Jump to content

Lepidodendron Stem With Branch Scars


RomanK

Recommended Posts

Hi Roman, that is an interesting find! I'm wondering if that is just another one of mother nature's plant anomolies or a recurring characteristic feature. I've seen some present day plants do some really strange branching for no some apparent reason. Looking forward to hearing/seeing what others have to say. Regards, Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Roman, that is an interesting find! I'm wondering if that is just another one of mother nature's plant anomolies or a recurring characteristic feature. I've seen some present day plants do some really strange branching for no some apparent reason. Looking forward to hearing/seeing what others have to say. Regards, Chris

Hi Chris! I don't think that's an anomaly. We just know quite a few about that. it's an additional evidence on fact that anisotomous dichotomy was a common thing for Lepidodendron as well. My first impresssion was - Lepidophloios, but then I saw the infrafoliar parichnos at the leaf cushion, so that's Lepidodendron mannebachense.

Another find - Sigillaria adpression

post-814-0-00235600-1384696740_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Chris! I don't think that's an anomaly. We just know quite a few about that. it's an additional evidence on fact that anisotomous dichotomy was a common thing for Lepidodendron as well. My first impresssion was - Lepidophloios, but then I saw the infrafoliar parichnos at the leaf cushion, so that's Lepidodendron mannebachense.

Another find - Sigillaria adpression

attachicon.gifDSCN0668.jpg

Hi Roman. Agreed, I wasn't clear. I was referring to the very small size of the branching. Regards, Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Roman. Agreed, I wasn't clear. I was referring to the very small size of the branching. Regards, Chris

Chris, you obviously remember the article "Contribution to knowledge on ontogenetic developmental stages of Lepidodendron mannebachense Presl, 1838"

we discussed earlier. If you look at Fig.5 you can see absolutely the same (but a bit better one) specimen with the scars of pseudomonopoidal branches which beared the cones. I just think whether he (Oplustil) was right those shoots were branched. Regards, Roman
post-814-0-53581400-1384704100_thumb.jpg
Edited by RomanK
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...