Fossil Algæ

Abstract

IN a review of Saporta's work on “Fossil Algæ” in NATURE (vol. xxvii. p. 514) there are certain opinions brought forward which ought not to be passed by without some remarks. At first it should be stated that Saporta, while still insisting upon the vegetable nature of his so-called “algæ,” does not only defend his views about those doubtful bodies which have been the objects of my criticisms, but also “defends” true algæ, concerning which I have never expressed any doubt. Such are, for example, the Florideæ represented on the first three plates in his work, and by “defending” them he puts me in a somewhat false position, at least in the eyes of the readers who have not studied my work.¹ The real fact is that I have only questioned—and still do so—the vegetable nature of almost all those objects which Schimper in Zittel's “Handbuch der Paleontologie” comprises under the head of “Algæ incertæ sedis.” There is consequently some exaggeration in Saporta's statement of my opinion.