Skip to main content
Log in

Mesozoic conifers

  • Published:
The Botanical Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstrakt

Die Coniferophyta erreichnen ihren grössen Formenreichtum und die meiste Häufigkeit während des Mesozoikums. Viele frühe Formen sind ausgestorben aus ohne an der Evolution moderner Typen beteiligt zu sein. Jedoch alle noch lebenden Familien der Coniferophyta und eine überaschend grosse Anzahl der heute existierenden Genera lassen sich mit Sicherheit im Mesozoikum nachweisen. Im allgemeinen sind die modernen Familien im später Trias oder im der frühen Jura erkenntlich während gewisse zeitgenössische Genera schon im der mittleren Jura erscheinen. Die Pinaceae scheinen später als andere Familien aufzutreten, sie weisen keine unanfechtbare Vertretung bis vor dem Beginn der Kreidezeit auf, wenngleich Funde von bestimmten Teilstücken aus dem später Trias und der Jura in diese Familie gehören könnten. Moderne Familien der Coniferophyta scheinen etwas früher entstanden zu sein, als man bisher glaubte, und dieses lässt Fragen um ihre Evolution aus dem bekannten Voltziales entstechen. Samenzapfen der letzteren, die grössere Veränderungen aufweisen, als man sie fruher kannte, werden jetzt durch versteinertes Material bekannt. Verschiedenartige abgetrennte Organe, die existierenden Familien nicht zu geschrieben werden können, werden beschrieben und diskutiert, und auf die Bedeutung dieser Fossilienfunde für bestimmte Fragen in der Systematik der Coniferophyta wird hingewiesen.

Abstract

The Coniferophyta attained their greatest diversity and abundance during the Mesozoic Era. Many early forms died out without apparent involvement in the evolution of the modern types. Yet, all living coniferophyte families and a surprising number of their present-day genera are clearly in evidence in the Mesozoic. Generally, modern families are recognizable by the Late Triassic or Early Jurassic while certain contemporary genera make their appearance as early as the Middle Jurassic. The Pinaceae appears to lag behind other families in that it lacks unequivocal representation before the onset of the Cretaceous although certain Late Triassic and Jurassic remains may belong to the family. Modern coniferophyte families appear to have originated somewhat earlier than was formerly believed and this brings to light problems in envisioning their evolution from the known Voltziales. Seed cones of certain of the latter are now known from petrified material which show a greater modification than was formerly known. Various kinds of detached organs that cannot be assigned to existing families are described and discussed and the bearing of the fossil record in certain questions on coniferophyte systematics is evaluated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Literature Cited

  • Alvin, K. L. 1953. Three abietaceous cones from the Wealden of Belgium. Mem. Inst. Roy. Sci. Nat. Belgium125: 1–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1957a. On the two conesPseudoaraucaria heeri (Coemans) nov. comb., andPityostrobus villerotensis nov. sp. from the Wealden of Belgium.135: 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1957b. OnPseudoaraucaria Fliche emend., a genus of fossil pinaceous cones. Ann. Bot., N.S.21: 33–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1960a. On the seedVesquia toumaisii C. E. Bertrand, from the Belgian Wealden Ann. Bot., N.S.24: 508–515.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1960b. Further conifers of the Pinaceae from the Wealden Formation of Belgium. Mem. Inst. Roy. Sci. Nat. Belgium1461-39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, H. N. 1961. Studies in Paleobotany. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York. 487 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, H. N. 1970. Index of generic names of fossil plants, 1820–1965. U. S. Geol. Survey Bull. 1300. 354 pp.

  • Archangelsky, S. 1963. A new Mesozoic flora from Ticó, Santa Cruz Province, Argentina. Bull. British Mus. (Nat. Hist.) Geology8: 4–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1966. New gymnosperms from the Ticó Flora, Santa Cruz Province, Argentina. Bull. British Mas. (Nat. Hist.) Geology13: 259–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1968. On the genusTomaxellia (Coniferae) from the Lower Cretaceous of Patagonia (Argentina) and its male and female cones. J. Linn. Soc. (Bot.)61: 153–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, andJ. C. Gamerro. 1967. Pollen grains found in coniferous cones from the Lower Cretaceous of Patagonia (Argentina). Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol.5: 179–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arnold, C. A. 1953. Silicified plant remains from the Mesozoic and Tertiary of western North America. II. Some fossil woods from northern Alaska. Pap. Michigan Acad. Sci. Arts. Lett.38: 9–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1964. Cordaites-type foliage associated with palm-like plants from the Upper Triassic of southwestern Colorado. Jour. Indian Bot. Soc., Maheshwari Comm. Vol.,42A: 4–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1967. The proper designations of the foliage and stems of the Cordaitales. Phytomorphology17: 346–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, andI. S. Lowther. 1955. A new Cretaceous conifer from northern Alaska. Amer. Jour. Bot.42: 522–528.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ash, S. R. 1972. Late Triassic plants from the Chinle Formation in northeastern Arizona. Palaeontology15: 598–618.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, I. W. 1933. The cambium and its derivative tissues. VII. Problems in identifying the wood of Mesozoic Coniferae. Ann. Bot.47: 145–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Banks, H. P. 1970. Evolution and Plants of the Past. Wadsworth Publishing Co., Inc., Belmont, California. 170 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barale, G. 1973. Contribution à la connaissance de la flore des calaires lithographiques de la province de Lérida (Espagne):Frenelopsis rubiesensis n. sp. Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol.16: 271–287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnard, P. D. W. 1968. A new species ofMasculostrobus Seward producingClassopollis pollen from the Jurassic of Iran. J. Linn. Soc. (Bot.)61: 167–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, C. B. 1970. The appearance of gymnospermous structure. Biol. Rev.45: 379–400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, W. A. 1949. Uppermost Cretaceous and Paleocene floras of Western Alberta. Geol. Surv., Canada, Bull.13: 1–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1956. Lower Cretaceous floras of western Canada. Canada Geol. Surv. Mem.285: 1–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1957. Flora of the Upper Cretaceous Naimo Group of Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Canada Geol. Surv. Mem.293: 1–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1963. Upper Cretaceous floras of the Dunvegan, Bad Heart, and Milk River Formations of western Canada. Geol. Surv. Canada Bull.94: 1–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, E. W. 1903. New species of plants from the Matawan Formation. Amer. Nat.37: 677–684.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1908. A mid-Cretaceous species ofTorreya. Amer. Jour. Sci., 4th ser.25: 382–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1910. Contributions to the Mesozoic flora of the Atlantic coastal plain, pt. 5. Torrey Bot. Club Bull.37: 181–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • -. 1914. The Upper Cretaceous and Eocene floras of South Carolina and Georgia. U. S. Geol. Survey Prof. Pap. 84. 200 pp.

  • -. 1916. Maryland Geol. Surv., Upper Cretaceous. 61–105: 776–805.

  • —. 1928. Tertiary fossil plants from the Argentine Republic. Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus.73(2743): 1–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • -. 1938. Tertiary Flora from the Rio Pichileufu, Argentina. Geol. Soc. Amer., Spec. Pap. 12. 140 pp.

  • Bhardwaj, D. C. 1953. Jurassic woods from the Rajmahal Hills, Bihar. The Paleobotanist2: 59–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bock, W. 1954.Primaraucaria, a new araucarian genus from the Virginia Triassic. Jour. Paleo.28: 32–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • -. 1969. The American Triassic Flora and Global Distribution. Geological Center. Pennsylvania. 406 pp.

  • Bose, M. N. 1961. Leaf-cuticle and other plant microfossils from the Mesozoic rocks of Andøoya, Norway. The Paleobotanist8: 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, andH. K. Maheshwari. 1973. Some detached seed-scales belonging to Araucariaceae from the Mesozoic rocks of India. Geophytology3: 205–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, R. W. 1935. Some fossil conifers from Maryland and North Dakota. Washington Acad. Sci. Jour.25: 441–450.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. T. 1972. The Flora of the Morrison Formation (Upper Jurassic) of Central Montana. Ph.D. Dissertation, Univ. of Montana. 64 pp.

  • Buchholz, J. T. 1934. The classification of Coniferales. Trans. Illinois Acad. Sci.25: 112–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1948. Generic and subgeneric distribution of the Coniferales. Bot. Gaz.110: 80–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burlingame, L. L. 1915a. The origin and relationships of the araucarians. I. Bot. Gaz.60: 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1915b. The origin and relationships of the araucarians. II. Bot. Gaz.60: 89–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calder, M. G. 1953. A coniferous petrified forest in Patagonia. Bull. British Mus. (Nat. Hist.) Geol.2: 97–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaloner, W. G. andJ. Lorch. 1960. An opposite-leaved conifer from the Jurassic of Israel. Palaeontology2: 236–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaney, R. W. 1950. A revision of fossilSequoia andTaxodium in western North America based on the recent discovery ofMetasequoia. Amer. Philos. Soc. Trans.40: 171–240.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1954. A new pine from the Cretaceous of Minnesota and its paleoecological significance. Ecology35: 145–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christophel, D. C. 1973.Sciadopitophyllum canadense gen. et sp. nov., a new conifer from western Alberta. Amer. Jour. Bot.60: 61–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creber, G. T. 1967. Notes on some petrified cones of the Pinaceae from the Cretaceous. Linn. Soc. London, Proc.178: 147–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cridland, A. A. 1964.Amyelon in American coal-balls. Palaeontology7: 186–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Critchfield, W. B. and E. L. Little, Jr. 1966. Geographic distribution of the pines of the world. U. S. Dept. Agric. Misc. Publ. #991.

  • Dallimore, W. andA. B. Jackson. 1966. A Handbook of the Coniferae and Ginkgoaceae, 4th Edition (revised by S. G. Harrison). St. Martin’s Press, New York. 729 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daugherty, L. H. 1941. The Upper Triassic flora of Arizona. Carnegie Inst. Wash. Publ. 526.

  • De Laubenfels, D. J. 1953. The external morphology of coniferous leaves. Phytomorph.3: 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delevoryas, T. andR. C. Hope. 1973. Fertile coniferophyte remains from the Late Triassic Deep River Basin, North Carolina. Amer. Jour. Bot.60: 810–818.

    Google Scholar 

  • ——. 1975.Voltzia andrewsii, n. sp., and Upper Triassic seed cone from North Carolina, U.S.A. Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol.20: 67–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dilcher, D. L. 1969.Podocarpus from the Eocene of North America. Science164: 299–301.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dorofeyev, P. I. andI. N. Sveshnikova. 1959. On the discovery of remains of the genusSciadopitys S. and Z. in the Upper Cretaceous deposit of the Urals. Doklady Akademii Nauk S.S.S.R. (Earth Sciences Sect.)128: 1014–1016.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dupler, A. W. 1920. Ovuliferous structures ofTaxus canadensis. Bot. Gaz.69: 492–520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckenwalder, J. E. 1976. Re-evaluation of Cupressaceae and Taxodiaceae: a proposed merger. Madrono23: 237–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Endo, S. 1951. A record ofSequoia from the Jurassic of Manchuria. Bot. Gaz.113: 228–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Florin, R. 1922. On the geological history of the Sciadopitinae. Svensk Bot. Tidskr.16: 260–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1948. On the morphology and relationships of the Taxaceae. Bot. Gaz.110: 31–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1950. Upper Carboniferous and Lower Permian Conifers. Bot. Rev.16: 258–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1951. Evolution in cordaites and conifers. Acta Horti Bergiani15: 285–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1958. On Jurassic taxads and conifers from northwestern Europe and eastern Greenland. Acta Horti Bergiani17: 257–402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fontaine, W. M. 1889. The Potomac or younger Mesozoic flora. U. S. Geol. Surv. Mon. 15. 377 pp.

  • Frenquelli, J. 1942. Contributiones al conocimiento de la flora del Gondwana Superior en la Argentina. VIII.Phacolepis mendozana n. gen. et n. sp. Notas del Museo de la Plata7: 323–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, R. E. 1975. The succession of Australian pre-tertiary megafossil floras. Bot. Rev.41: 453–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grambast, L. 1952. Sur la signification des structures généralisées chez les Coniférales et la valeur des Protopinacées en tant que groupe. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris235: 1533–1535.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • —. 1961. Évolution des structures ligneuses chez les Coniférophytes. Bull. Soc. Bot. France, Mém.39: 30–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grauvogel-Stamm, L. 1969. Nouveaux types d’organes reproducteurs males de conifères du gres a Voltzia (Trias Inférieur) des Vosges. Bull. Serv. Carte géol. Als. Lorr.22: 93–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1972. Révision de cônes mâles du Keuper “Inférieur” du Worcestershire (Angleterre) attribués àMasculostrobus willsi Townrow. Paleontographica140B: 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • — andL. Grauvogel. 1973.Masculostrobus acuminatus nom. nov., un un nouvel organe reproducteur male de gymnosperme du Grés à Voltzia (Trias Inférieur) des Vosges (France). Géobios6: 101–114.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1975.Aethophyllum Brongniart 1828, conifère (non Équisétale) du Grès à Voltzia (Buntsandstein Supérieur) des Vosges (France). Note préliminaire. Géobios8: 143–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greguss, P. 1955. Identification of Living Gymnosperms on the Basis of Xylotomy. Akadémiai Kiadô. Budapest. 263 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1967. Fossil Gymnosperm Woods in Hungary. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest. 136 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, T. M. 1935. The fossil flora of Scoresby Sound, East Greenland, Pt. 4: Ginkgoales, Coniferales, Lycopodiales and isolated fructifications. Medd. om Gronland112: 176 pp.

  • Harris, T. M. The fossil coniferElatides williamsoni. Ann. Bot. N. S.7: 325–339.

  • — 1953. Conifers of the Taxodiaceae from the Wealden Formation of Belgium. Mem. Inst. Roy. Sci. Nat. Belgium126: 1–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1957. A Liasse-Rhaetic flora in South Wales. Proc. Roy. Soc., B,147: 289–308.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • -. 1969. Naming a fossil conifer. Bot. Soc. Bengal, J. Sen. Mem. Vol., 243–252.

  • —. 1973. Pollen from fossil cones. The Botanique4: 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1976a. The Mesozoic gymnosperms. Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol.21: 119–134.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1976b. Two neglected aspects of fossil conifers. Amer. Jour. Bot.63: 902–910.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heer, O. 1874. Nachträge zur miocene Flora Grönlands,in Flora fossilis arctica, Band 3, Heft 3: Kgl. Svenska vetenskapsakad. handlingar,12: 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1880. Nachträge zur Jura-Flora Sibiriens,in Flora fossils arctica, Bd. 6, Teil 1, Heft 1: Acad. imp. sci. St. Pétersbourg Mém., v. 27, p. 1–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • -. 1883. Die fossile Flora der Polarlander,in Flora fossilis arctica, Band 7, Zurich. 275 pp.

  • Hildreth, S. 1837. Miscellaneous observations made during a tour in May, 1835, to the falls of Cuyahoga, near Lake Erie. Amer. Jour. Sci., 1st ser.,31: 1–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirmer, M. andL. Hörhammer. 1934. Zur weiteren Kenntis vonCheirolepis Schimper andHirmeriella Hörhammer mit Bemerkungen über deren systematisch Stellung. Palaeontographica79B: 67–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollick, A. and E. C. Jeffrey. 1906. Affninites of certain Cretaceous plant remains commonly referred to the generaDammara andBrachyphyllum.

  • ——. 1909. Studies of Cretaceous coniferous remains from Kreischerville, New York. New York Bot. Gard. Mem.3: 1–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • — andG. C. Martin. 1930. The Upper Cretaceous floras of Alaska. U. S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Paper159: 1–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeffrey, E. C. 1908. On the structure of the leaf in Cretaceous pines. Ann. Bot.22: 207–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1912. The history, comparative anatomy, and evolution of the araucarioxylon type. Proc. Amer. Acad. Arts, Sci.48: 531–571.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1917. The Anatomy of Woody Plants. Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois. 478 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jongmans W. J. and S. J. Dijkstra. 1971–75. Fossilium Catalogus II: Plantae, Pars 79–87, Gymnospermae, Uitgeverig Dr. W. Junk B. V., ’s-Gravenhage. 1094 pp.

  • Jung, W. W. 1968.Hirmerella muensteri (Schenk) Jung nov. comb., eine bedeutsame Konifere des Mesozoikums. Palaeontographica122B: 55–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendall, M. W. 1949a. On a new conifer from the Scottish Lias. Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 12,2: 299–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1949b. OnBrachyphyllum expansum (Sternberg) Seward, and its cone. Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 12,2: 308–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1952. Some conifers from the Jurassic of England. Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 125: 583–594.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keng, H. 1969. Aspects of morphology ofAmentotaxus formosana with a note on the taxonomic position of the genus. Jour. Arnold Arb.50: 432–446.

    Google Scholar 

  • Konar, R. N. andY. P. Oberoi. 1969. Recent work on reproductive structures of living conifers and taxads—a review. Bot. Rev.35: 89–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knobloch, E. 1972.Aachenia debeyi n.g.n.sp.—eine neue Konifere aus dem Senon von Aachen. N. Jb. Geol. Paläont. Mh.7: 400–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kon’no, E. 1962. Some coniferous male fructifications from the Carnic Formation in Yamaguchi Prefecture, Japan. Tohoku Univ. Sci. Rept., 2nd ser. (Geol.) Spec. v: 9–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1968. Additions to some younger Mesozoic plants from Malaya. Geol. Paleont. Southeast Asia4: 139–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knowlton, F. H. 1905. Fossil plants of the Judith River beds, pp. 129–155in Stanton, T. W. and J. B. Hatcher. Geology and Paleontology of the Judith River beds. U. S. Geol. Survey Bull. 257.

  • -.1916. The flora of the Fox Hills Sandstone. U. S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Pap. 98-H: 85–93.

  • Krassilov, V. A. 1967. The Early Cretaceous Flora of South Primorye and its bearing on Stratigraphy. Moscow. 364 pp. (In Russian).

  • —. 1971. Evolution and systematics of conifers (critical review). Paleont. Zhur.1: 7–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1974.Podocarpus from the Upper Cretaceous of eastern Asia and its bearing on the theory of conifer evolution. Paleontology17: 365–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kräusel, R. 1949. Die fossilen Koniferen-Hölzer. Palaeontographica89B: 83–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1952.Pachylepis nov. gen., eine neue Konferen-Gattung aus dem süddeutschen Keuper. Senckenbergiana32: 343–350.

    Google Scholar 

  • — andK. P. Jain. 1964. New fossil coniferous woods from the Rajmahal Hills, Bihar, India. The Paleobotanist12: 59–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemoigne, Y. 1967. Paléoflore à Cupressales dans le Trias-Rhétien du Contentin. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris264: 715–718.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesquereux, L. 1874. Contributions to the fossil flora of the Western Territories —Part 1, The Cretaceous flora. U. S. Geol. and Geog. Survey Terr. Rept.,6: 1–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorch, I. 1968. Some Jurassic conifers from Israel. J. Linn. Soc. (Bot.)61: 177–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matsuo, H. 1962. A study on the Asuwa flora (Late Cretaceous age) in the Hokuriku Dustruct, central Japan. Sci. Rep. Kanazawa Univ.8: 177–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1966. Plant fossils of the Izumi group (Upper Cretaceous) in the Izumi Mountain Range, Kinki District, Japan. Ann. Sci. Kanazawa Univ.,3: 67–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1970. On the Omichidani flora (Upper Cretaceous), inner side of central Japan. Trans. Proc. Palaeont. Soc. Japan, N. S.80: 371–389.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, C. N. 1974.Pityostrobus hallii, a new species of structurally preserved conifer cones from the Late Cretaceous of Maryland. Amer. Jour. Bot.61: 798–804.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1975. Petrified cones and needle bearing twigs of a new taxodiaceous conifer from the Early Cretaceous of California. Amer. Jour. Bot.62: 706–713.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1976a. Early evolution in the Pinaceae. Rev. Palaeobot. Palynol.21: 101–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1976b. Two new pinaceous cones from the Early Cretaceous of California. Jour. Paleo.50: 821–832.

    Google Scholar 

  • — andJ. T. Brown. 1973. A new voltzialean cone bearing seeds with embryos from the Permian of Texas. Amer. Jour. Bot.60: 561–569.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitra, A. K. 1927. On the occurrence of two ovules on araucarian cone-scales. Ann. Bot.41: 461–471.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nathorst, A. G. 1908. Paläobotanische Mitteilungen, y, ÜberPalissya, Stachyotaxus andPalaeotaxus Kgl. Svenska vetenskapsakad. handlingar.43: 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nishida, M. 1973. On some petrified plants from the Cretaceous of Chosi, Chiba Prefecture VI. Bot. Mag. Tokyo86: 189–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogura, Y. 1930. On the structure and affinities of some Cretaceous plants from Hokkaido. Tokyo Univ. Fac. Sci. Jour., sec. 3, Botany2: 381–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1932. On the structure and affinities of some Cretaceous plants from Hokkaido —second contribution. Tokyo Univ. Fac. Sci. Jour., sec. 3, Botany2: 455–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Page, V. M. 1973. A new conifer from the Upper Cretaceous of central California. Amer. Jour. Bot.60: 570–575.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pant, D. D. andG. K. Srivastava. 1968. On the cuticular structure ofAraucaria (Araucarites) cutchensis (Feistmantel) comb. nov. from the Jabalpur Series, India. J. Linn. Soc. (Bot.)61: 201–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penny, J. S. 1947. Studies on the conifers of the Magothy flora. Amer. Jour. Botany34: 281–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramanujam, C. G. K. 1969. A petrified bark of Cupressaceae from the Upper Cretaceous of Alberta. Canadian Jour. Bot.48: 855–858.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1972. Fossil coniferous woods from the Oldman Formation (Upper Cretaceous) of Alberta. Canadian Jour. Bot.50: 595–602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, A. R. andM. N. Bose. 1970.Podostrobus gen. nov., a petrified podocarpaceous male cone from the Rajmahal Hills, India. Paleobotanist19: 83–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robison, C. R. 1975. Pinaceous Dwarf Shoots from the Late Cretaceous Magothy Formation of Martha’s Vineyard Island, Massachusetts. Ph.D. Dissertation, Univ. of Montana. 106 pp.

  • Roselt, G. 1955. Eine neue männliche Gymnospermenfruktifikation aus dem Unteren Keuper von Thüringen and ihre Beziehungen zu anderen Gymnospermen. Friedrich-Schiller-Univ. Wiss. Zeitschr., Jahrg.5: 75–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1958. Neue Koniferen aus dem unteren Keuper and ihre Beziehungen zu verwandten fossilen und rezenten. Friedrich-Schiller-Univ. Wiss. Zeitschr., Jahrg.5: 75–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothwell, G. W. 1976. The vascular architecture ofCordaites concinnus Delevoryas. Bot. Soc. America, Program of Abstracts, p. 30.

  • Rouse, G. E. 1967. A Late Cretaceous plant assemblage from east-central British Columbia, I. Fossil leaves. Canadian Jour. Earth Sci.4: 1185–1197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roy, S. K. 1972. Fossil wood of Taxaceae from the McMurray Formation (Lower Cretaceous) of Alberta, Canada. Canadian Jour. Bot.50: 349–352.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sah, S. C. D. 1957.Coniferocaulon latisulcatum sp. nov. from the Rajmahal Hills, Bihar, with remarks on the affinities of the genus. Paleobotanist6: 71–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahni, B. 1931. Revisions of Indian fossil plants —Part 2, Coniferales. India Geol. Survey Mem. 2, Palaeontologia Indica11: 51–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saxton, W. T. 1934. Notes on Conifers VIII. The morphology ofAustrotaxus spicata Compton. Ann. Bot.48: 412–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmid, R. 1967. Electron microscopy of wood ofCallixylon andCordaites. Amer. Jour. Bot.54: 720–729.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schweitzer, H. I. 1963. Der weibliche Zapfen von Pseudovoltzia liebeana und seine Bedeutung für die Phylogenie der Koniferen. Palaeontographica113B: 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1974. Die “Tertiären” Koniferen Spitzbergens. Palaeontographica149B: 1–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seward, A. C. 1919. Fossil Plants. Cambridge University Press, V. 4 (reprinted from the original. 1969). Hafner Publishing Co., Inc., New York, 543 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, B. D. 1970.Taxaceoxylon cupressoides sp. nov. from Dhokuti in the Rajmahal Hills, India. Ameghiniana7: 275–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shoemaker, R. E. 1966. Fossil leaves of the Hell Creek and Tullock Formations of eastern Montana. Palaeontographica119B: 54–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, H. 1961. The life history and systematic position ofCephalotaxus drupacea sieb, et Aucc. Phytomorph.11: 153–197.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spegazzini, C. 1924. Coniferales fosiles Patagonicas. Soc. cient. Argentina Anales98: 125–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stockey, R. A. 1975. Seeds and embryos ofAraucaria mirabilis. Amer. Jour. Bot.62: 856–868.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stopes, M. 1915. Catalogue of the Mesozoic plants in the British Museum. The Cretaceous flora, Part 2, Lower Greensand (Aptian) plants from Britain. British Mus. (Nat. Hist.), 360 pp.

  • Stopes, M. C. andK. Fujii. 1910. Studies on the structure and affinities of Cretaceous plants. Roy. Soc. London Philos. Trans.201: 1–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teixeira, C. 1948. Flora mesozóica portuguesa. Portugal Servicos geol., Pt. 1, 118 pp.

  • -. 1950. Flora mesozóica portuguesa. Portugal Servicos geol., pt. 2, 31 pp.

  • Thompson, R. B. 1914. The spur shoot of the pines. Bot. Gaz.57: 362–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, R. B. andA. E. Allin. 1913. Do the Abietineae extend to the Carboniferous? Bot. Gaz.53: 339–344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Townrow, J. A. 1962. On some disaccate pollen grains of Permian to Middle Jurassic age. Grana3: 13–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1967a. OnRissikia andMataia, podocarpaceous conifers from the Lower Mesozoic of the southern lands. Pap. and Proc. Roy. Soc. Tasmania101: 103–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1967b. On a conifer from the Jurassic of East Antarctica. Pap. Proc. Roy. Soc. Tasmania101: 137–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1967c. TheBrachphyllum crassum complex of fossil conifers. Pap. Roy. Soc. Tasmania101: 149–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1967d. OnVoltziopsis, a southern conifer of Lower Triassic age. Pap. Proc. Roy. Soc. Tasmania101: 173–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1969. Some Lower Mesozoic Podocarpaceae and Araucariaceae. Pages 159–184in Gondwana Stratigraphy. UNESCO. Louis-Jean, Gap. France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Konijnenburg-Van Cittert, J. H. A. 1971.In situ gymnosperm pollen from the Middle Jurassic of Yorkshire. Acta Bot. Neerl.20: 1–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1972. In situ gymnosperm pollen from the Middle Jurassic of Yorkshire. Acta Bot. Neerl.20: 95–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaudois, N. andC. Privé. 1971. Révision des bois fossiles de Cupressace. Palaeontographica134B: 61–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velenovsky, J. 1885. Die Gymnospermen der böhmischen Kreideformation. Prague, 34 pp.

  • Velenovsky, J.. 1889. Kvetena ceského Cenomanu. Abhandl. K. bohm. Ges. Wiss., ser. 7, vol.3: 1–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • -and L. Viniklár. 1926. Flora cretacea bohemiae. Czechoslovakia Statniho Geol. Üstav. Rozpravy, pt. 2, p. 1–51.

  • -and -. 1927. Flora cretacea bohemiae. Czechoslovakia Statniho Geol. Ústav. Rozpravy, pt. 2, p. 1–51.

  • Vishnu-Mittre. 1954.Araucarites bindrabunensis sp. nov., a petrified megastrobilus from the Jurassic of Rajmahal Hills, Bihar. The Paleobotanist3: 103–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1958. Studies on the fossil flora of Nipania (Rajmahal series), Bihar —Coniferales. The Paleobotanist6: 82–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogellehner, D. 1965. Untersuchungen zur Anatomie und Systematik der verkieselten Hölzer aus dem fränkischen und südthüringischen Keuper. Erlanger geol. Abh.59: 1–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1967. Zur Anatomie und Phylogenie Mesozoischer Gymnospermenhölzer, 5: Prodomus zu einer Monographie der Protopinaceae I. Die protopinoiden Hölzer der Trias. Palaeontographica121B: 30–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1968. Zur Anatomie und Phylogenie mesozoischer Gymnospermenholzer, 7: Prodromus zu einer Monographie der Protopinaceae II. Die protopinoiden Holzer des Jura. Palaeontographica124B: 125–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, J. 1928. On the structure of a Paleozoic cone-scale and the evidence it furnished of the primitive nature of the double cone-scale in the conifers. Mem. and Proc. Manchester Lit. and Phil. Soc.73: 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, R. 1975.Aachenia knoblochi n. sp., an interesting conifer from the Upper Cretaceous Olmos Formation of northeastern Mexico. Palaeontographica152B: 76–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wesley, A. 1956. Contributions to the knowledge of the flora of the grey limestones of Veneto —Part 1, A revision of the flora fossilis formationis oolithicae of De. Zingo. 1st. geol. e mineral. Univ. Padova Mem.,19: 1–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wieland, G. R. 1935. The Cerro Cuadrado petrified forest. Carnegie Inst. Washington Pub. 449. 180 pp.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Miller, C.N. Mesozoic conifers. Bot. Rev 43, 217–280 (1977). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02860718

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02860718

Keywords

Navigation