L. Hably szerk.: Studia Botanica Hungarica 19. 1986 (Budapest, 1986)
Bande, M. B.; Awasthi, N.: New thoughts on the structure and affinities of Viracarpon hexaspermum Sahni from the Deccan Intertrappean beds of India
the top of each fruit as against their presence in Viracarpon hexaspermum . Another species of Viracarpon, V. chitaleyi was described by PAXIL (1977) from the Mohgaon kalan beds which is more similar to Viracarpon elongatum Sahni. Thus, so far there are in all four recognisable species of Viracarpon Sahni from the Deccan Intertrappean beds of India, viz., Viracarpon hexaspermum, V, taleyi. Besides the above-mentioned species of Viracarp on, el ongatum , V. sahnii and V. chiVERMA (1958) described an inflorescence under the name Shuklanthus superbuni from .Mohgaonkalan which is also structurally very similar to Viracarpon. However, CHITALEY und PATIL (1971) believed that Shuklanthus superbum is a fructification and not an inflorescence. They also suggested that it is a junior synonym of Viracarpon elongatum Sahni. Similarly, NA MBU DIR I and TIDWELL (1978), on the basis of their studies on Viracarpon Sahni concluded that the differences between V. hexaspermum and V. sahnii are due to differences in the preservation, and therefore their separation as different species seems anomalous. Thus, according to these authors V. hexaspermum and V. sahnii should be merged with SAHNI' s original species Viracarpon hexaspermum. Similarly to the difference of opinion regarding the correct number of species of Viracarpon, there is also a considerable difference of opinion amongst various authors regarding the actual structure of this fossil. In most of the cases the studies have been made with the help of thin sections and more than once attempts have been made to reconstruct the fossil as a whole. As mentioned earlier, the first reconstruction of an individual fruit was attempted by CHITALEY fl954) also reconstruction a single flower of Shuklanthus superbum and in recent years NAMBUDIRI and TIDWEL (1978) have also given a complete reconstruction of Viracarpon hexaspermum (Figs 1 A B C D). As there is such a difference of opinion regarding the structure as well as the number of species of Viracarpon Sahni, when the present authors came across some well-preserved specimens of Viracarpon in their collection of fossils from Mohga onkal in, it was thought proper to study them in detail. The main idea was first to understand the structure of the individual fruit by studying them at various level of grinding and then to attempt a reconstruction of the whole fructification. During the course of this study it was found that the structure of the individual fruit is quite different from what has been suggested by the earlier authors. As this is bound to have a direct bearing on the botanical affinities of this interesting fossil, it has been decided to present our observations in detail. However, before that is taken up it is necessary to discuss briefly the structure of this fructification as interpreted by earlier workers. As mentioned earlier, the first description of Viracarpon was given by SAHNI (1944). SAHNI did not give any generic diagnosis of the genus but described two species Viracarpon hexaspermum and Viracarpon elongatum separately as follows: " Viracarpon hexaspermum - Specimen apparently with a fleshy axis about 6 mm thick, . length Fig. 1 AB. Reconstruction of a single fruit of Shuklanthus superbum Verma (After Verma, 1958), 1 C. Reconstruction of an individual fruit of Viracarpon hexaspermum Sahni (after Chitaley, 1954), 1 D. Reconstruction of V. hexaspermum Sahni as suggested by Nambudiri and Tidwell (1978)
