From Hollick (1930) (p. 46-47)
"Yukon River, north bank, about 6 miles above Nahochatilton (original No. 3AH16); collected by Arthur Hollick and Sidney Paige in 1903 (lot 3252) (pl. 6, fig. 6b; pl. 8, fig. 8; pl. 10, fig. 4; pl. 16, figs. 1b, 3b; pl. 30, fig. 1a). Yukon River, north bank, at Fossil Bluff, about 6 miles above Nahochatilton (original No. 2AC238); collected by A. J. Collier and Sidney Paige in 1902 (lot 2962) (pl. 6, fig. 8b; pl. 7, fig. 3b; pl. 8, figs. 2, 7; pl. 10, fig. 1; pl. 11, fig. 7). Yukon River, north bank, about 5 miles above Louden station (Nahochatilton) (original Nos. 22 and 22A); collected by W. W. Atwood and H. M. Eakin in 1907 (lots 4635 and 4636) (pl. 7, figs. 2b, 9b; pl. 10, fig. 3a). Yukon River, north bank, about 12 miles below Melozi telegraph station (original No. 3AH11); collected by Arthur Hollick and Sidney Paige in 1903 (lot 3248) (pl. 8, figs. 5, 6a; 6b). Yukon River, south side, about 3 miles below Seventymile Creek (original No. 3AH4); collected by Arthur Hollick and Sidney Paige in 1903 (lot 3243) (pl. 8, fig. 4). Yukon River, north bank, about 17 miles below Nulato (original No. 33); collected by W. W. Atwood and H. M. Eakin in 1907 (lot 4639) (pl. 9, fig. 1). Yukon River, north bank, at Blatchford's mine (original No. 3AH22); collected by Arthur Hollick and Sidney Paige in 1903 (lot 3261) (pl. 9, figs. 2, 3, 4; pl. 10, fig. 5; pl. 30, fig. 4a). Yukon River, north bank, just above Kaltag (original No. 3AH27); collected by Arthur Hollick and Sidney Paige in 1903 (lot 3266) (pl. 10, fig. 2a). Yukon Riiver, north bank, just below Pickart's mine (original No. 3AH18b); collected by Arthur Hollick and Sidney Paige in 1903 (lot 3255) (pl. 20, fig. 1b). Yukon River, south bank, about 1 1/2 miles below Seventymile Creek (original No. 80); collected by G. C. Martin in 1914 (lot 6815) (pl. 27, figs. 5, 6a). Yukon River, north bank, shore from 2 to 10 miles below Blatchford's mine (original No. 3AH20); collected by Arthur Hollick and Sidney Paige in 1903 (lot 3259)."
From Hollick (1930) (p. 46-47)
"Plate 6, Figures 6b, 8b; Plate 7, Figures 2b, 3b, 9b; Plate 8, Figures 2, 4-8; Plate 9, Figures 1-4; Plate 10, Figures 1, 2a, 3a, 4, 5; Plate 11, Figure 7b; Plate 16, Figures Ib, 3b;
Plate 20, Figure Ib; Plate 27, Figures 5, 6a; Plate 30, Figures la, 4a"
"Podozamites lanceolatus (Lindley and Hutton) C. F. W. Braun, in Munster, Beitrage zur Petrefacten-Kunde, vol. 2, No. 6, p. 33, Bayreuth, 1843. (Braun, 1843)
Zamia lanceolata Lindley and Hutton, The fossil flora of Great Britain, vol. 3, p. 121, pl. 194, London, 1836." (Lindley and Hutton, 1836)"
From Hollick (1930) (p. 46-47)
"Under this species I have included a number of leaf forms to which distinct varietal and specific names have been applied from time to time by different authors, for the reason that in the collections from Alaska these leaf forms occur in every gradation of size and shape, often in the same piece of matrix, and I have found it impossible to separate or to distinguish them satisfactorily one from another.
The type of the species, Zamia lanceolata Lindley and Hutton, is a narrow-leaved form, similar to P. lanceolatus genuinus Heer (1876) (p. 108, pl. 26, fig. 10) and P. lanceolatus minor (Schenk) Heer (1876) (p. 110, pl. 27, figs. 5a, 5b, 6-8) from the Jurassic of Siberia, and to P. lanceolatus as identified by Dawson (1885) (sec. 4, p. 6, pl. 1, fig. 3), from the Kootenai formation of British Columbia, by Fontaine (1900) (p. 360, pl. 64, fig. 1), from the Jurassic of California, and by Velenovsky (1887) (p. 642 (10) , pl. [not numbered], fig. 18,)from the Cenomanian of Bohemia. Our Figure 1, Plate 10, represents this form.
Our Figure 2, Plate 9, is typical of P. lanceolatus eichwaldi (Schimper) Heer (1876) (p. 109, pl. 23, figs. 1c, 4a, b, c, d; pl. 26, figs. 2, 3, (4a, b?), 9; pl. 27, figs. 1, (5c, 11a?)) especially if compared with Heer's Figure 1, Plate 27. This form was differentiated and named P. eichwaldi by Schimper (1870) (p. 160) on the basis of a specimen figured by Eichwald (1865) (p. 40; Atlas (Periode moyenne), pl. 3, fig. 1); and as originally used by Schimper this name was designed to define the form represented by oblong leaves with blunt apices; but subsequent authors included a wide variety of forms under the name, as may be seen by reference to Heer's figures and to the specimens previously figured by the same author from the Jurassic of Svalbard (Heer, 1876) (p. 36, pl. 6, fig. 22c; pl. 7, fig. 7e; pl. 8, figs. 1b, c, d, e, 2a, b, c, 3, 3b, 4a, b, c, d,) and by Velenovsky (1885) (p. 11, pl. 2, figs. 9, 10, 23) from the Cenomanian of Bohemia. If we accept any such comprehensive conception of the variety as those references would imply, the specimens represented by our Figures 1-4, Plate 9, and Figures 3a, 4, and 5: Plate 10, would be included under it or under P. lanceolatus latifolius (Schenk) Heer (1876) (p. 109, pl. 26, figs. 5, 6, 8b, c,). Other forms, such as those represented by our Figures 2, 5-7, Plate 8, would probably be recognized under the names P. lanceolatus intermedius Heer (1876) (p. 108, pl. 26, fig. 8a) and P. lanceolatus distans (Presl) Heer (1876) (p. 109, pl. 26, fig. 7; pl. 27, figs. 3a, 4a).
The large leaf represented by our Figure 8, Plate 8, may be compared with Podozamites tenuinervis Heer (1882) (p. 44, pl. 16, fig. 9,) which is probably merely a large form of P. lanceolatus and the small leaf represented by our Figure 4, Plate 8, is probably identical with Podozamites pusillus Velenovsky (1885) (p. 11, pl. 2, figs. 20-22, 24a) which is practically indistinguishable from small forms of P. lanceolatus. Size variations in leaves of P. lanceolatus are figured by Velenovsky on the same plate (Velenovsky (1885) (p.11, pl. 2, figs. 11- 19) from which may be seen the great diversity in this respect that exists in the species as recognized by that author. A similar diversity is recorded by Yokoyama (1906) (p. 26, pl. 6, figs. 1b, l; p. 33, pI. 11, fig. 3; p. 37, pl. 12, fig. 3) in connection with the species from Jurassic and Cretaceous strata in China, and he takes occasion to remark Yokoyama (1906) (p.19) that "the subdivision of this species into many varieties according to the form of the leaflets, as has been done by Heer, is, I believe, not tenable, as already pointed out by Seward." I have also found a similar condition in specimens collected on Long Island, N.Y. (Hollick, 1912) (p.155, pl. 162 in part; pl. 163, figs. 2, 3) where leaves of Podozamites have been found that show every gradation in size and a wide diversity of form, all matted together in the same matrix so that it is impossible to resist the idea that they must all belong to a single species, referable to P. lanceolatus. A somewhat similar example may be seen in our Figure 6, Plate 8, in which a large leaf (a) is shown in close proximity to a small leaf (b), in a single fragment of matrix.
The wealth of material collected in Alaska, instead of being of assistance in determining specific or varietal forms in the genus Podozamites, has only added to the uncertainty of attempting to differentiate them satisfactorily, and it would be quite possible to arrange an intergrading series of forms, with our Figure 8, Plate 8, at one extreme and our Figure 4, Plate 8, at the other, in which any dividing line or lines to differentiate specific, varietal, or form groups would be purely arbitrary and would merely represent personal ideas, or opinions. The feature of principal interest and significance, however, is that we can recognize, beyond qnestion, in these specimens from the Cretaceous of Alaska, a type of vegetation that is specifically identical with vegetation from equivalent geologic horizons
elsewhere in America and in the Old World, and also with vegetation that is recognized as Jurassic from localities that include the northwestern United States and practically the whole of the Eurasian Continent.
In America the vertical range and areal distribution of Podozamites lanceolatus in its various forms includes the Jurassic of California (Fontaine, 1900) (pp. 360, 361, pl. 63, fig, 4; pl. 64, figs, 1, 2; pl. 66, fig. 4 in part; pl. 67, figs. 3, 4), Oregon (Fontaine 1905) (pp. 110-112, pl. 24, figs. 17-20; pl. 25, figs, 1- 7; p. 150, pl. 38, figs. 11, 12) and Alaska (Knowlton, 1914) (pp. 52, 53, pl. 5, fig. 6; pl. 6, fig. 5 in part) the Lower Cretaceous (Kootenai formution) of British Columbia (Dawson, 1885 ) (P. 6, pl. 1, fig. 3,) and Montana (Knowlton 1907) (p. 120, pl. 14, fig, 4) the lower part of the Potomac group of Virginia (Berry, 1911) (p. 341, pl. 53, figs. 5, 6) the Raritan formation of New Jersey (Newberry, 1895 ) (p. 44, pl. 13, fig. 2, under the name "Podozamites angustifolius
(Eichw.) Schimp."; excluding figs. 1, 3, 4) and Maryland (Berry, 1916) (p. 272) the Dakota sandstone of Kansas (Lesquereux, 1892) (p. 28, pl. 1 , figs. 5, 6) and the Magothy formation of New York (Hollick 1906) (p. 35, pl. 2, fig. 1) (Hollick, 1912) (p. 155, pl. 162 in part; pl. 163, figs. 1, 3). So far as the known distribution in Alaska is concerned the species, in any of its forms, is confined to the Jurassic of Cape Lisburne and the Cretaceous of the Yukon River Valley. In the Yukon region it is one of the most abundant elements in the Cretaceous flora, being included in at least 10 of the collections; but not a specimen has yet been found in any of the collections from the Alaska Peninsula."