyllum Ettingshausen. Among existmg species the 

_leaves of Sapindus georgiana may also be compared with those of Gomphia linearis of the South 

Ameriean Ochnacere and Rhus lanceolatea A. Gray, a Texas species of Anacardiacere. 

· Occurrence_.-Congaree clay member· of McBean formation (of Claiborne group). Phinizy 

Gully, Columbia County, Ga. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Ooltection.-U. S. National Museull!:. 

Order THYMELEALES. 

Family LA URACE.lE. 

Genus MALAPOENNA Adanson. 

MALAPOENNA sp. 

Plate XXVII, figure 10. 

' I 

Description.-A single poorly preserved lauraceous fruit was obtained from the locality 

south of Macon. It is too poor for adequate description, and is referred with hesitation to the 

genus Malapoenna. _ 

Occurrence.-Congaree clay member of McBean formation (of Claiborne group), _10 miles 

south of Macon, Twiggs County, Ga. (Collected by E. W. Berry.) 

Oollection.-U. S. National Museum. 

Order MYRTALES. 

Family RmZOPHORACE.lE. 

Genus RmzOPHORA Linne. 

RHIZOPHORA EOCENICA sp. nov. 

Plate XXIX, figures 1 and 2. 

_. 

DescriptiQ'f!-.-Leaves of small size (presumably young) and of medium. size, elliptical in 

outline, rounded or obtusely pointed at the apex, a few somewhat emarginate smaller-sized 

variants from the normal form. The base slightly narrowed and broadly cuneate. Margins 

entire. Length about 7 to 8 centimeters; greatest width about 3.3 centimeters. 'rexture 

coriaceous, especially in the leaf shown in figure 1, Plate XXIX, in which the margi.p.s were 

1 Lesquereux, Leo, The T~rtiary flora, 1878, p. 265, Pl. XLIX, figs. 2-7. 2 Idem, p. 264, Pl. XLIX, fig: 1. 
MIDDLE EOCENE FLORA OF GEORGU. 1.45 

apparently somewhat revolute. Midrib and petiole extremely stout. Secondary venation 

inunersed and not ~een. 

Leaves of this species are not .common in the collections, probably because the colleqtions 

are s1nall and far fTonl representative. · The species is, however, of peculiar· interest in that it 

sheds much light on the environment of the Claiborne flora of Georgia. Because of tlus great 

care has been taken to compare the present fossils with the leaves of all living or extinct forms 

wluch might be expected to occur in the latitude of Georgia at this stage of the Eocene. The 

species is 'obviously new to science, and it shows so many points of contact with the modern 

forn1s of Rhizophora, especially with Rhizophora mangle Linne of the American tropics, that 

its reference to tlus genus seems c-learly warranted. With the exception of a single specimen 

of Rhizophora. described by Massalongo 1 from the later Tertiary (Messinian) of the east coast of 

Italy, and a forn1 referred to this genus by Ettingshausen, this is the only known fossil.representative of this widespread modern genus. The form determined by Ettingshaus(m carne fron1 

the Ligurian-Aqu~tanian. of Austria, and was compared by him with the existing Rhizophora 

parvi.folia Roxburg, of the East Indies. 2 The similarity 'of this forn1 to. various members of 

the :Myrtacere and Leguminosre, however, caused Schenk 3 to expr~ss doubt .of Ettingshausen's 

identification. 

It is possible that in the past leaves of tlus genus ;may not have been recognized when 

collected; the leaves from the "Eolignitic" which Lesquereux 4 identified with Quercus chlorophylla Unger are almost certainly not that species and are very similar to Rluzophora leaves. 

Not having seen the specimens, the writer is not juatified in doing more than to call attention 

to tllis possible relation. · 

There are three existing species of Rhizophora. Rhizophora mangle Linne of the American 

trQpics is found as far north as Mosquito Inlet and Cedar Key in peninsular Florida and at 

the mouth of the :Mississippi; it also extends from the :Mexican coast for some distance along the 

coast of Texas. It occurs throughout the Bahamas and West Indies and very generally 

throughout Cent.ral America and northern South America, h~ving in comparatively recent times 

extended its range northward through the Bahamas to Bermuda. · On the west coast it is found 

northward to Lower California and southward to the Galapagos Islands. Rhizophora mucronata 

La~narck ranges from ~outhern Japan to northern Australia and westward to east Africa; 

Rhizophora conjugata Linne 'is confined to tropical Asia. Doubtless modern systematists will 

differentiate additional specific forms, but judging by the rather uniform h~;tbits of these plants 

such differentiation will be based on minor characters. The mangrove plants possess the ' 

singular ability to flourish in sea water, and their manner of life and development have become 

well adapted both structurally and physiologically to their mode of existence, so that they have 

becon1e widely dissmninated and individually abundant; in fact, they are the most remarkably 

specialized plants for this habitant known, and their specialization was in a measure reached 

in the Eocene. They do much work as makers of land, as !1as often been described, and they 

are especially well developed on low shores around the heads of tropical or subtropical bays and 

estuaries. (See Pl. XVI, p .. 160.) It is believ~d that the Grovetown locality was well toward 

the northern limit of the range of mangrove swamps in Claiborne time and that they were not 

so pi·o1ninent an ecologic feature there as they evidently were farther south. Presumably there 

were some such swamps in the Grovetown estuary and elsewhere along the Claiborne coast from 

~hich the present leaves were derived, and possibly the lignite deposits a few miles southwest 

of Grovetown may represent such a swamp in place. The shores of this estuary were ·for considerable distances sandy, 1nade up of the reworked sands of the Lower Cretaceous, as is shown 

by the fossil plants collected, for plants characteristic of the beach jungle predominate. over 

those characteristic .of mangrove swamps. 

1 Studii sulla flora fossile e geologia stratigraphica del Semigalliese, 1859, p. 407. 

· 2 Die Tertiii.re Flora von Riiringin Tirol, 1853, p, 82, Pl. XXVII, figs. 28 and 29. 

s Zittel's Randbuch, Abth. 2, 1890, p. 632. 

, ~ Proc. Am. Philos. Soc., new ser., vol. 13,-1869, p. 416, Pl. XVII, figs. 5-7. 

80G9°-14-l0 
146 : UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Occurrence.-Congaree clay member of McBea:n fo;rmation (of Claiborne group), Phiruzy 

Gully, Columbia County, Ga. (collected by E. W. Berry); a well 13! miles west of Sandersville, 

Washington County, Ga. (collected' by S. W. McCallie); a locality 10 .miles south of Macon, 

Twiggs County, Ga. (collected by E. W .. Berry). 

Oollection.-:-U. S. National Museum. 

F~mily CO:MBRETACE.Bl} R. Brown (TER:MINALIACEm J'. St. Hilaire) 

Genfts TER:MIN ALIA Linne. 

TERMINALIA PH1EOCARPOIDES sp. nov. 

Plate XXIX, figure 3. 

Description.-Leaves ot medium and large size, broadly obovate in general outline with a 

rounded or pointed_ apex and a cuneate base. Margins entire. Length about ·15 or 16 centimeters, and greatest width, which is above the middle, about 7 or 8 cep.timeters ... Midrib stout. 

Secondaries about 8 pairs, subopposite qr alternate, branching from 'the midrib at angles of 

about 50° and curving ~pward, approximately parallel, camptodrome. Tertiary venation not 

seen. As the remains of this species are merely impressions the texture can not be determined. 

In a more northern· flora this species would doubtless be compared with a Magnolia, and 

possibly some fossil species of Magnolia may be profitably compared with Terminalia; Otherwise the abundance of Terminalia in the European Tertiary, where it furnishes both leaves and 

characteristic fruits, and its absence from America is difficult to understand. 

The present species is very similar _to the modern widespread Terminalia catappa Linne 

if the apical portion, which is unfortunately missing, is broad and rounded like the outside 

dotted line in the figure; and is very similar to the modern Terminalia ph::Eocarpa Eichler of 

northern South: America if the outline corresponds to the- inner dotted line .in the figure. . 

The modern species of Ter~nalia are all trop:lcal and number more than 100 forms, distributed among the various continents in the. following proportions according to Engler and 

Prantl: America, 24; Asia, 27; Madagascar, 16; Africa, 17; Australia, 19. One indigenous 

species, Terminalia buceras, reaches the United States; it is common along the shores of the 

Caribbean Sea, extending northward through th~ West Indies to Elliotts Key, Fla., and growing 

generally on co~al soil~ 

The pre~ent species is the only known American fossil member of this genus. About a 

dozen species are described from Europe, the oldest, not positively identified, coming from 

the Upper Cretaceous of Bohemia. · One species is described from the lower Oligocene of Aix 

(Provence, France) and. the others range in age from the Oligocene. to the Pliocene and are 

represented by both leaves and fruit. They are especially common along the extended late 

Tertiary seacoast of south-central Europe, the Messinian showing four species, the Sarmatian 

three, and 'the Astian two. The ~uropean fossil form nearest the Georgia form, though the 

resemblance is not especially close, is Terminalia radobojensis Unger, which has a recorded range 

from the Tongrian to the Astian. 

Terminalia 'catappa is one of the prominent elements in the oriental littoral forest or beach 

jlingle of the Tropics (Barringtonia formation of Schimper), its buoyant fruits having enabled 

it to become widespread within its limits of range through the agency of ocean currents. In 

this connection attention should be called to the two species Magnolia hilgardiana 1 and Magnolia laurifolia 2 described by Lesquereux fro in the "Eolignitic" of the Mississippi embayment. 

Either of these species may ~nd its nearest modern affinity among the various species of Terminalia rather than Magnolia, and it is perhaps significant that Lesquereux compared the second 

of these to the European Tertiary species Terminalia radobojensis Unger. 

Occurrence.-Congaree clay member of McBean formation (of Claiborne group). Fiske 

property, Grovetown, Columbia County. (Collected by S. W. :McCallie.) 

Collection.-U. S. National Museum. 

1 Lesquereux, Leo, Proc. Am. Philos. Soc., new ser., vol. 13,1869, p. 421, Pl. XX, fig. 1. 2 Idem, p. 421, Pl. XX, figs. 2 and 3. 
MUDDLE EOCENE FLORA OF GEORGU. 147 

Genus CONOCARPUS Linne. 

· CoNOCARPUS EOCENICA sp. nov. 

Plate XXIX, figures 4-7. 

Description.-Leaves of medium and small size, lanceolate and usually inequilateral in 

outline, with an obtusely pointed apex and a similarly pointed base, margins entire. Length 

6 to 10 centimeters; greatest width, which is about midway between the apex and the base, 

1.5 to 2.6 centimeters. Midrib stout. Secondaries remote, about six pairs, opposite or subopposite, branching from the midrib at angles of about 50°, extending outward and then sweeping 

upward in a broadly rounded curve, parallel with the margin and approximately parallel with 

their fellows, ultimately camptodrome. Tertiaries fine forming a polygonal areolation. 

This species is represented by several specimens from both localities near Grovetown and is 

obviously related to Conocarpus both in outline and in venation, as well as probably in habitat. 

Conocarpus is a monotypic genus in the existing flora, the single species, Oonocarpus 

erectus Linne, being widespread along low muddy or sandy tropical shores in Centr31 and South 

America and on the west coast of Mrica. (Guinea and Senegainbia). It is found in the Gala- ' 

pagos Islands and extends northward from the West Indies to the Florida Keys and to BerInuda, where it is found on the sand dunes. Its distribution has been effected through the 

agency of ocean currents. rhe fossil form appears to be closest to the modern vaJiety arboreus 

Grise bach of Central America. The modern species is not only a typical member of the mangrove 

association of Mrica and A1nerica, but much more widespread than the mangroves, for it is 

equally a plant of strand and dunes. The texture and anatomy of its leaves differ somewhat 

according to their degree of exposure to the rays of the sun. . 

No other fossil species of Co no carpus are known, but this species may be compared with 

certain European Tertiary forms referred to the allied genus Eugenia, of which several have 

been described, more especially from the Oligocene. Both Eugenia aizoon Unger and Eugenia 

haeringiana Unger are somewhat similar to the Georgia leaf. 

Occurrence.---Congaree clay member of McBean formation (of Claiborne group). Phinizy 

Gully, Columbia County, Ga. (collected by E. W. Berry); Fiske property, Columbia County, 

Ga. (collected by S. W. McCallie); 10 miles south of Macon, Twiggs County, Ga. (collected by 

E. W. Berry). ~ 

Oollection.-U. S. National Museum. 

EOCENE FLORAS OF EUROPE AND NORTH "AMERICA. 

A large nun1ber of speCies of plants have been described from various Eocene localities in 

Europe, but the data for an accurate comparison of these floras with that of the Claiborne are 

most incomplete. This lack of data is due in a measure to the fact that the bulk of the European 

Eocene deposits are marine, and the usual difficulties in correlation present themselves when the 

attempt is made to compare isolated fluviatile and lacustrine phtnt-bearing bed~ with their 

n1arine equivalents where the standards and nomenclature are largely those of invertebrate 

paleontology. This is particularly true of the Eocene, because the most complete paleobotanic 

section of tlus age, which is checked by paleozoology, has remained to a large extent undescribed. 

The splendid series of plant-bearing horizons of the south of England J:ave, with the exception 

of sporadic descriptions of certain local florules by De laHarpe, IIeer, Ettingshausen, and others, 

and the work of J. Starkie Gardner on the ferns and conifers, remained unknown down to the 

present. It seems remarkable that only two Englishmen, Bowerbank and Gardner, have 

devoted any considerable attention to these floras, and the latter failed to complete his work, 

so that in 1llany ways the most interesting part of the British Eocene flora, certainly the most 

useful for purposes of correlation, remains unknown to science except for various antiquated 

and scattered references. 

A brief sketch will be given of the present state of knowledge of European Eocene floras, 

com1nencing with the earliest anq giving special attention to the floras more nearly homotaxial 

with the American Claiborne. 
148 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

The basal Eocene beds, Montian and Thanetian stages (Paleocene of Schimper and Saporta 

and lower Landenian of the last edition of De Lapparent) furnish a fairly representative flora 

described from the plastic clay of Trieu de Leval (Hainaut) Belgium by M:arty/ from the travertines of Sezanne, France, by Saporta,2 and from the marnes heersiennes of Gelinden, Belgium, 

by Saporta and Marion. 3 In addition to these two florules a few scattered algre and fragments 

of land plants are preserved in the marine deposits of these stages. 

The lower Eocene beds, Sparnacian and Ypresian 4 stages, include in earlier deposits the flora 

found in the Oldhaven, Woolwich, and Reading beds of England, largely unstudied, and the small 

flora recently described by Fritel 5 from the· Paris basin. In their later deposits (Cuisian of 

Dollfuss, 1909, in part the Londinian of Mayer-Eymar, 1857) they include the flora of the 

gres de Belleu in France 6 and those of Alum Bay and the London clay in England. The 

London clay fossils are largely lignitized and pyritized fruits and seeds from the Isle of Sheppey 

and leaf impressions from the pipe clay of Alum Bay. These have never been figured or carefully 

studied, but the following old list will give some idea of the Alum Bay flora: 

Alum Bay flora a8 determined by Ettingshausen. 7 

Acacia brittanica Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

sotzkiana Unger. 

Acer.eocenicum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

prre-decipiens Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Adenopeltis alumensis Ettingshaus!')n and Gardner. 

Alyxia europrea Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Amygdalus pereger Unger. 

prre-ceningensis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

tenue-striata Ettivgshausen and Gardner. 

Andromeda protogrea Unger. 

Anemia subcretacea Saporta. 

Anona cyclosperma Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

elongata Ettiugshausen and Gardner. 

Apocynophyllum grande Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

haeringianum Ettingsha:usen. 

prre-amsonia Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

titanire Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Aralia primigenia De laHarpe. 

Aristolochia alumensis Ettingsha11sen and Gardner. 

Aronium eocenicum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Artocarpidium grandifolium Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

integrifolium Unger. 

Arundo goepperti (Muenster). 

Banksia dillenioides Ettingshausen. ' 

ungeri Ettingshausen. 

Bombax menjre Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

sagorianum Ettingshausen. 

tenuinerve Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Bumelia dryadum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

oreadlim Unger. · 

Cresalpi.llia remula Heer. 

haidingeri Ettingshausen. 

Callicoma fornacis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Callistemophy llum diosmoides Ettingshausen. 

Callistemophyllum elegan~ Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

melaleucreforme Ettingshausen. 

obtusum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Callitris curta Bowerbank. 

Carpolithes alumensis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

crassipes Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

elliptico-val vatus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

naprerum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

prreboveyanus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

tricoccinus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Cassia berenices Unger. 

fischeri Heer. 

feronire Ettingshausen. 

hyperborea Unger. 

memnonia Unger. 

phaseolites. 

pr~ligtiitum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

prre-memnonia Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

prre-phaseolites Ettingshausen and Gardner." 

prre-sagorina Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

prre-stenophylla Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

pseudo-glandulosa Ettingshausen. 

sagoriana Ettingshauserl. 

ungeri De la Harpe. 

zephyri Ettingshausen. 

Cecropia eocenica Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Cedrela primigenia Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Celastrophyllum undulatium Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Celastrus elrenus Unger. · 

fengre Et.tingshausen and Gardner. 

myricinus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

prre-europreus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

salidre Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

tafnis Ettingshausen .and Gardner. 

1 Etudes stir les vegetations fossiles du Trieu de Leval (Hainaut): Mem. Musee d'hist. nat. Belgique, vol. 5, 1907. This is an older flora than 

that of Gelinden or Sezanne and is said to show aifmities with tropical American flora. 

2 P.rodrome d'une flore fossile des travertins anciens de Sezanne: Mem. Soc. geol. France, 2d ser., voJ. 8,1868, pp. 289-436, ·Pis. XXII-XXXVI. 

a Saporta, G. de, and Marion, A. F., Essai sur l'etat de la vegetation a l'epoque des marnes heersiennes de Gelinden: Mem. cour. et des Sav. 

etrang. Acad. roy. Belgique, vol 37, 1873, No.6, pp. 1-94, Pls. I-XII. Revision de la flore heersienne de Gelinden, etc.: Idem, vol. 41, 1878, 

No.3, pp. 1-112, Pis. I-XIV. , 

• These and other Eocene floras of the Paris basin are at present being, admirably revised by Prof. P. H. Fritel, of the Museum of Natural 

History, Paris. 

& Fritel, P. H., Etude sur I~ vegetaux fossiles de l;etage Spamacien <.lu bassin de Paris: Mem. Soc. geol. France, vol. 16, 1910, K.:>. 40. 

s Watelet, A., Description des plantes f()ssiles du bassin de Paris, 1866. 

1 Proc. Roy. Soc. London, vol. 30, 1880, pp. 228-236. ' 
MIDDLE EOCEN.E FLORA OF GEORGIA. 149 

Celtis woodwardi Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Ceratopetalum crassipes Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

haeriugianum Ettiugshausen. 

manni Ettiugshausen and Gardner. 

Chrysodium la~zeanum (Visiani). 

Cinchonidium lanceolatum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

prre-bilinicum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

prre-latifolium Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Cin.namomum eocenicum Ettingshausen. 

polymorphum AI. Braun. 

rossmressleri Heer. 

Cissus aurorre Ettin.gshausen and Gardner. 

celastrifolia Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Clerodendron europreum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Comptonia acutiloba (Sternberg). 

Copaifera harpei Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

· prisca Ettiugshausen and Gardner. 

veledre Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Coruus atlantica Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Cupania c9rrugata Bowerbank. 

depressa Bowerbank. 

grandis Bowerbank. 

lobata Bowerbank. 

subangulata Bowerbauk. 

tumida Bowerbank. 

Cup1·essinites globosus Bowerbank. 

Cyperites eocenicus Ettiugshausen and Gardner. 

Dalbergia cyclophylla Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

eocenica Unger. 

haeringiana Ettiugshausen. 

longifolia Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

primreva Unger. 

ungeri Ettingshausen. 

Daphne aquiranica Ettingshausen. 

baplmogene anglica Heer. 

veronensis Massalongo. , 

Diospyt·os eocenica Ettingshau~en and Gardner. 

Dodonea prre-salicites Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

subglobosa Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Elreodendron dubitlm Ettingshausen. 

Eucalyptus haeringiana Ettingshausen. 

oceanica Unger. · 

Eugenis apollin.is Unger. 

Fagus intermedia Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Ficus arenacea IJesquereux. 

bowerbankii De la Harpe. 

bumelirefolia Ettingshausen. 

cisre Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

deleta Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

falconeri Heer. 

granadilla Massalongo. 

hydrarchos Unger. 

inguionis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

jynx Unger. 

lanceolata Heer. 

morrisii De laHarpe. 

nerthi Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

planicostata Lesquereux. 

prre-arcinervis Ettiugshausen and Gardner. 

prre-lanceolata Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

reussii Ettiugshausen. 

rhamnoides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

wudgre Ettingshausen ~nd Gardner. 

Flabellaris sp. 

Fraxinus jovis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

prre-savinensis Ettiugshausen and Gardner. · 

Glycyrrhiza deperdita Unger. 

Glyptostrobus europreus Brongniart. 

Grevillea hermionir, Ettiugshausen and Gardner. 

Grewiopsis integerrima Ettingshausep. and Gardner. 

Hightea elliptica Bowerbank. 

turbinata Bowerbank. 

Hiraea intermedia Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Ilex atlantica Ettingshausen and Gardner.· 

Juglandites cernuus Saporta. ' 

Juglans prre-parschlugiana Ettingshausen and· Gardner. 

sharpei De laHarpe. 

Lauris agathophyllum Unger. 

haidiugeri Ettiugshausen. 

jovis De la Harpe. 

lalages Unger. 

ocoteides Lesquereux. 

primigenia ·Unger. 

salteri De laHarpe. ·~;; 

socialis Lesquereux. 

swoszowiciana Unger. 

vetusta Saporta. 

Leguminosites callisemrefolium Ettiugshausen and Gardner. 

pachyphyllus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Lomatia brittanica Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Magnolia stygia Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Malpighiastrum banistQrinum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

grandifolium Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

prre-venosum Ettingshausen and Gardner· 

Marattia hookeri Ettin$shausen and Gardner. 

Mimosites prre-cassireformis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Myrica acuminata Unger. 

haeringiana Unger. 

lignituni. Unger. 

sagoriana Ettingshausen. 

salicina Unger. 

Myrsine erdre Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Myrtus eocenica Ettingshausen and Gradner. 

Nelumbium buchii Ettingshausen. 

Notelrea primigenia Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Nymphrea doris Heer. 

Nyssa alumensis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

europrea Unger. 

prre-striolata Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Olea brittanica Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Palreolobium haeringianum Unger. · 

heterophyllum Unger. 

prre-rado bojense Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

sotzkianum Unger. 

Persoonia eocenica Ettingshausen. 

Phaseolites eriosemrefolius Unger. 

Phyllites ap9cynoides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

' arbutoides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

cecropioides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

crassipies Ettingshausen and Gardner.' 

densinervis'Ettingshausen and Gardner. · 

elreocarpoides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

I · euphorbioides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

ficoides Ettingshausen and Gardner. · 

franguloides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 
~ll:50 UPPER· CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS .OF :SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

,Phyllites freoo ~ttingshausen and Gardner. 

gargantuoo Ettingshauseri and Gardner. 

hederaceus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

hilticis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

hymel!oooides Et.tingshausen and Gardner. 

lantanoides Ettingshausen and Gardner: 

myrtaceus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

nimrodis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

nerthi Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

sa.pindoides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

simaruboides Ettingshausen and Gardner·. 

syringooforniis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

veledoo Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Physolobium antiquum Unger. 

·orbiculare Unger. 

Pisonia eocenica Ettingshausen. 

PistachL brittanica Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Pittosporum eocenicum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Planera ungeri Ettingshausen. 

Podocarpus eocenica Unger. 

Podogonium obtussissimum Ettingshasen and Gardner. 

sheppyense Ettingsha.usen and Gardner. 

Populus eocenica Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Pora.na. ceningenesis Al. Braun. 

Proteoides crassipes Ettingshausen and Gardn~r. 

Prunus druidum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

pygmooorum Ettingsha.usen and Gardner. 

Pterospermites dentatus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Pterospermum eocenicum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

_Quercus bournensis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

drymeja Unger. 

lonchitis Unger. 

lyellii Heer. 

pr::e-lonchitis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

proo-mediterranea Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

viburnifolia Lesquereux. 

Rhamnus acutangula Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

proo-pomaderris Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

proo-rectinervis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Rhus atlantidis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

·Rhus cyclophylla Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

prisca Ettingshausen. 

Rhytisma eucalypti Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

priscum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Sabal major Unger. 

Salix proo-integra Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

rhedoo Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

tenuifolia Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Salmalia borealis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Santalum acheronticum Ettingshausen. 

microphyllum Ettingshausen. 

osyrinum Ettingshausen. 

salicinum Ettingshausen. 

Sapindus angustifolius Lesquereux. 

crassinervis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

eocenicus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

falcifolius Al. Braun. 

Sapotacites emarginatus Heer. 

eocenicus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

sideroxyloides Ettingshausen. -

Saurauja robusta Saporta. 

Sclerotium antiquutn Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Sequoia couttsioo Heer. 

langsdor:fii Brongniart. 

Smilax lancifolia Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Sophora europooa Unger. 

Sterculia labrusca Unger. 

sigfridi Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Symplocos brittanica Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Ternstra>mia bilinica Ettingshausen. 

eocenica Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Ulmus antiqu.i.ssima Saporta. 

plurinervia Unger. 

Vaccinium acheronticum Unger. 

· eocenicum Ettingshausen and Gar9-ner. 

Vitis proo-teutonica Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Zizyphus integrifolius Heer. 

pachyneuris Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

ungeri Heer. 

vetustus Heer. 

Isle of Sheppey flora as determined by Ettingshausen. 1 

Acer sp. 

Agave eocenica Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

. Amomum sheppyensis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

stenocarpum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Amygdalus eocenica Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

sporadum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Apeiobopsis variabilis (Bowerbank). ' 

A pocynophy Hum sheppyensis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Areca prisca Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

recentior Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Aronium eocenicum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Asterocaryum europooum Ettingshausen and·Gardner. 

Bactris prisca Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Bauhinia primigenia Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Callitris comptoni (Bowerbank). 

curta (Bowerbank). 

Carpolithes affinis Ettmgshausen and Gardner. 

amygdaloides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

atlantidis Ettingshausen and Gardner .. 

Carpolithes biococculatus Ettingshausen and Gardner .. 

bispermus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

breviangulatus Ettingshausen and Gardner . 

brevicristatus Ettingshau13en and Gardner. 

bruceoides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

caryopsiformis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

caryotoides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

circumscriptus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

colletioides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

costatus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

. cruciferinus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

disciformis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

folliculiformis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

franguloides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

hydrophylloides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

lineatus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

metrosideroides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

morrisii Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

musooformus Etingshausen and Gardner. 

l Proc. Roy. Soc. London, vol. 29, 1879, pp. 388-396. 

\· 
-\ 

\ 

MIDDLE EOCENE FLORA OF GEORGU. .151 

Carpolithes naprearum Ettingshausen and Gardner .. 

nimrodis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

nyssreformis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

populoides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

ph,uiocculatus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

punctatostriatus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

radiotopunctatus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

reticulatorugosus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

subalatus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

f~Ulcatus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

tenuepunctatus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

verrucosus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

websterioides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

zizyphoides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

·zoroastri Ettingshausen and Gardner. ·: 

Caulinites sheppyensis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Chamrerops borealis Ettingshausen and Gardner; 

Cinchonidium priscum Ettingshausen arid Gardner. 

Corchorites quadricostatus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

quinquecostatus Ettingshausen and Gard.ner. 

Corylus primigenia Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Coton~aster sheppyensis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Cucumites sheppyensis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Cupania corrugata (Bowerbank). 

depressa (Bow~rbank). 

grandis (Bowerbank). 

infl.ata (Bowerbank). 

lobata (Bowerbank). · 

pygmrea (Bowerbank). 

subangulata (Bowerbank). 

tumida (Bowerbank). 

Cupt'essinites elongatus Bower.bank. 

globosus Bowerbank. 

recurvatis Bowerbank. 

subfusiform:i,s Bowerbank. 

Cyperites eocenicus Ettingshausen and Gard:Q.er. 

Diospyros eocenica Ettingshausen and Gardn.er. 

pleadu'm Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Elreis eocenica Ettingshauseri and Gardner. 

Eucalyptus oceanica Unger. 

Eugenia eocenica Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Euphorbiophy llum eocenicum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Faboidea acuta Bowerbank. · 

angustissima Bowerbank. 

bifalcis Bowerbank. 

complanata Bowerbank. 

crassa Bowerbank. 

crassicutis Bowerbank. 

doliformis Bowerbank. 

larga Bowerbank. 

longiuscula Bowerbank. 

marginata Bowerbank. · · 

oblonga Bowerbank. 

ovata Bowerbank. 

pinguis Bowerbank. 

plana Bowerbank. 

plan1dorsa Bowerbank. 

planimeta Bowerbank. 

quadrnpes Bowerbank. · 

robusta Bowerbank. 

rostrata Bowe.rbank. 

semicurvilinearis Bowerbank. · 

subdisca Bowerbank. 

Faboidea subrobusta Bowerbank. 

subtenuis Bowerbank.· 

symmetrica Bowerbank. 

tenuis Bowerbank. 

ventricosa Bowerbank. 

Hightea elegans Bowerbank. 

elliptica Bowerbank. 

infl.ata Bowerbank. 

minima Bowerbank. 

orbicularis Bowerbank. 

· oviformis Bowerbank. 

turbinata Bowerbank. 

turgida Bowerbank. 

Hybothya crassa (Bowerbank). 

Illicium apollinis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Iriartea punctata Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

striata Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Juglans eocenica Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Lauruslalages Unger. 

Lawsonia europrea Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

· Leguminosites requilateralis Bow·erbank. 

cordatus Bower bank. 

crassus Bowerbank. 

curtus Bowerbank. 

dimidiatus Bowerbank. 

elegans Bowerbank. 

enormis Bowerbank. 

gracilis Bowerbank. 

inconstans Bower.bank. 

lentiformis Bowerbank. 

lobatus Bowerbank. 

longissimus Bowerban;k. 

planus Bowerbank. 

reniformis Bowerbank. 

rotundatus Bowerbank. 

subquadrangularis Bowerbank. 

subovatus Bowerbank. 

trapeziformis Bowerbank. 

Liquidambar eocenicum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

. Livistona eocenica Ettingshauseri.and Gardner. 

Magnolia eocenica Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Menispermatacites abutoides Ettingshausen. 

Metrosideros microcarpa Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Mimosites brownianus Bowerbank. 

Musa eocenica Ettingshausen and ·Gardner. 

Nelumbium buchii Ettingshausen. 

microcarpum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Nipa burtini (Brongniart). 

elliptica (Bowerbank). 

lanceolata ( Bowe:rbank). 

parkinsonis (Brongniart). 

semiteres (Bowerbank). 

Nyssa eocenica E'ttingshausen and Gardner~ 

CEnocarpus sheppyensis Ettingshausen and Gardn.er. 

Petrophiloides conoideus Bowerbank. 

imbricatus Bowerbank. 

oviformis Bowerbank. 

Pinus sheppyensis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Podog~nium sheppyenses Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Proteoides bisulcatus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Prunus druidum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

prise a Ettingshausen and Gardner. · ·· 

Quercus drymeja Vnger. 
152. UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

Quercus, eocenica Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

lonchitis Unger. 

Sabal dianm Ettin'gshausen and Gardner. 

dryadum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

major Unger. 

oreadum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Salisburia eocenica Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Sapindus eocenicus Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Sapotacites chr:ysophylloides Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

· · mimusops Ettingshausen. 

Sequoia bowerbankii Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Smilax pristina Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Solanites elegans Ettingsha:usen and Gardner. 

· Solenostrobus corrugatus (Bowerbank)., 

semiplotus (Bowerbank). · 

subangulatus (Bowerbank). 

sulcatus (Bowerbank). 

Sphreria flabellarire Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Strychnos urani Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Symplocos radobojana Unger. 

The.obroma nimrodis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

zoroastri Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Thlaspidium ova tum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Trlcarpellites aciculatus Bowerbank. 

communis Bowerbank. 

crassus Bowerbank. 

curtus Bowerbank. 

gracilis Bowerban·k. 

patens Bowerbank. 

rugosus Bowerbank. 

Thrinax bowerbankii Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

var. elliptica. 

var. globosa. 

Victoria najadum Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

sheppyensis ~ttingshausen and Gardner. 

Wetherellia variabilis Bowerbank. 

Xulinospi-ionites latus Bowerbank. 

zingiberiformis Bowerbank. 

This list, though it leaves much to be desired, shows that the flora of this horizon indicates 

a considerably warmer cliillate than the floras which preceded it, though it is doubtful tliat it 

was as tropical in character as Gardner represented it to be. 

The middle Eocene, with which the Claiborne is more directly comparable, is divided by 

De Lapparent into the Lutetian and Bartonian stages. The Lutetian, the lower part of the 

Parisian of D'Orbigny, is marked by an advance of the sea, both in Europe and America. In 

France the sea advanced southward-beyond the old Suessonian shore line around Paris, to the 

west, an9. north into Belgium. A similar arm of the sea extended across the present site of the 

Pyrenees. Practically all Italy and a large part of Austria-Hungary were submerged and a 

great Mediterranean or· Nummulitic sea extended.from the Atlantic eastward to the Indian 

Ocean, .over southeastern Europe, northern Africa, and. southwestern Asia, and with possibly 

a narrow,northern outlet to the Arctic Ocean across the Russian Empire. The calcaire grossier 

beds of the Paris basin are typically marine below, becoming lacustrine or fluviatile above 

(calcaire grossier superieur). Bureau 1 has described a· few plants from these beds, the number 

mcluding species of Nitophyllum, Pandanus, Flabellaria, Sabal, PalmtJ,cites, Yucca, and N uphar. 

In the upper beds at Trocadero, near Paris (argile verte lignitifere), an estuary flora, largely 

undescribed, occurs. Species identified from this locality include Dryandra, Euphorbiophyllum 

vetus, Nerium parisiensis, Ottelia. parisiensis (which is comparable with the Potamogeton 

described in this report), Pandanus lutetianus, and Zizyphus pseudoungeri. The characteristic 

large floating· seeds of Nipadites burtini, also found ~t this place, suggest an environment like 

th'at of Grovetown. The Monte Bolca plant beds of Italy, with their numerous and large palms,. 

are in general of character similar to these other localitie~. Th~ plant beds of the Bagshot 

sands and Bournemouth clays of southern England, ,an<i possib1y those of Antrim and Mull 

described by J. Starkie Gardner, also belong at about the same level. The south coast flora, 

of which the angiosperms have never been described or figured, includes·th.e following forms: 

FILICALES:. 

Acrostichum lanzreanum (Visani). 

Adiantum apalophyllum Saporta. 

"Anemia subcretacea · (Saporta) Ettingshausen and 

Gardner.' 

Asplenites prre=-allosuroides Ettingshausen and 

Gardner. 

Gleichenia hantonensis (Wanklyn) Ettingshausen 

and Gardner. · 

Glossochlamys transmutans ,Ettingshausen and 

Gardner. 

FILICALEs-Continued. 

Goniopteris stiriaca (Unger) Ettingshausen and 

Gardner. 

Hewardia regia. Ettings4ausen and Gardner. 

Lygodum kaulfussi Heer. · 

Meniphyllum elegans Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

· Osmunda lignitum (Giebel) Heer. 

Phegopteris bunburii (Heer) Ettingshausen and 

Gardner. 

Phegopte:r;'is prre-cuspidata Ettingshausen and 

Gardner. 

1 Etudes sur la tlore fossile dri calcaire grossier parisien, Mem. Soc. Philom., 1888, pp. 235-264, Pis. XXII and XXIII. 

\ 
MITDDLE EOCENE FLORA OF GEORGIA. 153 

FILICALES-Continue<t. CoNIFERALEs-Continued. 

Phymatodes affine Ettingshausen and Gardner. Podocarpus? incerta Gardner. 

Phymatodes polypodioides Ettingshau~Sen and 

Gardner. 

Sequoia couttsire Heer (considered an Arthrotaxopsis by Gardner). 

Pter.is bournensis Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

Pteris eocenica Ettingsha.usen and Gardner. , 

vYoodw~u-dia? \renosa Ettingshausen and Gardner. 

CONU'EltAL1~S: 

Araucaria greppert.i Sternberg. 

Cupressus taxiiormis Unger. 

Glyptostrobus (Gardner). 

Glyptostrobus eocenum (Gard'ner). 

Pinus bowerbaukii Carruthers. 

Pinus dixoni Bowerbank. 

Podocarpus eocenica Unger. 

Sequoia tournalii (Brongnart) Saporta. 

MoNOCOTY.LEDON£: 

Numerous specimens of both fan and feather palms 

(Iriartrea, Phrenix, Calamus, and Nipa). 

DICOTYLEDON£: 

Castanea-like leaf( =Godoya? according to Gardner). 

Ficus. 

Myrica. 

Cinnamomum. 

Dioscorea. 

The flora of the pottery clays and lignites of Bovey Tracey in Devonshire was fully described 

by I-Ieer 1 in 1863, who referred it to the Aquitanian. This determination was questioned by 

J. Starlde Gardner, 2 who considered the Bovey,Tracey flora to be of the same age as that from 

Bournemouth, or Lutetian. Notwithstanding the· inadequacy of the evidence in support of 

Gardner's opinion, it was generally accepted, especially· in Great Britain. Recently Clement 

and Eleanor M. Reid 3 have reexamined both the geology and the flora of Bovey Tracey and 

have corroborated I-Ieer's conclusion that these thick deposits (160 meters) are a unit of upper 

Oligocene age. They are considered honiotaxial 'Yith the Wetterau lignites of Germany (Aquitanian or lower Miocene of the :fifth edition of De Lapparent). 

The Bartonian o~ upper Parisian takes its name from the Barton clays of England (100 

meters thick), with an undescribed flora, and there are scattered florules of this age from various 

localities in France and Italy. Such a florule from Brives in Velay has been partially describ~d 

by Saporta.4 It includes the following genera: Acacia~' Andromeda,. Comptonia, Dryandra, 

Laurus, Leguminosites, Magnolia, Myrica, Myrsine, Phreni~, Populus, Quercus, Sabalit~s, 

Sapotacites, Sapindus, Sophora~' and Zanthoxylon t 

From Main, Anjou, and Vendee, in western France, Crie .in various contributions 5 has 

described a flora of this age in more than 50 _species, referred to the follo~g genera: Anacardites, 

Anemia, Andromeda, Apeiobopsis, Apocynophyllum, Bambusa, Bumelia, Celastrus, Diospyros, 

Echitonium, Ficus, Flabellaria, Laurus; Lygodium, Morinda, Myrica, 1\iyrsine, N erium, Palmacites, Podocarpus, Quercus, Sabalites, and others. 

The upper Eocene-Ludian, Priabonian, and Ligurian (if the last is made to include the 

"gypse," which bymanystudentsis placed in the lowerOligocene)~has aric,h flora, that described 

. by Saporta 6 from Ai~ in Provence, France, being the most complete and remarkable. It is 

much later i1l. character than the Claiborne flora and need not be considered in detail. The 

floras from the lignit·es of Haring 7 in the Tyrol and from Monte Promina 8 and other localities 

in Dalmatia 0 belong at about this level or slightly higher. 

In North America, on . the border between the Cretaceous and the Eocene in the Rocky 

Mountain province, a large number of local floras appear. These floras are.found in the Arapahoe 

and Denver formations of Colorado, the Livingston formation and the Lance formation ("Hell 

Creek beds") of Montana, the "Ceratops beds" (Lance formation) of Wyoming, and in various 

1 Heer, Oswald, On the fossil flora of Dovey 'fracey: Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, vol. 152B, 1862, pp. 103g.=1086, Pis. LV-LXXI. 

2 On the correlation of tho Boumomouth marine series with the Bracklesham beds, the upper and middle Bagshot beds of the London basin , 

and the Bovey 'fracoy bods: Geol. Mag., 1879, pp. 148-154. 

a The lignite of Bovey ~rracey: Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, vol. 20113,1910, pp. 161-178, Pis. XV-XVI. 

• Essai descriptif sur les plan tes ~ossil!38 des arkoses de Brives pres le Puy-en-Velay, 1878. 

~ Annales sci. g6ol., vot. 9, 1877, pp. 1-72, Pis. VIII-XXII; Bull. Soc. Linn. Normandie (III), vol. 1, 1877, pp. 121-123;• vol. 2, 1878, pp. 46-50! 

Coinpt. rend., vol. 92, 1881, p. 759; vol. 100, 1885, p. 870; vol. 103, 1RSG, pp. 487, 699,894, 1143. 

6 Etudes sur Ia v6g6tation du sud-est de Ia France il.l'6poque tertiaire: Ann. sci. nat., botanique, ser. 5, vol. 9, 1868, suppl. 1, R6vision dela 

flore fossile des gypses d' Aix; ser. 7, vol. 7, 1888, Dernieres adjonctions il.la flore fossile d' Aix-en-Provence. 

7 Ettingshauson, Constantin, Abhandl. K.-k. geol. Reichsanstalt Wien, vol. 2, Abth. 3, 1853, pp. 1-118, Pis. I-XXXI. 

B Ettingshaqsen, Constantin, Denkschr. K. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Math.-nat. Kl., vol. 8,1854, pp. 17-44, Pis. I-XIV; Sitzungsber. K. Akad. Wiss. 

Wien, Math.-nat. Kl., vol. 12, 1854, pp. 180-182. ' ' 

u Kerner, Fritz v., Tertiiirpfianzen vom Ostrande des Sinjsko Polje in Dalmatien: Verhandl. K.-k. geol. Reichsanstalt, 1902, pp. 342-344. 
154 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

other areas. The deposits in which they occur consist of lacustrine, fluviatile, and terrestrial 

deposits derived from the rising land area of the Rocky Mountain province. Some are embraced 

in what Cross ~has termed the Shoshone group,1 and the others are referred by Knowlton 2 to 

what he calls the lower member of the Fort Union formation. They may profitably be compared with the Paleocene of Europe. All were apparently laid ,dpwn subsequent to the epeirogenic uplift which marks the close .of the conformable Cretaceous deposits in this general region, 

or, in other words, are post-Laramie. Their floras are, according to F. H. Knowlton, markedly 

distinct from that of the true Laramie and are, on the other hand, essentiallyidentical in character 

with the flora of the true Fort Union. These floral relations correspond to the conformable 

sequence by which the deposits pass into those of the typical Fort Union in some of the areas. 

Most known American Eocene floras, however, come from the basal Eocene or Fort Union 

formation, between 500 and 600 species having been collected from the beds of this age (Thanetian ~). · This flora is apparently of northern origin and is very different in character from the 

Georgia Eocene flora. It is characterized by species of Aralia, Celastrus, Cocculus, Corylus, 

Elreodendron, Ficus, Ginkgo, Glyptostrobu!3, Grewiopsis, Hicoria, Juglans, Onoclea, Populus, 

Platanus, Pterospermites, Sapindus, Sequoia, Taxodium, Viburnum, and other genera, and 

presents everywhere an unmistakable botanical facies. Its marked contrast with the Claiborne 

flora of Georgia is to. be explained in part by the fact that the one is a· seacoast flora of tropical 

affinities, whereas the other is an inland flora, in the main of temperate affinities, although it· 

contains palms, figs, camphor trees, and other warm-temperate types, indicating a climate 

moderately warm and humid, marked by ,mild winters but far from tropical. The Fort Union 

flora is, of course, a much older Eocene flora than that of the Claiborne of Georgia, which is 

more nearly the age of that of the Green River formation of Wyoming. Present knowledge of 

the flora of the Green River formation, with. which the flora of the Florissant lake beds of 

Colorado was confused by Lesquereux, is due to the labors of Lesquereux 3 and Newberry. 4 

As described by these authors, excluding that of the much younger Florissant lake beds, the 

Green River flora embraces the following number of species in the genera enumerated: 

. Acrostichum, 1. 

Alnus, 1. 

Ampelopsis, 1. 

Aralia, 1. 

Arundo, 2. 

Brasenia?, 1. 

Cheilanthes, 1. 

Cissus, 1. 

Cyperus, 1. 

Equisetum, 1. 

Eucalyptus?, 1. 

Ficus, 4 .. 

Ilex, 2. 

Juglans, 3. 

tegumiriosites, 1. 

Lygodium, 1. 

Manicaria, 1. 

Musophyllum, 1. 

Myrica, 1. 

Phragmites, 1. 

Planera, 2. 

Quercus, 2. 

Rhus, 1. 

Sabal, 1. 

Salix, 2. 

Sapindus, 1. 

Sphooria, 1. 

Zizyp~us, 2. 

This flora indicates a considerably warmer climate than that of the Fort Union, for it 

includes such types as Acrostichum,· Manicaria, and Musophyllum. It furnishes points of 

contact with the Georgia Eocene flora in the species of Acrostichum, which is very close to the 

Georgia species, in an identical species of Arundo, and in the common generic representation 

of Ficus and Sapindus. It differs in the presence of genera like Ilex, Jugla'ns, Myrica, Planera, 

Quercus, Rhus, Salix, and Zizyphus, which are for the most part temperate types. 

The inland flora of the Georgia area contemporaneous with the Claiborne strand flora, if 

known, would undoubtedly furnish additional forms similar to those of the Green River formation, which show a commingling of warm temperate and tropical types such as are found in 

modern times in the subtropical and temperate rain forests with a mean annual temperature 

of about 14° C., uniform humidity, and a rainfall exceeding 200 centimeters per annum. 

The Green River formation, on the evidence of its vertebrate remains, is correlated by 

Osborn 5 with the upper Ypresian of France, a correlation not very di:fferent from that indicated 

by the acc<;>mpanying plant remains, which suggest a comparison with the more recent Lutetian 

1 Cross, Whitman, Proc. Washington Acad. Sci., vol. 11, 1909, pp. 27~5. 

t Knowlton, F. H., idem, pp. 179-238. 

a Lesquereitx, Liw, Cretaceous and Tertiary floras, 1883. 

4 Newberry, J. S., The later extinct floras of North America: Mon. U.S. Ge~l. Survey, vol. 35, 1898. 

5 Osborn, H. F., Age_ of mammals, 1910, p. 42. · 
MIDDLE EOCENE FLORA OF GEORGIA. 155 

stage of the Paris basin. The Green River is the only described middle Eocene flora known 

on this. continent. Other Eocene ·floras deserving of mention in this connection are those of 

the Clarno formation in the John Day basin, Oreg., and the so-called "Eolignitic" flora (Wilcox 

and :Midway groups) of the Mississippi embayment. The lpwer Clarno flora (Cherry Creek, 

Oreg.), is lower Eocene in age and includes the number of species indicated of the following 

genera: 1 

Aralia, 2. 

Asplenium, 1. 

Cinnamomum, 1. 

Cornus, 1. 

Diospyros, 1. 

Eq~isetum, 1. 

Ficus, 1. 

Hicor-ia, 1. 

Juglans, 2. 

Lastrea, 1. 

Lyg~dium, 1. 

Magnolia, 2. 

Pteris, 1. 

Quercus, 2. 

Rhamnus, 1. 

Salix, 1. 

It.has been compared by ICnowlton with the upper Fort Union flora. The upper Clarno 

flora (Bridge Creek, etc., Oreg.) is of upper Eocene age and has been compared by Knowlton 

with the Green River flora. It includes the number of species indicated of the following genera: 2 

Acer, 2. 

Alnus, 5. 

Ailanthus, 1. 

Betula, 4. 

Berberis, 1. 

Carpinus, 1. 

Cassia, 1. 

Corylus, 1. 

Cratregus, 1. 

Cinnamomum, 1. 

Ficus, 1. 

Fraxinus, 2. 

Grewia, 2. 

Hicoria, 1.· 

Juglans, 4. 

Liquidambar, 1. 

Myrica, 1. 

Platanus, 2. 

Quercus, 7. 

Rhamnus, 1. 

Sapindus, 1. 

Sequoia, 2. 

Ulmus, 2. 

Neither of these John Day Eocene floras offers any points of resemblance to that of Georgia. 

The "Eolignitic" flora of the Mississippi embayment for the most part has yet to be 

described. Many years ago Lesquereux 3 described various collections made in this area by 

Professor I-Iilgard, and I-Iollick 4 has described a small collection from Louisiana. There is a 

very large field for future work in this area, as Tertiary plants in a most excellent state of 

preservation are common at a considerable number of localities in Alabama, Mississippi,· 

Arkansas, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Louisiana. All these described lower Eocene plants 

appear to be older than the Claiborne and merit a few comments. In Lesquereux's report such 

familiar genera as Populus, Salix, Quercus, Juglans, and Magnolia are discussed, .but not all 

the identifications appear .to be well founded. In the writer's judgment the Salisburia is a 

fern of the genus Lygodium, Populus monodon is not a Populus but a Ficus, and it is doubtful 

if Salix worthenii and Salix tabellaris are willows. Quercus moorii and the forms identified as 

Quercus lyellii I-Ieer and Quercus chlorophylla Unger, the writer believes, are hardly oaks, and 

the latter of the three is suggestive of Rhizophora. The Banksia described by Lesquereux is 

not, in the writer's opinion, referable to that genus; and Magnolia hilgardiana and JJ{agnolia 

laurifolia are both suggestive of Terminalia. Doubtless modern methods of collecting and 

study would result in a very different intrepretation of this flora and would furnish much data 

regarding physical conditions. . 

The writer spent parts of. the field seasons of 1910-1913 in collecting in the embayment 

area. Very extensive collections were made, especially from the Wjlcox group, and these 

collections are being elaborated at the present time. They fully confirm the above ~tatements. 

These floras are subtropical in character and show many features similar to those of the early 

Tertiary floras of 'the south of England as elaborated by Ettingshausen. 

The flora described by I-Iollick from Louisiana has nothing in con;unon with that of Georgia, 

and the fossils might well have been compared with the existing arborescent flora of the American 

tropics rather than with fossil plants listed in previously published works. It is apparently a 

more tropical flora than that described by Lesquereux, for it co~tains, among other interesting 

things, at least two species of breadfruit (Artocarpus). · 

1 Knowlton, F. H., Bull. U.S. Geol. Survey No. 204, 1902. 

2 Knowlton, l~. ll., loc. cit. . . 

a I~osquoreux, Leo, Am. Jour. Sci., 2d ser., vol. 27, 1859, pp. 363-366; Proc. Am. Phllos. Soc., new ser., vol. 13, 1869, pp. 411-430, Pis. XIV-XXII. 

• Hollick, Arthur, in Harris, 0. D., and Veatch, Otto, A preliminary report on the geolog.y of Louisiana, 1900, pp. 276-288, Pls. XXXII-XL VIII. 
156 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

· Knowlton 1 has described a few fossil woods from Arkansas and- has identified a small 

collection of leaf remains of Eocene age from Texas. 2 Penhallow 3 has also described some 

fossil woods from the Texas Eocene . 

. Other American Eocene flor~s .deserving of mention are those of the· Kenai formation of 

the north Pacific coast region. 4 They have nothing in common with the Claiborne flora and 

are said to be of upper Eocene age. A full historica] sketch, with references to the older works 

and lists of the forms collect~d, is given in various papers by Knowlton. 5 Their chief interest 

rests on the fact that they are apparently of the same age as the widespread so-called ''Arctic 

Miocene" of Heer. Another flora of upper Eocene age correlated with the upper Clarno flora 

of the John Day basin in Oregon is th@ meager one described by Knowlton from The Dalles, 

Oreg., 6 and that of the Payette formation collected along Snake River in western Idaho. 7 These 

are all so far removed from the Georgia area and are also so much younger that they are of 

slight interest -in the present connectiol). I 

'· In central Washington several Eocene formations have been described as containing fossil 

plants.8 The oldest of these is the Swauk formation, outcropping just east of the Cascade 

Mountains. The flora, as yet undescribed, is said to be a representative one and is remarkable 

fo:r its large and abundant palms and for the Central American and tropical South American . 

types which it contains. . · 

Separated from the Swauk formation by several hundred or thousand feet of basaltic lava 

flows and interbedded tuffs is the Roslyn formation bearing an Eocene flora of a more temperate 

type, apparently Jacking pahns and other tropical plants. A still younger Eoc6ne formation 

is the Manastash formation, which contains a temperate ·flora as yet undescribed. There is' 

also an extensive· but undescribed Eocene flora in the Puget group of Washington west of the 

Cascade Mountains. 9 

ECOLOGIC CONDITIONS INDICATED BY THE BOTA~IC CHARACTER OF THE 

F,LORA. 

The Georgia Claiborne flora is not extensive, as it embraces only 17 well-defined species, 

and these forms are not representative of the Claiborne flora as a whole but are for the most 

part representative of a single or at most two plant associations-one the strand flora, confined 

to the beach and extending inland where the edaphic factors were favorable, .ahd the other the 

coastal swamp flora, more or les,s confined to muddy or possibly san~y shores'between low and 

high tide. 

These 17 species are distributed in fifteen families and include one fungus, one fern, and 

four Monocotyledonffi-a reed, a Potamogeton, a Pistia, and a palm. There are 11 Dicotyl~­

donffi, representing th0 . families Ulmaceffi, Fagaceffi, Moraceffi, N y~taginaceffi, Mimosaceffi, 

Lauraceffi, Terminaliaceffi, Rhizophoraceffi, Dodonffiaceffi, and Sapindaceffi. No gymnosperms, 

which are usually represented in European Lutetian floras, at least by the genus Podocarpus,. 

have been discovered.10 The following table of described species, all of which are new to science, 

gives in one polumn the described fossil species with which the Georgia plants are· compared 

and in another the geologic occurrence or range of these species. A third column shows the 

existing species with which these Claiborne plants are most closely allied and a fourth column 

the geographic distribution and the character of the habitat of these species. · 

1 Knowlton, F. H., Ann. iept. Geol. Survey Arkansas for 1889, 1890, vol. 2, pp. 249-267, Pis. IX-XI. 

2 Knowlton, F. H., in Vaughan, T. W., Am. Geologist, vol. 16, 1895, pp. 308,309. 

a Penhallow, D. P., Trans. Roy. Soc. Canada, 3d ser., vol. 1, sec. 4, 1908, pp. 93-113. 

4 This flora is being studied by Dr. Hollick. , · 

5 Knowlton, F. H., Harriman Alaska Expedition, vol. 4, 1904, pp. 149-162, Pis. XXII and XXIII; Bull. Geol. Soc. America, vol. 5, 1893, pp~ 

673-590; Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., vol. 17, 1894, pp. 207-240, Pl. IX. . . 

o Knowlton, F. H., Bull. U.S. Geol. Survey No. 204, 1902, p. 112: 

7 Knowlton, F. H., Eighteenth Ann. Rept. U. S. Geol. Survey, pt. 3, 1898, pp. 721.:.744, Pis. XCIX-CII. 

BKnowhon in Smith, G. 0., Mount Stuart foiio (No. 106), Geol. Atlas U.S., U.S. Geol. Survey, 1904, pp. 5 and 7. · 

9Knowlton, F. H., in Willis, Bailey, and Smith, G. 0., Tacoma folio (No. 54), Geol. Atlas U.S., U.S. Geol. Survey, 1899, p. 3. 

10 The writer has recently found the genus Arthrotaxis, a coastal type; In the Eocene deposits of the Mississippi embayment. 
MIDDLE EOCE~E FLORA OF GEORGIA. 157 

Existing and fosSil species comparable to the Claiborne'jlora of Georgia. 

Georgia species. Fossil species for comparison. Range. Living species for comparison: 

Acrostlchum georgianum ..... Acrostichum Newberry. hesperium Green River ...... Acrostichumaureum Linne. 

Anmdo pseudogocpperti ..... Arundo goepperti (M:iin- Oligocene to Plio- ster) Beer. cene. Castanea clalbornensis ......................................................... . 

Arundo donax Linne ....... . 

Castanea dentata (M:arsh) Borkhausen. 

Babitat and range. 

Swamps, Florida to Brazil Africa, Asia, Polynesia, and Australia. Wet places, Mediterranean re- 'gion. Uplands, M:aine to Alabama. 

Conoearpus eocenica .......... {~~~::: ~~~?~g~~~eu-nge~:: }oligocene ... : .... . 

Dodonrea vlscosoides......... Dodonrea species of Europe.. Upper Eocene and {

M:uddy or sandy shores, Florida Conocarpus erectus Linne... to Galapagos Islands, west . tropical Africa. Dodonrea viscosa Linne ..... Florida keys and tropical shores Oligocene. }'lcus clalbornensls. . . . . . . . . . . Ficus species.... . . . . . . . . . . . . Eocene ........... . ltfalapoelula sp ............................................................... . 

M:omisia o.mericarm ........... Cinnamomum species ....... Eocene ........... . 

Pisonia clo.ibornensis......... Pisonia eocenica Ettings- Ligurian ......... . hansen. Pistia claibornensis ............................................................ . 

Ficus sp ................... . Malaf.!oonna gcniculata (V. alt.) Coulter. Momisia aculeata (Swartz) Klatsch. Pisonia macranthocarpa Donnell Smith. Pistia stratiotes Linne ..... . 

of both hemispheres. Beach jungle of tropical America. Shallow ponds, Georgia to Lou- isiana. Florida kElYS and throughout tropical America. Shore zone, Central America. 

Aquatic floating plant, tropics and subtropics of Old and New Worlds. . Potamogeton megaphyllus.... Ottelia parisiensis Sa porta... Lutetian ....................................... . Rhizophora eooonica ................................................ ·............ Rhizophora mangle Linne... Tidal fiats, American tropics and 

!

Sapindus affinis Newberry .. 

Sapindus georgiana · · · · · · · · · · Sapfndus angustifolius Les- , auereu..x. Sphmrites claibornensis ....... SPAi:~~~s myricre (Lesq.) 

Terminalia pbmocarpoides.... Terminalia radobojensis Un- . ger. "...'hrinax eocenica............. Flabellaria raphifolia (Stern- berg) Ettingshausen. 

subtropics. 

stone. . . . Strand, Bermuda and Florida Mouth of Yellow- ) 

Lower Eocene of Sapmdus saponana Lmne. · · { keys to South America. - Gulf. _ Green River...... Various Pyrenomycetes ..... 

Tongrian to Astian Terminaliaphreocarpa Eich- Str~nd, northern South America. 

!cr. Ligurian of Dal- · Thrinax sp.................. Florida keys and West Indies. matia.a 

a Not the other recorded occurrences. 

Befo~·e considering the facts which may be legitimately deduced fro~ this fossil flora it 

might be valuable to point out frankly to what extent the writer feels certain of his identifications. It is believed that all the ide.ntifications have been made with unusual care and that a 

considerably larger amount of comparative living material has been passed in review than is 

generally customary. The National Herbarium and the collection of the New York Botanical 

·Garden have been carefully searched for modern analogues of these fossil leaves; the latter 

.institution is espe~ially rich in comparative material beca'llcse it has been so active of late years 

in West Indian exploration. It is believed that the following genera are positively recognized: 

Acrostichum, Castanea, Dodonrea, Ficus, Conocarpus, Rhizophora, Pistia, Sapindus, Sphrerites, 

and Thrina..x·. With regard to the genus Rhizophora, other tropical'genera have somewhat 

.similar coriaceous leaves, but the associated species in the. Claiborne and the contemporary 

physical conditions serve firmly to corroborate this identification. Both Terminalia and 

Momisia are less certainly identified. They are types of lea·ves that might belong to other and 

·unrelatQd genera; this is especially· true of the Momisia, though both fossils agree remarkably 

·well in their characters with the leaves of the recent species with which they have been compared 

and fossil leave~ similar 'to 'those which .have been here referred to Terminalia are .else~here 

.accompanied by characteristic fruits. The Pisonia agrees perfectly with the leaves of the 

existing species with which it has been compared, and is generically identical with other fossil 

leaves so identified. The reference of the Arundo to the grasses is· positive, but in so far as its 

generic aifm.ity is concerned the writer has simply conformed to paleobotanic usage. The form 

classed as Potamogeton may :not be a Potamogeton, although it resembles that ·genus very closely 

and is most certainly a monocotyledon of aquatic or semiaquatic habit. 

In examining these Claiborne forms and the ecology of the modern types with which they 

have been compared, it will be ob,served .that only three species, the Castanea, the Pistia, and 

the Potamogeton, are not coastal forms, and that the two last-named forms are aquatics whose 

presence associated with-coastal swamp or strand plants is not difficult to explain. The Castanea, 

then, apparently represents the only upland type preserved in this flora, and, as it is not common, 

the presumption is strong that it was brought down t<;> the basin of sedimentation by some 

Eocene river, most likely by the river which it seems certain emptied into this Clai?orne estuary. 
158 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND .GEORGIA. 

It is interesting to note that the remaining 12 species are all plants of a coastal habitat, 

their modern representatives flourishing in tidal nipa swamps of the Orient, in mangrove swamps 

of th~ Orient and Occident, on the strand in beach jungle, or on the landward side of coastal 

sand dunes. Nearly all are represented by forms found in the existing flora on the Florida keys 

or along the shores of peninsular Florida, some, like the Conocarpus~ flourishing equally well on 

either muddy or sandy shores. Every species .has representatives in the American tropics, 

and four of the compared forms, Oonocarpus erectus, Dodonrea viscosa, Rhizophora mangle, and 

Sapindus saponaria, range northward· to Bermuda. In Schimper's classical work on the IndoMalayan strand flora the following representation of species in genera which occur in the Claiborne 

flora may be noted: 

Acrostichum (Chrysodium), 1 sp. 

Dodonrea (vlscosa), 1 sp. 

Eugenia, 2 sp. (represented in West Africa and in America 

by-the allied genus Conocarpus). 

Ficus, 1 sp. 

Malapoenna (Litsrea), 1 sp. 

Pisonia, 4 sp. 

Rhizophora, 2 sp. 

Sapindus, 1 sp. 

Terminalia,, 1 sp. (catappa). 

Of ·these the Sapindus, Terminalia, Dodom:ea, F~cus, Malapoenna, and Pisonia are more 

particularly elements in the littoral forest (beach jungle of Kurz, Barringtonia formation of 

. Schimper); the others are integral members of or rather intimately associated with the Rhizophora 

or Nipa associations. It is really remarkable to what an extent the identified elements in the 

Claiborne flora of Georgia agree in indicating the character of their habitats, which were tidal 

Rhizophora swamps at certain points in the Grovetown estuary where the conditions were 

favorable. and elsewhere the sand beaches or the rain forests, which, if they did not come down 

to the water's edge, were developed behind the dunes that possibly in places formed the 

highest inner margin of the beach. · 

The Claiborne species of Conocarpus, Dodonooa, Ficus, Pisonia, Rhizophora, Sapindus, 

and Terminalia all have more or less coriaceous leaves, due to a combination of factors of which 

the following _may be enumerated. Those which grew below the level of high tide had to 

withstand the salinity of the estuary waters and those which grew above high tide in more or 

less exposed situations had to Withstand the drying effect of windblown salt spray, which must 

have been considerable and which undoubtedly, was an important factor, just as it is in similarly 

situated plant associations in the existing flora. Another factor was the strong light of low 

latitudes, to which was added reflection from the. water in the mangrove swamps and from the 

sand in the beach jungles. 

Cert~;tin deductions regarding the climate and rainfall of the latitude of Grovetown i.e. 

Cla~borne time can be drawn from the distribution: of the modern allies of these fossil forms. 

Since they are all rather uniform in their distribution, the accompanying sketch map (fig. 11) 

showing the geographic range of the modern species of Rhizophora will serve in a measure for 

all the genera. 

The present winter isotherm in the latitude of Grovetown is approximately 48° F. None 

of the closely allied modern plants flourish north of the winter isotherm of 52° F. and most of 

them do no~ occur north of the winter isotherm of 60° F. None of the fossil forms except 

possibly the Potamogeton, the modern species of which range over a great many degrees of 

latitude, or the Castanea, which likewise has a wide range, would be expected to occur outside 

the latitudes where what Schimper calls the subtropical o~ warm temp~rate rain forests are 

found. We would expect the Claiborp.e climate, at least at low elevations along the coast and 

in proximity to the warm Eocene ocean current or currents, to have been uniformly humid, 

with an annual rainfall somewhere between 150 and 200 centimeters. The actual rainfall could. 

become a more or less negligible factor provided the water table approached close to the surface 

and the humidity was high and constant. The temperature would have to be uniform rather 

than hot, judging by'modern standards, for any degree of winter c.old would ha~e been fatal. 

This climate need not have been tropical, nor would it be surprising if the Claiborne marine. 

fauna failed to show tra;pical forms or reef corals, for the .main factors which would lilnit the 

spread of a flora like the one described would be uniform humidity, ample rainfall, and the 

I. 

/ 
MIDDLE EOCENE FLORA OF GEORGIA. 159 

absence of severe cold. In the existing tlora these favorable factors permit the existence of an 

, almost tropical plant growth in New Zealand uplands, in latitude 40° south, and a quasi-tropical 

vegetation 1night flourish much more readily in latitude 33° north in Eocene time, particularly 

along a coast. Minimum temperatures mark the liinits of distribution; other factors, such as 

soil, humidity, and rainfall, furnish. optimum conditions for development within· these wider 

litnits. 1 

Such considerations are in a large measure corroborated by the results of investigations, 

of the ~onditions in Europe at this time. It is well kno'Yn that the middle Eocene floras of 

Europe show Inany tropical characters absent in the lower Eocene. The~e characters first 

bec01ne marked in the fruits from the London clays and the leaves from Alum Bay and in 

homota..xial deposits on the Continent, and though it was formerly the common practice to 

correlate these floras with Australian ~or Mrican types, they show closer affinities with the 

n1odern floras of Malaysia and tropical America, as was long ago· suggested by Gardlier. The 

FIGURE 11.-Sketch map showing the distribution of existing species of Rhizophora. 

sketch 1nap forming figure 12 (p. 160) will bring this out very well. It shows the distribution of 

the modern genus Nipa ·and of the Eocene genus Nipadites, which is indistinguishable from 

the modern Nipa. Nipa has only one existing species, which inhabits the tidal waters of 

the Indian Ocean and ranges from India through the Malay Archipelago to the Philippines, 

vying with the n1a,ngroves for possession of the tidal flats. . It produces clusters of large floating 

fruits, and similar fruits form the basis for the genus Nipadites. As shown by the map, these 

tropical'or subtropical floras ranged northward in Europe at this time to southern England or, 

on this continent, to about the latitude of Newfoundland. ·These Eocene Nip a swamps furnished 

a congenial habitat for a species of Acrostichum closely allied to the one described from the 

Georgia Claiborne, and other comparable forms are not wanting. · A species of Pandanus is 

associated with Nipadites in t}fe Paris basin just as the two are found associated at the present 

tin1e in the Oriental tropics, and many sim.ij.ar occurrences could be n1entioned. , 

The Lutetian abroad and the Claiborne in this country are both characterized by a considerable transgression of the sea. 

1 'l'he real factor recognized in tho foregoing statement is not so much killing cold as length of growing season. 
160 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA. 

As the Claiborne flora of Georgia indicates more tropical conditions than the known earlier 

Eocene floras, it seems probable that its direction of advance was from the tropics northward. 

The Claiborne strand flora was so largely dependent upon warm ocean currents for itt; dispersal 

a11d survival that an Eocene representative of the Gulf Stream can be safely assumed. Even 

if the course of this. current was offshore, the coastal area was under its direct influence by 

reason of accesso~y or counter currents of similar character., Tidal currents more or less trans-

·. verse to the shore line and minor wind-blown currents assisted in carrying the oceanic drift 

into the shallows and through the inlets into the estuaries, or over the sand bars into the lagoons. 

Judging from mqdern conditions in comparable areas the general direction of the prevailing 

winds was either parallel with or transverse .to the coast line, and though considerable n1inor 

variations probably existed, their general direction was probably from the southeast during 

the greater part of the year. 

· In studying the present ·flora the writer became much interested in the means of dissemination of its modern allies. It has been shown that certain species of Eugenia; Terminalia, 

FIGURE 12.-Sketch map showing the distribution of Nipa (northwest-southeast ruling) and Nipadites (northeast-southwest ruling). 

Rhizophora, Pisonia, and Sapindus have become a~apted for dispersal through the agency of 

ocean currents by specialization of their fruits or seeds, which have developed air chambers 

or woody husks f<ir buoyancy and practically impervious coverings to exclude sea water from 

their vital parts. Best known, perhaps, is the extreme specialization of the mangrove, which 

sends its germinating plantlets out into the world fully prepared to anchor themselves in .water 

of the required depth. The somewhat similar specialization of the other members of this flora, 

though less in degree, is almost· as effective, judging by the geographic distribution of these. 

genera in the existing flora, so that the part played by ocean currents is considerable, despite 

the contrary opinion of De Candolle. Hemsley has eyen recorded seeds of such a plant as 

Sapindus saponaria washing ashore on the south coa~t of Bermuda and actually germinating; 

in fact, this author gives a large amount of interesting data upon the dispersal of plants by 

ocean currents in his discussion of insular floras in the Challenger report devoted to such floras. 

Other species of th~ Georgia Cla-iborne flora, particularly species of Ficus, may be supposed to 

have been distributed by fruit-eating birds; in fact, the seeds of a number of modern species 

of Ficus have been recorded from the· crops of birds. The same means of distribution may 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE XVI 

A . MANGROVE SWAMP ALONG MIAMI RIVER, NEAR MIAMI, FLA. 

B. HABIT OF GROWTH OF MANGROVES ALONG MIAMI RIVER. 
MIDDLE EOCENE FLORA OF GEORGIA. 161 

haYe been also applied to the Malapoenna, but no data concerning methods of distribution are 

available for the stnall remainder of the Claiborne forms. 

It can be readily shown that the existing flora of peninsular Florida, the Bahamas, and 

Bermuda contains a large element which has been derived in comparatively recent geologic 

times from the south. Almost the entire flora of the Bahamas and Bermuda has had such an 

ongm. If, however, geographic distribution is studied in the light of historical geology, the 

1nnin elen1ents in these modern floras will be found to have been already in existence in the 

middle Eocene, if not earlier .. Such study shows that nearly all the modern plant families, 

except possibly the most specialized forms, as the orchids among the ~1onocotyledonre or the 

Co1npositre and their allies among the Dicptyledonre, were at some period more. widely distributed 

than they are at_ the present time, and that the details of modern distribution represent not so 

nlt1Ch the interchange of different types between continents as the greater or less degree of 

segregation of descendants of forms once spread over much wider areas. This generalization .. 

is made even more emphatic when the comparisons embrace the floras of the Upper Cretaceous, 

although the certa:inty of identification based upon foliar characters for n1any genera varies· 

more or less directly ·with the length of time that they have been preserved. 

From a study of the Claiborne flora it is evident that the main elements of the modern 

flora of tropical America reached at least as far north as latitude 33° and probably several 

degrees farther in the middle Eocene, and that in _post-Eocene time, probably not until toward 

the close of the Tertiary, they retreated southward to the West Indies, Central America, and 

northern South America as the result of lowering temperatures or diminished rainfall or both. 

Therefore, though the strictly modern movement of the subtropical flora along the course of the 

G{tlf Stream has been from the south toward the north as the various coral islands of the Bahamas 

fol'lned, this dispersion was preceded by similar migrations on a much more extended scale 

during the early Tertiary. From a study of the marine faunas of Florida Dall 1 pl~ces this 

change of clin1ate at the close of the Oligocene and predicates 2 a southwardly flowing cold 

ocean current to a:ccount for it. 

BIBLIOGRAPHY. 

The following bibliography refers entirely to the Eocene flora and to .works on modern 

plant distribution and ecology which have some bearing on it. It is introduced for the benefit 

of botanic or other readers who may not be familiar with works on these subjects, many of 

which are published abroad. 

BERRY, E. W., An Eocene flora in Georgia and the indicated physical conditions: Botanical Gazette, 'Vol. 50, 1910, 

pp. 202-208, figs. 1, 2. 

-- Study of tlw Tertiary floras of the Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain: Proc. Am. Philos. Soc., vol. 50, No. 199, 1911, 

pp. 301-315. 

BoimOESEN AND PAULSEN, La vegetation des Antilles danoises: Revue 'generale de botanique, 1900, vol. 12. 

BRONONIART, ADOLPHE, Tableau des genres de vegetaux fossiles: Extrait du Dictionnai're universelle d'histoire :"latu-

. relle, Paris, 1849. 

BuREAU, E., Etudes sur la fl.ore fossile du calcaire grossier.Parisie.n: Mem. Soc. philom., 1888, pp. 235-264, Pls. XXII 

and XXIII. ' 

CHRIST, 1:1., Vegetationen uncl Flora cler canarischen Inseln: Engler's Jahrbiicher, vol. 6, 1885. 

CLARK, W. B., Correlation Papers-Eocene: Bull. U. S. Geol. Survey No. 83, 1891. 

CooK, 0. F., A synopsis of the palms of Porto Rico: Bull. Torrey Bot. Club, vol. 28, 1901, p. 528. 

CRu~, L., Recherches sur la vegetation de !'ouest de la France a l'epoque tertiaire: Annales sci. geol., vol. 9, 1877, 

pp. 1-72, Pls. VIII-XXII. . . 

DAI~L, \V. 1:1., A table of North American Tertiary horizons: Eighteenth Ann. Rept. U. S. Geol. Survey, pt. 2, 1898, 

pp. 323-348. 

- Contributions to the Tertiary fauna of Florida: Trans. Wagner Inst. Phila., 1886 to 1903. 

DALL, W. H., AND HARRIS, G. D., Correlation Papers-Neocene: Bull. U. S. Geol. Survey'No. 84, 1892. 

DARWIN, CHARLES, On the action of sea water on the germination of seeds: Jour. Linn. Soc. London, vol. 1, 1857, 

p. 130. . 

DxELS, L., Vegetations-Biologic von Neu-Seeland: Engler's Jahrbiicher, Bd. 22, 1896. · 

I Dull, w. n., Trans. \Vagncr Inst., vol. 3, pt. G, 1903, pp. 1549, 1550. 

2 Vaugha11, T. W ., A contribution to thq geologic history of the Floridian Plateau: Publication Carnegie lust.., Washington No. 133, 1910. 

. 8069°-14-11 . 

. I 
162 UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE FLORAS OF SOUTH CAROLINA AND GEOH.GIA. 

DRUDE, 0., Atlas der Pflanzenverbreitung: Berghaus Physikal. Atlas, v. Gotha, 1887. 

ENGLER, A., AND PRANTL, K., Die natiirlichen Pflanzenfamilien, Leipzig, 1887-1901. 

ETTINGSHAUSEN, C. voN, Die tertiareFlora von Haring in Tirol: Abhandl. K.-k. geol. Reichsanstalt, Wien, vol. 2, 

Abth. 3, 1853, pp. 1-118, Pls. I-X:XXI. . 

-- Report on phyto-palreontological investigations generally and on those relating to the Eocene flora of Great Britain 

in particular: Proc. Roy. Soc. London, voi. 28, 1878, pp. 221-227. 

-- Report on phyto-palreontological investigations of the fossil flora of Sheppey: Proc. Roy. Soc. London, vol. 29, 

1879, pp. 388-396. 

-- Report on phyto-palreontological investigations of the fossil flora of Alum Bay: Proc. Roy.Soc. London, vol. 30, 

1880, pp. 228-236. 

-- Die eocene Flora des Monte Promina: Denkschr. K. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Math.-nat. Kl., vol. 8, 1855, pp. 17-44, 

Pls. I-XIV. 

-- Nachtrag zur eocenen Flora des Monte Promina in Dalmatien: Sitzungsber. K. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Math.-nat. 

Kl., vol. 12, 1855, pp. 180-182. 

-- Die fossile Flora des Tertiar-Beckens von Bilin: Denkschr. K. Akacl. Wiss. Wien, Math.-nat. Kl., vol. 26, 1867, 

pp. 79-176, Pls. I-XXX; vol. 28, 1868, pp. 191-242; Pls. XXXI-XXXIX; vol. 29,1869, pp.1-110, Pis. XI-XIV. 

-- Beitrage zur Kenntniss der fossile Flora von Racloboj: Sitzungsber. K. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Math.-nat Kl., vol. 

61, Abth. 1, 1870, pp. 829-906, Pls. I-III. 

FRITEL, P. H., Revision de la flore fossile des gres Ypn§sie.Q. clu bassin de Paris: Jour. botanique, 2d'ser., vol. 11, 1909, 

pp. 86-91, 101-112, 149-156 . 

.--- Contribution a l'etude des flores Eocenes du bassin de Paris: Compt. rend. Cop.g. Soc. sav., 1908, Paris, 1909, 

pp. 315-327. 

~- Etude sur les vegetaux fossiles de l'etage Sparnacien clu bassin de Paris: Mem. Soc. geol. de France, No. 40, 1910. 

GARDNER, J. S., AND ETTINGSHAUSEN, C. VON, British Eocene flora: Palreont. Soc., vol. 1, 1879-1882; vol. 2,1883-1886. 

GARDNER, J. S., On the correlation of the Bournemouth marine series with the Bracklesham beds, the upper and middle 

Bagshot beds of the London Basin, and the Bovey Tracey beds: Geol. Mag., 1879, pp. 148-154. 

-- Eocene ferns from the. basalts ofireland and Scotland: Jour. Linn. Soc. London, vol. 23, 1885, pp. 655-664, Pl. 

XXVI. . . 

-- On the flora of Alum Bay: Mem. Geol. Survey Eng. and Wales, Geology of the Isle of Wight, 2cl ed., 1889, pp. 

104-108. . 

GARDNER, J. S., AND CoLE; A. J., On the leaf-beds and gravels of Arcltun, Carsaig, etc., in Mull: Quart. Jour. Geol. 

Soc. London, vol. 43, 1887, pp. 270-300, Pls. XIlJ-XVI. 

GRISEBACH, A.. H. R.,.Flora of t:q.e British \Vest Indian Islands, London, 1864. 

-- Die geographische Verbreitung der Pflanzen-Westindiens, Gottingen, 1865. -

GuPPY, H. B., The gizzard contents of some oceanic birds: Nature, vol. 26, 1882, p. 12. 

-- Fruits from the crops of pigeons: Jour. and Proc. Roy. Soc. New South Wales, vol. 27, 1883, p. 226. 

-- The dispersal of plants as illustrated by the flora of the Keeling or Cocos Islands: Ti·ans. Victoria Inst., vol. 24, 

1890-91. . 

-- Observations of a naturalist in the Pacific, vol. 2, Plant dispersal, 1906. 

HABERLANDT, G., Eine botanische Tropenreise, Leipzig, 1893. 

HARSHBERGER, J. W., The comparative leaf structure of the sand clune plants of Bermuda: Proc. Am. Philos. Soc., 

vol. 4 7, 1908·. ' 

HEER, OswALD, Flora Tertiaria Helvetire, vol. 1, 1855; vol. 2, 1856; vol. 3, 1859. 

-- On the fossil flora of Bovey Tracey: Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, vol. 152, pt. 2, 1862, pp. 10:39-1086, Pls. 

LV-LXXI. 

HEMSLEY, W. B., 1-Report on the present state of knowledge of various insular floras, etc.; 2-Report on the botany 

of the Bermudas and various islands of the Atlanti<; and southern oceans; 3, 4-Report on the botany of Juan 

Fernandez, the southeastern Moluccas, and the Admiralty Islands; Appendix-On the dispersal of plants by 

ocean currents and birds: In report of scientific results of the voyage of H. M. S. Challenger .during the years 

1873-1876, Botany, vol. 1, 1885. 

HILL, R. T., The geology and physical geography of Jamaica: Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool. Harvard Coil., vol. 34, 1::;99. 

l;IoLLICK, ARTHUR, A report on a collection of fossil plants from northwestern Louisiana: In Harris, G. D., and Veatch, 

A. C., ·A preliminary report on the geology of Louisiana, 1900, pp. 276-288, Pls. XXXII-XLVIII. 

-- Fossil ferns from the Laramie of Colorado: Torreya, vol. 2, 1902, pp. 145-148, Pls. III and IV. 

JoHow, FR., Vegetationsbilder aus West-Indien unci Venezuela: Kosmos, 1885. 

KARSTEN, G., Ueber die Mangroven-Vegetation im Malayischen Archipelago: Bibliotheca botanica, Heft 22, 1891. 

KNOWLTON, F. H., Description of.fossil woods and lignites from Arkansas: Ann. Rept. Geol. Survey Arkansas for 1889, 

· vol. 2, 1890, pp. 249-267, Pls. IX-XI. ... 

-- Fossil flora of Alaska (abstract): Bull. Geol. Soc. America, vol 5, 1893, pp. 573-590. 

-- Appendix, in Russell, I. C., A geological reconnaissance in central \Vashington: Bull. U. S. Geol. Survey No. 

108, 1893. 

-- A review of the fossil flora of Alaska with descriptions of new species: Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 27, 1894, pp. 

207-240, Pl. IX. .. • ..!. ... 
r 

M~DDLE EOCENE l!"'LORA OF GEORGIA. 163 

, o I 

KNOWI~TON, F. H., Report on a small collection of fossil plants from old Port Caddo Landing, in Little Cypress Bayou, 

Harrison County, 'l'ex., made by Mr. T. Wayland Vaughan: Am. Geologist, vol. 16, 189'5, pp.' 308, 309. 

-- Report on the fossil plants collected in Alaska in 1895, as well as an enumeration of those previously known 

from the same region, with a table showing their relative distribution: Seventeenth Ann. Rept. U. S. Geol. 

Survey, p~. 1, 1896, pp. 876-897. . 

· -- The fossil plants of the Payette formation: Eighteenth Ann. Rept. U. S. Geol. Survey, pt. 3, 1898, pp. 721-744, 

Pls. XCIX-CII. ' · 

--:Fossil flora. of the John Day basin, Oregon: Bull. U. S. Geol. Survey No. 204, 1902. 

-- Fossil plants from Kukak Bay: Harriman Alaska Expedition, vol. 4, 1904, pp. 149-162, Pls. XXII-XXXIII. 

KuRz, S., Preliminary report on the forest and other vegetatio;n of Pegu, Calcutta, 1875. ' 

LESQUEH.Eux, L1~o, On species of fossil plants from the Tertiary of the State of Mississippi: Proc. Am. Philos. Soc., 

new ser., vol. 13, 1869, pp. 411-430, Pls. XIV"-XXII. 

-- The Tertiary flora: U. S. Geol. Survey Tet;r., vol. 7, 1878. 

-- The Cretaceous and 'l'ertiary floras: U. S. Geol. Survey Terr., vol. 8, 1883. 

LUDWIO, R., Fossile Pflanzen aus der altesten Abtheilung der Rhein.isch-Wetterauer Tert.iar-Format.ion: Palreontographica, vol. 8, 1859, pp. 39-154, Pls. VI-LX. 

:MARTY, PIERRE, Etudes sur les vegetaux fossiles du Trieu de Leval (Hainaut): :Mom. Musee d'hist. na~. belgique. 

vol. 5, 1907. 

1vlcCALT,n~, S. W., Underground waters of Georgia: Bull. Georgia Geol. Survey No. 15, 1908. 

NEwBERRY, J. S., Later extinct floras of North America: Mon. U. S. Geol. "Survey, vol. 35, 1898. 

Pl.I~AR, A. G., Flora fossilis suseda~a: Acta Acad. sci. slav. merid., vol. 1, 1883, pp. 1-163, Pls. I-XV. 

REID, CLEMENT, AND ELEANOR M., The lignite of Bovey Tracey: Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. London, vol. 2ll1B, 1910,. 

pp. 161-178, Pls. XV and XVI. 1 

SAPORTA, G. DE, Prodrome d'une flore fossile des travertins anciens de Sezanne: Mem. Soc. geol. France (2d ser),. 

vol. 8, 1868, pp. 289-436, Pls. XXII-XXXVI. 

-- Jttudes sur la vegetation du sud-est de la France a l'epoque tertiaire: Annales sci. nat. botanique, 5th smO:, vol. 

9, 1868; 7th ser., vol. 7, 1888. 

-- Essai descripiif sur les plantes fossiles des arkoses de ·Brives pres le Puy-en-Velay: Extract from Annales de la. 

societe d'agriculture, sciences, arts et commerce du Puy, vol. 33, 1878. 

-- Le monde des plantes avant l'appa.rition de l'homme, Paris, 1879. 

SArORTA, G. DE, AND 1hmoN; A. F., Essai sur l'etat de la vegetation a l'epoque des marnes heersiennes de Gelinden:. 

M6m. cour. et des Sav. 6trang. Acad. roy. belgique, vol. 37, 1873, No. 6, pp. 1-94, Pis. I-XII. 

-- H.evision de ln. flore heersienne de Gelinden: Idem, vol. 41, 1878, No. 3, pp. 1-112, Pls. I-XIV. 

ScniliH'ER, A. F. \V., Die indomalayische Strandflora: Botan. Mittheil. aus den· Tropen, Heft 3, Jena, 1891. 

-- Pflanzengeographie auf physiologischer Grundlage, 1898.. . 

8HAL1m, N. S., General account of the fresh-water morasses of the United States: Tenth Ann. H.ept. U.S. Geol. Survey,. 

pt. 1, 1890, pp. 255-339. ' 

SPBNC1m, J. W. W., First report of progress, Ge'ol. Survey, Georgia, 1891. 

VAUGHAN, '1'. W., The geologic work of mangroves in southern.Florida: Smithsonian Misc. Coil., vol. 52, quart. issue,. 

vol. 5, pt. 4, 1910, pp. 461-464, Pis. XLVI-LII, figs. 79, 80. 

--A contribution to the geologic history of the Floridian Plateau: Publ. Carnegie Inst. \Vashiugton No. 133, 1910. 

WAnlluNa, E., Rhizophora mangle: Engler's JahrbP,cher, vol. 4,~1883. 

W A'l'Kl~E'I', A., Description des plantes fossiles du bassin de Paris, Paris, 1866. 

Wnrr1<onn, H. N., The vegetation of the Lamao Forest Reserve: Philippine Jour. Sci., vol. 1, 1906, pp. 373-431, 637.:..-

682, Pis. I-XLV and map. · 
PLATE XVII. 

165 
·PLATE XVII. 

Page. 

FIGURES 1, 2. Dryopterites stephensoni Berry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 

1. Type found near Byron. 

2. Pinnule of same, X 6. 

FIGURE 3. Doryanthites cretacea Berry (type, found near Buena Vista)...................................... 108 

All the 'specimens are from the Eutaw formation. 

166 

,-
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE XVII 

2 

UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANTS FROM GEORGIA. 
.. 

. PLATE XVIII. 

167 

• 
PLATE XVIII. 

FIGURES 1-10. Androvettia elegans Berry ................................................................. . 

1-4. Specimens, natural size, from McBrides Ford. 

5-7. Same, X 4. 

8, 9. Apical part of two lateral twigs, X 45. 

· 10. Epidermis, X 205. 

All the specimens are from the Eutaw formation. 

168 

Page. 

103 

.,~ 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

UPPER CRETACEOUS 

PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE XVIII 
PLATE. XIX. 

169 

'!' 

I ' 
.. 

PLATE XIX. 

Page. 

FIGURES 1, 2. Araucaria bladenensis Berry .................................... ,.............................. 105 

1: Figure of a specimen from Horrell Landing, N. C., to illustrate the method of occurrence 

at Chimney Bluff, Ga. 

2. 1\fe thod of 'occurrence near Buena Vista. 

FIGURE 3. Salix eutawensis Berry, the most' complete specimen from Broken Arrow Bend...................... 109· 

FIGURE 4. Ficus krausiana Heer, Chimney Bluff.................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 

FIGURES 5-7. Ficus ovatifolia Berry, McBrides Ford....................................................... 111 

All the specimens are from the Eutaw formation. 

170 

'f 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAP ER 84 PLATE XIX 

)!\ 

i 

7 

I 

2 j 

1 

4 

• 

3 

5 

6 

UPPER CRE TACEOUS . PLANTS FROM GEO RGIA. 
PLATE XX. 

1'71 

..... • 

• 
.PLATE XX. 

Page. 

FIGURE 1. Ficus georgiana Berry, near Buena Vista ..................... ~ .................... :.............. 111 

FIGURES 2-4. Eucalyptus angusta Velenovsky, near Buena Vista ........................ ,................... 119 

FIGURE 5. Magnolia boulayana Lesquereux, McBrides Ford................................................. 112 

FIGURE 6. Magnolia capellinii Heer, McBrides Ford ........ ·_ ...................................... ·........ 112 

FIGURE 7. Aralia eutawensis Berry, McBrides Ford ................. ·_ .... ~ ................................ :'.. . . 119 

All the specimens are from the Eutaw formation. 

·172 

L. 

t 

.... ,' ... 
• -<. 

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

I 

\ 

/ 

~; ... '' 

' ' ' ' 

\ 

\ 

1 

5 

7 

I 

I 

I 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

I 

I 

\ 

' 

I 

\ 

PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE XX 

2 

I 

I 

I 

I 

/t\ 

/ I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

6 

3 

4 

I 

UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANTS FROM GEORGIA . 
PLATE XXI. 

. 173 

_,.,.. 
PLATE XXI. 

Page. 

FIGURES 1-4. Menispermites variabitis Berry, McBrides .Ford ........................... -.. _ ............... _ . . 113 

FIGURES 5, 6. Paliurus upatoiensis ;Berry, McBrides Ford.................................................. 116 

FIGURE 7 .. Zizyphus laurijolius Berry, McBrides Ford ........ _ ................... _. _ .............. __ .. 116 

FIGURE 8. Cinnamomum heerii Lesquereux (?), McBrides Ford._._,_ ....... _______________ ._ ........... _ 118 

FIGURES 9-11., Cinnamomum newberryi Be.rrjr, McBrides Ford ....................... ·....................... 117 

All the specimens are from the Eutaw formation. 

174 

. . r 

... - ~ 
• 

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

1 

5 

6 

flo, 

I 

I 

[ 

\ 

'·· 

7 

PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE XX I 

8 11 

9 10 

UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANTS FROM GEORGI~ 
PLATE XXII. 

175 

L..-
PLATE XXII. 

Page. 

Manihotites georgiana Berry, type specimen from Eutaw formation at McBrides Ford.......................... 114 

176 
lU. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

·" ,_ 

\ 

' 

---

' .... .... .. .... 

... -

.. ..... ..... 

' ' 

\ ' 

' ' 

' ' 

' ' 

' ' 

UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANT FROM GEORGIA. 

PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE XXII 

--- ----..-7 

---

~""' 

/ 

/ 

/ 

I 

/ 

l 

-, 

/ 

/ 
_,(,. 

' 

PLATE XXIII. 

177 
PLATE XXIII . 

. iJ:lanihotites georgiana Berry, type spedm~n-fr~~·Eu-~w form"~ti~n at Mcl~ricles Ford ............. : ........... P~~~ 178 

... 

··--~ 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

, _,. ----- -- ~ .... ~,, '"' 

,, .... ..... 

' \ 

\ 

' ----

-- ...... ........ 

' \ 

..... _ 

........ ..... 

--

..... 

\ 

"\ 

..... 

, ' I \ 

\ ' \ 

\ 

' \ 

\ 

\ 

.... 

' " ' 

\ 

' ' ' 

--

' 

--- ' ' ' ' ' 

-

........ 

' 

' ' ' ' ' ' \ ' "\ 

' ' ,. 

' ~ " 

............... 

........ 

' 

--........ 

.... .... 

' 

---

' ..... 

' 

....... 

........ ..... 

..... 

' ' \ 

\ 

' 

' \ 

' ' 

................... 

' 

\ 

\ 

........ 

----------------

' 

\ 

\ 

........ 

' 

\ 

' ' ' ' 

\ 

' ' ' ' \ 

; 

' ' ' " \ 

---

' \ 

' \ 

\ \. 

' ' ' 

.-. -----

' 

\. 

\ 

\ 

\ 

' ' \ 

\ 

' \ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\. 

\ 

' \ 

' \ 

\ 

\ 

' ' 

UPPER CRETACEOUS PLANT FROM GEORGIA. 

PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE XXIII 

I 

I 

I 

........ --:~ , I 

,-' I 

I 

I 

I 

"' / 
'.-

· · PLATE XXIV. 

179 
PLATE XXIV. 

Page. 

FIGURE 1. Andromeda novrecresarere Hollick, near Buena Vista .......................................... : .. ,. 120 

FIGURE 2. Andromeda eretacea Lesquereux (?),McBrides Ford.............................................. 120 

1. FIGURE 3. Andromeda wardiana Lesquereux, McBrides Ford.................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 

FIGURES 4, 5. Manihotites georgiana Berry; fragmentary specimens collected near Buena Vista................ 114 

FIGURE 6. Ficus claibornensis Berry.with Sphrerites claibornensis Berry, Fiske property, Grovetown ....... 148, 156 

FIGURE 7. Arundo pseudogoepperti Berry, Phinizy Gully, near Grovetown................................... 150 

All the specimens except those shown in figures 6 and 7 are from the Eutaw formation. 

The specimens shown in figures 6 and 7 are from the Congaree clay member of the McBean formation. . ' 

180 
U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE XX IV 

1 

2 6 

7 

UPPER CRETACEOUS AND EOCENE PLANTS FROM GEORGIA. 
•, 

.... PLATE XXV .. / 

181 

,., 
,• 

_.PLATE XXV. , _ Page. 

Thrinax eocenica Berry, type from Conga~ee ~lay.meniber of th~ McBean fo;ma~ion at Fiske property, Grovetown_ 136 

182 

-, 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE XXV 

EOCENE PLANT FROM GEORGIA. 
; .' ' • '4' ' 

PLATE X~VI . 

. •' : 

183 

. :_., 
. PLATE XXVI. 

FIGURES 1, 2. Pistia claibornensis Berry ..............................................................•... 

1. Type from Fiske property, Grovetown. '· · . 

2. Same, showing traces of venation . 

. FIGURE 3. ThrinaxeocenicaBerry, fragment from fiske property, q.rovetown, two-thirds natural size ....•... 

All the specimens are from the Congaree clay member of the McBean formation. 

184 

Page. 

137 

136 

( 

\ 

,._ 
" 

> X 

X 

w 

';( 

_J 

Q. 

... 

00 

a: 

w 

Q. 

~ 

_J 

<( 

z 

0 

[ii 

w 

lL 

0 

a: 

Q. 

>- u.J 

> 

a: 

::> 

U) 

_J 

<( 

(.) 

(5 

0 

_J 

0 

w 

<!> 

u:i 

::i 

~ (!) 

a: 

0 

w 

(!) 

::E 

0 

a: 

lL 

(/) 

1-

z 

<( 

,_J 

0.. 

o:> w 

z 

w 

(.) 

0 

w 
J 

PLATE XXVII. 

185 
... 

PLATE XXVII. 

Page. 

FIGURE 1. Acrostichum georgianum Berry, type from Phinizy Gully near Grovetown ... ~ ................... · .. 133 

FIGURE 2. Potamogeton megaphyllus Berry, type from Phinizy Gully near Grovetown ..................... . 135 

FIGURES 3, 4. Ficus claibornensis Berry, .type·specini~ns from :f'is~e property, provetown ..... ·.' .......... . 

FIGURES 5-9. Mimosites georgianus Berry, Phlniiy Gully near Grovetown .. : .. : ............................ . 

140 

142 

FIGURE 10. Malapoenna sp., 10 miles south of Macon .................. ~- ................................. . 144 

FIGURES 11, 12. Sapindus georgiana B~rry, Phinizy Gully near Grovetown ............................... . 143 

. Fw URE 13. Momisia americana Berry, type specimen from· Phinizy Gully near Grovetown ................. . 139 

All the specimens are from the Congaree clay memb.er of the McBean formation. 

186 

...... 

..... _. 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE XXVII 

( 

1 

! 

/ \ , 

l ~ \ ~~ \ 

'\ 

I 

~ 3 

\ 

\ 

I 

5 6 

12 

7 8 

10 

9 

4 11 13 

EOCENE PLANTS FROM GEORGIA. 

-
.. , . ' ' . 

PLATE . XXVIII. 

187 

,.. 

I ••• 
PLATE XXVIII.· ,.--

Page. 

FIGURES 1, 2. Castanea claibornensis Berry ............................................................... . 138 

1. Type from Fiske property, Grovetown. 

2. Restoration of sam::l. 

FIGURE 3. Pisonia claibornensis Berry,, type specimen froni Ph:lnizy Gully, near Grovetown ................... . 140 

FIGURES 4-8. Dodonrea viscosoides Berry ...................................... : ................. : ...... :;. ... . 142 

.. : 4, 5, 7. Phinizy Gully, near Grovetown. · 

6, 8. South of Macon. 

All the specimens are from the .Congaree clay member of the McBean formation. 

188 

..... 
PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE XXVIII 

U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

3 

r I 

I 

J 

' I I I I J I I 

\ ( 

I 

8 I 

t I 

6 

• 

5 

7 

4 2 1 

EOCENE PLANTS FROM GEORGIA. 
·, 

PLATE XXIX . 

..... ' 

. 189 
/ 

PLATE XXIX. -, Page .. 

FIGURES 1, 2. Rhizophora eo~enica Berry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 

1. Phinizy Gully, near Grovetown. 

2. Near Sandersville. · · · 

FIGURE 3. Terminalia phreocarpoides Berry,· Fiske 'property, Grovetown.~ ... : ........... ~................... 146 

FIGURES 4-7. Conocarpus eocenica Berry.................................................................. 147 

4-6. Phinizy Gully, near Grovetown. 

7 .. Fiske property, _Grovetown. 

All the specimens are from the Congaree clay member of the McBean formation. 

190 

r-

~·. 
U. S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

1 

I 

} 

.. 4 

7 

2 

5 

f 

f 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I I I I I I I I i I I I 

I I I 

\ I 

\ I 

'I 

I I 

I 

' ' ' 

I 

I 

I 

I , I 

I 

PROFESSIONAL PAPER 84 PLATE X X IX 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

' \ 

\ \ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

6 

\ 

\ 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I ' 

I 

l 

If '' 

(/ 

II 

J! 

I' 

EOCENE PLANTS FROM GEORGIA. 
\ 

·~ 

~) 

INDEX. 

Names in italic are sy~onyms; figures in black face are descriptions; figures in italic are illustrations. 

A. Page. 

Abletites ........................ :............................... 22 

Acacia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46, 65, 153 

brittanica................................................... 148 

sotzkianli .......... ."........................................ . 148 

Acaciaphyllites ................. ~ ..................... _. ........ 45-4.6 

grevilleoides ............................... 45-46, 50. GS, 69, 72,88 

Acer ............. ·. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150, 155 

eocenicum... ... . .. ... ... .. . . . .. . ..... ..... .... .. ...... ..... 148 

prro-decipions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 

Acemtos amboyensc ....................... ~.............. ... . • . • 70 . 

Acknowledgments to those aiding ........................ ; . . . . . 5 

Acrostichum ....................... 131,133-134,139,154,157,158,159 

aurcum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150,157 

georgianum ................................ 131,133-134, 157,186 

hesperium ................................................ 133,157 

lonzreanum ................... : ... : ....................... 133,152 

Actinostrobcro .......................... .-........................ 122 

Adenopeltis alumensis.......................................... 148 

Adiantum apalophyllum...... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . ... . . . ... .. 150 

Ago._ve eoceui~a ........................................ ,........ 150 

Ailanthus....................................................... 155 

Alabama, fossils of. ........................ ~ .................... 70, 71 

Algites............................ ...... ..... ..... ..... .......... 14 

americana ........................................ 11, 14, 68, 69, 72 

valdeusis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 

Alnus ....................................................... 45, 154, 155 

Alum Bay, England, fossils of. .............. , ................ 148-150 

Alyxia enroproa................................................. 148 

Amomum sheppyensis.......................................... 150 

stenocarpum ................................ 0......... .. . . . . 150 

Ampelopis ...................................................... 42,154 

Amygdalus eocenica............................................ 150 

pereger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... 148 

prro-oeningensis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 

sporadum................................................... 150 

tenue-striato............. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 

Anaco.rdiacere ................................................. 51-52. 

Anacrtrc1ites.................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 

Andromeda ................ 45,58-60,63,66, 67, 120-121,122,126,153 

cretacea ......................................... 101, 120,125, 180 

euphorbiophylloides .................... ·.· ... 59-60,68,-69, 7'2, 98 

grandifolia .................................... 10, 59, 60, 69, 72, 98 

latijolia . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . • • • • . . • . • • • 59 

novrecrosarero ................... 58-59,69,72,98,102,120,126,180 

novmcalcarem . . . . . . :. . • . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . • . . . . . . . . . . • . • . . . ·68 

parlatorii ....................... ·.· ................. 10, 58, 60, 69, 72 

protogroa ................................. ·................... 148 

tenuincrvis . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . •• .• 121 

warcliano. .................................. 101, 120-121,125,180 

Androvettia ............................... : ......... 67, 103-105, 11.3 

co.rolinensis .................................................. 70,104 

clegans ................................... 101, 103-;1.05, 125,168 

sttttenensis. :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104 

Anomia subcrotacca ................................. : .... 148,.152,153 

Angiosponme ....................................... 2!(.-63,·134-14 7 

Anona cyclosperma ......... , ............................... :: .. : . 148 

olongata ................................. : .. · ...... · .. ,.· ........ · 148 

Anthurium .......................................... •"···•·.:.·.~···. 42 

Apeiobopsis ............................................. , .•.. ·.... 153 

variabilis .......................................... ,, ...... ~ ... 150 

t\pocynophyllum ......................................... •·:~ •. 0. 153 

grande ................................. : ........... , ..... ,;·.... 148 

;hreringianum ................................. :, . . . .... . . • .. . 148 

·pr00-amsonla .................... , .... , ............ · .... ~... ...... 148 

sheppyensis ...................................... ·. : . . ;.'. . . . . . 150 

titanire ................. : .. ,.. ................. .............. 148 

Page. 

Apocyqum...................................................... 45 

Aracere ........... : ...................................... 42, 137-138 

Arales ....................................................... 137-138 

Aralia ......................................... 67, 119,122,126,154,155 

· coriacea .......................................... '............ 51,66 

~~ia~:::s~~~~-· _· .· .· .· .·.· .· .· .· .· .· .' .' .· .· .· _· .· .· .· .· .· .· .· .· .· .·: .· .· .· .· .· ·ioi: i i'9: i25, ~~~ furcata...................................................... 115 

newberryi................................................... 119 

primigenia .. .............. ...... .. ........................ .. 148 

Araliacere ......................................... 57 .. 58, 66,115, ;119 

Araucaria .................................. 19-21,63,68, 105,118,122 

. bidwilli ................................................... 19, 20,21 

bladenensis . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11, 

19-20,21,56,72, 76,102, 105,120,125,126,127,170 

.:<;:larki ....................................................... 70 

cookii.................................................. ... . . . 21 

darlingtonensis .......................... .' ...... 11, 20, 68, 69, 72,76 

rrici .......... v ......................................... ·...• 21 

goepperti. ................................... ." ......... ·...... 153 

ha tcheri ............................. 0.... .. • • .. .. .. .. .. .. • • • • • 20 

jefl'reyi. ......... .-........... 10,21-21,69,72,102, 1()5, 107,125,127 

toucasi ............................... '....................... 20 

Arancariacem ............................................. 19,21,64,67 

Araucariem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22, 122 

distribution of, figures showing ........................... 123,124 

Araucarinre ................................. : ...................... 104 

Araucarites ovatus.............................................. 19 

reichenbachi ... . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . . 23 

Areca prisca.... . . .. .. .. . . .. . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . 150 

recentior ..................................... : . . ·.·.·......... 150 

,Arecacere ................................................ _ ... 136-137 

. Arecales ............................................ 29.,-30, 136-137 

Arisrema . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................. ·. . . . . . 42 

Aristolochia alumensis .................................. ·.·...... 148 

Aronium eocenium ............................................ 148,150 

Arthrotaxopsis ... '............................................... ·153 

Artocarpacere ............................................. 36-39, 140 

Artocarpidium grandifolinm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 

integrifolium.... ... . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .. .. .. .. .. 148 

Artocarpus ........ : ................. -.................... ,. . .. .. . . 171 

Arundo •....... : .•........................ 28, 64, 67, 134-;135, 154,157 

donax ....... : ........................................... :. 134,157 

goepperti ...•.................................... , ...... 134, 148, 157 

groonlandica ........................... : ........... 10,~8,69, 72,78 

pseudogoepperti. ........................... 131,134-135,157,180 

reperta ................................................... · ... . . 134 

Ashby's place, S. C., fossils at. ................................ 11-12,72 

Asplenites prre-allosuroides:...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . • . 152 

Asplenium.......................... . . . .. . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. .. . .. 155 

Asterocarpum europreum . _. ........................... ·.· .. .. . .. . 150 

n. 

Bactris prisca .................................................. . 

Balanus ... , ................................................ , .. · .. 

llambusa ............................................... -:· ...... . 

Bambusium latifolium ............ : . .................. : .. ..... , . 

Banksia ..................... _ ............................... · .. · .. 

.. dillenoides .......... _ .............. _ ............... ·.· .. , .. ··-:· 

ungeri .... ····.·· ........................................... . 

Bauhinia .................................... _ .................... . 

Ber~;::i~~~~~---.·.·-~~: :::::::::::::::::,::::::::.::::::::::::::.::::. 

Bertrand, C. E., cited ........................................... . 

Betula ........................................................ . 

Black Creek, S. C., fossils on .................................... . 

191 

150 

131 

153 

108 

155 

148 

148 

115 

150 

155 

18 

155 

11,72 
192 INDEX. 

PagP. 

Black Creek formation, correlation of. .................. .' ........ 68-71 

deposition of .... , ........................................... 12-14 

fossils of ................................................. 68-72,128 

occurrence and character of.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . 7-8 

Bombax menjre .. · ... '............................................ 148 

sagorianum ...... :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 

tenuinerve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 

Brachyphyllacere. ·································:··· .. ··· ~1-22,64. Brachyphyllum ................................... .' ........ 21-22,67 

crassicaule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106 

crassum.... ................................................. 21 

macrocarpum ........................ 21-22,64,69,72, 76,106,125 

var. formosum .......... :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 

obesiforme var. elongatum.. .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . 106 

Brasenia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 

Britton, N. L., cited............................................ 141 

Broken Arrow Bend,, Ga., fossils at .................... 101,121,125,128 

Buena Vista, Ga., fossils near ........................ ·. 102,121,126,128 

view at...................................................... 102 

Bumelia ...................................... :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 

dryadum...... .. .. .. .. . . .. . . . . .... .. ............ ... . . . ... .. . 148 

oreadum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . 148 

Bureau, E., cited . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 

Byron, Ga., fossil~ near ........ ~ ................ : ...... 102,121,126-128 

c. 

Cresalpinia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46, 65 

remula ····································.······ ................ 148 

cookiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 

haidingeri. ............. ;.................................... 148 

middendorfensis .................................. : ... 46, 69, 72, 90 

Cresalpiniacere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 

Calamopsis ......... '. ......... ....... .. .. .. .. ... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 

Calamus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 

Callicarpa ..•.............. · ............. : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . fi1 

Callicoma fornacis ..................................... , . . . . . . . . . 148 

Callistemophyllull! diosmoides.................................. 148 

elcgans.. .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 

melaleucreforn1e............................................. 148 

obtusum ....................................... ·... . . . . . . . . . . 148 

Callitris comptoni. ........................ ·...................... 150 

curta ....................................... , .............. 148, 150 

Calycites.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 

middcndorfensis ................. · ................. 63, 68, 69, 72,90 

Carex ......................... ............ .. .................... 64 

clarkii. ................................................... 10,69, 72 

Carpinus . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 

Carpolithes affinis·... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

alumensis .................................... ·........ . . .. . . 148 

amydaloides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

atlantidis ...................................... :............. 150 

biococculatus................................................ 150 

bispermus................................................... 150 

breviangulus.............. .. .. . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 150 

brevicristatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

bruccoides ................... ;; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

caryopsiformis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

caryotoides ......... : ............ .'~.......................... 150 

circumscriptus ....................................... ·. . . . . . . 150 

colletiuides ....................... :.......................... 150 

costatus......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

~~::~:r~~·s·::::: :·~:::::::::::::: :.::::::::: :·::::: ·.::::::::: ~:~ disciformis.................................................. 150 

elliptico-valvatus.................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 

folliculiformis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

franguloides............... .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . . 150 

hydrophylloides............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

lineatus ...................... , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

metrosideroides ...................... : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

morrisii ..................................................... : '150 

musreformus.. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .. . .. . . 150 

napreruni ................................................. 148, 151 

nimrod is.............................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 151 

nyssreformis..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

populoides .................. · .............................. ,. 151 

pluriocculatus ............................. : ................ -. 151 

prae-boveyanus . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 148 

Page. 

Carpolithes punctatostriatus ..... • ........ , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

radioto-punctatus........................................... 151 

reticulatorugosus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

subalatus ...................... ! . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 151 

sulcatus..................................................... 151 

tenucpunctatus... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . . . . 151 

tricoccinus.................................................. 148 

verrucosus ............................................ : . . . . . 151 

we bsteroides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

zizyphoides ................................................ . 151 

:ioroastri ................................................... . 151 

Cashua Road, S.C., fossils on ............. · ..................... . 

Cassia .......................................................... . 

11,72 

155 

berenices ......... : ......................................... . 148 

fischeri. .................................................... . 148 

feronire ..................................................... . 148 

hyperborea ................................................. . 148 

memnonia ........................................ .' ........ . 148 

phaseolites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 

prre-li~itum.. .. . .. ... ........ .. ............... .. . . . . . .. .... 148 

. prre-memnonia ..... · ....... ·.................................. 148 

prre-phaseolites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 

prre-sagorina ...................................... -:. . . . . . . . . 148 

prre-stenophylla .................... :........................ 148 

pseudo-glandulosa ........................ :.:................ 148 

sagoriana ........................... :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 

ungeri ................... :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 

zephyri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 

Carex ...................................... .. ........ ........... 29 

clarkii....................................................... 29 

Castanea ....................................... 138-139, 153, 157, 158 

claibornensis ............................... 131, 138-139,157,188 

· dentata ........ , .......... · ............................ 129, 138, 157 

nana ................ :............. .......................... 139 

pumila...................................................... 139 

vulgaris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 

Castano psis ............. : ........... ·.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 

Caulinites inquirendus ................................... ·... . . . . 14 

cec::;i~~:~~-s-i~::::::: :::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::: : :::::::::: :· ~~~ eocenica..................................................... 148 

Cedrela primigenia ....................•.... ~.................... 148 

Celastracere ................................................... 49-51 

Celastrophyllum ........................................ 50-51,63,65 

carolinensis ................. .' ..................... 10,51,69, 72,96 

crena tum ............................................... 50, 69, 72 

~~~~~=ii~~::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::. ~~:~-~~~~· 72i:! 

undulatum ...... : ......................... ."................. 70 

Celastrus ............................................. · ......... 153, 154 

arctlca ..................................... ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 

elrenus.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '148 

fengre....................................................... 148 

myricinus................................................... 148 

prre-europreus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 

salidre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 

tafnis.... ........ .. .. .. . ..... .. ....... .. . .. . .. . . .. .. . . . . .... 148 

cei~~~~~~~r~ii;:::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :·::. 36, 1:~ iguanens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 

reticulata.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 

woodwardi.................................................. 149 

Cephalotaxites insignia ... .' ........................... •........... 18 

Ccpbalotaxopsis................................................. 18 

Cephalotaxospermum .....................................••.• 18·19 

· carolinianum .. .' ................................... 11, 18·19, 72,76 

Cephalotaxus............. .. . . . .. . . . . .. . . .. . .. . . . . . .. .. . . .. .. 18, 19, 68 

Ceratopetalum crassipes...... . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. . . .. .. .. . .. .. 149 

haeringianum............................ ... . .. . . . . .. . .. . . . . . i49 

manni ............ :. .. . . . .. . .. . . . . .... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 149 

Chamrerops...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 

· borealis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

Cheilanthes ............ .'........ . . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. . . . .. .. . . . . . .. . . 154 

Chenopodiales ....................... : ................. ~ .... 140.142 

Cheraw, S. C., fossils at ......................................... 11,72 

Chimney Bluff, Ga., fossils at .................... 101-102, i21, 125,128 

view at . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 

Chiropteris .. : ............................. i .... :................ 115 

.,-4 

J. 

, 
INDEX. 193 

Page. 

Chondrophyllum norderskioldi................................. 138 

Chrysodium O.l!roum .......................................... 134,158 

lo.nzeo.num ................................................. 133, 149 

Cinehouidium lo.neolatum...................................... 149 

prae-bilinlcum ........................................... ,.. 149 

~;~:~~~~~~~~~:: :::::::::::::::::: ::: : :::::: : ~::: ::: :::::::: . ~:~ Cinno.momum .... ; ........................................ 36, 54·55, 

63,66, 6i,68,117-118, 122,1-39,153,155,1.57 

o.lbillorun1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. • .. .. • • .. .. . . • .. . . . . .. . • • . .. .. .. 55 

chlnonsis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 

eocenionn1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

distribution of, figure showing.............................. 124 

heerii. .................................... 70,101,118,119,125,174 

inteT?nedium................................................. 117 

lniddendorfensis ........................... 54-55,68,69,72, 86,88 

newberryi. ........... 10, 54-55,66, 69, 72,88,101,117-118,125,17 4 

polymorphum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

rossmmsslori . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

sezannense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 

Cissus. .............. .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. ... . .. . . . ......... 154 

aurorm...................................................... 149 

celastrlfolia .............................................. :... 149 

Citrophyllum ........................................... 47-48,65,68 

aligcrum ......................................... 10,47-48,69,72 

Citrus ......................................................•.••. 47,65 

Claiborne group, distribution of.. ....... :...................... 148 

fossils from .................................... 129,131,132,156-157 

occurrence and character of. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . 129-130 

Clark, W. B., cited .. .. . .. .. . .. . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . .. .. . . .. .. . .. .. .. . 128 

Clarno formation, fossils of.............................. . . . . . . . . 155 

Clerodendron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 

europmum ................................................ , . 149 

Climate, Cretaceous, nature of ............... .' ............... 66-68,122 

Climate, Eocene, nature of .................................... 158-159 

Cocculus ........................................ :. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 154 

cinnamomeus................... . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 55 

Columbia, S.C., 25 miles below, fossils at....................... 10 

Combretacem ............................................... 146•147 

C01npositm........ .. . .. . .. . .. ... . . ....... ... . .. . . . . . .. . . ... ..... 161 

Comptonia acutiloba ...................... , ................ : . .. 149,153 

Congaroe Hivcr, S. C., fossils on .................... , ............ 10,72 

Coniferales ............................ · .... 17-27,63,64,103-107,153 

Con~~~~~~~t~~ ·.·.·:.-.·.·.·::.".".".·.·.·.·.-.-.~ ·.·. ·.·.·.·_-_-_·.".".".".'.".".".'.".".".·.·.· ... -~~~~~57,~!~ oocenioa ............................................... 131, 157,190 

Cop~~:~:~~~ ~;~;l;~i ·.: ............ ·. · ....... '.".".".". ·. ·. ·. ·. · ..... · ....... ·. ·. ·.:: ·. ·. ·. ·. ·.: ·.·.-~~~~-~57'~!~ prisca ...............................•........... ·.··.... .. . . . 149 

vcladm...................................................... 149 

Corchorites quadricostatus......... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 151 

quinquecostatus .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

Cornophyllum sp............................................... 70 

Cornus.. .. .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 

atlantica . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

Corylus ....................................................... 154,155 

primigonia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

Cotoneo.stcr sheppycnsis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

Cmssatcllites protcxta........................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 

Cratmgus....................................................... . 155 

Cretaceous climate, nature of. ................................... 66-68 

Cretaceous flora. See Georgia; South Carolina. 

Cric, L., cited................................................... 153 

Crot.on.......................................................... 65 

Crotonophyllum ............................................ 48,65,69 

crotacetun ................. :................................. 48 

panclurmformis ................................. 10,48,68,69, 72,84 

Oryptomcria primreva . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • . • • • • • • • 23 

Ctonopt:orla insiguis............................................. 105 

Cucumites sheppycnsis.......................................... 151 

Cunninghamia .................................................. 25, 64 

elegans.. .. .. ....... ... . . . ... . .. . .. . . .. .... .. .. .. .... .. ...... 24 

Cunninghamites .................... 24-25, 64, 106-107, 118,126, 127 

elogans ............................ 10, 24-25, 69, 72, 102, 106-107 

oxyceclrus................................................... 25 

squamosus ................................................. . 

vo.r. densifolia ........ .................................. . 

var. Zinearia .....................•................ . · ..... . 

24 

24 

24 

Page. 

Cunninghamites stembergii.. .. . .. .... .. . .. .. . . . . .... .. .. ... .. ... 27 

Cunonia ................ ........................................ 51 

Cupanla corrugata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149, 151 

depressa .................................................. 149, 151 

grandis .................................................... 149,151 

inflata....................................................... 151 

lobata ................ ~ .................................... 149,151 

pygmma ........................ ·. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

subangulata ............................................... 149, 151 

tumida ........................ , ........................... 149,151 

Cupresseacom ............................................... 25-26,64 

Cupressinitcs clongatus . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. . . . . . .. . . . .. .. . 151 

globosus ........ ·.· ........................................ 149, 151 

recnrvatls....... ..... .. .. .. . . .. . .. . .. .. . . .. . . . . .. . . .. . ... . . . 151 

subfusiformis ............... ,..................... ... .. .. . .. 151 

Cupressus taxiformis. ................... .. . . . . .. . . . . .. .. .. . . .. . . 153 

Cusseta sand member, correlation of............................. 126 

fossils of..................................................... 126 

occurrence and character of. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 

view of ....... : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 

Cycadacere.... ............ .. ...... ........ .. .......... .. ........ 16 

Cycad ales .................. : ............................. 16, 18, 63,64 · 

Cyco.dlnocarpus circularis....................................... 70 

Cyperacere ........................ • ............................. ·. 29 

Cyperites eocenicus ........................................... 149,151 

Cyperus ...................... ~. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 

Cytherea ovata var. greggi ....... .......... :.................... 131 

D. 

Dacrydium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 

Dakota sandstone, fossils of. ............................ 71, 72, 126,128 

Dalbergia cyclophylla ..... .'............... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

eocenica..................................................... 149 

haeringiaua .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . .. .. .. 149 

longifolia ...................... :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 . 

primreva .................................................... · 149 

ungeri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 149 

Dall, W. H., cited ........................ , ........... : ......... 161 

Damman\ ..... : ................................................. 6i, 71 

borealis .' ................. ·. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 

Daphne......................................................... 45 

Dap~C:i;:~!c:r:~ll~~-:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: .·::::: ~::::::: ~:: heeri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118 

veronensis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

Darlington, S. C., 8 miles east of, fossils· at ................... ~ .. 11,73 

Darton, N. H.,cited......................... .... ......... .. . .. .. 6 

Dawson, J. 'N., cited . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. .. . . . . .. . . . . 48 

Delesseria....................................................... 115 

ruscifolia.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 

Dewalquea ................................................. 41-43,65 

aquisgranensis ................ :............................. 42 

· coriacea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42, 43 

dakotensis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 

:;!~~:.:~!~~:::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::-::::::::: 33, ~~ haldemiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42, 43 

ins ignis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42, 43 

pentaphyila ................................................. 42,43 

primordialis................................................. 42 

smithi ...................................... 10,41, 41-43, 69, 72,86 

trifoliata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 

Dicksonia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · 67 

Dicotylcdonm ...... 30-63,64,67,109-121,122,138:.147,153,156,161 

Dioscorca ...... .. . .. . . . . . ... .............................. .. .... 169 

Diospyros .................................... 61-62,63,66,68,153,155 

eoccnioa ................................................... 149, 151 

plcaclum....... .. . . . . .. . .. . . . . .. .. . . . . . . .. .. .. .. ............ 151 

primrova ................................ 10,61-62,661 69,72,92,98 

rotundifolia ..................................... 10, 62, 66, 69, 72,98 

,;irginiana. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . .. . . .. .. .. . .. . .. 62 

Diploclon ta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 

Dipterocarpacem .................. ~............................. 63 

Dodonma ................................................ 142-143,157 

prae-salicites...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . • . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. 149 

prisca ........................................................ 143 

subglobosa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 149 

vetusta.................................................. . . . . 143 
I ' 

194 INDEX. 

Page. 

Dodo~roa ~cosa .......................................... 143,157,158 

VlSCOSOldes ................................... 131,142-143,157,188 

Dodonrocero ............................................ 142-143,156 

Doryanthes..................................................... 108 

Doryanthites ........................................... 108-109,113 

cretacea .................................... 102, 108-109,126,166 

Dryandra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 

Dryanoides ..................... , .... : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 

quercinea ........................ ,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 

Dryophyllum ... : .............................. '....... . . . . . . . . . . 154 

Dryopterites .............................................. 67, 1q3, 122 

kennerleyi_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 

oerstedi . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 

stephe~soni. ............................... : ..... 102, 103,127, 166 

E. 

Ebenacero ...................... : •........... : ................. 61-62 

Ebenales ................. · ............. :: ................... 61-62,66 

Echinostrobus ..................................... i-·............ 22 

Echitonium .......................... :.......................... 153 

Elrois eocenica . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

Elrood~ndron .............. '........ ... . . . . .. . . . .... . . . . . . . .... .. 154 

. dubium..................................................... 149 

Engler, A., cited................................................ 137 

Eocene flora, bibliography of.. ............................. ' ... 161-163 

See also Georgia. · 

Eolirion.... •. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 

Equise.tum ................ --~---~---- ......................... 154-155 

Ericacero ........................................... 58-60, 120-121 

Ericales ......................................... , 58-60,66, 12o-121 

Ettingshausen, C. von, cited .............. : ................ 27,117,145 

Eucalyptus ............. 55-57,63,66,67,68,.119-120,121,122,126,154 

augusta ...... 11,55-56,57,66, 72,98, 101,102, 119-120,125,126,172 

angustifolia. . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. . • . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . .. 56 

attenuata................................................... 70 

distribution of, figure showing . _............................ 125 

dubia ........ :............................................... 57 

geini tzii .. : .............................. 10, 39, 56-57, 60, 72, 96, 98 

haeringiana .............. .' .............. .' ...... ,............ 149 

la tifolia . _ .. ~. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 

linearifolia .................................................. 57,70 

nervosa ....................... _. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 

oceanica ........................... : ............... , ....... 149,151 

wardiana ................................... .' ......... 57,69, 72,98 

Eugeinitzia ......................... _ ...... ·..................... 23 

Eugenia ................................................. _ ..... 158, 160 

aizoon ..................................................... 147, 157 

eocenica ............ , . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 151 

hroringiana .......... _ ... _ ..................... '. . . . . . . . . . . . 147, 157 

primrova . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 

Eugenis apollinis................................................ 149 

Euphorbiacero ....................................... 48,65,114-116 

Euphorbiales .. <f ............... __ ........... _ .......... 48, 114-116 

Euphorbiophyllum eocenicum... . .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . . . 151 

vetus .... · .......... _ .. _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 

Europe, Eocene floras of ...................................... 147-151 

- Upper Cretaceous fossils of ......... _ ................ 71, 72, 127-128 

Eutaw formation, correlation of ............................... 125-126 

fossils of. ................................................ 70, 72,125 

occurrence and character of.......... . . .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. 100 

F. 

Faboidea acuta ........ ............... ............................ 151 

angustissima .................. :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . .. .. . . . . 151 

· bifalcis ............................................... , . . . . . . 151 

complanata ..................................... :. . . . . . . . . . . 151 

crassa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

crassicu tis ................... _ .. _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

doliformis ............................................... :. :. 151 

larga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

longiuscula ........................................ :. . . . . . . . . 151 

marginata............................................... . . . . 151 

oblonga ........... : .. _. _........................ . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

ovata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

pinguis............................ . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . .. .. . .. . .. . 151 

plana ...................... _................................ 151 

planidorsa ........... : _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

planimeta.. . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

Page.· 

Faboidea quadrapes.... ... . .. .. .. .. ... . . . . . . . ................... 151 

robusta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

rostrata.:................................................... 151 

semicurvilinearis............................................ 151 

subdisca . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . . .. .. .. .. . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . 151 

subrobusta.............................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

sub tennis ........................ _ ...................... ·.... 151 

· symmetrica .............. _ .. : ........ , .. . .. .. . .. . . . . . . .. . .. . 151 

tennis ............ _ . _ ... _ ... : . ............. ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

ven tricosa .... , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

J<'agacero ........................ _ ......... ' ..... 35-36, 138-139, 156 

Fagales .................. _ ......... : ................ 35-36, 138-139 

Fagus ..... ·........................................................ 67 

intermedin. ........................................... ."...... 149 

·Ficus ........................... 36-39,63,65.68,69,71,110-111,121, 

126,129, 140,153,154,155,157,158,160 

aligera .......•... _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . 47 

arenacea ................ _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

atavina ..................... : ........... 10,36-37,38,69,72,90,111 

beck\vithii ................................................. 38,111 

bowerbankii ............................ · .. ,................. 149 

bumelirofolia ............... _,_............................... 149 

bumelioides ............................. : .................... : 47 

celtifolius ..................................... , .... 37,68,69,72,94 

cisro. _ ... _................................................... 148 

claibornensis ................................. 131,140,157,180,186 

crassipes ........... 10, 11, 37,05, 68,60, 72,90,94, 102,110-111,125 

daphnogenoides..................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 

delata....................................................... 149 

elastica .... · .................... .' ........... _ -.· .............. 39,140 

falconeri .. . . .. .. . .. . . . .. .. . .. . . .. . .. . . .. .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . 149 

georgiana .. __ .. _ ................... _._ ........... 102,111,126,172 

glascoeana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . 39 

granadilla .............. ~............... .... . . . . .. ..... ...... 149 

hydrachos ............ ."...... .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. . 149 

inguionis ........ · ....... ~ .. _.. ....... ....... ......... ........ 149 

jynx ................ ........................................ 149 

krausiana ... __ .. _ ....... 10, 11,37, 38,65, 69, 72,92, 102,110,125, 170' 

lanceolata ........ ·................... ............ ............ 149 

mohliana ............................................. ,...... 38 

morridi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

mudgei........ ........ ... .. ... ... ........................... 47 

nerthi. ... ·.................................................... 149 

ovata .. ................ _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . • . . . . 111 

ovatifolia ...... _ ..... _ ..................... 37, 70,101, 111,125,170 

planicostata ........................ _ .. _.................... 149 

prro-arcinervis .... ·- .........•............. :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

prro-lanceolata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

peruni . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 

protog;ea . _ . _ . _ ..... _ .. _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . 36 

reussii. .. _ ... _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . 149 

rhamnoidcs . _ .... _. _. _. _.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

steph~nsoni. .. : . ......... _ .................. 10,38-39,65,69,72,94 

suspecta ......... _ ...................... : .......•.•..• :. • . . . . 38 

woolsoni. .................................................... 37,111 

wudgro _ . _ ........ __ .. __ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • 149 

Filicalcs ............................... 14-15,103,133-134,152-153 

Finch, John, cited ... _........................................... 5 

Fiske property, Ga., description of.............................. 130 

fossils from ................................................ 129,131 

Flabellaria . _ ..................................... ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . 152, 1\)3 

raphifolia ... : .... _ ... _ .......... _ .................... _ ..... 137,157 

Flabellaris sp .......... , ........................................ , 149 

Florence, S. C., fossils near ...................................... 11-12 

'Fontainea ................................................. ·...... 115 

grandifolia .............. _ ~......................... . . . . . . . • . . 114 

Fort Union formation, fossils from......... .. . . .. . .. . . . . . .. . . . .. . 154 

Fraxinus .......... , ....................... ,.· .................... 51,155 

jovis ....................•................................... '" 149 

Fuc~;:.;:~~:~~~=~-::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 

G. 

149 

115 

Gardncr,J. S.,citcd .......................... ~ ................ 139,153 

Geinitzia.................................................... .. . . 27 

cretacea . .............. :. . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . 23 

reichenbachi. . .................. c. • • .. . • . • . . . .. • .. .. • • . .. • .. • • 23 

Geography, ancienL ............................. 66-68,122-125, 157-11(} 

1 ..... 
. .,.. 

\· 

, 

-• 

\ 

INDEX. 195 

Page. 

Geologic history (Upper Cretaceous) of South Carolina .......... 12-14 

!)co noma...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · 30 

Georgia, Middle Eocene floras of. ........................ · ...... 129-161 

botanic character of ....................................... 156-157 

conditions indicated by ............................... 157-161 

bibliography of.. ...................................... 161-163 

geology of. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129-132 

localities of. ........................................... 130-132 

plates showing .................................. :. 128, 182-190 

study of................................................. 129 

systematic description of .............................. 132-147 

Upper Cretaceous flora of ................................. :. 99-144 

botanical character of.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121-122 

correlation of' .......................................... 125-128 

geology of ............................................... 99-110 

localities of. ........................................... 100-102 

physical conditions sllown by . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122 

plates showing... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165-180 

range of ............................................... 122-125 

figures showing ................................ 123,124,125 

study of................................................. 99 

systematic description of ........... .-.................. 103-121 

Geraniales .................................................. 47-48,65 

Ginkgo.......................................................... 154 

Ginkgoales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 

Gleditsiophyllum tricanthoides .................. '·.............. 70 

Gleichenia ................................................ :. . . . . . 67 

lumtonensis .... ·............................................. 152 

Glenn, L. C., work of............................................ 6,11 

Glossochlamys transmutrms..................................... 152 

Glycymeris tr;gonella............................................ 132 

Olycyrrhiza deperdita........................................... 149 

Glyptostrobus ................................... · ............. : 153, 154 

eocenica ..................................................... · 153 

ouroprous . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

Godoya ....................................................... 149,153 

Oomphia lincaris .............. ·...... .. .... .. .. . . .. . . .. .. . . . . . . . . 144 

Goniopteris stiriaca...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 

Greenland, Upper Cretaceous fossils of ..................... i2, 126,128 

Green River formation, fossils of .... , ......................... 154-155 

Grovillca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 

hermionis ...................................... _.. . . . . . . . . . . 149 

ten era....................................................... 103 

Grevilleophyllum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 

eonstans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 

Grewia....... ............................. .... .. .. ... ....... .... 171 

Grewiopsis............................................... .. . .. . . 154 

integerrima . .. . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . .. .. . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . .. . . 149 

·Grovetown, Ga., fossils from .................................. 130,131 

Gymnogramma gardner! . . .. . . .. . . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 

Gymnospermro .................................. 16-27,63,103-107 

H. 

Haliseritcs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 . 

polypodoides................................................ 115 

relchil....................................................... 114 

·Hamamelidace:::e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 

Hamamelidoxylon .. . . .. .. .. . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .. . . .. . . . . .. . . 45 

Hmnmnelis... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 

Hamamelites (?) .... , ...............•............••....••...•..• 45,65 

co:datus ........................................... 10,45,69, 72,90 

Hamburg phase, correlation of , .. . .. ... . . . . . .. .. . . . . .. . . .. .. . . . . 7 

'Heer, 0., cited ......................................... 18,110,113,137 

Heimerl, A., cited............................................... 141 

Hedera ..................................................... 57-58,66 

helix ................................ ,........................ 5!i 

primordia lis ...... : .................................. 11,5 7-58,72 

·nelleborero ............................................. :. . . . . . . . 42 

Hephzibah, Ga., fossils near..................................... 131 

Hoterolepis ..................................................... 10, 27 

cretaceus .......................................... 27, 68, 69, 72,76 

Heward Ia regia ............................ , . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 

Hi coria ........................ · ................................ 154,155 

:Hightca elcgans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

elllptica ................................................... 149,151 

inflata •.................................... , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

minima..................................................... 151 

orbicularis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

Page. 

Hightea oviformis.............. . . . • . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

turbinata ............................ ~ .................... 149, 151 

Hip~~~;~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~: : :::: :::: ~ ~ : ~:::: :: :: :::: :: : :: : ~! Hiraea intermedia .......... ~........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

History, geologic. See Geologic history. 

Hollick, Arthur, cited........................................... 155 

Hollick, A., and Jeffrey, E. C., cited ............ : ........... 23, 26,104 

Hybothya erassa................................................ 151 

Hydrocharitacero ............................ ,................... 135 

H ymenroa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 

I. 

Ilex ......................................................... ; . . . . 154 · 

atlantica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

Illicium ..........•................................... 44-45,65,68,69 

deletum.... ..... .. . .. .... ...... .... .... .... ..... .... .. ...... 45 

apollinis ............................................ : ....... , 151 

w'atereensis ................................. 10,44-45,68,69,72,98 

Inolepis ..................................... ·. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 

Iriartea ... · ................................................ · ..... 30,153 

punctata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

striata. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

J. 

Jatropha ...................................................... 114,115 

Juglandacero ............................................. 30-31,109 

Juglandales ................................ .' .......... 30-31,64,109 

Juglandites eernuus ............. , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. . . . . . . .. . . 149 

Jugla~s .............. : .......................... 30-31,64, 122,154,155 

arctica ............................... 30-31,69, i2,86, 101,109,125 

crassipes ....................................... ; . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 

eocenica ............................ ; .... :................... 151 

· prro-parschlugiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

sharpe!...................................................... 149 

K. 

Kalmia brittoniana .............................. ·. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 

Kenai formation, fossils of.. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 

Kerner, F. von., cited...... . .. . .. . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 17, 20 

Knowlton, F. H., cited ............................. 30,106,154,155,156 

l{rannera . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 

I 

L. 

Langdon, D. W.,cited ........................... .': ......... 99,102,129 

Langley, S. C.,clay near, view of. ............................... , 8 

fossils near ................. ~ ................................ 10, 72 

Lastrea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 

Latanites.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . 30 

Lauracero ... : ............................ 52-55,67,117-119,144,156 

La uris agathophyllum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 149 

haidingeri. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

jovis .. . . .. . . .. . . .... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. 149 

lalages ............................ , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

ocoteides. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

primigenia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

salteri.......................................... .. . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

socialis...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

swoszowiciana ....................................... :. . . . . . 149 

vetusta. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

Laurophylhim .......................................... 53-54,63,66 

angustifolium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 

daphnog~noides ............................. :............... 54 

elegans ........................................... 53-54,69,72,94 

lanceolatum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 

nervillosum ................................. 11, 53-54, 54, 69, 72,94 

reticulatum ..................... ·....... .......... .... ....... 54 

Laurus ........................................ 52-53,63,66,67 ,68,153 

angusta ....... ... ....... .............. ...................... 53 

atanensis ............................................. 53, 69, 72,96 

lalages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

plutonia ................................. 10, 52-53, 54, "70, 72, 9£,96 

Lawsonia curopma . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

Leda ....................... ~ ........... ·............. .. .. . . . . . . . . 131 

Leguminosro ................................................... 6i, 145 

Leguminosites ........ !. ~ ........... : ......... 46-4 7, 63, 65, 69,153,154 

roquilateralis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

callisemrofolium............................................. 149 
196 INDEX. 

. . . Page. Legummos1tes cordatus ..... _ .................... _............... 151 

crassus .......... · .................................... _ . . . . . . . 151 

curtus ..................... _ . _ ................. _ ..... _ . __ . . . . 151 

dimidiatus ......................... _ .. _ ...... _ ..... : _ ..... _ _ 151 

elegans ............................... ·. _. _ .. _ ......... _. . . . . . 151 

enormis ·_ ............................ _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

. gracilis ..................... _ .......... _ ..... _ .... _ . _ . . . . . . . . 151 

inconstans ............ ~ ............... _ ...... _ ... _ . . .. .. .. .. 151 

lentiform is . .. . .... .. . .. .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. 151 

lobatus ................................... _ .. __ .............. 151 

longissimus .......... __ .............. _ .. _ ..... _ ... · ........ _.. 151 

middendorfensis ........ : ............................. 46, 70,72,86 

pachyphyllus ........... _ ....................... _ ........ _. _ 14~ 

planus .................................. __ .. _. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

reniformis .............................. _ ...... '_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

robinifolia ...................................... , 10,46-47,72,84 

·rotundatus .............. _ ..... _ ..... _ ..... _ ....... _ ...... _... 151 

subquadrangularis ..................... _................ .. .. 151 

subovatus ................... · .......................... _. _... 151 

trapeziformis ............................................... _ 151 

Lesquereux, Leo, cited ........................... 18, 29, 30, 138, 154,155 

Leucosyke .................................................. _... 55 

Leucothoo .................................. _ ..... _ ........ _... . . 60 

Lib~:e:l::~~i-i_::: ::::::::::::::,:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~~ Lieber, 0. E., cited.............................................. 6 

Liliales ... .'...................................................... 108 

Liquidambar. .. . . ... .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. .. . . ... . 155 

eocenicum ....................... ·............................ 151 

Lii:iodendron ....................... _ ..... _ ..................... 48, 122 

dubia .................................... -~ ............. _ .... 70 

prim::evum.................................................. 70 

succedens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 

Livistoma eocenica. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

Lomatia brittanica ......................... ·:................... 149 

Lower Cretaceous series, occurrence and character of. ..... _...... 7 

Lycopodiace::e ........................................ :.. .. .. .. .. 15 

Lycopodiales ........................................ ~........... 15 

Lycopodium ................................................... 15,64 

crctaceum ......................................... 15,68,70,72,74 

Lyell, Charles, cited ..................................... ~....... .5 

Lygodium ............................................. : ...... 153,154 

· ,kaulfussi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . 152 

M. 

McBean formation, fossils from................................... 130 

occurrence and character of. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. i3o 

McBrides Ford, Ga., fossils at .......... : .............. 101,121,125,128 

McCallie, S. W., cited .... : ................................. 99,129,131 

Macon, Ga., fossils near ....................................... 129,131 

Magnolia .............. 43-44,63,67,68, 112-1131121,122,146,153,155 

boulayana ....................................... 101,112,125,172 

capellinii ................... 10,43,69, 72,90, 101,112,-113,125,172 

eocenica..................................................... . 151 

glaucoides.. ... .. . .. . . . . .. . ... . . . . . . .. . .. . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . .. .. 112 

hilgardiana ................................................ H6, 155 

longifolia ................................................... 43,155 

longipes....................................... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 

newberryi. ............. : . ............................ 11,43-44,72 

laurifolia.................................................... 146 

obtusata ................................................ 44, 70,72 

speciosa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 

stygia.................. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

tenuifolia ............................................... 44,172,88 

vaningcni ............................ ~............... . . . . . . . 112 

woodbridgensis ..... t ••••••• .' ••••••• ~....................... 43 

Magnoliace::e .................................... 43-45,112-113,122 

Magotby formation, fossils of. ........................... 70-72,126,128 

Malapoenna ...................... : ..... 118-119,122,131,144,-158,161 

genicuhita ............... , ................. : ................. · 157 

horrelensis .................................. 70,101,118-119,125 

sp ...................................... · ............... ·. 144,157,186 

Malpighiastrum banisterium ..................................... , 149 

grandifolium . . .. .. . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .... . . .. .. . . . .. .. . 149 

prre-venosum............................................ ... 149 

Page. 

Manastash formation, fossils of ............................ ·.. . .. . 156 

Mangroves, view of.......................................... .. .. 103 

Manicaria .........................•............................ 30, 154 

Manihot ...................................................... 114,116 

Manihotites .... : .. ................................. 113, 114-116, 122 

georgiana ............... 101,102,114-116,115,125,126,176,178,180 

Marattia hookeri .............. : . .......................... _..... 149 

Maryland, fossils of ....................................... :. .. .. 71 

Matawan formation, fossils of................................... ·n 

Mcniphyllum elegans ............... :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 

Menispermites .. : ........................................ 113,122,126 

abutoides ..................... : .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............. 151 

variabilis ................... ~---·······------ .... 101,113,125,174 

Mesozoic flora, range of. ........................................ 122-125 

range of, figures showing .............................. 123,124,125 

Mctrosideros"microcarpa ................................... _.... 151 

Miami, Fla., mangroves near, view of. ..................... _.... 103 

Middendorf, S.C., fossils near ................................... 8-9,72 

section near .................................. : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 

view of.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 

Middendorf arkose member, correlation of. ...................... GS-70 

deposition of ................................................ 12-13 _ 

fossils from ................... · .......... : .... : ...... 7, 72,68-70,126 

occurrence and cbaractQr of... .. .. .. . . . .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. . . .. .. 7, 8 

views of. ...................................... ·.............. 8 

See also Black Creek formation. 

Miles Mill, S. C., fossils at_ .................................... 10-11,72 

Miller, B. L.,workof ...... _...................................... 7 

Mimosacere .......................................... 44-48,142,156 

Mimosites....................................................... 142 

brownian us . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

georgianus ............................... : . .......... 131,142, 186 

Miq ~~.e;~-~~;~~~:~ed. : : :::::::::::::::: ::: :: :::::::::::::: :·:::- ~~~ Modiolus ...................................................... 130,131 

alabamiensis..... ... ... .. . . . .. .... .. .... . .. . .. ...... . .. .. . .. . 131 

texanus ................................................... 131,132 

Momisia ... , ..................................... 36,65,139-140,157 

aculeata ........... : ........................................ 140,157 

americana .................................. 131,139-140, 157,186 

carolinensis ....................................... 36, 68, 70, 72,94 

Monocotyledonre .. 27-30, 63, 64, 108-109, 122,134-135, 153,156,161 

Montana group, fossils of.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72, 128 

Moracere .......................................... 110-111, 140, 156 

Moriconia .......................... : .............. 22, 26··27, 64, 67,69 

americana ............................................... 26, 72,84 

cyclotoxon .................................................. 21,26 

Morinda ....................... :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 

Musa eocenica ..................................................... 151 

Musophyllum ................. : ................................... 154 

Myrica ......................... 31-32, 51, 63, 65, 68, 132, 153, 154, 155 

acuminata . . .. . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. .. 149 

aspera..................... .... .... ... . . . . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 

brittoniana., ......................................... 11, 31, 72, 84 

cliffwoodensis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 

elegans ....................................... 11,31-32,51, 72,88 

haeringiana ·................................................. 149 

heerii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 

lignitum.. .. .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . .. .. . .. . .. . . . . .. . . . ...... .. . 149 

pr::ecox...................................................... 32 

.sagoriana ............................. :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

· salicina.......................... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

serrata.................................................. ... . 51 

Myricaccre ..................................................... 31-32 

Myri~ales .................................................. 31-32, 65 

Myrsinacere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 

Myrsine ............................. · .................... 61, 66, 69, 153 

borealis ........................ :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62, 70 

elongata.: ............................................. :.. . . . 61 

erdre ....................... ,................................ 149 

gaudini ..................... ' .. . . .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 61, 72,98 

.!tfyrsinites gaudini . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . • . • . . . . 61 

Myrtacere ............................... 55-57,65, 67, 119-120, 145 

Myrtales .............................. 55-57,66,119-120,144-147 

Jviyrtophyllum geinitzi........................... ... . . . . .. . . . .•. . . . 56 

warderi. .... . . . .. ... . .. . . .. .. . .. . .. .. . . .. . ... .. . .. .. . . . .. .. . . 59 

Myrtus eocenica ..................................•.......... :. . . 149 

... 

L-
. JINDEX. 197 

N. Page. 

Nngelopsis .......................................... 0........... 18 

longifolin 0 0 0 0 •••• 0 •••••• 0 ••••••••• 0 0 0 ••••• 0 ••• 0 ••• , • 0 • • • • • • • • 16 

Nnindncem ........ 0 0 0. 0 ••• 0 0 •• 0. 0 ••••••••••••••• 0 •••• 0 0 •• 27-28, 135 

Naiad ales ............................................ 0 0 •• 27-28, 135 

~elumbium buchii .............. 0 •••••••••••• 0 ••••• 0 ••••••••• 0 149,151 

microcarpum ................... 0 •••••••• 0 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• • • 151 

Norilnn •......... 0 ••••••••••••••••• 0 ••••• •••••••••••••••••••••••• 153 

parisiensis .. 0 0 ••••• 0 ••••• 0 •••••• 0 •••••••••• 0................. 152 

Newberry, J. S., ct'tedo.o .. .. .. .. . ... .. . .. . . . . . ... . . . . ... . .. ..... 154 

New Jersey, fossils of ..................................... o ...... 70,71 

Nipa ................................... , ................... 30,153,159 

burtini............................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

distribution of, figure showing............................... 160 

elllptica..................................................... 151 · 

lanceolatn........... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

parkinson is . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

senllteres .......................................... .'......... 151 

Nipadites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 

burtini...................................................... 152 

distribution of, figure showing............................... 160 

Nitophylh:un .............. : ....................... ." ....... ,..... 152 

North Am!lrlca, Eocene floras of ................... ." ........... 153-156 

North Carolina, fossils of........................................ 71 

Not.elma primigenia............................................. 149 

Nuculamagnlflca.. .. ... ... . . .. .. .. . ... . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . 131 

ovula ..................................................... 131,132 

Nuphnr. .... ................. .. .. ... ..... .. .. .. . . . . .. ... .. ........ 152 

N yctaginacem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . 140-1.42, 156 

Nymplima doris................................................. 149 

Nyssa........................................................... 45 

alumensis................................................... 149 

eoeenica. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

enropma......................... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

pnu-striolata................................................ 149 

0. 

Ochnaccm ................................................... ·. . . . 139 

CEnocarpus sheppycnsis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 

Olea brlttanica...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

Onoclea ................................................ 14-15,64,154 

inquircuda ...................................... ~ 14-15,70,72,74 

Orangeburg County, geology of.................................. 6 

Oreodoxites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30. 

Osborn, H. F., cited............................................. 154 

Osmunda lignitmn.................................... . . . . . . . . . . 152 

obergiana ••. .••.•............................................ 14,15 

Ostrco... ........ .. .. . .. . ... . . . .. . . .. .. .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 131 

almnbmniensls. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132 

Ottclla ..................... ·.................. .. . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . 135 

po.rlslcnsls ....... : ......................................... 152,157 

P . 

Pachyphyllmn araucarinum.................................... 20 

rlgidun1 ............................................ ·......... 20 

Pachypteris .................................................... 17,103 

Paehystima ................................................ 49-50,65 

cretaccn ....................................... 49-50,68,70,72,90 

Pagiophyllum arnucarinmn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , 20 

rlgiduJn ............................. ·........................ 20 

Palmlobium haoringianum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .• . . . . . 149 

hctcrophyllum.............................................. 149 

prac-radobojcnsc............................................ 149 

sotzkianun1 ........................ ·.......................... 149 

Paleogeography ............ · ..................... 6G-68, 122-125,157-161 

Paliurus .................................................. 116,122,126 

obovatus.................................................... 116 

populifolius . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . • . . . . . . 116 

upo.toicnsis ...................................... 101,116,125,174 

Pal1nncites ............................................ .' ....... 152,153 

Palmro ...•.......................................... 29-30,136-137 

Panax..... .... .. . . . . . .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... ........ -51 

Pandanus ................................. · ..................... 152, 159 

lutctianus .................................. ·................. 152 

Pecdee sand, deposition or:...................................... 14 

occurrence and character of. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 

Pelecypod a ..................................................... : 130 

Penhallow, D.P., cited......................................... 156 

Pcrsoonia ................... ·.................................... 141 

Persoonia eocenica .................................... 0 ••••••••• 

Petrophiloidcs conoideus ....................................... . 

imbricatus .................................................. . 

oviformis ................................................... . 

Phaseolitcs eriosem::efolius ....... .' .............................. . 

Page. 

149 

151 

151 

151 

149 

formus....................................................... 70 

Phegoptcris bunburii............................................ 152 

prae-cuspidata............................................... 152 

Phinizy Gully, Ga., fossils from ..................... : ..... 131,134,146 

Ph~~~~~-~~~-~~-~~~ ~~~~v-i~-g- ~ ~ ::::: :·:::: : : : :: : : ~ ~: ~: ~:::: :: : ::: . 30, ~~~ Phragmites ............ · ......... : . ............... 28,64,67,69, 109,154 

prattii. ....................................... 10, 28, 72,101, 109,125 

Phyllitm monocotylei.. ... . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 

rei chi.: .......................... :·. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115 

Phyllites apocynoidcs....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

arbutoides................................................... 149 

cecropioides........ .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

crassipes......................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

densinervis.................................................. 149 

el::eocarpoidcs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .149 

cuphorbioidcs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

ficoides.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

franguloides. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 

fre::e......................................................... 150 

gagantu::e .............. _.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

hcdcraccus .................................................. · 150 

hilticis ........ • ................ ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

hymenrooidcs ................ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

lantanoidcs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

myrtaceus ............................................. ·. . . . . . 150 

nimrod is .................................... ·................ 150 

nerthi ........................................ "'. ............. : 150 

reich! ............... ·......................................... 145 

sapindoidcs..... .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

simaruboicles......... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . 150 

syringreformis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

veled::e , ....... : . ........................................ ·.. . . 150 

Phyllocladus ................................... ::............... 67 

Phymatodes affine ................... ··'......................... 153 

polypodioides ........................ :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 

Physolobium antiquum............... .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . ... . .. . . 150 

orbiculare................................................... 150 

Pinacero ........................ , ............................... 22,64 

Pinus .................................................... 22, 27, 64,96 

bowerbankii................................................. 153 

dixoni ...... ........ .. .. .... .......... ........ .... .......... 153 

raritanensis ........................................... : . ... 22,72 

sheppyensis................................................. 151 

Pinus triphylla................................................. 22 

Pisonia ..................................... 139, 140-142, 157,158,160 

aculeata..................................................... 141 

atavia..... .. . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . .... .. 141 

bilinica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 

claibornensis .........•...................... 131, 140-142,157,188 

cretacea ..................................... , ......... :..... 70 

eocenica ............................................... 141,150,157 

floridian a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 

lancifolia................................................ . . . . 141 

macran thocarpa .............. · ............................. 141, 157 

ovata ... .,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 

racemosa.................................................... 141 

radobojana........................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141 

Pistacia brittanica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

Pistia ....................................... 28,118, 137-138,156,157 

claibornensis ............................... 131, 1.37-138,157,184 

corrugata ................................................. 137,138 

mazelii. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 

nordenskioldi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 

stratiotes ................................................. 137,157 

Pistites loriformis .............................................. _ 138 

Pittosporum eocenica .... , .................................... :. 150 

Planera . , ................................................... 0... 154 

cretacea..................................................... 70 

ungeri.. 0 00 0. 00 •• 0 0 •• 00 00 •••• 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 •• 0 •• 0 0 •••• 00 140 

Plantaginopsis marylandica..................................... 105 

Plant localities in Georgia ................ : .................... 100-102 

in South Carolina........................................... 8-12 
198 INDEX. 

Page. 

Platanus ...............•....•••..•••.•.•••••...•..........••.. 154,155 

Poacern ................................................• 28, 134-135 

Poales .............................................. 28-29, 134-135 

_Podocarpus ..... : ....... _,_ .............................. 18, 67, 153, 156 

elongata............................. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . 18 

eocenica ................................................... 150. i53 

incerta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · 1.53 

Podogonium obtl;lssissimum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

sheppyense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150, 151 

Podophyllum ... _._ ............................................ 114, 115 

Podozamites .. : ................................................ 16,64' 

angustijolius . ..................... ·. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . • . . 16 

knowltoni ..... _ .................................... 10, 16, 69, 72,78 

Polypodiacern ............................. 14-15,103,122,133..:134 

' Poplar Church. Ga., fossils near ........................ ' ....... 131,132 

Populus ................................................... 153,154, 155 

eocenica..................................................... 140 

monodon ................................................ ~... 155 

Porana roningensis ....... :................... .. . .. . . . . •. ... . . . . . 150 

Potamogeton ......................... 27-28,54,151,152,156,157,158 

curtissii.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . 135 

floridanus ............................................... :. . . 135 

megaphyllus .................................. , .. 131, 135,157,186 

middendorfensis ...................... , .... 27-28,67,68,70, 72,78 

nordenskioldi.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 

perfoliatus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 

Primulales ............................................... : ..... 61,66 

Pro tea ............................. : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 

Proteacern ............................................ 40,46,65,67,122 

Proteales .................................. · ..................... 40,65 

·Proteoides ...... .. : ........... .................... 40,63,67,68,69,111 

acuta .................................................. :..... 40 

bisulcatus ..................... ·.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . lui 

crassipes .............•.........................•......... 110,150 

daphnogenoidrs .................... . • .............. , ....... 33, 43,54 

grevillirnforinis.. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 40 

lancifolius ...................................... 10,11,40,69, 72,90 

parvula ......... :·············-------·----····--·· 40,69,70,72,90 

Protophyllocladus ... , ...................................... 17, 64,67 

~o~;:~~~;h~~::::::::::: ~: :::::::::::: :·::: :::::: -~~~~-~~~~~~~· 72, ~i subintegrifolius ...............................•......... ·..... 17 

Providence sand member, occurrence and character of . . . . . . . . . . 100 

Prunus druidum .............................................. 149, 151 

:parlatorii.................................................... 60 

prisca.. .. ... . ... .. . ...... .. ... . .. . . . . .. . . .. .... .. ........•.. 151 

pygmrnorum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . 149 

Pseudogeinitzia................................................. 23 

Psilocochlis mccallici..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 

Pteridolemma gymnorachis..................................... 103 

Pteridophyta .......................... ,. 14-15,63,64,103,133-134 

Pteris .. .. .... .. . .. . . . . . .. . . . .......... .. . . . . . ....... .. . . ........ 155 

bournensis .......................................... :. . . . . . . 153 

eocenica .................... :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 

Pterospermi tes ...... ':. ...................... : . ............. ~. . . . . 154 

carolinensis ..... : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 

crednerafolia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 

dentatus .............................................. :. . . . . 150 

Pterospermum eocenicum.. .. .. .. . . . . .. .. . .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . ..... .. 150 

Pyrenomycetes ................... · ..... '...... . . . . . . . . . . 132-133, 157 

Q. 

Quercus ................... 35-36,45,51,63, 67,129,138,139,153,154,155 

bournensis . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

chlorophylla ........................................ · ...... 145,155 

dakotensis................................................... 35 

drymeja .................................................. 150, 151 

eocenica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 

eoprinoides.............................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 

lonchitis .................................................. 150,151 

lyelli ....... : ............... .' .............................. 150, 155 

marylandica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • 35 

michauxii ••••.. ~ ................................... , . . . . . . • . . 35 

moorii........... .. . . . .. ... ................ ...... ............ 155 

phe!los .••••••••••.................. : ............ :. . . . . . . . . . • . 35 

prrn-lonchitis.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

prrn-me?iterranea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i50 

Page. 

Quercus pratti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 

prinoides.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 

prinus .................................... .................. 35 

pseudodrymeja.............................................. 35 

pseudowestfalica .............................. 10,35-36,69,72,88 

raritanensis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 

rudkini . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 ' 

sumterensis ................................. 10, 35, 68, 69, 70, 72,90 

viburnifolia . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

westfalica ............................................ '. . . . . . . 35 

R. 

Ranales ....................................... 41-45,63,65,112-113 

Ranunculacern ...................................... -'· ........ 41-43 

Raritan formation, fossils of ...................... , .......... il; 72,128 

Reid, C. and E. M., cited........................................ 153 

Rhamnacern .. ·.................................................. 116 

Rhamnales...................................................... 116 

Rhamnus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 

acutangula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

prrn-pomaderris .................................... :. . . . . . . . 150 

prrn-rectinervis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

Rhizophora •.. ; ............................ 144-146,155,157,158,160 

conjugata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 

distribution of, figure showing .... ·...............•.•••....... 159 

eocenica .......... ; ..................... 131, 132, 144-146, 157, 190 

mangle ................................................ 145,157,158 

mucroi:~ata ............ , ............................... '...... 145 

parvifolia ...... :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 

Rhizophoracern ......................................... 144-146, 156 

Rhus ................................................... 51-52,65,154 

altantidis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

cyclophy lla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . . . . 150 

darlingtoncnsis ................................... 11,51-52,72,88 

glabra ............................. ,... . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 

lanceolata... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 

prisca ............... :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

Rhystisma eucalypti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

priscum... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

Ripley formation, correlation of ............................... 126-128 

fossils of..................................................... 126 

occurrence and character of. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 

vie'v of. ..•................... ·_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 

Robinia pseudacacia ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . .... 47 

Rocky Point, S. C., fossils at .............. ~ ..................... 10,72 

section at..... . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 

Rosales ............................................... 45-48,65,142 

Roslyn formation, fossils of. .................................. :. . 156 

Rutacern .................. · .................... ··.; ............ : 47-48 

s. Sabal ........................................... · ........... 30, 152,154 

adansoni . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 

dianrn .......... ......... .. .. ..... .......... .......... ....... 152 

dryadum.................................................... 152 

major ............................. ·.......................... 150 

oreadum ...... ····.···· .................. ...............••• :. 152 

Sabalites ...................... , ........................ 29-30, 64,153 

carolinensis .........................•.......... 29-30,69,72,80,82 

magothiensis ........ : . .........................•............ 30, 66 

Salicacern ........................................... 32-34, 109-110 

Salicales ••••........................................ 32-34, 109-110 

Salisburia· ..•••..................................... _... . . . . . . . . . . 155 

eocenica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 

Salix ................................. 32-34,63,69, 109-110,154,155 

bonplandiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 

denticulata ................... .'.... .... ...................... 110 

eutavvensis ....•... : . ................. 34, 70,101,109-110,125,170 

flexuosa ................... 10,32-33,69, 72,84,92, 101,109, t'25, 126 

fluviatilis ...........................................•....... 34,110 

lavateri. ................................... ,. . . . . • • • . • . . . . . . . . 110 

lesquereuxii. ...................... 10, 11, 33,69, 72,84, 102,109,125 

newberryana ...............................••.............. 70,110 

nigra........................................................ 110 

prrn-integra ......... :................................. .. . .. . . 150 · 

protrejolia .. .' ................................................. 32,33 

jiexuosa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • 32 

linearifolia...... . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • 32 

longifolia ... _ .... :........................................ 33 
;J· 

INDEX. 199 

Page. 

Salix psoudohay'ol ........................................ 34, 70, 72, 92 

rmana ...................................................... : 34 

roiohonbnchii................................................ 69 

rhcdm ...................................... .-. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

sloan! .......................................... 10, 34, G9, 70, 72,86 

tabellnris'.................................................... 155 

· tc,nuifolia.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

varians .............................. : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110 

worthenii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15!i 

Salmalit~ borealis ............................. · ............ , ..... ' 150 

Santalum acheronticum......................................... 150 

· miorophyllum ......... ...... :......... .... .... ........ ..... . 150· 

osyrinum ..................... :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150: 

snlicinum .. . . . .. . .. . . .. . . . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . .. .. . .. .. .. .. . . 150 ( 

Sapindar.ern ........................................ 49, 143-144,156: 

Sapindnles ..................................... 49-52 ,63,65,142-144! 

Sapindopsis .................................. !.................. 115 · 

Sapindus ..................... 49, 65,143-144,153,154, 15.'i,157, 158, 1()0 

affinis: ....... : . ....................................... 143-144,157 

nngustifolius ...................................... 143,144,1.50,157 

crossinervis ............................. :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

eoconicus .................................................. 150,152 

falcifolius.................................................... 150 

georgiana ................................... 131,143-144,157,186 

1narg:natus.................................................. 144 

morrisoni ................... : .. ................... 10, 49, 70, 72,88 

snponaria ......................................... 144,15i,158,1GO 

stellal'irnfolht .............................................. 143,144 

So.porta, G. do, cited ...................... .' .................... 20,153 

Saporta, G. de, and Marion, A. F., cited........................ 42 

Sapotacitos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 

ehrysophylloides............................................ 152 

emnrginatus . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . .. .. . . . \150 

coconicus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

1nimusops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 

sidcroxyloidcs............................................... 150 

Sassafras ...................................................... 122,125 

o.cutilobum ....................... , .. .. .... . .. . . . .. . . . .. .. .. 70 

Saurajn. robusta . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . .. .. . . 150 

Sclerotium antiquum . .. . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . . .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. . 152 

Sequoia ............................ 23-24,27, G7,107,122, 125,154,155 

bowcrbankii ... ·....................................... ... . . . . 150 

eouttsill' ................................................ 23,150,153 

heterophylla ......................•........... ."............. 70 

lnngsdorfl.i ................................................. 23, 150 

JninOt' ....................................... :..... .. ........ 70 

reichenbachi .............. 9, 23-24,64,72,78,101,102,107,125, 12G 

tonrnalii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . 153. 

Sheppey, England, fossils of .................................... 15G-152 

Sloan, Earle, cited ........... ~................................... 6 

workof. ..................................................... . 

Smilacina rackiana .................. .,... ........................ 135 

Smila.x lancifolia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

pristina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 

Solanltes .......................... :........................... . . 152 

Solenostrobus eol'l'ugnt.us........................................ 152 

semiplotus .................... :. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 152 

subangulatus ... ·............................................. 152 

sulcntus..................................................... 152 

Sohns-Laubach, H., cited ......... .'............................. 18 

Sophora................................................. . . . . . . . . 153 

etlrOJ)ffil\ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

South Carolina, Upper Cretaceous flora of....................... 5-72 

Upper Crctneeous flora of, botanic character of ............... 63-66 

distribi.1Uon of.......................................... 72 

geology of............................................... 7-8 

historical sketch of. .. ,.................................. 5-7 

localities of.......................................... . . . 8-12 

physical conditions indicated by ........................ 6G-G8 

plates showing .......................................... 73-98 

systematic description of ................................ 14-63 

Upper Cretaceous geologic history of ...................... · .. 12-14 

Spcrmophyta .......... · ............... 16-63,63,103-121,134-147 

Sphmria ........................................ · ............... 132,154 

f.labclhwitu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 

Sphmrites .......................................... 132-133,140,15,7 

claiborncnsis ................................... 131, 132-133,157 

Inyricm .................................................... 132, 157 

·.~r:-. 

Page. 

Sphrerites nervisequus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 

Sphenopteris grevilloidcs........................................ 103 

Stenzel, l{. G., cited .............................. :............. 30 

Stcphe~son,!-'. W.,workof. ............................. 5,6,7,99,102 

Sterculia........................................................ 67 

labrusca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

sigfridi ................................................... :. . 150 

Strobilitcs....................................................... 27 

anceps ............................................ 11, 27,69, 72,76 

inquircndis........................................ ... . .... .. 27 

Stryclmos urani................................................. 152 

· Swank formation, f03sils of...................................... 156 

· Symplocos ~---·· .................................... ·.. .. ........ 51 

bri ttanica ................. ·. . .. .. .. . .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 150 

radobojana ............. :.................................... 152 

T. 

'Paxacere .. ." ............................................ 17-19,64,122 

'raxites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 

Taxodieacere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23-25 

Taxodium ................................................ 122, 125, 154 

Terminalia ...................................... 146,155,157,158,160 

buccras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 

catappa ......................................... :. .. . .. .. .. . 146 

phreocarpa ................................................ 146,157 

phroocarpoides .............................. 131, 146-147,157,190 

Ter:~~~i~:;,~~-- ~ ·. ·. ·. ·. ·. ~ ·. ·. ·. ·. ·. ·. ·. ·.:. ·. ·. ·.·.·. ·.·. ·. ·. ·. ·.·.·.·.·.·. ·. ·. ·. ·.·.·.· .. 'i4~~1~;: ~~~ 'l'crnstrcemia.................................................... 51 

bilinica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

eocenica .................................... : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

Thallophyta ......................................... 14, 63, 132-133 

Theobroma nimrodis. ..... .. ... . . .. .. .. .. ..... .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 152 

zoroastri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 

Thinnfcldia ............ ...... .............. .. ... ................ 17 

marylandicum . . .. . . . . .. .. . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .. . . .. .. . . . . 105 

rhomboidalis....... ... .. .. .. . ........................... ... . 17 

Thlaspidium ovatum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 

Thrinax ................................................ 30,131,139,157 

bowerbankii.. .. . . . ... . . . . . . .. . . . . . ..... .. .. . . .. ... . .. .... .. \1.52 

var. clliptica ......................................... ·... 152 

var. globosa .............. : . ................... .'......... 152 · · 

eocenica ............................ 131, 1S6, 136-137, 157,18£,184 

Thuitcs crassus . ...... : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • 21 

'l'hymcleales ............................... 52-55,63,66, :U 7-119, 144 

. Thyr;soptcris grcvilloides............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 

'l'ombigbee sand member, occurrence and character of.......... 100 

Torrubia........................................................ 141 

Trar.y, F. M:., cited.............................................. 116' 

Tricarpcllites aciculatus......................................... 152 

communis................................................... 152 

crassus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 

curtus....................................................... 152 

gracilis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 

patens ........... ~ ............... ;.......................... 152 . 

rugosus ............ , ........................................ · 152 

'l'umion .............................................. 18, 107, 122,125 

carolinian urn .................................. 18, 70,101,107, 125 

distribution of, figure showing.............................. 123 

Tuomey, Michael, cited ........................................ : S-6 

'l'urbinella mccalliei . .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. . .. . . 131 

Tuscaloosa formation, fossils of. ........ · ..................... 70, 72,128 

'l'witchcll, M. ·w., work of...................................... 7 

Typhreloipum cretaceum ................... :.................... 108 

u. 

Ulmacere ........................................... 36, 139-140, 156 

Ulmus ........................................... :.............. 155 

antiquissima................................................ 150 

plurinervia.................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

Umbellales ........ ~ ................................... 57-58,66,119 

Upper Cretaceous series, occurrence and character of............ 7-8 

Urticalcs ........................... 36-39,63,65,110-111,139-140 

v. 

Vaccinium acheronticum............... ... .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . 150 

cocenicum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

Vanuxem, Lardner, cited....................................... 5 
·200 INDEX. 

Page. 

Veach, Otto, cited ............................................. :. 99 . . . X. . Paga 

Xulmospnorntes latus........................................... 152 

Velenovsky, J., cited ......................................... 22,35,55. zingiberiformis.............................................. 152 

Vesquia tournaisii............................................... 18 

Viburnum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45, 154 

Victoria najadum .......................... ~ ............ ·........ 152 

sheppyensis ................................. :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 

Vitex ......................... ~................................. 115 

Vi tis pne-tentonica ............................................ . 150 

/ W. 

Ward, L. F., work of........................................... 6,11 

Weller, S., cited................................................. 128 

Wetherella variabilis.... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .• 152 

Widdringtonites ........................................ 25-26, 27,67 

reichii. ............................................... ~- ..... 25,74 

subtilis .................................... 10,25-26, 64, 70, 72, 7~ 

Wieland, G. R., cited···········:····........................... 20 

Williamsons Bridge, S.C., fossils at. .................... .' ...... ~ 10,73 

Woodbine sand, fossils of.. ..................................... 72,128 

Woodwardia? venosa.. .. . . . .. ... . . . . . ... . . . . . . . .. . .. . ..... .. . . . . 153 

Y. 

Yegua formation, fossils of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 

occurrence and character of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129 

Yucca ........................................................... · 152 

Yuccitcs ................................................ :. . . . . . . 108 

z. 

Zamiopsis insignis.· ...................................... :....... 105 

Zamites angustijolius............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 

Zanthoxylon..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 

Zizyphus ......................................... .55, 116, 122,126,154 

cliffwoodensis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . 116 

integrifolius ................ : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

laurifolius ........ '............................... 101,116, 12.5,174 

0 

pachyneuris. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

pseudoungeri. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 

ungeri... .. . . . . . ... .. . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .. . . 150 

vetustus •................... ,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 

._, 

·• 

.-~