PALEONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. 
VOL. XLV. 


STROMATOPOROIDS. 
Parr IIT. 


CRETACEOUS ECHINODERMATA. 


Vou. II, Parr fF. 
(Asteroidea.) 
Pacers 1—28; Piates I—VIII. 


INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. 
Pann V% 
Paces 225—256; Prarrs XXXVII—XLIV. 


DEVONIAN FAUNA OF THE 


SOUTH OF ENGLAND. 
Parr ii 
Paces 155—250; Pratzrs XVI—XXIV. 


TITLE-PAGES, ETC., FOR THE SUPPLEMENT 
TO THE FOSSIL CORALS. 


IssurD For 1890. 


~ California Academy of Sciences 


Presented byPaleontographical Society. 


December 


’ 1 906. 


fh 


un 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2011 with funding from 
California Academy of Sciences Library 


http://www.archive.org/details/monographof441890pala 


PALHONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. 


VOLUME XLIV. 


CONTAINING 


THE STROMATOPOROIDS. Part III. By Prof. Atteynz Nicnouson. Six Plates. 


THE CRETACEOUS ECHINODERMATA (Asterompga). Vol. Il. Part I. By Mr. W. Percy S.apen. 
Hight Plates. 


THE INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. Part V. By Mr.8.8S. Buckman. Light Plates, 


THE DEVONIAN FAUNA OF THE SOUTH OF ENGLAND. Part III. By the Rev. G. F. Wuipzorne. 
Nine Plates. 


TITLE-PAGES FOR THE SUPPLEMENT TO THE FOSSIL CORALS. By Prof. Duncan. 


ISSUED FOR 1890. 


APRIL, 1891. 


THE PALAONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY was established in the year 1847, 
for the purpose of figuring and describing the whole of the British Fossils. 


Each person subscribing ONE GUINEA 1s considered a Member of the Society, and is 


entitled to the Volume issued for the Year to which the Subscription relates. 
Subscriptions are considered to be due on the First of January in each year. 


All the back volumes are in stock. Monographs which have been completed can 


be obtained, apart from the annual volumes, on application to the Honorary Secretary. 


Gentlemen desirous of forwarding the objects of the Society can be provided with 
plates and circulars for distribution on application to the Honorary Secretary, the 
Rev. Professor THomas Wittsuire, M.A., F.G.S., 25, Granville Park, Lewisham, 


London, S.E. 


A List of completed Monographs ready for binding as separate volumes, will be 


found on page 22. 


The Annual Volumes are now issued in ¢wo forms of Binding: 1st, with all the 
Monographs stitched together and enclosed in one cover; 2nd, with each of the 
Monographs in a paper cover, and the whole of the separate parts enclosed in an 


envelope. 


Members wishing to obtain the Volume arranged in the LarrER rorM are requested 


to communicate with the Honorary Secretary. 


has: 


OF 


The Council, Secvetaries, amd atlembers 


OF THE 


PALHONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY ; 


AND 


J. A CATALOGUE OF THE WORKS ALREADY PUBLISHED ; 


II. A CLASSIFIED LIST OF THE MONOGRAPHS COMPLETED, IN COURSE OF PUBLICATION, 
AND IN PREPARATION, WITH THE NAMES OF THEIR RESPECTIVE AUTHORS ; 


III. THE DATES OF ISSUE OF THE ANNUAL VOLUMES; 
IV. A GENERAL SUMMARY, SHOWING THE NUMBER OF THE PAGES, PLATES, FIGURES, 
AND SPECIES IN EACH MONOGRAPH ; 
V. A STRATIGRAPHICAL LIST OF THE BRITISH FOSSILS FIGURED AND DESCRIBED IN THE 
YEARLY VOLUMES. 


Council and Officers elected 20th June, 1890. 


Dresident. 
PROFESSOR SIR R. OWEN, K.O.B., F.B.S., GS. 


Vite-presidents. 
Dr. A. Gurxtn, F.R.S. | Sir A. C. Ramsay, LL.D., F.R.S. 
Pror. H. Atteyne Nicnotson, F.G.S. Dr. H. Woopwarp, F.R.S. 
Council. 

Dr. Bianronrp, F.R.S. Dr. J. S. Poenf, F.G:S. 
Rev. Pror. Bonney, D.Sc., F.R.S. Str A. Rouurt, LL.D., F.R.A.S., M.P. 
J. Carter, Esq., F.G.S8. T. G. Rytanps, Esq., F.G.S. 
Rev. H. Day, M.A. W. P. Suapen, Esa., F.G.S. 
Pror. A. H. Green, F.R.S. C. Trier, Esq., F.G.S. 
W. H. Hupuzston, Esq., F.R.S. T. Warptie, Esa., F.G.S8. 
J. W. Itort, Esq. Rev. G. F. Wurpporns, F.G.S. 
S. R. Pattison, Esa., F.G.S8. Rev. H. H. Winwoop, F.G.S. 

CGreaswrec. 


R. Erneripes, Esa., F.R.S., British Museum (Natural History), S.W. 


Honorary Secretary. 
Rev. Pror. T. Wittsurre, M.A., F.G.S., 25, Granville Park, Lewisham, London. S.E. 


Potal Secretaries. 


Bath—Rrv. H. H. Winwoop, M.A., F.G.S. | Melbourne—R. T. Litton, Esy., F.G.S. 
Berlin—Mussrs. FRIEDLANDER & Son. North Devon—TownsimndD M. Haut, Esq, F.G.S. 
Birmingham—W. R. Huenss, Esq., F.L.S. Oxford—Pror. A. H. Grunn, M.A., F.R.S. 
Cambridge—Jamus Carter, Esa., F.G.S. Paris—M. F. Savy. 

Cheltenham—H. WntuEren, Esq, F.G.S. Roxburghshire—D. Watson, Esa. 

Durham—Ruv. A. Warts, F.G.S. Scotland (Central and Southern)—Dr. J. R. S. 
Glasgow—J. Tuomson, Esa., F.GS. Hunter, F.G.S8. 

Gloucester—S. 8. Buckman, Esa., F.G.S. Sheffield—P. G. Pocutn, Esq., F.GS. 
Halhifax—J. W. Davis, Esq., F.G.S8. Sydney—Hi. Duane, Esq, F.L.S. 
Hertfordshire—J. Hopkinson, Esa., F.G.S. Torquay—W. Prnca.ty, Esa., F.R.S. 
Liverpool—G. H. Morton, Esq., F.G.S. 


LIST OF MEMBERS.* 


CORRECTED TO JANUARY, 1891. 


Her Most Gracious Masesty THE QUEEN. 


Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia, U.S.A. 

Adelaide Public Library, Australia. 

Adlard, R. E., Esg., Bartholomew Close. E.C. 

Agassiz, Alex., Esq., Cambridge, U.S.A. 

Albert Memorial Museum, Queen Street, Exeter. 

Allendale E. J. A., Esq., Creswick, Victoria, Australia. 

Amburst College, Mass., U.S.A. 

Anderson, Sir James, F.G.S., 62, Queen’s Gate. S.W. 

Asher and Co., Messrs., 13, Bedford Street, Covent Garden. W.C. 

Ashworth, J. W., Esq., F.G.S., Thorne Bank, Heaton Moor Road, Heaton Chapel, near 
Stockport. 

Athenzum Library, Liverpool. 

Auckland, The Institute of, New Zealand. 

Australia, Acclimatization Society of. 


Balfour, Professor I. Bayley, M.A., F.R.S., Botanic Gardens, Edinburgh. 
Balme, E. B. Wheatley, Esq., Loughrigg, Ambleside. 

Balston, W. E., Esq., F.G.8., Barvin, Potters Bar. 

Barclay, E. F., Esq., F.G.S., 43, Augusta Gardens, Folkestone. 
Barclay, Joseph G., Hsq., 54, Lombard Street. E.C. 

Bardin, Mons. le Prof. L., Université d’Angers, Maine et Loire, France. 
Barrow, J., Esq., Beechfield, Folly Lane, Swinton, Manchester. 
Barrow-in-Furness Free Public Library. 

Barthes and Lowell, Messrs., 14, Great Marlborough Street. W. 

Bath Royal Literary and Scientific Institution. 

Bather, F. A., Esq., F.G.S., British Museum (Natural History). S.W. 
Becker, M. Edvald, Breslau, Silesia. 

Bedford, J., Esq., Woodhouse Cliff, Leeds. 

Bell, W. H., Esq., F.G.S., Cleeve House, Seend, Melksham. 

Bell and Bradfute, Messrs., 12, Bank Street, Edinburgh. 

Benn, C. A., Esq., Trinity Hall, Cambridge. 


* The Members. are requested to inform the Secretary of any errors or omissions in this list, and of any delay in 
the transmission of the Yearly Volumes. 


Berkeley, Earl of, 21, Drayton Gardens, South Kensington. S.W 

Berthand, Prof., Faculté des Sciences, Lyons. 

Bewley, John, Esq., Central Buildings, North John Street, Liverpool. 
Bibliothéque de Ecole des Mines, Paris. 

Bibliothéque du Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris. 

Bibliothéque du Palais des Arts, Lyons. 

Bibliothéque publique, Boulogne-sur-Mer, per Mons. C. Cougnacq, Conserv. Adjoints. 
Birkenhead Free Library. 

Birmingham Free Library, Ratcliff Place, Birmingham. 

Birmingham Old Library, Union Street, Birmingham. 

Blackburn Free Library. 

Blackmore, Humphrey P., M.D., F.G.S., Salisbury. 

Blake, W., Esq., Bridge House, South Petherton, Ilminster. 

Blanford, H. T., Esq, 7, Inglis Road, Folkestone. 

Blanford, W. T., Esq., LL.D., F.R.S., 72, Bedford Gardens, Kensington. W. 
Blathwayt, Lieut.-Col. Linley, Eagle House, Batheaston, Bath. 

Bompas, G. C., Esq., F.G.S., 121, Westbourne Terrace, Hyde Park. W. 
Bonissent, Monsieur, Clarentan. 

Bonney, Rev. Prof. T. George, D. Se., F.R.S., 23, Denning Road, Hampstead. N.W. 
Bootle cum Linacre, Free Public Library, Liverpool. 

Bordeaux, La Faculté des Sciences de. 

Boston Society of Natural History, Boston, U.S.A. 

Bradford Technical College. 

Braga, J. F., Esq., F.G.S,, Glen Villa, Sunbury-on-Thames. 

Brassey, Lord, K.C.B., 24, Park Lane. W. 

Brenchley Trustees, Museum, Maidstone. 

Briggs, Miss Ellen, 55, Lincoln’s Inn Fields. W.C. 

Brighton aud Sussex Natural History Society, Brighton. 

Bristol Naturalists Society, Geological Section, A. M. Metcalf, Esq., Hon. Sec. 
British Museum, Departmental Mineralogical and Geological Library. S.W. 
British Museum, Printed Book Department. W.C. 

Brown, H. I., Esq., 47, High Street, Burton-on-Trent. 

Brown, Isaac, Esq., Kendal. 

Brown, T. Forster, Esq., F.G.S., Guildhall Chambers, Cardiff. 

Brushfield, Dr. T. N., The Cliff, Budleigh Salterton, Devonshire. 

Buckman, 8. 8., Esq., F.G.S., &c., Local Secretary, Oxlynch, Stonehouse, Gloucestershire. 
Buxton, A. F., Esq., 5, Hyde Park Street. W. 


Cambridge University Library. 

Cambridge University Museum of Zoology. 

Campbell, Rey. J., M.A., F.G.S., M.R.A.S.E., Holy Trinity, Glen Innes, New South Wales. 
Canada Geological Survey, Sussex Street, Ottawa, Canada. 

Cardiff Free Library. 

Carpenter, Dr. Alfred, Heath Lodge, Croydon. 

Carpenter, Dr. P. Herbert, F.R.S., &c., Eton College, Windsor. 
Carruthers, W., Esq., F.R.S., British Museum, Cromwell Road, S.W. 
Carter, James, Esq., F.G.S., Local Secretary, 30, Petty Cury, Cambridge. 
Cash, Wm., Esq., F.G.S., L.S., R.M.S., Halifax, Yorkshire. 

Chadwick Museum, Bolton. 


Chapman, Thomas, Esq., 37, Tregunter Road, South Kensington. S.W. 
Charterhouse School, Godalming. 

Cheltenham College, Bath Road, Cheltenham. 

Cheltenham Permanent Library, Royal Crescent, Cheltenham. 

Chester Society of Natural Science. 

Chicago, Library of. 

Christiania, Library of University of, Norway. 

Christ’s College, Cambridge, Library of. 

Clark, J. E., Esq., 9, Faversham Terrace, York. 

Clarke, Stephenson, Esq., F.G.S., Croydon Lodge, Croydon. 

Clifford, the Hon, and Rt. Rev. Bishop, Prior Park, Bath. 

Clifton College, Clifton, Bristol. 

Clothworkers’ Company, Mincing Lane.  E.C. 

Clough, C. T., Esq., F.G.S., Museum, Jermyn Street. S.W. 

Cobbold, Rev. R. H., The Rectory, Ross, Herefordshire. 

Cochrane, C., Esq., Green Royde, Pedmore, near Stourbridge. 

Colman, J. J., Esq., M.P., &c., Carrow House, Norwich. 

Colville, H. K., Esq., F.G.S., Bellaport Hall, Market Drayton. 
Copland-Crawford, Robert Fitzgerald, General, R.A., F.G.S., Sudbury Lodge, Harrow. 
Cornell University, Ithica, U.S.A. 

Corporation of London, Library Committee of, Guildhall. E.C. 

Cotteau, Mons. Gustave, Auxerre. 

Cowan, Thomas W. Esq., F.G.S., R.M.S., Comptons Lea, Horsham. 
Craig, R., Esq., Langside, Beith, Ayrshire. N.B. 

Crisp, F., Esq., LL.B., B.A., F.G.S., &c., 6, Lansdowne Road, Notting Hill. 
Cross, Rev. J. E., F.G.S., Appleby Vicarage, Doncaster, Lincolnshire. 
Crosskey, Rev. H. W., LL.D., F.G.S., 117, Gough Road, Birmingham. 


Darlington Public Library. 

Darwin, W, E., Esq., Ridgemont, Basset, Southampton. 

Davies, E. H., Esq., 1, Adelaide Terrace, Bournemouth. 

Davis, J. W., Esq., F.S.A., F.G.S., Local Secretary, Chevinedge, Halifax. 

Dawkins, Prof. W. Boyd, F.R.S., G.S., Woodhurst, Wilmslow Road, Fallow Field, Manchester. 
Dawson, Sir W., LL.D., F.R.S., G.S., &c., McGill’s University, Montreal. 

Day, Rev. Hen. George, M.A., 55, Denmark Villas, West Brighton. 

Day, J. T., Esq., ¥.G.S., 12, Albert Square, Stepney. 

Deane, Henry, Esq., F.L.S., Local Secretary, Railway Department, Sydney, New South Wales. 
Deighton, Bell, & Co., Messrs., Cambridge. 

Delgado, Signor J. F. N., Seccaé dos Trabathos geologicos, 118, Rua do Arco a Jesus, Lisbou. 
De Mercey Mons. M., Hyéres. 

Derby, Free Library and Museum. 

Derham, Walter, Esq., 2, Essex Court, Temple. E.C. 

Deslongchamps, Prof., Faculté des Sciences, Caen. 

Devas, Mrs. Anne, The Quarry Colwall, Great Malvern. 

Devonshire, Duke of, F.R.S., G.S., &c., Devonshire House, Piccadilly. W. 

Devon and Exeter Institution, Exeter. 

Dewalque, Prof., F.C.G.S., Liége. 

Dickinson, W., Esq., F G.S., 3, Whitehall Place, S.W. 

Dickson, Edw., Esq., 30, Easthaurne Road West, Birkdale, Southport, Lancashire. 


Donald, Miss, 2, Eden Mount, Stanwix, Carlisle. 

Dorset County Museum Library, Dorchester. 

Dowson, E. T., Esq., F.R.M.S., Geldeston, Beccles. 

Dresden Nat. Society, Isis. 

Drew, Dr. J., F.G.S., Pembroke Lodge, Charlton Kings, Cheltenham. 

Ducie, the Earl of, F.R.S., G.S., &c., 16, Portman Square, W.; and Tortworth Court, Falfield, 
R.S.O., Gloucestershire. 

Dudley and Midland Geological and Scientific Society and Field-Club. 

Dundee Free Library. 

Dundee Naturalists Society, Albert Institute, Dundee. 

Dunlop, R. Esq., Staurigg Oil Works, Airdrie, N.B. 

Durham, the Dean and Chapter of (by C. Rowlandson, Esq., the College, Durham). 


Edinburgh Geological Society, 5, St. Andrew Square, Edinburgh. 

Edinburgh Museum of Science and Art, Argyle Square, Edinburgh. 

Essex Field Club, per A. P. Wire, Esq., Buckhurst Hill. 

Etheridge, R., Esq., F.R.S., G.S., &c., Treasurer, British Museum (Natural History), South 
Kensington. S.W. 

Eunson, J., Esq., F.G.S., 20, St. Giles Street, Northampton. 

Evans, John, Esq., D.C.L., F.R.S., G.S., Nash Mills, Hemel Hempstead. 

Eyre and Spottiswoode, Messrs., Great New Street. E.C. 


Falconer, A. P., Esq., 18, Royal Crescent, Bath. 

Feddon, F., Esq., F.G.S., Geological Survey of India. 

Firth College, Sheffield. 

Florence, Gambinetto di Palzontologia, per Dr. Major. 

Flower, Prof. W. H., LL.D., F.R.S., British Museum, South Kensington. S.W. 
Fontannes, Mons. F., 4, Rue de Lyon, Lyon. 

Foster, H. S., Esq., F.G.S., Sutton Court, Sutton, Surrey. 

Foulerton, Dr. J., 44, Pembridge Villas, Bayswater. W. 

Fraser, John, Esq., M.A., M.D., F.R.C.S. Edin., Chapel Ash, Wolverhampton. 
Friedlander, Messrs., Local Secretaries, 11, Carlstrasse, Berlin. 

Fritsch, Prof. K. von, Halle. 

Fuller, Rev. A., Pallant, Chichester. 


Galloway, Rev. W. B., 37, Belsize Square. N.W. 

Galton, Sir Douglas, K.C.B., F.R.S., G.S., &c., 12, Chester Street, Grosvenor Place. S.W. 

Gardner, J. S., Esq., F.G.S., 7, Damer Terrace, King’s Road, Chelsea. S.W. 

Garnett, C., Esq., Pembroke College, Cambridge. 

Gatty, Charles Henry, Esq., M.A., F.G.S., Felbridge Place, East Grinstead. 

Gaudry, Prof., Membre de I’Institute, F.M.G.S., Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris. 

Geikie, Archibald, Esq., LL.D., F.R.S.L. & E., Pres. G. S., Vice-President, Director-General 
of the Geological Survey of the United Kingdom, Museum, Jermyn Street. S.W. 

Geneva, Museum of Natural History. 

Geological Society of Liverpool. 

Geological Society of Manchester. 

Geological Survey of Ireland. 

Geologists’ Association, University College. W.C. 

Gibson, Mrs. Elizabeth, Saffron Walden. 


Gilmour, M., Esq., Saffronhall House, 1, Windmill Road, Hamilton. N.B. 
Glasgow Geological Society, 207, Bath Street, Glasgow. 

Glen, D. C., Esq., F.G.S., 14, Annfield Place, Dennistown, Glasgow. 

Godlee, Mrs., Whips Cross, Walthamstow. E. 

Goss, W. H., Esq., F.G.S., Stoke-on-Trent. 

Gosselet, Prof. J., F.M.G.S., Faculté des Sciences, Rue des Fleurs, Lille, France. 
Gough, Viscount, F.G.S., L.S., &c., Lough Cutra Castle, Gort, Galway, Ireland. 
Green, Prof. A. H., F.R.S., Local Secretary, Oxford. 

Groves, Prof. J. W., F.L.S., R.M.S., King’s College, Strand. W.C. 


Hagen, B. B., Esq., Sway House, Lymington, Hants. 
Haileybury College, near Hertford. 
Halifax Free Public Library. 
Hall, Townshend M., Esq., F.G.S., Local Secretary, Orchard House, Pilton, Barnstaple. 
Hannah, R., Esq., F.G.S., 82, Addison Road, Kensington. W. 
Harker, Alfred, Esq., B.A., F.G.S., St. John’s College, Cambridge. 
Harley, Dr. John, F.L.8., 9, Stratford Place. W. 
Harmer, F. W., Esq., F.G.S., Oakland House, Cringleford, near Norwich. 
Hartley Institution, Southampton, per T. W. Shore, Esq., F.G.S., Secretary. 
Haughton, Rev. Professor S., M.D., F.R.S., G.S., Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin. 
Havers, J. C., Esq., Joyce Grove, Nettlebed, Henley-on-Thames. 
Hawick Public Library. N.B. 
Hawkins, Rev. H. S., Beyton Rectory, Bury St. Edmunds, 
Hawkshaw, J. Clarke, Esq., 18, Harrington Gardens, Gloucester Road. S.W. 
Hedderley, J. S. Esq., Bulcote, near Nottingham. 
Heidelburg Library. 
Hepburn, A. Buchan, Esq., Smeaton-Hepburn, Preston Kirk. N.B. 
Herdman, J., Esq., 18, Camden Crescent, Bath. 
Herdman, W., Esq., Westgate, Weardale, Darlington, Co. Durham. 
Heywood, James, Esq., F.R.S., G.S., &c., 26, Palace Gardens, Bayswater Road. W. 
Hicks, Dr. H., F.R.S., Hendon Grove, Hendon. N.W. 
Hiil, Wm., Esq., jun., The Maples, Hitchin. 
Hind, Wheelton, Esq., M.D.Lond., 8, Wood House Terrace, Stoke-on-Trent. 
Hinde, Geo., Esq., Ph.D., F.G.S., Avondale Road, South Croydon. 
Hodges, Figgis and Co., Messrs., 104, Grafton Street, Dublin. 
Hogan, H. L., Esq., 12, Park Road, Wimbledon. 
Holeroft, C., Esq., The Shrubbery, Summerhill, King’s Winford, near Dudley. 
Hood, Dr. Geo., Tow Law, via Darlington. 
Hopgood, James, Esq., Clapham Common. S.W. 
Hopkinson, John, Esq., F.L.S., G.S., Local Secretary, The Grange, St. Albans. 
Horen, Dr. F. Van, St. Trond, Belgium. 
Hoskold, Signor Don C. A. L., 1% Ing", National Departments of Mines and Geology, 
Casilla, Correos 900, Buenos Aires. 
Hoskold, Signor Don H. D., F.R.G.S., F.G.S.M. Soc. A., Inst. M.E., Inspector-General of 
Mines, Argentine Republic, Casilla, Correos 900, Buenos Aires, 
Host, M., Copenhagen. 
Howden, Dr. J. C., Sunnyside, Montrose. 
Howse, H. G., Esq., M.S., F.R.C.S., 59, Brook Street, Grosvenor Square. W. 
Hudleston, W. H., Esq., F.R.S., 8, Stanhope Gardens. S.W. 
2 


10 


Hudson, Rev. R., M.A., Houghton, 9, The Drive, Brighton. 

Hughes, Prof. T. M‘K., F.R.S., &c., 4, Cintra Terrace, Cambridge. 

Hughes, W. R., Esq., F.L.8., Local Secretary, Wood House, Handsworth Wood, Birmingham. 
Hull, Prof. Edw., LL.D., F.R.S., &c., 14, Hume Street, Dublin. 

Hunt, J., Esq., Milton of Campsie, Glasgow. N.B. 

Hunter, Dr. J. R. S., Local Secretary, Daleville House, Carluke. N.B. 

Hunter, Rev. R., LL.D., M.A., F.G.S., Forest Retreat, Staples Road, Loughton, Essex. 
Huxley, Prof. T. H., LL.D., F.R.S., &c., Museum, South Kensington. S.W. 


Tlott, James William, Esq., Beechfield, Bromley, Kent. 
India, Geological Survey of. 
Ipswich Museum, Ipswich. 


Johnes, Mrs. and Miss, Dolan Cothy, Llandeilo, R.S.O., South Wales. 

Jones, Professor T. Rupert, F.R.S., G.S., &c., 10, Uverdale Road, King’s Road, Chelsea. S.W. 
Judd, Prof. J, W., F.R.S., &c., Hurstleigh, Kew. } 
Jukes-Browne, A. J., Esq., Geological Survey Office, 28, Jermyn Street. S.W. 


Keighley Mechanics’ Institute. 

Kendal Literary Institution, The Museum, Kendal, per S. Severs, Esq., Hon. Sec. 
Kilmarnock Library. 

King’s School, Library of, Sherborne. 

Kirkaldy Naturalists’ Society. N.B. 

Kirberger, W. H., Esq., Rokin 134, Amsterdam. 

Kirkby, J. W., Esq., Kirkland, Leven, Fife. 

Kirkland, Cope and Co., 4, Northumberland Street, Strand. W.C. 
Knowles, G., Esq., Moorhead, Shipley, near Leeds. 

Koebner, Herr W., Breslau, Germany. 

Koettlitz, Dr., Bleak House, Butterknowle, R.S.O., Darlington. 
Kynaston, Herbert, Esq., King’s College, Cambridge. 


Langdale, Mrs. Catherine, The Grange, Stroud, Gloucestershire. 

Laurie, Malcolm, Esq., King’s College, Cambridge. 

Lausaune Musée Géologique, Switzerland. 

Leaf, C. J., Esq., F.G.S., Old Change, E.C.; and 6, Sussex Place, Regent’s Park, London. N.W. 

Leaver, J. M. L. A., Esq., F.G.S., Hunter Street, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 

Leeds Philosophical and Literary Society. 

Lefevre, Mons. T., 10, Rue du Pont Neuf, Brussels. 

Leicester Town Museum. 

Leighton, T., Esq., 16, New Street Square, Fleet Street. E.C. 

Leipzig, Museum of. 

Lemarchand, Mons., Rouen. 

Linnean Society, Burlington House, Piccadilly. W. 

Lister, Arthur, Esq., Leytonstone. N.E. 

Literary and Philosophical Society of Manchester. 

Literary and Philosophical Society of Newcastle, Westgate Street, Newcastle-on-Tyne. 

Literary and Philosophical Society of Sheffield. 

Litton, Robert T., Esq., Sec. Geol. Soc., Australasia, Local Secretary, 45, Queen Street, 
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 


11 


Liveing, Professor G. D., M.A., Cambridge. 

Liverpool Free Public Library. 

London Amateur Society, H. Fleck, Esq., Secretary, 1284, Queen’s Road, Peckham, S.E. 
London Institution, Finsbury Circus. E.C. 

London Library, St. James Square. S.W. 

Lovén Professor S., Stockholm. 

Lubbock, Sir John W., Bart., M.P., F.R.S., L.S., &c., 15, Lombard Street. E.C. 
Luck, H. C., Esq., A.K.C., 122, Stamford Street. S.E. 

Lucy, W. C., Esq., F.G.S., Brookthorpe, near Gloucester. 

Lyon, Bibliotheque de la Ville de. 

Lyons, Lieut. H. G., R.E., F.G.S., Kasr-el-Nil, Cairo. 


Macadam, Prof. W. Ivison R.S.E., F.I.C., Surgeons’ Hall, Edinburgh. 

Mackenzie, G. W., Esq., 13, William Street, Lowndes Square. S.W. 

Mackeson, Henry B., Esq., F.G.S., &c., Hythe, Kent. 

Macmillan, Messrs., Cambridge. 

Madeley, W., Esq., Local Secretary, Martins Hill House, Dudley. 

Madras Government Museum (per Messrs. Williams and Norgate). 

Major, Charlies, Esq., Red Lion Wharf, Upper Thames Street. E.C. 

Malton Field Naturalists’ and Scientific Society, Malton, Yorkshire. 

Manchester Free Library. 

Manchester Museum, Owen’s College, Manchester. 

Mansel-Pleydell, John C., Esq., F.G.S., Whatcombe, Blandford, Dorset. 

Manzoni, Dr. Angelo, Ravenia. 

Marburgh, University of. 

Martin, Miss, Bredon’s Norton, Tewkesbury. 

Marr, J. E., Esq., M.A., F.G.S., St. John’s College, Cambridge. 

Mason Science College, Birmingham. 

Mason, P. B., Esq., Burton-on-Trent. 

Mathews, W., Esq., M.A., F.G.S., 60, Harborne Road, Birmingham. 

Mathison, R., Esq., Innerleithen, N.B. 

Melbourne Public Library. 

Melvin, J., Esq., V.P.G.S.E., 43, Drumsheugh Gardens, Edinburgh. 

Mennell, H. T. Esq., F.L.S., The Red House, Croydon. 

Meyer, C. J. A., Esq., F.G.S., 3, Princes Gardens, Clapham Common. S.W. 

Middlesbrough Free Library. 

Milne-Edwards, Prof. A., Museum d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris. 

Mitchell Library, Ingram Street East, Glasgow. 

Mitchinson, Rt. Rev. J., D.D., Asst. Bishop, Diocese of Peterborough, Rectory, Sibstone, 
Atherstone. 

Monks, Lieut.-Col. James, Aden Cottage, Durham. 

Mons, Museum of, Belgium, per Prof. C. A Houzeau, Ryon, prés Mons. 

Moore, J. Carrick, Esq., M.A., F.R.S., G.S., &c., 118, Eaton Square. S.W. 

Morison, Dr. J., F.G.S8., Victoria Street, St. Albans. 

Morris, T., Esq., 85, Bewsey Road, Warrington. 

Morton, George Highfield, Esq., F.G.S., Local Secretary, 209, Edge Lane, Liverpool. 

Munich Royal Library. 

Museum of Practical Geology, Jermyn Street. S.W. 


Nantes, Musée d’ Histoire Naturelle de. 


12 


National Library, Dublin. 

Neale, Edward Vansittart, Esq., Bisham Abbey, Marlow, Bucks. 

Newberry Library, Chicago, United States America. 

Newport (Mon.) Free Library. 

Newcastle-upon-Tyne Public Library, 

Nicholson, Prof. H. Alleyne, F.G.S., Vice-President, Marischal College, Aberdeen. N.B. 

Niven, Geo., Esq., F.G.S., Erkingholme, Coolhurst Road. N. 

Norfolk and Norwich Library, Norwich. 

Norwich Free Library. 

Norman, Rev. A. M., Burnmoor Rectory, Fencehouses, Durham. 

North Devon Athenzum, Barnstaple. 

Northampton Natural History Society. 

Northwich Library. 

Nottingham Free Library. 

Nottingham Naturalists’ Society, F. R. Jackson, Esq., Hon. Sec., 2, Stratford Square, 
Shakespeare Street, Nottingham. 

Nutt, D., Esq., Strand. W.C. 


Oldham Free Public Library. 

Oldham, Mrs., 96, Lescham Gardens, Kensington. W. 

Omond, R. T., Esq., F.G.S.E., &c., Ben Nevis Observatory, Fort William, N.B. 

Oswestry Naturalists’ Field Club, Oswestry. 

Ormerod, H. M., Esq., 5, Clarence Street, Manchester. 

Owen, Professor Sir R., M.D., LL.D., K.C.B., F.R.S., &c., President, Sheen Lodge, Richmond 
Park, East Sheen. S.W. 

Owens College Library, Manchester. 


Paisley Philosophical Institution. 

Parker, J., Esq., F.G.S., Turl Street, Oxford. 

Paterson, J., Esg., Palmyra Square, Warrington. 

Pattison, S. R., Esq., F.G.S., 11, Queen Victoria Street. E.C. 

Paynter, Rev. Samuel, 13, Bolton Street, Piccadilly. 

Peabody Institute, Baltimore, America. 

Peal, C. N., Esq., F.L.S., F.R.M.S., Fernhurst, Mattock Lane, Ealing. 

Peckover, Algernon, Esq., F.L.8., Wisbeach. 

Peek, Sir Henry W., Bart., M.P., Wimbledon House, Wimbledon. 

Pengelly, William, Esq., F.R.S., G.S., Local Secretary, Lamorna, Torquay. 

Penruddocke, Charles, Esq., Compton Park, near Salisbury. 

Penton, Edw., Esq., F.G.S., 1, Mortimer Street. W. 

Peterborough Natural History, Scientific, and Archzeological Society. 

Peyton, J. E. H., Esq., F.G.S., R.A.S., 5, Fourth Avenue, Brighton. 

Philosophical Society of Glasgow. 

Phené, John S., Esq., LL.D., F.S.A., G.S., 32, Oakley Street, Chelsea. S.W. 

Piper, G. H., Esq., F.G.S., Court House, Ledbury. 

Plymouth Institution, Library of. 

Pochin, P. G., Esq., F.G.S., R.M.S., S.Se., V.Ph.I., Local Secretary, 13, Ranmoor Park, 
Sheffield. 

Portal, Wyndham S., Esq., Malshanger House, Basingstoke. 

Portis, Dr. A., Professor of Geology, The University, Rome. 

Portsmouth Free Public Library. 


13 


Poynton, Rev. Francis, Rectory, Kelston, Bath. 

Preston Free Library. 

Prestwich, Prof. Joseph, F.R.S.,G.S., Shoreham, near Sevenoaks, Kent. 
Price, F. G. H., Esq., 17, Collingham Gardens, South Kensington. S.W. 
Pryor, M. R., Esq., Weston Manor, Stevenage, Herts. 


Quaritch, B., Esq., Piccadilly. W. 

Queen’s College, Belfast. 

Queen’s College, Cork (by Messrs. Hodges and Smith). 
Queen’s College, Galway. 

Queensland Museum. 


Radcliffe Library, Oxford 
Ramsay, Sir A. C., LL.D., F.R.S., G.S., &e., Vice-President, 7, Victoria Terrace, Beaumaris, 


Ramsden, Hildebrand, Esq., 26, Upper Bedford Place, Russell Square. W.C. 
Reading Public Library and Museum. 

Reed, Dr. Frederick G., 46, Hertford Street, May Fair. W. 

Richards, W., Esq., B.Sc., F.C.S., Clock House, Tooting. S.W. 

Ripon, Marquis of, 9, Chelsea Embankment. S.W. 

Roberts, Isaac, Esq., F.G.S., Crowborough, Sussex. 

Roberts, Sir Owen, M.A., F.S.A., 48, Westbourne Terrace. W. 

Roberts, Thos., Esq., M.A., F.G.S., Woodwardian Museum, Cambridge. 
Robertson, D., Esq., F.G.S., Fern Bank, Millport, N.B. 

Robinson, George, Esq., 8, Broad Street, Halifax, and Portalegre, Portugal. 
Roemer, Professor F., University of Breslau, Silesia. 

Rogers, G. H. Esq., The Red House, Bagshot, Surrey. 

Rollit, Sir Albert, LL.D., D.C.L., F.R.A.S., M.P., Dunster House, Mark Lane. E.C. 
Roper, F. C. S., Esq., F.G.S., L.S., Palgrave House, Eastbourne. 

Ross, Dr. J. C., F.R.C.P. Edin., F.G.S., F.S.A. Scot., Parsonage Nook, Withington, Manchester: 
Royal College of Physicians, Edinburgh. 

Royal College of Science for Ireland, Stephen’s Green, Dublin. 

Royal College of Surgeons, Lincoln’s Inn Fields. W.C. 

Royal Geological Society of Cornwall, Penzance. 

Royal Institution of Cornwall, Truro. 

Royal Institution of Great Britain, Albemarle Street. W. 

Royal Institution, Liverpool. 

Royal Institution of South Wales, Swansea. 

Royal Irish Academy, 19, Dawson Street, Dublin. 

Royal Microscopical Society, 20, Hanover Square. W. 

Royal Society of Edinburgh. 

Royal Society of New South Wales. 

Royal Society of London, Burlington House. W. 

Rudler, F. W., Esq., F.G.S., Museum Practical Geology, Jermyn Street. S.W. 
Ruscoe, John, Esq., F.G.S., Ferndale, Gee Cross, near Manchester. 

Rutter, John, Esq., [minster. 

Rylands, T. G., Esq., F.L.8., G.S., Highfields, Thelwall, near Warrington, 


St. Helens Free Public Library, Town Hall, St. Helens. 
St. John’s College, Cambridge. 
St. Peter’s College, Cambridge. 


14 


Salford Borough Royal Museum and Library, Peel Park, Manchester. 

Salt, S., Esq., Gateside, Silecroft, Cumberland. 

Sampson Low and Co., Messrs., Crown Buildings, 188, Fleet Street. E.C. 

Sanford, W. A., Esq., F.G.S., Nynehead Court, Wellington, Somerset. 

Saunders, James Ebenezer, Esq., F.L.S., G.S., 9, Finsbury Circus. E.C, 

Savy, Mons. F., Local Secretary, 77, Boulevard St. Germain, Paris. 

Scarborough, Philosophical Society of. 

Science and Art Department, South Kensington. S.W. 

Scientific Society, Midland Institute, Birmingham. 

Seguenza, Prof., Messina. 

Semple, Dr. Andrew, F.C.S.E., Caledonian United Service Club, Edinburgh. 

Seward, A. C., Esq., B.A., F.G.S., St. John’s College, Cambridge. 

Sharpus, F. W., Esq., 80, Compton Road, Highbury. N. 

Sheffield Free Public Library. 

Sherborn, C. D., Esq., 540, King’s Road, Chelsea. S.W. 

Sidney Sussex College Library, Cambridge. 

Simpkin, Marshall, and Co., Messrs., Stationers’ Hall Court. E.C. 

Simpson, Rev, A., B.A., B.Sc., F.G.S., 46, Princes Square, Strathbango, Glasgow. 

Simpson, J. B., Esq., F.G.S., Hedgefield House, Blaydon-on-Tyne. 

Sladen, W. P., Esq., F.G.S., 54, Comeragh Road, Kensington. W. 

Slatter, T. J., Esq., F.G.S., The Bank, Evesham. 

Smith, B. Woodd, Esq., F.A.S., F.R.A.S., F.Z.S., Branch Hill Lodge, Hampstead Heath. 
N.W. 

Smith, Hubert, Esq., Belmont House, Bridgenorth, Shropshire. 

Smith, J., Esq., Monkredding, Kilwinning. N.B. 

Smithe, Rev. F., LL.D., M.A., F.G.S., Churchdown, Gloucester. 

Somersetshire Archeological and Natural History Society, Museum, Taunton. 

Sorbonne Laboratoire de Géologie, Paris. 

Southport Free Library. 

South Shields Free Public Library. 

Spicer, Henry, Esq., jun., F.G.S., 19, New Bridge Street, Blackfriars. E.C. 

Spackman, F. T., Esq., 7, Richmond Road, Worcester. 

Stanley, W. F., Esq., F.G.S., Cumberlow, South Norwood. S.E. 

Stebbing, Rev. T. R. R., M.A., Ephraim Lodge, The Common, Tunbridge Wells. 

Stirrup, Mark, Esq., F.G.S., High Thorn, Stamford Road, Bowdon, Cheshire. 

Stobart, W. C., Esq., Spellow Hiil, Burton Leonard, Yorkshire. 

Stockholm Royal Library. 

Strahan, A., Esq., F.G.S., Museum, Jermyn Street. S.W. 

Strangways, C. Fox, Esq., F.G.S., Museum, Jermyn Street. S.W. 

Streatfield, H. S., Esq., F.G.S., The Limes, Leigham Court Road, Streatham. 

Strickland, Sir C. W., Hildenley, Malton. 

Sugg, J. W., Esq., F.G.S., Knollbrow, Dorking. 

Sunderland Corporation Museum. 

Sunderland Subscription Library, Fawcett Street, Sunderland. 

Swanston, W., Esq., F.G.S., 50, King Street, Belfast. 

Swayne, H. J. F., Esq., The Island, Wilton, Salisbury. 

Sympson, T.. Esq., F.R.C.S., James Street, Lincoln. 


Tasmania, Royal Society of. 


15 


Tate, A. Norman, Ksq., F.G.S., 9, Hackins Hey, Liverpool. 

Taylor, 8. Watson, Esq., Erlestoke Park, Devizes. 

Taylor-Smith, Dr. James, Bellingham, Northumberland. 

Tegima, S., Esq., Tokio Educational Museum, Japan. 

Thomson, James, Esq., F.G.S., Local Secretary, 26, Leven Street, Pollokshields, Glasgow. 

Thompson, I. C., Esq., Woodstock, Waverley Road, Liverpool. 

Toronto University. 

Torquay Natural History Society, Museum, Babbacombe Road, Torquay. 

Trautschold, Dr., Moscow. 

Traquair, Dr. R. H., 8, Dean Park Crescent, Edinburgh. 

Trinity College, Cambridge. 

Twelvetrees, W. H., Esq., F.L.S., F.G.S., Lidjessy Mines, Province of Sivas, Asia Minor, 
care of Messrs. Huber and Co., Constantinople. 

Tyler, Capt. Chas., F.L.S., G.S., Elberton, New West End, Hampstead. N.W. 


University College, Gower Street, London, W.C. 
University of Bale, Switzerland. 

University of Edinburgh. 

University of Glasgow. 

University of Marsburgh. 

University of Wurtzburg. 

University of Sydney, New South Wales. 
University Library, Aberdeen. 

University Library, Bordeaux. 

University Library, Leipzig. 

University Library, Rennes, France. 

University Library, St. Andrew’s. 

University Library, Toulouse. 

Upton, C., Esq., 1, Great Winchester Street. .C. 


Varty, Major Thos., Stagstones, Penrith. 

Vernon Park Museum, Stockport. 

Vicary, William, Esq., F.G.S., The Priory, Colleton Crescent, Exeter. 
Victoria Public Library, per S. Mullen, Esq., 48, Paternoster Row. E.C. 
Volney, The Dean of the Faculty of Sciences of, Angers, France. 


Walcott, C. D., Esq., U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, United States, America. 

Walker, B. E., Esq., Canadian Bank of Commerce, Toronto, Canada. 

Walker, Rev. F. A., Dues Mallard, Cricklewood. N.W. 

Walmstedt, Dr. L. P., Professor of Mineralogy, Upsala. 

Walford, E. A., Esq., F.G.S., 71, High Street, Banbury. 

Warburton, Thos., Esq., F.G.S., 11, Grange Road, Canonbury. N. 

Ward, Henry, Esq., F.G.S., Rodbaston, Penkridge. 

Wardle, Thos., Esq., F.G.S., St. Edward Street, Leek. 

Warrington Museum and Library. 

Warwickshire Natural History Society, Warwick. 

Watson, D., Esq., Local Secretary, Hillside Cottage, Hawick, N.B. 

Watson, Rev. R. B., B.A., F.R.S.E., F.L.S., F.G.8., F.C., Manse, Cardross, Dumbarton, 
Scotland. 


16 


Watts, Rev. Arthur, F.G.S8., Local Secretary, Rectory, Wittou Gilbert, Durham. 

Watts, W. W., Esq., M.A., F.G.S., Broseley, Shropshire. 

Westermann, Messrs., New York. 

Wethered, Edw., Esq., F.G.S., C.S., Local Secretary, 5, Berkeley Place, Cheltenham. 

Whidborne, Rev. G. F., F.G.S., St. George’s Vicarage, Battersea Park Road. S.W. 

Whitby Literary and Philosophical Society, Museum, Whitby. 

White, C., Esq., Holly House, Warrington. 

Wight, G. P., Esq., 55, Hillmarton Road, Camden Road. N. 

Williams, H. 8., Esq., United States Survey, Ithaca, N. Y., United States, Americ: 

Williams and Norgate, Messrs., Henrietta Street, Covent Garden. W.C. 

Williamson, Prof. W. C., LL.D., F.R.S., The Owens College, Manchester. 

Willis and Sotheran, Messrs., Strand. W.C. 

Wiltshire, Rev. Prof. Thomas, M.A., Treas. G.S., F.R.A.S., L.S., Honorary Secretary, 25, 
Granville Park, Lewisham, Kent. S.E. 

Winchester College Natural History Society. 

Winwood, Rev. Henry H., F.G.S., Local Secretary, 11, Cavendish Crescent, Bath. 

Witts, G. B., Esq., Hill House, Leckhampton, near Cheltenham. 

Wollaston, G. H., Esq., M.A., F.G.S., 24, College Road, Clifton, Bristol. 

Wolley-Dod, Rev. Charles, Edge Hall, Malpas, Cheshire. 

Wood, Henry, Esq., 10, Cleveland Square, Hyde Park. WW. 

Wood, J. G., Esq., M.A., LL.B., F.G.S., 7, New Square, Lincoln’s Inn. 

Woodall, Major J. W., M.A., F.G.S., &c., St. Nicholas House, Scarborough. 

Woods, H., Esq., F.G.S., Woodwardian Museum, Cambridge. 

Woodd, A. B., Esq., Woodlands, Hampstead. N.W. 

Woodd, C. H. L., Esq., F.G.S., &c., Roslyn, Hampstead. N.W. 

Woodward, Henry, Esq., LL.D., F.R.S., G.S., Vice-President, British Museum. S.W. 

Woodwardian Museum, Cambridge. 

Worcester Public Library and Hastings Museum. 

Wright, Joseph, Esq., F.G.S., 1, Donegall Street, Belfast. 

Wurzburg, the Royal University Library of. 


Yeats, Dr. J., F.G.S., 7, Beaufort Square, Chepstow, Monmouth. 

Yorkshire College of Science, Leeds. 

Yorkshire Philosophical Society Museum, York. 

Yule, Miss A. F., Chateau Malet, St. Etienne au Mont, Pas de Calais, France. 


Zoological Society of London, 3, Hanover Square. W. 


Li) 


§I. CATALOGUE OF WORKS 


ALREADY PUBLISHED BY 


THE PALHZONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY: 


Showing the ORDER of publication ; the Years during which the Society has been in 
operation ; and the Contents of each yearly Volume. 


Vol. I. Issued for the Year 1847. The Crag Mollusca, Part I, Univalves, by Mr. S. V. Wood, 21 plates. 


The Reptilia of the London Clay, Vol. I, Part I, Chelonia, &c., by Profs. Owen and 

I: i 1848 Bell, 38 plates. 

The Eocene Mollusca, Part I, Cephalopoda, by Mr. F. E. Edwards, 9 plates. 

The Entomostraca of the Cretaceous Formations, by Mr. T. R. Jones, 7 plates. 

The Permian Fossils, by Prof. Wm. King, 29 plates. 

The Reptilia of the London Clay, Vol. I, Part II, Crocodilia and Ophidia, &c., by Prof. 
Owen, 18 plates. 

The Fossil Corals, Part I, Crag, London Clay, Cretaceous, by Messrs. Milne Edwards 
and Jules Haime, 11 plates. 


5 LOO is 1849 


The Mollusca of the Great Oolite, Part I, Univalves, by Messrs. Morris and Lycett, 15 
ny LO - 1850 plates. 
The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. I, Part III, No. 1, Oolitic and Liassic, by Mr. Davidson, 
13 plates. 


The Reptilia of the Cretaceous Formations, by Prof. Owen, 39 plates. 
Vv 1851 The Fossil Corals, Part II, Oolitic, by Messrs. Milne Edwards and Jules Haime, 19 


plates. 
The Fossil Lepadidx, by Mr. Charles Darwin, 5 plates. 


The Fossil Corals, Part III, Permian and Mountain-limestone, by Messrs. Milne 
Edwards and Jules Haime, 16 plates. 
The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. I, Part I, Tertiary, by Mr. Davidson, 2 plates. 
The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. I, Part II, No. 1, Cretaceous, by Mr. Davidson, 5 plates, 
| The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. I, Part III, No. 2, Oolitic, by Mr. Davidson, 5 plates. 
The Eocene Mollusca, Part II, Pulmonata, by Mr. F. E. Edwards, 6 plates. 
L The Radiaria of the Crag, London Clay, &c., by Prof. E. Forbes, 4 plates. 


L 
S Crag Mollusca, Part IT, No. 1, by Mr. 8. V. Wood, 12 plates. 
| 
4 


» VI. 99 1852 


The Fossil Corals, Part IV, Devonian, by Messrs. Milne Edwards and Jules Haime, 10 
plates. 
The Fossil Brachiopoda, Introduction to Vol. I, by Mr. Davidson, 9 plates. 
The Mollusca of the Chalk, Part I, Cephalopoda, by Mr. D. Sharpe, 10 plates. 
The Mollusca of the Great Oolite, Part II, Bivalves, by Messrs. Morris and Lycett, 8 
plates. 
The Mollusca of the Crag, Part II, No. 2, Bivalves, by Mr. 8. V. Wood, 8 plates. 
The Reptilia of the Wealden Formations, Part I, Chelonia, by Prof. Owen, 9 plates. 


» VII. PP 1853 
The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. I, Part II, No. 2, Cretaceous, with Appendix and Index 
f to Vol. I, by Mr. Davidson, 8 plates. 
The Reptilia of the Wealden Formations, Part II, Dinosauria, by Prof. Owen, 20 plates. 
| The Mollusca of the Great Oolite, Part ITI, Bivalves, by Messrs. Morris and Lycett, 7 
plates. 
The Fossil Corals, Part V, Silurian, by Messrs. Milne Edwards and Jules Haime, 16 
plates. 
The Fossil Balanide and Verrucide, by Mr. Charles Darwin, 2 plates. 
The Mollusca of the Chalk, Part II, Cephalopoda, by Mr. D. Sharpe, 6 plates. 
[ The Eocene Mollusca, Part III, No. 1, Prosobranchiata, by Mr. F, E. Edwards, 8 
plates. 


5 NAL LE Te 1854 


* The Volume for the year 1849 consists of two separate portions, each of which is stitched in a paper cover, on 
which are printed the dates 1848, 1849, and 1850. The one portion contains ‘Cretaceous Entomostraca” and ‘ Permian 
Fossils ;’ the other, ‘London Clay Reptilia,’ Part II, and ‘ Fossil Corals,’ Part I. 

} This Vol. is marked on the outside 1855. 


3 


Vol. TX.* 


5 ok 


Fy O-U 0b 


Ne 


Hy OAs 


aL 


7 LET. 


18 


CATALOGUE OF WORKS—Continued. 


{ The Mollusca of the Crag, Part II, No. 3, Bivalves, by Mr. S. V. Wood, 11 plates. 
The Reptilia of the Wealden Formations, Part ITI, by Prof. Owen, 12 plates. 


Tasncditorathe The Hocene Mollusca, Part III, No. 2, Prosobranchiata, continued, by Mr. F. E. 


”” 


Year 1855 Edwards, 4 plates. 


The Mollusca of the Chalk, Part III, Cephalopoda, by Mr. D. Sharpe, 11 plates. 
h The Tertiary Entomostraca, by Mr. T. R. Jones, 6 plates. 
The Fossil Echinodermata, Oolitic, Vol. I, Part I, by Dr. Wright, 10 plates 


The Fossil Echinodermata, Oolitic, Vol. I, Part II, by Dr. Wright, 12 plates. 
The Fossil Crustacea, Part I, London Clay, by Prof. Bell, 11 plates. 
The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. II, Part IV, Permian, by Mr. Davidson, 4 plates. 
1856 4 The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. II, Part V, No. 1, Carboniferous, by Mr. Davidson, 8 plates. 
The Reptilia of the Wealden Formations, Part IV (Supplement No. 1), by Prof. Owen. 
11 plates. 
The Reptilia of the London Clay, Vol. I (Supplement), by Prof. Owen, 2 plates. 


The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. II, Part V, No. 2, Carboniferous, by Mr. Davidson, 8 plates. 
The Reptilia of the Cretaceous Formations (Supplement No. 1), by Prof. Owen, 4 plates. 

{ The Reptilia of the Wealden Formations (Supplement No. 2), by Prof. Owen, 8 plates. 
The Polyzoa of the Crag, by Prof. Busk, 22 plates. 


{ The Fossil Echinodermata, Oolitic, Vol. I, Part III, by Dr. Wright, 14 plates. 
1857 


The Fossil Echinodermata, Oolitic, Vol. I, Part IV, by Dr. Wright, 7 plates. 
The Eocene Mollusca, Part III, No. 3, Prosobranchiata continued, by Mr. F. E. 
| Edwards, 6 plates. 
1858 } The Reptilia of the Cretaceous Formations (Supplements No. 2, No. 3), by Prof. Owen, 
lates. 
The Reptilia of the Purbeck Limestones, by Prof. Owen, 1 plate. 
The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. II, Part V, No. 3, Carboniferous, by Mr. Davidson, 10 plates. 


The Reptilia of the Oolitic Formations, No. 1, Lower Lias, by Prof. Owen, 6 plates. 
The Reptilia of the Kimmeridge Clay, No. 1, by Prof. Owen, 1 plate. 
The Eocene Mollusca, Part IV, No. 1, Bivalves, by Mv. 8. V. Wood, 13 plates. 


The Fossil Brachiopoda, Part V, No. 4, Carboniferous, by Mr. Davidson, 20 plates. 
1859 | 


The Reptilia of the Oolitic Formations, No. 2, Lower Lias, by Prof. Owen, 11 plates, 
The Reptilia of the Kimmeridge Clay, No. 2, by Prof. Owen, 1 plate. 

| The Fossil Estherie, by Prof. Rupert Jones, 5 plates. 

L The Fossil Crustacea, Part II, Gault and Greensand, by Prof. Bell, 11 plates. 


1861 | The Fossil Echinodermata, Oolitic, Vol. II, Part I (Asteroidea), by Dr. Wright, 13 


{ The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. II, Part V, No. 5, Carboniferous, by Mr. Davidson, 8 plates. 
1860 < 


plates. 
Supplement to the Great Oolite Mollusca, by Dr. Lycett, 15 plates. 


The Trilobites of the Silurian, Devonian, &c., Formations, Part I (Devonian and 
Silurian), by Mr. J. W. Salter, 6 plates. 
1862 4 The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. III, Part VI, No. 1. Devonian, by Mr. Davidson, 9 plates. 
The Eocene Mollusca, Part IV, No. 2, Bivalves, by Mr. 8. V. Wood, 7 plates. 
The Reptilia of the Cretaceous and Wealden Formations (Supplements), by Prof. Owen, 
10 plates. 


U 
The Trilobites of the Silurian, Devonian, &c., Formations, Part II, by Mr. J. W. 
1863 
L 


The Fossil Hchinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part I, by Dr. Wright, 11 plates. 


Salter, 8 plates. 
The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. III, Part VI, No. 2, Devonian, by Mr. Davidson, 11 plates. 
The Belemnitide, Part I, Introduction, by Prof. Phillips. 
The Reptilia of the Liassic Formations, Part I, by Prof. Owen, 16 plates. 


rp The Fossil Echinodermata, Oolitic, Vol. II, Part II (Liassic Ophiuroidea), by Dr. 
Wright, 6 plates. 
| The Trilobites of the Silurian, Devonian, &c., Formations, Part III, by Mr. J. W. 
Salter, 11 plates. 
1864 The Belemnitide, Part II, Liassic Belemnites, by Prof. Phillips, 7 plates. 
The Pleistocene Mammalia, Part I, Introduction, Felis spelea, by Messrs. W. Boyd 
| Dawkins and W. A. Sanford, 5 plates. 
Title-pages, &e., to the Monographs on the Reptilia of the London Clay, Cretaceous, 
L and Wealden Formations. 


* This Vol. is marked on the outside 1856. 


Vol. XIX.* 


(py 0.0: Gu 


mp OK 


1 SOB 


7p OGM Ges 


5 2 OD ie; 


my OGG 


39 XX VI* 


» XXVII* 


19 


CATALOGUE OF WORKS—Continued. 


{ The Crag Foraminifera, Part 1, by Messrs. T. Rupert Jones, W. K. Parker, and 
| H. B. Brady, 4 plates. 


Issued for the 1 Supplement to the Fossil Corals, Part I, Tertiary, by Dr. Duncan, 10 plates. 


” 


99 


39 


39 


7 


Year 1865 


The Fossil Merostomata, Part I, Pterygotus, by Mr. H. Woodward, 9 plates. 
L The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. III, Part VII, No. 1, Silurian, by Mr. Davidson, 12 plates. 


Supplement to the Fossil Corals, Part IV, No. 1, Liassic, by Dr. Duncan, 11 plates. 

The Trilobites of the Silurian, Devonian, &c., Formations, Part IV (Silurian), by Mr. 
1866 J. W. Salter, 6 plates. 

The Fossil Brachicpoda, Vol. III, Part VII, No. 2, Silurian, by Mr. Davidson, 10 plates. 

The Belemnitide, Part III, Liassic Belemnites, by Prof. Phillips, 13 plates. 


( Flora of the Carboniferous Strata, Part I, by Mr. E. W. Binney, 6 plates. 
Supplement to the Fossil Corals, Part IV, No. 2, Liassic, by Dr. Duncan, 6 plates. 
The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part II, by Dr. Wright, 14 plates. 
1867 4 The Fishes of the Old Red Sandstone, Part I, by Messrs. J. Powrie and E. Ray 
Lankester, 5 plates. 
The Pleistocene Mammalia, Part II, Felis spelza, continued, by Messrs. W. Boyd 
Dawkins and W. A. Sanford, 14 plates. 


Supplement to the Fossil Corals, Part II, No. 1, Cretaceous, by Dr. Duncan, 9 plates. 

The Fossil Merostomata, Part II, Pterygotus, by Mr. H. Woodward, 6 plates. 

The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. III, Part VII, No. 3, Silurian, by Mr. Davidson, 15 plates. 

The Belemnitide, Part IV, Liassic and Oolitic Belemnites, by Prof. Phillips, 7 plates. 

The Reptilia of the Kimmeridge Clay, No. 3, by Prof. Owen, 4 plates. 

The Pleistocene Mammalia, Part III, Felis spelewa, concluded, with F. lynx, by 
Messrs. W. Boyd Dawkins and W. A. Sanford, 6 plates. 


Supplement to the Fossil Corals, Part II, No. 2, Cretaceous, by Dr. Duncan, 6 plates. 
The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part III, by Dr. Wright, 10 plates. 

The Belemnitide, Part V, Oxford Clay, &c., Belemnites, by Prof. Phillips, 9 plates. 
The Fishes of the Old Red Sandstone, Part I (concluded), by Messrs. J. Powrie and 
iT 


— 
wm 
oS 
@ 


—_ 
(o) 
for) 
co 


E. Ray Lankester, 9 plates. 
he Reptilia of the Liassic Formations, Part II, by Prof. Owen, 4 plates. 
The Crag Cetacea, No. 1, by Prof. Owen, 5 plates. 


The Flora of the Carboniferous Strata, Part II, by Mr. E. W. Binney, 6 plates. 

The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part IV, by Dr. Wright, 10 
plates. 

The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. III, Part VII, No. 4, Silurian, by Mr. Davidson, 13 plates. 

The Kocene Mollusca, Part IV, No. 3, Bivalves, by Mr. S. V. Wood, 5 plates. 

The Fossil Mammalia of the Mesozoic Formations, by Prof. Owen, 4 plates. 


{ The Flora of the Carboniferous Strata, Part III, by Mr. E. W. Binney, 6 plates. 
| The Fossil Merostomata, Part III, Pterygotus and Slimonia, by Mr. H. Woodward, 
5 plates. 
Supplement to the Crag Mollusca, Part I (Univalves), by Mr. 8S. V. Wood, with an 
Introduction on the Crag District, by Messrs. 8. V. Wood, jun., and F. W. 
1871 4 Harmer, 7 plates and map. 
Supplement to the Reptilia of the Wealden (Iguanodon), No. IV, by Prof. Owen, 
3 plates 
The Pleistocene Mammalia, Part IV, Felis pardus, &c., by Messrs W. Boyd Dawkins 
and W. A. Sanford, 2 plates. 
| The Pleistocene Mammalia, Part V, Ovibos moschatus, by Mr. W. Boyd Dawkins, 
lL 5 plates. 
f Supplement to the Fossil Corals, Part ITI (Oolitic), by Prof. Duncan, with an Index 
to the Tertiary and Secondary Species, 7 plates. 
1879 4 The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part V, by Dr. Wright, 5 plates. 
“| The Fossil Merostomata, Part IV (Stylonurus, Eurypterus, Hemiaspis), by Mr. H. 


a 
DD 
aI 
oO 


TN SS SST (ipa 


H Woodward, 10 plates. 

L The Fossil Trigoniew, No. I, by Dr. Lycett, 9 plates. 

( The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol I, Part VI, by Dr. Wright, 8 plates. 

| Supplement to the Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. IV, Part I (Tertiary and Cretaceous), by 

| Mr. Davidson, 8 plates. 

1873 2 Suppiement to the Crag Mollusca, Part II (Bivalves), by Mr. 8. V. Wood, 5 plates. 

: Supplement to the Reptilia of the Wealden (Iguanodon), No. V, by Prof. Owen, 
9 
2 plates. 
f Supplement to the Reptilia of the Wealden (Hyleochampsa) No. VI, by Prof. Owen. 
The Fossil Reptilia of the Mesozoic Formations, Part I, by Prof. Owen, 2 plates. 


* These Volumes are issued in two forms of binding; first, with all the Monographs stitched together and enclosed in 
one cover; secondly, with each of the Monographs separate, and the whole of the separate parts placed in an envelope. 
The previous Volumes are not in separate parts. 


Vol. XXVIII* 


»» XXIX* 


» XXX.* 


9» XXXI.* 


9) SX XI¥ 


rp. 0.0.4 00k. 


5 SAL 


9» SAK V* 


20 


CATALOGUE OF WORKS—Continued. 


( The Post-Tertiary Entomostraca, by Mr. G. S. Brady, Rev. H. W. Crosskey, and Mr. 
D. Robertson, 16 plates. 


| 
Issued for the 4 The Carboniferous Entomostraca, Part I (Cypridinade), by Prof. T. Rupert Jones 


Year 1874 and Messrs. J. W. Kirkby and G. 8S. Brady, 5 plates. 


The Fossil Trigoniz, No. II, by Dr. Lycett, 10 plates. 


The Flora of the Carboniferous Strata, Part IV, by Mr. E. W. Binney, 6 plates. 
1875 The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part VII, by Dr. Wright, 10 plates. 

The Fossil Trigoniz, No. III, by Dr. Lycett, 8 plates. 

The Fossil Reptilia of the Mesozoic Formations, Part II, by Prof. Owen, 20 plates. 


(The Carboniferous and Permian Foraminifera (the genus Fusulina excepted), by Mr. 
| H. B. Brady, 12 plates. 
1876 J Supplement to the Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. IV, Part II, No. 1 (Jurassic and Triassic), 
by Mr. Davidson, 8 plates. 
| Supplement to the Reptilia of the Wealden (Poikilopleuron and Chondrosteosaurus) 
No. VII, by Prof. Owen, 6 plates. 


The Fossil Trigoniz, No. IV, by Dr. Lycett, 13 plates. 

The Eocene Mollusca (Univalves), Part IV, by Mr. S. V. Wood, 1 plate. 

The Carboniferous Ganoid Fishes, Part I (Paleoniscide), by Dr. Traquair, 7 plates. 

The Fossil Reptilia of the Mesozoic Formations, Part III, by Prof. Owen, 2 plates. 
L The Fossil Elephants (E. antiquus), Part I, by Prof. Leith Adams, 5 plates. 


Supplement to the Eocene Mollusca (Bivalves), by Mr. 8. V. Wood, 2 plates. 
1877 | 


( The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part VIII, by Dr. Wright, 8 plates. 
Index and Title Page to the Fossil Hchinodermata, Oolitic, Vol. I (Echinoidea), by Dr. 
right. 
The Fossil Merostomata, Part V (Neolimulus, &c.), by Dr. H. Woodward, 6 plates. 
Supplement to the Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. IV, Part II, No. 2 (Jurassic and Triassic), 
1878 4 by Mr. Davidson, 13 plates. 
; The Lias Ammonites, Part I, by Dr. Wright, 8 plates. 
The Sirenoid and Crossopterygian Ganoids, Part I, by Prof. Miall, 6 plates. 
Supplement to the Reptilia of the Wealden (Goniopholis, Petrosuchus, and Sucho- 
saurus), No. VIII, by Prof. Owen, 6 plates. 
L The Pleistocene Mammalia, Part A (Preliminary Treatise), by Prof. Boyd Dawkins. 


( The Eocene Flora, Vol. I, Part I, by Mr. J.S. Gardner and Baron Httingshausen, 5 plates. 
Second Supplement to the Crag Mollusca (Univalves and Bivalves), by Mr. S. V. Wood, 
6 plates. 
1879 The Bogail (Ps soniees No. V (Conclusion), by Dr. Lycett, 1 plate. 
‘9% The Lias Ammonites, Part II, by Dr. Wright, 10 plates. 
| Supplement to the Reptilia of the Wealden (Goniopholis, Brachydectes, Nannosuchus, 
Theriosuchus, and Nuthetes), No. [X, by Prof. Owen, 4 plates. 
l the Fossil Elephants (E. primigenius), Part II, by Prof. Leith Adams, 10 plates. 


( The Eocene Flora, Vol. I, Part II, by Mr. J. 8. Gardner and Baron Ettingshausen, 
6 plates. 

| The Foauil Helinodenanta: Oolitic, Vol. II, Part III (Asteroidea and Ophiuroidea), 

1880 by Dr. Wright, 3 plates. 

1 Supplement to the Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. IV, Part III (Permian and Carboniferous), 
by Mr. Davidson, 8 plates. 

| The Lias Ammonites, Part III, by Dr. Wright, 22 plates. 

(The Reptilia of the London Clay, Vol. II, Part I (Chelone) by Prof. Owen, 2 plates. 


The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part IX, by Dr. Wright, 6 plates. 

Supplement to the Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. IV, Part IV (Devonian and Silurian, 
from Budleigh-Salterton Pebble Bed), by Mx. Davidson, 5 plates. 

The Fossil Trigonie (Supplement No. 1), by Dr. Lycett. 

The Lias Ammonites, Part IV, by Dr. Wright, 10 plates. 

The Reptilia of the Liassic Formations, Part III (Conelusion), by Prof. Owen, 13 plates. 

The Fossil Elephants (E. primigenius and EH. meridionalis), Part III (Conclusion), 
by Prof. Leith Adams, 13 plates. 


1881 


* These Volumes are issued in two forms of binding ; first, with all the Monographs stitched together and enclosed in 
one cover ; secondly, with each of the Monographs separate, and the whole of the separate parts placed in an envelope. 


Vol 


LB] 


” 


33 


99 


” 


3) 


99 


21 


CATALOGUE OF WORKS—Continued. 


The Eocene Flora, Vol. I, Part III (Conclusion), by Mr. J. S. Gardner and Baron 
Ettingshausen, 2 plates. 

Third Supplement to the Crag Mollusca, by the late Mr. 8. V. Wood, 1 plate. ; 

The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. I, Part X (Conclusion), by Dr. Wright, 


. XXXVI* Issued for the 5 plates. 


XXXVII* ,, 


XXX VEL ,, 


XXXIX* 


32 


XL* ” 


XLI* 


XLIi* 


39 


XLITI* 5 


XLIV _ 


Year 1882 | Supplement to the Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. IV, Part V (Conclusion), by Dr. Davidson. 


Supplement to the Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. V, Part I (Devonian and Silurian), by 

Dr. Davidson, 7 plates. 
The Lias Ammonites, Part V, by Dr. Wright, 22 plates. 
( The Eocene Flora, Vol. II, Part I, by Mr. J. 8. Gardner, 9 plates. ‘ 

The Trilobites of the Silurian, Devonian, &c., Formations, Part V (Conclusion), by the 
late Mr. J. W. Salter. 

1883 The Carboniferous Trilobites, Part I, by Dr. H. Woodward, 6 plates. ' 

Supplement to the Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. V, Part II (Silurian), by Dr. Davidson, 
10 plates. 

The Fossil Trigonixw (Supplement No. 2), by the late Dr. Lycett, 4 plates. 

The Lias Ammonites, Part VI, by Dr. Wright, 8 plates. 
¢ The Eocene Flora, Vol. II, Part I, by Mr. J. S. Gardner, 11 plates. 
The Carboniferous Entomostraca, Part I, No. 2 (Conclusion), by Prof. T. Rupert Jones, 
Mr. J. W. Kirkby, and Prof. G. 8. Brady, 2 plates. 
1884 { The Carboniferous Trilobites, Part II, by Dr. H. Woodward, 4 plates. ‘ 
| Supplement to the Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. V, Part III (Conclusion), by Dr. Davidson, 
4 plates. 
L The Lias Ammonites, Part VII, by Dr. Wright, 10 plates. 

The Eocene Flora, Vol. II, Part III (Conclusion), by Mr. J. S. Gardner, 7 plates. 

The Stromatoporoids, Part I, by Prof. Alleyne Nicholson, 11 plates. 

1885 4 The Fossil Brachiopoda (Bibliography), Vol. VI (Conclusion), by the late Dr. Davidson 
and Mr. W. H. Dalton. 

The Lias Ammonites, Part VIII (Conclusion), by the late Dr. Wright, 1 plate. 

( The Morphology and Histology of Stigmaria Ficoides, by Prof. W. C. Williamson, 
5 plates. 
The Fossil Sponges, Part I, by Dr. G. J. Hinde, 8 plates. 
1886 4 The Jurassic Gasteropoda, Part I, No. 1, by Mr. W. H. Hudleston. 

The Inferior Oolite Ammonites, Part I, by Mr. 8. 8. Buckman, 6 plates. 

The Pleistocene Mammalia, Part VI, by Prof. Boyd Dawkins, 7 plates. 

The Fossil Sponges, Part II, by Dr. G. J. Hinde, 1 plate. 

1887 The Paleozoic Phyllopoda, Part I, by Prof. T. R. Jones and Dr. Woodward, 12 plates. 

The Jurassic Gasteropoda, Part I, No. 2, by Mr. W. H. Hudleston, 6 plates. 

The Inferior Oolite Ammonites, Part II, by Mr. 8. 8. Buckman, 8 plates. 

The Stromatoporoids, Part II, by Prof. Alleyne Nicholson, 8 plates. 

The Tertiary Entomostraca (Supplement), by Prof. T. Rupert Jones and Mr. C. D. 
Sherborn, 3 plates. 

The Jurassic Gasteropoda, Part I, No. 3, by Mr. W. H. Hudleston, 5 plates. 

1888 2 The Inferior Oolite Ammonites, Part III, by Mr. 8. 8. Buckman, 10 plates. 

The Devonian Fauna of the South of England, Part I, by the Rev. G. F. Whidborne, 
4 plates. 

Title-pages to the Monographs on the Reptilia of the Wealden and Purbeck (Supple- 
ments), Kimmeridge Clay, and Mesozoic Formations, and on the Cetacea of 
the Red Crag. 

( The Cretaceous Entomostraca (Supplement), by Prof. T. Rupert Jones and Dr. G. J. 
Hinde, 4 plates. 
1889 The Jurassic Gasteropoda, Part I, No. 4, by Mr. W. H. Hudleston, 5 plates. 
1 The Inferior Oolite Ammonites, Part IV, by Mr. 8. S. Buckman, 13 plates. 
\ The acer Fauna of the South of England, Part II, by the Rev. G. F. Whidborne, 
2 plates. 
[ The Stromatoporoids, Part III, by Prof. Alleyne Nicholson, 6 plates. 
The Fossil Echinodermata, Cretaceous, Vol. II, Part I (Asteroidea), by Mr. W. Percy 
| Sladen, 8 plates. 
1890 { The Inferior Oolite Ammonites, Part V, by Mr. S. S. Buckman, 8 plates. 
The Poor Fauna of the South of England, Part III, by the Rev. G. F. Whidborne, 
plates. 
Title-pages to the Supplement to the Fossil Corals, by Prof. Duncan. 


* These Volumes are issued in two forms of binding; first, with all the Monographs stitched together and enclosed in 
one cover; secondly, with each of the Monographs separate, and the whole of the separate parts placed in an envelope. 


§ II. LIST OF MONOGRAPHS 


Completed, in course of Publication, and in Preparation. 


1, MONOGRAPHS which have been Comrterep, and which may be bound as separate 
Volumes, with directions for the Binp1ne :— 


The Morphology and Histology of Stigmaria ficoides by Prof. W. C. Williamson. (Complete 
with Title-page and Index in the Volume for the year 1886.) 

The Eocene Flora, Vol. I (Filices), by Mr. J. S. Gardner and Baron Ettingshausen. (Complete 
in the Volumes for the years 1879, 1880, and 1882. Title-page, Index, and directions 
for the binding, will be found in the Volume for 1882.) 

The Eocene Flora, Vol. II (Gymnospermee), by Mr. J. S. Gardner. (Complete in the 
Volumes for the years 1883, 1884, and 1885.  Title-page, Index, and directions for the 
binding, will be found in the Volume for 1885.) 

The Carboniferous and Permian Foraminifera (the genus Fusulina excepted), by Mr. H. B. 
Brady. (Complete in the Volume for the year 1876.) 

The Tertiary, Cretaceous, Oolitic, Devonian, and Silurian Corals, by MM. Milne-Edwards 
and J. Haime. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1849, 1851, 1852, 18538, and 
1854. The Title-page and Index, with corrected explanations of Plates XVII and XVIII, 
will be found in the Volume for the year 1854.) 

Supplement to the Tertiary, Cretaceous, Liassic, and Oolitic Corals, by Prof. Martin Duncan. 
(Complete in the Volumes for the years 1865, 1866, 1867, 1868, 1869, 1872, and 1890. 
The Title-page, with directions for binding, will be found in the Volume for the year 1890.) 

The Polyzoa of the Crag, by Mr. G. Busk. (Complete with Title-page and Index in the 
Volume for the year 1857.) 

The Tertiary Echinodermata, by Professor Forbes. (Complete with Title-page in the Volume 
for the year 1852.) 

The Fossil Cirripedes, by Mr. C. Darwin. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1851, 1854, 
and 1858. The Title-page will be found in the Volume for the year 1854, and the Index 
in the Volume for the year 1858. 

The Post-Tertiary Entomostraca, by Mr. G. 8S. Brady, the Rev. H. W. Crosskey, and Mr. D. 
Robertson. (Complete, with Title-page and Index, in the Volume for the year 1874.) 

The Tertiary Entomostraca, by Prof. T. Rupert Jones. (Complete, with Title-page and Index, 
in the Volume for the year 1855.) 

The Cretaceous Entomostraca, by Prof. T. Rupert Jones. (Complete, with Title-page and 
Index, in the Volume for the year 1849.) 

Supplement to the Cretaceous Entomostraca, by Prof. T, Rupert Jones and Dr. G. J. Hinde. 
(Complete, with Title-page and Index, in the Volume for the year 1889.) 

The Carboniferous Entomostraca, Part I (Cypridinade and their allies), by Prof. T. Rupert 
Jones, Mr. J. W. Kirkby, and Prof. G. S. Brady. (Complete in the volumes for the years 
1874 and 1884. The Title-page and Index will be found in the Volume for the year 1884.) 

The Fossil Estherie, by Prof. T. Rupert Jones. (Complete, with Title-puge and Index, in the 

‘olume for the year 1860.) 

The Trilobites of the Cambrian, Silurian, and Devonian Formations, by Mr. J. W. Salter. 
(Complete in the Volumes for the years 1862, 1863, 1864, 1866, and 1883. The Title- 
page and Index, with directions for the binding, will be found in the Volume for the year 


1883.) 


23 


The Fossil Merostomata, by Dr. H. Woodward. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 
1865, 1868, 1871, 1872, and 1878. The Title-page and Index, with directions for the 
binding, will be found in the Volume for the year 1878.) 

The Fossil Brachiopoda (Tertiary, Cretaceous, Oolitic, and Liassic), Vol. I, by Mr. T. Davidson. 
(Complete in the Volumes for the years 1850, 1852, 1853, and 1854. The Index will be 
found in the Volume for the year 1854, and corrected Title-page in that for 1870.) 

The Fossil Brachiopoda (Permian and Carboniferous), Vol. II, by Mr. T. Davidson. (Complete 
in the Volumes for the years 1856, 1857, 1858, 1859, and 1860. The Index will be found 
in the Volume for the year 1860, and corrected Title-page in that for 1870.) 

The Fossil Brachiopoda (Devonian and Silurian), Vol. III, by Mr. T. Davidson. (Complete in 
the Volumes for the years 1862, 1863, 1865, 1866, 1868, and 1870. The Title-page and 
Index will be found in the Volume for the year 1870.) 

The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. IV, by Dr. T. Davidson. Supplements: Tertiary, Cretaceous, 
Jurassic, Triassic, Permian, and Carboniferous. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 
1873, 1876, 1878, 1880, 1881, and 1882. The Title-page and Index, with directions for 
the binding will be found in the Volume for the year 1882.) 

The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. V, by Dr. T. Davidson. Supplements: Devonian and Silurian. 
Appendix to Supplements, General Summary, Catalogue and Index of the British Species. 
(Complete in the Volumes for the years 1882, 1883, and 1884. The Title-page, with 
directions for the binding will be found in the Volume for 1884.) 

The Fossil Brachiopoda, Vol. VI, by Dr. T. Davidson and Mr. W. H. Dalton. Biblio- 
graphy. (Complete in the Volume for the year 1885.) 

The Eocene Bivalves, Vol. I, by Mr. S. V. Wood. (Complete, with Title-page and Index, in 
the Volumes for the years 1859, 1862, and 1870. The directions for the binding will be 
found in the Volume for the year 1870.) 

Supplement to the Eocene Bivalves, by Mr. 8. V. Wood. (Complete, with Title-paye and 
Index, in the Volume for the year 1877.) 

The Eocene Cephalopoda and Univalves, Vol. I, by Mr. F. E. Edwards and Mr. S. V. Wood. 
(Complete in the Volumes for the years 1848, 1852, 1854, 1855, 1858, and 1877. The 
Title-page, Index, and directions for the binding, will be found in the Volume for the year 
1877.) 

The Mollusca of the Crag, Vol. I, Univalves, by Mr. 8. V. Wood. (The Text, Plates, and 
Index, will be found in the Volume for the year 1847, and the Title-page will be found in 
the Volume for the year 1855.) 

The Mollusca of the Crag, Vol. II, Bivalves, by Mr. S. V. Wood. (Complete in the Volumes 
for the years 1850, 1853, 1855, 1858, and 1878. The Title-page will be found in the 
Volume for the year 1878, and the Index will be found in the Volume for the year 1855, 
and a Note in the Volume for the year 1858). 

The Mollusca of the Crag, Vol. III, Supplement, by Mr. 8. V. Wood. (Complete in the 
Volumes for the years 1871 and 1873. The Title-page and Index will be found in the 
Volume for the year 1873.) 

Second Supplement to the Crag Mollusca, by Mr. 8. V. Wood. (Complete, with Title-page 
and Index, in the Volume for the year 1879.) 

Third Supplement to the Crag Mollusca, by Mr. S. V. Wood. (Complete, with Title-page and 
Index, in the Volume for the year 1882.) 

The Great Oolite Mollusca, by Professor Morris and Dr. Lycett. (Complete in the Volumes 
for the years 1850, 1853, and 1854. The Title-paye and Index will be found in the 
Volume for the year 1854.) 


24. 


The Fossil Trigoniz, by Dr. Lycett. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1872, 1874, 
1875, 1877, and 1879. The directions for the binding will be found in the Volume for the 
year 1879.) 

Supplement to the Fossil Trigoniz, by Dr. Lycett. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 
1881 and 1888. The Title-page, Index, with directions for the binding, will be found in 
the Volume for the year 1883.) 

The Oolitic Echinodermata, Vol. I, Echinoidea, by Dr. Wright. (Complete in the Volumes 
for the years 1855, 1856, 1857, 1858, and 1878. Title-page, Index, and directions for 
the binding, will be found in the Volume for the year 1878.) 

The Oolitic Echinodermata, Vol. II, Asteroidea, by Dr. Wright. (Complete in the Volumes 
for the years 1861, 1864, and 1880. Title-page, Index, and directions for the binding, 
will be found in the Volume for the year 1880). 

The Cretaceous Echinodermata, Vol. I, Echinoidea, by Dr. Wright. (Complete in the Volumes 
for the years 1862, 1867, 1869, 1870, 1872, 1873, 1875, 1878, 1881, and 1882. The 
Title-page and Index, with directions for the binding, will be found in the Volume for the 
year 1882.) 

The Cretaceous (Upper) Cephalopoda, by Mr. D. Sharpe. (Complete in the Volumes for the 
years 1853, 1854, and 1855, but wants Title-page and Indev.) 

The Lias Ammonites, by Dr. Wright. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1878, 1879, 
1880, 1881, 1882, 1883, 1884, and 1885. The Title-page and Index, with directions for 
the binding, will be found in the Volume for the year 1885.) 

The Fossils of the Permian Formation, by Professor King. Complete, with Title-page and 
Index, in the Volume for the year 1849. Corrected explanations of Plates XXVIII and 
XXVIII* will be found in the Volume for the year 1854.) 

The Reptilia of the London Clay (and of the Bracklesham and other Tertiary Beds), Vol. I, 
by Professors Owen and Bell. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1848, 1849, 1856, 
and 1864. Directions for the binding, Title-page, and Index, will be found in the 
Volume for the year 1864.) Part I of Vol. II, containing Chelone gigas (to be found in 
the Volume for the year 1880), can be added. 

The Reptilia of the Cretaceous Formations, by Prof. Owen. (Complete in the Volumes for the 
years 1851, 1857, 1858, 1862, and 1864. Directions for the binding, Title-page, and 
Index, will be found in the Volume for the year 1864.) 

The Reptilia of the Wealden and Purbeck Formations, by Professor Owen. (Complete in the 
Volumes for the years 1853, 1854, 1855, 1856, 1857, 1858, 1862, and 1864. Directions 
for the binding, Title-pages, and Index, will be found in the Volume for the year 1864.) 

The Reptilia of the Wealden and Purbeck Formations (Supplements 4—9), by Professor 
Owen. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 1871, 1873, 1876, 1878, 1879, and 1888. 
Directions for the binding, Title-page, Preface, and Table of Contents, will be found in 
the Volume for the year 1888.) 

The Reptilia of the Kimmeridge Clay Formation, by Professor Owen. (Complete in the 
Volumes for the years 1859, 1860, 1868, and 1888. Directions for the binding, Title- 
page, Preface, and Table of Contents, will be found in the Volume for the year 1888.) 

The Reptilia of the Liassic Formations, by Professor Owen. (Complete in the Volumes for 
the years 1859, 1860, 1863, 1869, and 1881. Directions for the binding, Title-pages, 
and Index, will be found in the Volume for the year 1881.) 

The Reptilia of the Mesozoic Formations, by Professor Owen. (Complete in the Volume for 
the years 1873, 1875, 1877, and 1888. Directions for the binding, Title-page, Preface, 
and Table of Contents, will be found in the Volume for the year 1888.) 

The Red Crag Cetacea, by Professor Owen. (Complete in the Volume for the years 1869 and 
1888. Directions for the binding, Title-page, Preface, and Table of Contents, will be 
found in the Volume for the year 1888.) 


25 


The Fossil Mammalia of the Mesozoic Formations, by Professor Owen. (Complete, with Title- 
page and Table of Contents, in the Volume for the year 1870.) 

The Fossil Elephants, by Professor Leith Adams. (Complete in the Volumes for the years 
1877, 1879, and 1881. Directions for the binding, Title-page, and Index will be found 
in the Volume for the year 1881. 


2, MONOGRAPHS in course of PusLication :—* 


The Eocene Flora, by Mr. J. S. Gardner. 

The Fossil Sponges, by Dr. G. J. Hinde. 

The Crag Foraminifera, by Messrs. T. Rupert Jones, W. K. Parker, and H. B, Brady.t+ 

The Stromatoporoids, by Prof. H. Alleyne Nicholson. 

The Jurassic Gasteropoda, by Mr. W. H. Hudleston. 

The Paleozoic Phyllopoda, by Prof. T. Rupert Jones and Dr. H. Woodward. 

The Trilobites, by Dr. H. Woodward. 

The Inferior Oolite Ammonites, by Mr. 8. 8. Buckman. 

The Belemnites, by Professor Phillips. 

The Sirenoid and Crossopterygian Ganoids, by Professor Miall. 

The Fishes of the Carboniferous Formation, by Prof. Traquair. 

The Fishes of the Old Red Sandstone, by Messrs. J. Powrie and E. Ray Lankester, and 
Professor Traquair. 

The Pleistocene Mammalia, by Messrs. Boyd Dawkins and W. A. Sanford. 

The Fauna of the Devonian Formation of the South of England, by the Rev. G, F. Whidborne. 


38. MONOGRAPHS which are in course of Preparation :—* 


The Fossil Cycadeze, by Mr. W. Carruthers. 

The Graptolites, by Prof. Lapworth. 

The Carboniferous Entomostraca, Part II (Leperditiadz), by Prof. T. Rupert Jones. 
The Wealden, Purbeck, and Jurassic Entomostraca, by Prof. T. R. Jones. 

The Purbeck Mollusca, by Mr. R. Etheridge. 

The Rheetic Mollusca, by Mr. R. Etheridge. 

The Cambrian Fossils, by Dr. H. Hicks. 

The Silurian Fish Bed, by Dr. Harley. 

The Fossils of the Budleigh Salterton Pebble Bed, by the Rev. G. F. Whidborne. 


* Members having specimens which might assist the authors in preparing their respective 
Monographs are requested to communicate in the first instance with the Honorary Secretary. 
+ Will be finished by Prof. T. Rupert Jones. 
t Unfinished through the death of the Author, but will be continued by Mr. G, C. Crick. 
4, 


26 


§ III. Dates of the Issue of the Yearly Volumes of the 
Paleontographical Society. 


Volume I for 1847 was issued to the Members, March, 1848. 


- Ik s;. 1848 3 i 5 July, 1849. 

55 III ,, 1849 a4 5 “F August, 1850. 

as [Vo5;,), e850 5 - 35 June, 1851. 

RS Vi; sbi a ay is June, 1851. 

Vi sb2 5 3 i August, 1852. 

B VIE) 5; 18538 a ‘5 a December, 1853. 
3 VIII ,, 1854 4 "5 Ms May, 1855. 

a EX, 0855 _ - 3 February, 1857. 
os Xe aL S56 a ae is April, 1858. 

a3 Or aksv¢ F “3 An November, 1859 
55 XI |; 1858 i 3 * March, 1861. 

as XT S859 5 Py e December, 1861. 
a XW S60 3 % y May, 1863. 

5 KV SG sf 5s a May, 1863. 

a MVD 2 1862 35 a3 Pi August, 1864. 

“A XVII ,, 1863 5s HS 5 June, 1865. 

3) | CUM WET 61864 5 x x April, 1866. 

$9 XCEXe <5, i865, - - By December, 1866. 
5 XOXs 55 S66 oe e a3 June, 1867. 

5 XX 55) S67 33 55 a June, 1868. 

, Xxiy SS 186s i, 3 io February, 1869. 
ROT SS 1869: 3 33 ar January, 1870. 
oe ORT 870 a “3 “ January, 1871. 
3 RXV sz 5 55 June, 1872. 

Sa VERON VAl aE eS 7.2, 59 os ss October, 1872. 
5 VIE sis aS 33 es February, 1874. 
> AXVIDE ,, 1874 5 a 5 July, 1874. 

| UD, 2 875 : r %3 December, 1875. 
35 XXX -;, 01876 53 af a December, 1876. 
Be XO 1ST 53 ks a February, 1877. 
3 OT S78 a es a March, 1878. 

7 TT S79 A 3 AA May, 1879. 
ORV FESSO a fs es May, 1880. 

5) gs. POON: 5 - “ May, 1881. 

yf OK Vila, S82 a 5 June, 1882. 

Fy SSS M3 ‘a pf October, 1883. 
»XXXVIII ,, 1884 5 es 35 December, 1884. 
5 | PROMI i ISS5 a rf ee January, 1886. 
5 XL 5, “1886 s es A March, 1887. 

- MLS; Alss7 s 55 y January, 1888. 
n XLIT .,, 1888 A i i March, 1889. 

» MLIII ,, 1889 55 : ms March, 1890. 


s XLIV ,, 1890 a Pr 53 Apnil, 1891. 


27 


“4x07, ON} 


tt paquiasap 
satvadg jo oN 
‘TIA 


*synOpoo My jo 
pue samaiy 
peydeasouqry 
Jo ON 
‘IA 


Leg 


o 6© Mf eH 


“ydersouoyy 
yore ut 
S$2}¥[q JO ON 
"A 


68T 


‘““CaVMAUOL CAIINAVY 


€98T 


PSST ‘FLST 


LES 


c9@ 
Let 
86 


068 
L0G 
16P 


66 
SPT 


GEG 


90P 
c06 


99T 
8L 
88T 
LPT 
6ST 
48 
99 


O68T 
OS8T 
688T 
LS81 


PLST 


SLET ‘ZL8T ‘SLST ‘69ST ‘998T|SZ8I ‘ZLST ‘TL8T ‘898T “S98T) 


_——S ee ee ee eee ee eee ee eee 


O98T SEE LILNISSSNISS”TIATTROO ‘HOUOL Qaodny ‘Jorg Aq ‘eaongs” [esoT ONL 
ween rer (OREO Oe Rea an a ae see aLATaoO ‘[ yaeq “Speag “gs “9 
‘Jorg pur Aqyiry “My ‘f ‘sassy puv souog yaodny ‘Jorg Aq ‘vovysomoyuy snosofruoqieg oy, 
688T see (quometddng) epury ‘pe Hag pue “s “ ‘“ 
6FST Wetting eee eee eewoww ooo vor eoveeseeeees TT TTAWOD ‘souor ylodny ‘Jorg Aq ‘vovaysoutoyuU snosoeqeID oy], 
88ST TLATANO “(quoweyddng) usoqaoyg “q “9 “AT pus “ “ “s 
gS8T Tee POs TT TT ARNON ouop qtodny ‘jorg Aq ‘vovaysowoquy Aavysey, oy, 
Bee oe Nees daclossies daaeisecaneiirdaneneleeelses siedestcerodseis hse seteeseeeeeeeereseeeseersesesseeeessoeers rtm aWNOD “MOS 


-HOqoy "q “AP pus ‘foyxssory “My ‘YE caoy “Apeag gy ‘ayy Aq ‘vouaqsomozug Areqsay-3s0q OL, 


TOST “GeST ‘Test DECQT ‘PSST ‘TSST POO meee renee eed eee enreeererereoeeseeeree Cee -cecccseves ALATAWOO UIMIR 78) “TN Aq ‘sapadraary [Isso] omnL 
I68T O68T “"'* worarduoa Jo asinoo uz ‘TI }oA ‘uoapryg Aotog “Ay “apy Aq ‘s Ss 
CSST‘TSST ‘SLET ‘ELST ‘PLAST |ZS8T ‘TSST BLST‘GLST ‘ELST |] ..seessecccsescsscveccenssesneeseeeues ae sar ears Ra Gann aid 
‘ZIT TLST ‘OLST S98T ‘FOST |‘ZLST ‘LST GOST LOST ZOST } ALATANOO “J ‘JOA ‘qySityy “aq Aq “vyeurAapouryoY snosovjory ayJ, 
OSST “998T “E99T OSS8T ‘FOST ‘TOST ee eee eee eee eee eee ree ee eee eee Tey ALATAIOO TI ‘TOA “ec “ 

SL8T ‘TOST “6S8T ‘SSS “LG8T/SZ8T SSST LEST OST ‘GGST) teeters (0) gtataMoo TOA “FUStIyy “Aq Aq ‘eyvuIepouryo 191100 PUL 
éS8l 6S8T Waa tas Sara por ea trreteeeesocessees Tr arawoo ‘soqtog Jorg Kq ‘eyeuaopoutyom Arerys9J, aT, 
6S8T LST Coe ceeceveeocsccns Peete eee ee seen sereeeeesereeeseeseneces TTT TWOO ‘ysngq 9) UN kq ‘Bvig ayy Jo vozATog auL 

T6ST ‘ZL8T ‘OL8T OBST “ZL8T “698T ALATAMON ‘uvoung ‘Jorg fq ‘spetog otssery pu ‘oy17009 ‘snosorqary ‘Lavtqaaq, oy 07 guomoddng 
“69ST “S98T “L98T ‘998T ‘98T ‘LOST ‘998T “S98T } ee ae nee ae ait eee 
ecgt FEST Deneceeaeereeesaseaseees Sobicordecuounoonnn stnsssaeseeesrsesseescesenseerevrecsecssrscseree¥es (ay) GETTE NOD ‘ULE 
“SST ‘ZEST ‘TEST ‘OCs ‘EG8T “ZEST ‘TS8T “6FST {-¢ pue sprvapgy-ourTpL “WIT Aq ‘s[etog ueranqig pue ‘ueruoaag “o171[0Q ‘snosovqor_Q ‘KavIyQIay, ey, 
T68T “688T ‘98ST OGST “88ST ‘essT seeeeseeeeeercrecescrssessesss worgazdmod fo asinoo ur Mos[oyoIn oudaTTy “Fotg Aq ‘sprorodozemosyg oy, 
9L8T 9L8T sreseeeeeesceeeercerseerorraTanoo Apetg ‘gq ‘H ‘ay Aq “vaosrurureiog Uviuleg pus snodazMoqiey aq], 
998T e98T eee ee eee eee eee eee eee eee ee eee ey Peewee een eeeene HOR meee were ee renee eeneee uouyayduoas fo 
aswnoo uz ‘Kpeag ‘g "FT pue ‘oyaieg “yy ‘Ay ‘souopr yaodny y, ‘sussopy Aq ‘etazturmetog Seip oy, 
88ST “198T L881 “98ST AQOOOOOOCIOOOOCIOOICIOOCOOOIOOOnOOCOnOOOOCM rn uoyarduoa fo as.inoa un ‘pulp fe "Dy Ad &q ‘sasuodg [Isso ouL 


GL8T “LST ‘TL8T ‘898T 
988T “PSST “EST 
Z88TI ‘OS8T “6L8T 

L881 


“ydeis0u0 yy 
yora ut 
ssaidiaqyary Jo 
soseg JO ‘ON 
“AL 


“paysiqud 
sea ydersou0yy 913 
yorym U2 SIRI IU} JO sayeg 
“Ww IIT 


GL8I “TLST “OL8T ‘L98T sreserecesscees worzaduoa fo aswnoa ue ‘Kouurg ‘Ay “ay “ay Aq “vyvayg snosazrmoqaey 043 Jo BIOL OY, 


GSST “FS8T “E88T sesccesecoeercrers TITTANMOO JT [OA ‘“soupiey gs ‘e ay fq “ ef 

ZS88T ‘OS8T “ELST sereeserescaTTTaWOO ‘J [OA ‘Uasneyssurgg” uolvg pue Joupaey ‘g ‘¢ ‘ay Aq “eto],q eus00q ay, 
988T “o TITTANOO WOSUIRTTIIM *O “AA ‘Jorg Sq ‘soprooy viavursiyg Jo ASopoystyZ puv ASopoydaoy ony, 

*pansst sea Ydeison0yy ‘HAVUNONOW AO LOTLAoaAS 


9Y} SUIUIe}WOD OUINTOA 9113 


yoryn Lof sxeax ay} Jo soyeq. 
‘Ir “he 


‘sydnubouopy quasaffip ay) ur paquiasap savwads pun ‘saunhy ‘sayojd ‘sabnd fo saqunu ay) ‘swunjoa bunoyjof pu HLUAOS 2y7 U2 puw £ (ams ay2 
burpug 07 apmb v sv) ydvashouopy svjnoyind yava umjuoo yorym sawnjoa hyamah ayy ‘wunjoo ENOOTS ay7 uw ‘uoelduIod Jo esanod ayz we «0 ‘ajaTdut0d ag 
paysrjqnd ojsaypy ydnihouopy yova wayjzoyn uunjoo isuta ay; we buamoys : (TEST “TINA V 07 Gn) SUTAWAIY TNL OL ATASSI SHAVUDONOTY AN FO LAVIVIWAG “AT § 


a ee 


28 


68 
O69T 


“4XOL OU} 
Ul paquiosap 
sataadg Jo “ON 

“ITA 


TéL 
@606 


“s]nopooM Jo 
pue saimaiy 
poydersoyyvy 
JO "ON 
‘TA 


OT@T 


Tg 
1G 


éT 
Leg 
“yderson0yy 


yoo ur 
$a4e[q JO ‘ON 
*A 


ZFO0T 


€0¢ 
996 


ina 
661 
G8E 
VG 

681 


196 


VG 
EGE 


PPE 
916 


61 

9FG 
€9T 
92P 
&8E 


86S 


T&é 


60P 


88 


98 
VEG 
GL 


SSTP 


“‘ydeiZon0y 
yove ur 
ssaidta}jory Jo 
saneg Jo ‘ON 
“AI 


““duVMUOT GAIMUVOD 


O88 “PSST “ESsT 
“G88T ‘SST ‘OS8T “6Z8T ‘8Z8T 


I6S8T ‘O6S8T “688T ‘88ST ‘L881 
O6ST “688T “888T “48ST 
£981 
GGST ‘SS8T ‘TS8T 
LL81 
TZST ‘POST ‘T9ST 


LLST ‘T98T 
“LSST ‘SSL ‘ZS8T ‘6PST 


688T 
6L8T ‘PLST “SLST 


T9O8T ‘LZS8T ‘S81 ‘TS8T 
LGST ‘SPST 


E88T ‘TS8T 
GLAST ‘LAST “SLZ8T ‘FLST ‘ZL8T 


988T 
PSST “E88T ‘Z88T 


E88T ‘I88T 
‘OSST “SA8T ‘9481 “FL8T 


TLST ‘6981 
‘LO8T ‘998T ‘GOST “FOBT 


€98T 
‘TOST ‘TOST ‘6S8T ‘8S8T 


GOST “ES8T ‘ZS8T ‘TSST 


S98T ‘8ST 


F881 “E88 
E88 ‘LOST “99ST ‘GOST ‘F9ST 
888T 


‘““duvMuor LHYDOUG 


*paystiqud 
sua ydersou0p, 43 
YIM U1 SABI af} JO Saye 
“ue IIL 


C88 “FSS ‘E88T 
‘S881 ‘TS8T‘OS8T ‘681 ‘8L8T 


OGST “688T ‘S88T ‘Z488T “988T 
688T ‘88ST ‘Z88T “98ST 
T981 
PSST “ES8T ‘OSST 
LL81 
OLST ‘Z98T “6S8T 


LL8T ‘8S81 
“ES8T “PSST ‘SS8T “SPST 


é8sL 
6L8T “EL8T ‘TST 


PSSST “GS8T “ES8T ‘OSST 
9SS81 ‘LP8T 


E88T ‘TS8T 
GLET ‘LL8T “SL8T ‘FLST SL8T 


S8sT 
PSST ‘ES8T ‘“Z88T 


ZS8T ‘T88T 
“OSST ‘81ST ‘94ST ‘EL8T 


OLST ‘898T 
“Q98T ‘GOST “E98T ‘ZO8T 


O98T 
‘6S81L ‘8S8T “LE8T “P9csT 


FEST “SST ‘Ses ‘OSsI 


O98T ‘9¢8T 


PSST ‘ESsT 
E88 ‘99ST “POST “E98T ‘ZOST 
L88T 


‘pansst sea Ydeisouop 
d1[} SULMTEZWOD JUIMOA 93 
youn tof sieax oy} Jo sayeq 
‘IL 


} 


{ 


{ 
{ 


DOO TOCICUDOOROCOOUCD OOOO OO CGD OO DUOC OOO OOCOOOCCODOOUOOUIG. Fr: £4 & 8 (0)0) QU Sti Ay Id &q ‘soqIMOmUy OISSBUT e1L 
Pics tink fo yacht oe" oe uouaduoa fo aSMNOI UL ‘uemiyong "9S °S “AL &q ‘soy uOomUy OPLOO LOLMoFUy oy, 


tereeeeseeresoeesserssess wouardmod fo asinoo UL “U04se[pUY “H “AA “A Aq ‘epodoszoysey orsseane ayy, 


“ “ce 


SOOTEOOOO OOOO OUD OU OOO OUD UUROOUUCOOOOOEE.: fi: ta i: Moye) §qqa0hrq IT &q quautetddng “ 


See ik 


“I TTTAWOO 430047] IE puw siLIOPY “Jorg Aq “wosny[oW 241109 4vexy ayy, 
tr eeeeeeseeesTTATTAWOO ‘J JOA *(SeATVAT) Poon “A *S “APT Aq “vosnqoy eusoogy oy} 07 yuomorddng 


Oe eeeee ner eee vee seseccoresssoresser mT MON oT TOA poo AA “A "g “UA &q ‘SOATBVAIG “BosnT[OP aua007q aud, 


raaieie(alelsiaidibislafe euininisele'ele(se/oaleinielajulniaiy.c'e/slelelele(e Ree eee meee erat eae ee eee ease eee nnt eeee 


‘ GLATAWOO J "TOA “poom 
"A'S ‘a Aq ponurquoo ‘spavapy "Gt Aq ‘soapeatug pur vpodoyeydag ‘vosnijoyy ouoo0g oy, 
III ‘ON ¢ ; 


seeeeeeeeecereceeeees TTATTNOO POOM *A *S “AT Aq “TT pur y ‘on “Bosnipoy SerQ ayy 07 syuomelddng 


Oe Reem wee ee eee tee “ee 


GLATAWOO 


ee eTe TERT eee eee oe 


DOGOOONCADOGOOI SSI OCODOSGOOOOOGOO Fs ea BB, 200) <(saaqeatg ) ‘II ‘TOA 
DOODOTOOUCOSIOOHOOOOOUOOG Hr: ta es KOO) ‘(soapeatuy ) “Ti ‘TOA 


—? poom “A ‘*S “ayy Aq SSvry oy] Jo vosnqpoyy ony, 


TOUTES ECERER ER EEEE Eee eee ee eee eee ee ere ree 


PTeRERE TERE RE Re eT 


seers TLaTaWoo 4qeokrq ‘aq Aq ‘wruosiry, [Isso,7 oy} 07 yuemtarddng 


BONOOIOOOIOOIOOOOOOOIOUUOOOOUGIOOOOOOIIOOOOUIOUOO OOOO ici innnr “TT TTTAWOO ‘4,00 4] aq &q ‘RIUOSLLY, [ISso,7 auL 


See doeseereceeneoceeoeessescsrsencoocssouserens TAT TWO <‘Kqdvasoryqrgy TA ‘JOA “ “ 
tereeeereereeeees TITTAWOO UBMINTIg puv uviuoaay ‘syuemetddng “A *[o4 oY és 
teevesecseeees TETTAWOO ‘snodazuogatey 07 Arviqzay, ‘syuametddng “AT ‘JOA se ‘“ 
seoseveevereers TITTEWOO “vpodompIgq UBIINTIG puv uRIMOAEg OUT, “TIT ‘1A cs ss 
“o TraTaMOO ‘vpodorpovrg snorosruoqieD pus UviItUteg OT, “II 1OA s : 


beer eee e meee eee enereee res eeeene 


Aq 
(spursucery pus Grneg ‘e[Q uopuory ey} Jo asouy Suisiidmo09) vaoujsnty snoovaqsoov[eyy ony, 
ALLTAWOO “pavapoony “A aq Aq ‘saqrqoytay, SNOLIFIUOGARD IT, 
ALATAWOO “loqeg "AA “AT Aq ‘suoyvut0,, ULIMOADG pUB ‘UBLINTIG ‘UBLAqUILD 949 JO SazIqoTITY, ey, 


uoyardmon fo asinoo ur ‘pavapoom *H “Iq pus souog ytodny ‘yorg Aq ‘vpodoyAyq 


wee seoeoonrrTaTdaNoo ‘UOsplAarq “iL “TIN 
‘ypodorovrg o1ssery pus ‘o1qI[00 ‘snosdovqory “ArvIQdeJ, OUT, 
uorajduoa fo asunoo we Taq “I, ‘Jorg Aq 


‘I ‘TOA “vpodormovtg fissoq ony, 


TUETEELER TRE ee cy 


d0Z0B[Vq Iq, 


“HdVHPNONOW AO LOTLaAoOs 


‘panuyuoo—(T68T “TIWNdV 7 dn) SutANayY THLE OL AHASsI SHAVUDONOT AHG JO AUVNWAG 


ST¢S 


“yxaq, ou 
UI paqttosap 
satoadg Joon 
“ITA 


SSS ee 


_  SSUOBULIOT O191T00 Jo vIpAdayy , Jaqe] episzno Wo poyte | 
*SuIpPUIG IOF suorooarp puv sosed-op414 sureqzUoy w 

‘moryeoryqud jo asmmoo ut Mou st yuamolddng y ¥ 

"S04U[q JO SUOTJIAIIOD OMY, 2 


‘pouoyoat ATuo sovods ystyag 2 


‘quemorddng £ UVIMLIAg oy} SUIBJUOD P 


sseneeeee eee eeTT TOT, 


TA8T OL8T 


L881 988T 


‘saroads MOU JO Sopep OY} SUTYST[GL4S9 To [NJos~) ws 
‘pouoxoor ATUO satoods ysiyag Y 


‘OMINTOA FOST OY} UL puNoj oq [IIA xopuy pun sosud-ayry, f 
‘TOA SZ8T Ul punog oq [ITM Xopuy 7 
*parnsy you 4ynq ‘paqiiosep av soroods oy Jo Auvyy F 


*VOSNT[OJ SVQ 07 JON 2 "SOATBATU) 03 adud-aqyIT, g *‘xopul » 


staeeeeeeueceeeeecurerecececeserrers TIAPTAWOO UIMGO ‘Jorg Aq ‘SuorpVULIO,| OIoZzosaTY oY} JO VI[VUIUIV], OTL, 


POLE M OOM mee eee eee HH eee HHH OOOH HOES HEE DEH OO OHHH EEE THESES HEHEHE OHO EO HEHE HOHE TH OER EEE EES 


uorarduoa 


‘BIST ‘ZLST GOST ‘89ST 99ST) ‘SAST ‘TLST ‘89ST ‘LOST “FOST fo asumoa ur ‘paiojurg *y ‘MM pue suryavg pfog “MA ‘sassopy Aq “vIPeUIUIVyY oMAD04SI9[q OT, 


TSST ‘6481 ‘448T UTS8T ‘6L8T ‘LL8T 


68ST ‘OL8T US8SI ‘698T 
LIST ‘GL8T ‘“FL81 USSST ‘LEST “GL8T ‘EZ8I 


UTS8T 
“G98T ‘E98T ||‘O98T II*6S8T 


T88T 
‘OLST “G98T ‘E98T ‘T9ST 
68ST “GIST “E98T ‘TOST U888T “898T ‘O9ST “6S8T 


688T U888T 
‘GLST ‘SLST ‘QLST ‘FLST ‘ZLST| GLST ‘SL8T ‘9Z8T “E48T ‘TL8T 


POST ‘TOST “6S8T ZOST ‘8S8T ‘LEST 
*SGST ‘LG81 ‘GSS ‘EST ‘Q9S8T ‘GST ‘PSST ‘ES8T 
FIST ‘TOST ‘68ST ‘TS8T ZIT ‘8S8T ‘LS8T ‘TS8T 


O8sT O88T 


6S8T ‘OST “6F8T JOST ‘6FST ‘SPST 


OLST ‘898T 698T “L98T 


LL8T 
8L8T 


LL8T 
8L8T 


909 T68T ‘O68T “688T OGST ‘68ST “88ST 


TTS GS8T ‘OS8T aPG8l ‘6FST 


6TE LOST “GS8T “EST GOST “PSST ‘ES8T 


OL8T 
“698T “LOST ‘998T “S98T 


‘““davMuod LHNAOUG 


698T 


669 ‘Q98T ‘99ST “F98T “E98T 


68096 


96 
OTéT 


8éT 
LVOOT 


*sjndpooM jo 
pue samo 
paydessouqvy 


*qdersou0yy 
yora Ur 
ssoidt994a'J JO 
saseg Jo ‘ON 
“AI 


*ydexrsou0; 
yora Ut 


*ponsst sea [dersou0yy 
sea [detsouo0yy 9114 AY} SUIUTEZMOD AUINIOA IT} 
Yorn U2 SLI IYy JO sajyeq yoryn tof s1vaX IyY JO SazBq 
“wm IIE ‘II 


“paystiqud 


‘panuyuoo—(T6st “TIMdV 


COOH He eee eee tet enone 


teeeseceeeecesecovcveveeseueceeeeorTTTTWOO ‘Ssuepy qyoy ‘yorg Aq ‘syuvydeq jIssoq oy, 
siasTewaleeaieaeaeessiiseciessieccineeseesuedehedsuscerieveae Inara WOO COMO fOleqeAd —BOdvIOM) eda) Por Oli, 


seeeeeaeeceaeceeeeeeccercorsceresces TITTTWOD MIMO ‘Jorg fq ‘suowMA0y otozosay oy} Fo wipydey oxy, 
|e ara rreeeeeeseecereeeereeues TITTIWON UIMO ‘Jorg Aq ‘suoryeUIOT OIsseIryT ay} Jo vIpIydey oy, 


steseesecseereeeoereeeee oT TTTAWOO MIMO ‘Jorg Lq ‘uoyvuIog AvpO eSprasuurgy oyy Jo vipyday any, 


tresses tata woo (G—p sjusuatddng) suoyvut0 Yooqtng pur wapyea, ory Jo vipIydoy ony, 


PTUTTTLELEERETERE EEE E ee errr rrr rrr Deemer ee weet reer eeee 


vroe FP TLTTANWOO 
oer ‘jorg Aq “(g ‘TL squameddng qytm) suoreuog yooqmg pue veppwery oyy Jo vip dey oT, 


Hisneeeeenseereserereesoeereeres FTTTTINON UIMGO ‘Jorg kq ‘suoyvMI0, snoaovzary oy} Jo vipydoy ony, 


seoeeeeeoeerscecsroeseoemrTTTa WOO UIMO "Jorg Aq ‘T WV_ “II 1OA as cs 


COS DO DODO OROGOODOGOGAMIAG OIG DO ALaTANOO 7 ‘TOA miGise pus TOMO 
{ ‘sjorg fq ‘[spog Arerqaay, toyjo puvs weysopprtg oy} Jo pur] Avg wopuory oy} Jo vipydey oxy, 


UTE RTR RR EE ee eee 


5 UOC Oe ee HOR EHH HEHEHE HOR OHO HOE EH HEHEHE DER EH EEE EERE EEE OHS EE EEE EEE 10230) dwW09 
{ fp asunoa ue ‘aaqsoyuvy Avy "| pue aiamog ‘fp ‘sassoyy Aq ‘ouozspuvg poy PIO ey} JO SOUSA OUT 


uoryazduoo fo asunoa ua sarenbeary, “aq, Aq ‘WoIyVMAO,T sHodazMogay oY JO SOUS OL, 


“es worgarduoa fo aswnoo wu Tyery ‘Jorg Aq ‘sprouvy) plouadig oy], 


eee eee te eee ete HET HEE OOH TER OPH ORO OER EET EET OOO HEE OEH EHS SHE ROREH EEE SET ERS 


88s-uorga7dusod fo asnoo ur 
‘UIOGPIUM “A “DH ‘Ady oy Aq ‘puvzpsug jo YJNog oy} Jo UOwUMIOT UeIUOAIB ay} JO BUNvT OY, 


trreseeeeeesseveeee rr oTaWoO Sury ‘jorg Aq ‘aoyeu0y UvIMIIg 944 JO s[issoy ON], 


Soe au ‘eeeeoraTawoo ‘adaeyg ‘q ‘ay Sq ‘epodopeydeg snosovyory reddy ayy, 


| PCR Se ae uovajrduoa fo assnod Ur ‘sdryiqd “Jol &q ‘soqIUUto[og. aL 


‘“HAVENONON AO LOaLaos 


07 dn) suqaWay{ AHL OL GUASSI SHAVANONOPY AHL GO AUVNWAG 


30 


§ V. SrratigRaPHicaL TABLE exhibiting the Bririsu Fossis already figured and described 
in the ANNUAL VoLumES (1847—1890) of the PALMONTOGRAPHICAL Socinry. 


Pleistocene 


Eocene 


Cretaceous 


Wealden 


Oolitie ... 


Liassic 


Triassic ... 


Permian 


Silurian, 


Cambrian 


SS 


seereseee 


f 
| 
| 
| 
L 


seeeeeeis 


see eeeeee 


PROTOZOA. RADIATA. ARTICULATA. 
wi | 
=! n 3 
A us! 5 : 2) 
mn & s o 
eos eal cee a 3 oe |e g B= gs 
A § ‘2 ace S = Are | 2 az ° BS 
a, 5 cr g H So) || Fs ° oe os 
ou RH € a3 iB de} Od |] g a a Sm 
eS 2a 4 ‘S) Se S a a0 
Rn je>| 2) =| 
1874 
Eta Dadam Taha 
= 1865 1849 | 1852 | { 1824 } | 1988 
1879 } 
1880 | 
1882| | 1849 1851 } | [1855 
jaca Be ihe 1852 { eT CHa oe. | oe i 
1884. | 
1885) J 
( 1862 
1867 
1869 | 
1870 | 
1849] | | 1872 
1851 | | £1849 
1868 }] J 1873 & { ieee Siecle} ee 
1869f| | 1875 | 
1878 | 
1881 | 
| 1882 | 
{ 1890 J 
ue WE assedl? Otley eee An nee 1860 
1855, 1856, 
1851} | | 1857, 1858, 
e Annes ee aa ieee 1860 
1880 
1851) | (1855, 1856, 
1866 || 4 1858, 1861, 
1867 1864 
1680. Ha alte 1860 
1849) 1849 |{ Toe) 1880 1640") [Neos 1849 |1860 
1867) 
1870 | 
ae 1874 |1860, 1872 
ee | TS87\TS76%)) US6207 versec. ie yee cere: 1884 |1ss7| 1878 [| 2983, 1884 
satel 1853 1865 
i 1885 1868 
1887 eS Peete nF acct 1888 1860/4 j9r5 P| 1862, 1888 
| 1890 | 1878 
| | 
lpaetere | 1868 
| f 1886 chest || | -| J 1871 | | ,1862, 1868 
‘ | 1887 ACE USS5eei| Py saSaseo © Vall” Beccses 1887 1872 {i864 1866 
| | (1890 | 1878 2 
| f 1886 | | 
| i887, | TSeOP V0) Geiaceer Bees 168%) nee 1864 


Nory.—The numbers in the above List refer to the Volumes issued for those Dates. 


31 


STRATIGRAPHICAL TABLE exhibiting the Britisu Fossius already figured and described in 
the ANNUAL VoLuMus (1847—1890) of the PaLAonTOGRAPHICAL Soctery (continued). 


MOLLUSCA. VERTEBRATA. 
E ga s i 
a 3 a8 3 a g aa 
SJ Ss BETS S a ey ey 
2 5 SES 3 © a 5 
Fa : ee G 5 F : 
pa AAS ‘) a 
(1864. 
1867 
1868 
1871 
Pleistocene ...... aes sy Bi Il asgoan see mo tk 9 SSncc05 1877 
1878 
1879 
1881 
1847, 1850, 1886 
Be ae Tees aan | 1869 
Ss eee 1879 1871, 1878, f seeinee 1881 
1879, 1882 1888 
1852, 1854, 
1852 1855, 1858, 
OCONG.sss.00s ises 1850, 1862, 1848 1848, 1849, 1856, 1880 
1870, 1877 
1872 1853 
eeeesta 1852,1854, 1875 een 1851, 1857, 1858, 
Cieleicieeices 1873, 1884. 1877 1855 1862, 1873, 1888 
1879 1853, 1854, 
| Tees 
1857, 1862, 
Wealden ......... i On 1 1871, 1873, 
| 1875, 1876, 
1878, 1879 
1850, 1853, > [i858 (kim. | 
1854, 1872, | (1850, 1861, |} Clay), 1859, | 
"1850,1852, 1874, 1875, 1868, 1869, | | | sear teees 
Oolitic i. occewceses jis76 878 JEST LOVOy 1886, 1887,|$ ... 4 1873, 1875, 1870 
1884 1883, 1886, 1888, 1889 | | RTT IBGS, 
1887, 1888, | L 1890 |J (Great Ooht 
| L 1889 J See al 
( 1863, 1864, 1875, 1888 J 
1850;1862.9)| ear aiaane nee 1668; 1859, 1860, 
MRPARSIC. cceseschos: {87887 } ey Mey Si Ee) ay ' 1863, 1869 
Slee 1879, 1883 1880, 1881 3 , 
1884 , | , >| | 1873, 1881 
| 1882, 1883, | | 
(1884, 1885, | J 
ERITASSIC! es eceeewes se 1876, 1878 SON (NG esate i US784 ieee. 1870 
Permian ......... 1849 Becca 1849 1849 1849 1849 
1856,1857, 
as i 1858,1859, 
Carboniferous .. 1860.1880,() tees 1877 
1884 
1862,1863, 1867 
Devonian ...,..... 1881,1882, 1890 1889 1869 
1884 7 
1865,1866, 
Sas 1868,1870, 
Silurian: ........00 1881,1882, 
Cambrian Eb) 


Nore.—The numbers in the above List refer to the Volumes issued for those Dates. 


= 
we 


PALAONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. 


INSTITUTED MDCCCXLVH. 


VOLUME FOR 1890. 


MDCCCXCI 


A MONOGRAPH 


OF THE 


BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


BY 


H. ALLEYNE NICHOLSON, M.D., D.Sc., Pa.D., F.G.S., 


REGIUS PROFESSOR OF NATURAL HISTORY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN. 


PART III].—DESCRIPTION OF SPECIES. 


Paggs 159—202; Prares XX—XXY. 


LONDON: 
PRINTED FOR THE PALHONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. 
1891. 


EXINTRD BY, 
ADLARD AND SON, BARTHOLOMEW CLOSE. 


LABECHIA CONFERTA. 159 


In internal structure the ccenosteum consists of stout, circular or oval, radial 
pillars, which have a diameter of + to } mm., and terminate upwards in pointed 
extremities, each being traversed by a central canal. The pillars give rise to 
radiating “arms” or plates, which unite with one another in such a manner that 
the entire space between the pillars becomes filled with a tissue of calcareous 
vesicles, the convexities of which are directed upwards. 

Obs.—This well-known species occurs typically in the form of laminar ex- 
pansions, with an epithecate base and peduncle of attachment; but in some 
instances an encrusting habit of growth is observable. Young examples (Plate 
III, figs. 9 and 10) may be only 2 or 3 cm. in diameter and 1 mm. in thickness ; 
but old specimens may be of greater size, perhaps a foot in diameter, and may 
reach a thickness of 2—3 cm. A single specimen often consists of two or more 
superposed colonies. The surface differs from that of many Stromatoporoids in 
the complete absence of “‘mamelons” and of any indications of an astrorhizal 
system, though studded throughout with prominent tubercles, which may be about 
+ mm. in height, and about the same diameter at their base. The tubercles 
may be placed about 4 to 7 mm. apart, or may be in contact, often coalescing 
in sinuous rows. The apices of the tubercles may be simply rounded or pointed, 
and may be apparently imperforate. In other cases a distinct circular aperture 
may be detected at the apex of a pillar, though it is not clear that this is not the 
result of weathering. 

Vertical sections (Plate XX, fig. 1; and Fig. 18, B) show that the coenosteum 


Fia. 18. 


Fia. 18.—Sections of Labechia conferta, Lonsd. sp., enlarged twelve times. Wenlock Limestone, Iron- 
bridge. A. Tangential section. B. Vertical section. pp. Radial pillars. ¢ ce. Connecting-processes 
or “arms.” 


is essentially composed of very stout radial pillars which spring from the basal 
epitheca and are continued to the upper surface, where they terminate in the 
prominent tubercles above spoken of. ‘The interspaces between the pillars are 
occupied by a vesicular tissue formed by the coalescence of connecting-processes 
or “arms,” given out from the pillars, the convexities of the vesicles being turned 


towards the upper surface. 
22 


160 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


Tangential sections (Plate XX, fie. 2; and Fig. 18, A) show that the radial pillars 
are hollow, each being traversed by a well-marked axialcanal. The tissue forming 
the periphery of the pillars (Plate XX, fig. 3) is composed of very delicate lamin, 
which surround the axial canal concentrically, and which often show a minute 
cribriform structure. The connecting-processes spring from this tissue, and can 
commonly be followed in vertical sections for a considerable distance into the 
substance of the pillars. Tangential sections further exhibit irregular dark lines 
connecting the transversely divided radial pillars; these lines are the cut edges of 
the vesicular plates or processes which fill the intervals between the pillars. 

There is, apparently, a complete absence of definite zodidal tubes or surface- 
apertures, and the ‘concentric lamine” of the ordinary Stromatoporoids are 
represented solely by the vesicular tissue which unites the pillars together. 

L. conferta differs from the L. ohioensis, Nich., of the Ordovician Rocks of North 
America in the fact that the radial pillars are of larger size, the surface-tubercles 
being correspondingly bigger, while the interstitial vesicular tissue is of a coarser 
type and is present in smaller amount. In its general external appearance 
L. conferta nearly resembles the Lophiostroma (Labechia?) Schuudiii* of the 
Silurian Rocks of the Island of Oesel; but the surface-tubercles of the latter are 
much larger, while the internal structure appears to be wholly different. 

Distribution.—Labechia conferta appears to be wholly confined to the Silurian 
Rocks (Upper Silurian of Murchison). It is acommon species in the Wenlock 
Limestone of Britain, occurring at Ironbridge, Dudley, Dormington, Longhope, 
&c. Ihave also specimens from the Wenlock Limestone of Gotland (collected by 
Prof. Lindstrém); but the species has not been recognised as occurring in the 
Silurian Rocks of Esthonia or Oesel. 


2. LABECHIA scaBlosa, n. sp. Pl. XX, figs. 4—6. 


Coenosteum forming a small discoid expansion, with a concentrically striated 
basal epitheca (Plate XX, fig. 5). The upper surface is flat, and is covered with 
irregular tubercles, which are usually multiple and are mostly placed from $ to 


! Labechia? Schmidtii was described by me at some length in the ‘Annals and Magazine of 
Natural History,’ ser. 5, vol. xviii, 1886. Judging from its apparent structure it cannot be referred to 
the genus Labechia, and I propose for it the generic name of Lophiostroma. The genus is characterised 
by the possession of a laminar ccenosteum, composed throughout of sharply undulated, closely approxi- 
mated, and exceedingly thin calcareous lamella. The upward bendings of these lamelle give rise to a 
series of spurious pillars, the superior extremities of which appear on the surface as prominent 
tubercles, while the downward bendings correspond with the interspaces between these. The under 
surface is covered with a concentrically-striated epitheca. 


LABECHIA STYLOPHORA. 161 


1 mm. apart, their size and height being variable (Plate XX, fig. 4). The only 
known specimen is about 23 cm. in length by 2 cm. in width. 

I have felt much hesitation in giving a name to this form, as I have only a 
single small specimen of it, and have therefore been unable to examine its internal 
structure by means of thin sections. It is clear, however, that we have to deal 
here with a species of Labechia which is distinct from L. conferta. The young 
form of the latter (Plate III, figs. 9 and 10) is an exceedingly thin, coin-shaped 
plate, epithecate below and tuberculate above. On the other hand, the specimen 
here described as L. scabiosa is not coin-shaped, and it is uncertain whether it 1s a 
young example or is fully grown. Moreover, the character of the tuberculation 
of the upper surface is very distinct from that shown in young examples of L. 
conferta, the tubercles being larger and more remote, while their distribution is 
irregular and does not show any radial tendency, and they are commonly multiple 
in structure. 

Distribution.—Wenlock Limestone, Dudley. 


3. LaBECHIA STYLOPHORA, n.sp. Pl. XX, figs. 7 and 8. 


The coenosteum in this species is of unknown form, but is probably laminar. 
It consists of irregularly undulated lamin, traversed by strong radial pillars, and 
so disposed as to give rise to the formation of a number of cylinders, which run 
at.right angles to the general mass (Plate XX, fig. 7). The cylinders are about 
8 or 9 mm. in diameter, and are placed about 5 mm. apart; and the radial pillars 
within them are so arranged as to be parallel with the axis of the cylinders in the 
middle line, while they are directed more or less transversely to the cylinder 
towards the circumference of the latter (Plate XX, fig. 8). The radial pillars are 
rounded or somewhat quadrangular in form, about two occupying the space of 
1 mm.; and the interstitial vesicular tissue is exceedingly delicate, four or five 
vesicles occupying the space of a millimétre measured vertically. 

Owing to the peculiar state of preservation of all the specimens of L. stylophora 
which I have seen, thin sections fail to yield any information further than that 
afforded by polished slabs. The species is, however, clearly distinguished from 
all other known forms of the genus by its unique mode of growth, its characteristic 
cylinders reminding one closely of the similar structures seen in the coenosteum 
of Actinostroma verrucosum, Goldf. sp. 

Distribution.—Not very uncommon in the Middle Devoman Limestones of 


Shaldon, South Devon. 


162 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


4, Lapecuia seurotina, Nich. Fig. 19. 


Laxpecuta sprotina, Nicholson. Introduction, p. 45, 1885. 
= _ = Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 5, vol. xviii, p. 15, 
1886. 


General form and surface of the ccenosteum unknown. In internal structure 
the skeleton is composed of cylindrical radial pillars, which have a diameter of 
about ¢ mm., and which are traversed by large axial canals. The canals of the 
pillars are provided with curved internal partitions, which run transversely to the 
canal, and have their convexities turned upwards. The pillars are very rarely 
isolated, but are mostly in contact laterally in such a way that they give rise to 
sinuous rows, forming a network of much the same pattern as that produced by 
the corallites of Halysites eschavroides, Lamk. sp. The interspaces between the 
winding rows of pillars are crossed by delicate calcareous fibres or plates, which 
connect the pillars together, and which are only rarely and partially vesicular. 
These connecting plates are usually straight, and are only occasionally curved ; 
hence they give to vertical sections the aspect of a tabulate coral. 


Fria. 19.—Labechia serotina, Nich. Devonian, Teignmouth. A. Tangential section, enlarged twelve 
times, showing the arrangement of the pillars in short interlacing rows, and their large axial canals. 
B. Vertical section, similarly enlarged, showing the partitioning of the axial canals of the pillars by 
transverse plates, and their connection by numerous horizontal “arms.’’ C. A single radial pillar 
further enlarged, showing its pointed extremity. 


The only example which I possess of this remarkable Stromatoporoid is a 
small polished fragment from a Devonian Limestone of Devonshire, which I 
purchased from Mr. Selater, of Teignmouth. The structure of the skeleton differs 
so widely from that of the ordinary species of Labechia that it is unnecessary to 
compare it minutely with these. ‘The characteristic features of L. serotina are 


LABECHIA CANADENSIS. 163 


the confluence of the radial pillars into a reticulation of sinuous rows, the large 
size of the axial canals, the presence of curved transverse partitions in the in- 
terior of the axial canals of the pillars, and the fact that the interstitial tissue is 
composed of straight horizontal plates, which but rarely become vesicular, and 
then only to a very limited extent. 

Distribution.—Middle Devonian of Devonshire. The only known specimen is 
in a red limestone, and is probably from the neighbourhood of Torquay. 


5. LABEecHIA CANADENSIS, Wich. and Mur. sp (?). Pl. XX, fig. 9. 


STROMATOCERIUM CANADENSE, Nicholson and Murie. Journ. Linn, Soe. Zool., vol. 
xiv, p. 228, pl. iii, figs. 9, 10 (1878). 
Lasecuta canapensts. Wicholson. Mon. Brit. Stromatoporoids, pl. ui, figs. 83—5, 
1886. 
ae = — Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 5, vol. xviti, 
p. 14, pl. ii, fig. 5, 1886. 


Typical American examples of this species have a generally massive ccenosteum, 
the upper surface of which is not fully known. The skeletal tissue (Plate II, figs. 
4 and 5) consists of large, comparatively remote, and irregularly developed radial 
pillars, which are united by a very irregularly developed vesicular interstitial 
tissue, the cells of which are usually of large size and irregular form, though 
occasionally of moderate dimensions. The vesicles have their convexities turned 
upwards, and the radial pillars terminate upwards in pointed extremities. 

This species is distinguished from all the other forms of the genus by its 
irregular and often remote radial pillars, and by the large size and irregular form 
of the interstitial cells. The only British specimen which I should feel disposed 
to identify with L. canadensis is a massive Stromatoporoid collected by Mrs. 
Robert Gray in the Ordovician limestones of the neighbourhood of Girvan. Un- 
fortunately this specimen, as, indeed, is usual in all examples of the species which 
I have examined, is in a highly mineralised condition, and its characters cannot 
therefore be determined with absolute certainty. Vertical sections (Plate XX, 
fig. 9) show longitudinal rows of large-sized lenticular vesicles, of very irregular 
dimensions, and thus closely resemble corresponding sections of typical examples 
of L. canadensis. The vesicles vary from less than a millimetre to about 3 mm, 
in their long diameter. On the other hand, though the vesicular tissue is 
sufficiently well marked, there are only obscure indications of the presence of 
the radial pillars, which must have existed if the species is rightly identified. 
Upon the whole, however, I have little doubt but that this specimen is really 


164 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


referable to L. canadensis, since the radial pillars are commonly more or less 
entirely destroyed in undoubted examples of this species. If we were to suppose 
that radial pillars were really wanting, the specimen would have to be referred to 
the genus Rosenella, Nich.; but this reference is negatived by the fact that the 
upper surfaces of the vesicles, as seen in vertical sections, are quite smooth, and 
are completely destitute of the tubercles which are present in this situation in all 
species of the genus Kosenella. 

Distribution.—A single large specimen was collected by Mrs. Robert Gray in 
the Aldons Limestone (Ordovician) at Aldons, near Girvan. ‘The typical forms of 
the species are found in the Trenton Limestone of Peterborough and Lake 
Couchiching in Ontario. The species also occurs in the Ordovician Rocks 
(‘‘ Wassalem Beds’’) of Saak in Esthonia. 


Famity—STROMATOPORID A. 


Genus 1.—StRomaropora, Goldfuss (emend.), 1826. 
(Introduction, p. 91.) 


1. Srromatorora concentTRICA, Goldfuss. PJ. III, fig. 5; Pl. XI, figs. 15—18; PI. 
XX, fig. 10; Pl. XXI, figs. 1—3; and 
Pl. XXIV, figs. 9 and 10. 


SrRoMATOPORA CONCENTRICA, Goldfuss. Petref. Germ., p. 22, pl. vii, fig. 5, 1826, 
2 _ — Michelin. Iconographie Zodphytologique, p. 190, 
pl. xlix, fig. 4, 1840—47. 
~- = Nicholson. Monogr. Brit. Strom., Introduction, 
p. 2, pl. xi, figs. 15—18, 1886. 
— — Waagen and Wentzel. “Salt Range Fossils,” Palz- 
ontologia Indica, No. 7, pl. exx, figs. 
4 and 5, and pl. exxi, 1a—le, 1887 
(figured, from European specimens, 
but not described). 
— -— Wentzel. Ueber fossile Hydrocorallinen, ‘ Lotos,”’ 
Neue Folge, Bd. ix, Taf. 11, figs. 4 and 
5, and Taf. iii, figs. 1 and 2 (figures 
only), 1889. 


The ccenosteum in this species is massive, spheroidal, cylindrical or bluntly 
conical, or irregular in form, often attaining a very large size. The base of 
attachment seems to have been small, and an epithecal membrane does not appear 
to have been developed. The skeleton always consists of successive “ latilaminee,”’ 

2 


or concentric strata, which are generally 2 to 3 mm. in thickness, and mark 
periodic intermissions in the process of growth (Plate XX, fig. 10, and Plate 


tl 


STROMATOPORA CONCENTRICA. 165 


XXI, fig. 1). Hach latilamina is made up of a number of trabecular concentric 
laminz, which are simply curved or are usually but slightly undulated, the surface 
being, therefore, usually free from prominences. Pointed eminences or ‘ mame- 
lons”’ are, however, present in one variety of the species (S. concentrica, var. 
colliculata, Nich.). 

Astrorhize are usually fairly numerous and are generally of small size (Plate 
XXI, fig. 3). In one form (var. colliculata) the astrorhize are disposed in vertical 
systems, and are often surrounded by concentrically disposed laminz, thus giving 
rise to “ astrorhizal cylinders ;” and in another form, which may be provisionally 
referred here (var. astrigera, Nich.), the astrorhize are large and spreading. The 
surface of the coenosteum, when well-preserved, exhibits vermiculate and inoscu- 
lating ridges corresponding with the reticulated skeleton (Plate XXI, fig. 3). 

As regards its internal structure, the coenosteum is of the strictly ‘ reticulate ” 
type, the radial pillars and horizontal connecting-processes being fused with one 
another to form a continuous and complex network traversed by correspondingly 
complex anastomosing canals (Plate XI, figs. 16—18). Distinct zodidal tubes, of 
a somewhat irregular and tortuous form, are developed, and are crossed by a 
moderate number of transverse partitions or “tabule.’ The skeleton-fibre itself 
is minutely porous in structure, and is from 4 to ¢ mm. in diameter, the reticu- 
lated tissue which it forms being thus very dense. 

Obs.—The typical examples of Stromatopora concentrica, Goldf., are usually 
spheroidal or subcylindrical in shape, and vary from about an inch up to over a 
foot in diameter. The latilamine are concentric with the general surface, and are 
either simply curved or are thrown into wide undulations (Plate XX, fig. 10). In 
the form which I have named, S. concentrica, var. colliculata, the coenosteum is 
cylindrical or cylindro-conical in shape, and the latilaminez are rolled concentrically 
round an imaginary central axis. Though the latilaminz form such a conspicuous 
feature in this species (Plate XXI, fig. 1), it can hardly be said that this feature is 
developed to a greater extent in S. concentrica, Goldf., than it is in S. Carteri, Nich., 
or S. typica, Rosen, or in some other Stromatoporoids of entirely different affinities 
(as, for example, in certain forms of Actinostroma stellulatum, Nich.). 

As regards its internal structure, S. concentrica presents the completely reticu- 
late skeleton of all the species of Stromatopora proper; but the blending of the 
radial and horizontal elements of the coenosteum is not so complete as to prevent 
the ready recognition of the radial pillars in properly prepared vertical sections. 
Owing to the comparative distinctness of the radial pillars (Plate XI, fig. 18) the 
zooidal tubes are clearly marked out as irregular, often sinuous, vertical tubes, the 
internal cavities of which are crossed by remote transverse “ tabule.” Tangential 
sections (Plate XI, figs. 16, 17) are, in general, readily distinguished from corre- 
sponding sections of allied species of the genus by the comparative density and 


166 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


closeness of the reticulation, due in part to the coarse nature of the skeleton-fibre, 
and in part to the proportionately small size and the irregular distribution of the 
canals which traverse the coenosteum. The skeleton-fibre is minutely porous (Plate 
XXI, fig. 2), but in very many cases, where the skeleton has not been perfectly 
preserved, the pores are represented by dark or cloudy dots only. 

Two principal groups of forms of S. concentrica may be distinguished, to which 
a third, of a more doubtful nature, may be provisionally added. 

The first group comprises what may be considered the normal form of the 
species, in which the ccenosteum is spheroidal or irregular in shape, the latilaminze 
are simply curved or undulated, and the surface is smooth and without ‘‘ mame- 
lons.” The astrorhize (Plate XXI, fig. 3) are small, their centres being from 
7 to 10 mm. apart, and are not surrounded by sheaths of concentrically disposed 
lamine (‘‘ astrorhizal cylinders ”’). 

The forms of the second group may be included under the varietal name of S. 
concentrica, var. colliculata, Nich. In this variety the coenosteum usually has the 
form of a thick cylinder, with a bluntly conical apex (Plate ITI, fig. 5), composed 
essentially of laminz rolled concentrically round a vertical line. The astrorhize 
are comparatively small, but are developed in superimposed groups, and are 
commonly the centres of more or less definite ‘‘ astrorhizal cylinders,” the spaces 
between which are filled up by undulated and flexuous lamine. Owing to this 
disposition of the astrorhize, the surface exhibits numerous eminences or ‘‘ mame- 
lons,” which may be rounded or sometimes acuminate, or at other times more or 
less drawn out in the direction of the long axis of the fossil (Plate ITI, fig. 5). 
The minute structure of the skeleton in this variety does not differ in any recog- 
nisable respect from that of normal examples of the species. 

To the above I may add, under the provisional name of S. concentrica, var. 
astrigera, Nich., a third group of forms distinguished essentially by the large size 
of the astrorhize, the centres of which may be 2 or 3 cm. apart, while their 
branches are comparatively few, and divide dichotomously at wide intervals 
(Plate XXIV, fig. 10). The only examples of this form with which I am 
acquainted occur in the Devonian Limestones of Devonshire, and their state of 
preservation is, unfortunately, such that I can say nothing as to the general form 
of the ccenosteum, or the condition of the surface. The best-preserved examples 
of this form which have come under my notice exhibit a microscopic structure of 
the skeleton which, except as regards the astrorhize, appears to agree in all 
essential respects with that of typical examples of S. concentrica. In the worse- 
preserved examples the skeleton has been more or less extensively replaced by 
calcite and its canal-system filled wp with calcareous mud, thin sections thus 
appearing under the microscope in a “ reversed’’ condition (Plate XXIV, fig. 9). 
In thin slices of such examples the astrorhizal canals often show a singular 


STROMATOPORA CONCENTRICA. 167 


structure, oval or circular clear spaces separated by dark intervals marking out the 
lines of the principal tubes (Plate XXIV, fig. 9). This curious phenomenon is 
easily recognised in polished sections of this form, even by the naked eye, or with 
a lens, but I cannot give any satisfactory explanation of it. The skeleton in this 
form grows in “ latilamins,”’ as in the ordinary examples of the present species. 
The large size and characteristic form of the astrorhize in this type might, how- 
ever, perhaps justify us in considering it as a distinct species of Stromatopora 
rather than as a mere variety of S. concentrica, Goldf. 

Specimens of all the three forms of S. concentrica above distinguished commonly 
occur in the “‘ Caunopora-state.” In such specimens the ‘‘ Caunopora-tubes”’ are 
generally of very small size, usually about { mm. in diameter, but sometimes 
reaching a diameter of 3 mm. ‘The tubes are connected with one another by 
horizontal stolons, as is the case with ‘‘ Caunopora-tubes”’ generally, but I have 
not recognised in them any structures of the nature of “tabule,” nor do they 
appear to be provided with septal spines. 

S. concentrica, Goldf., is more or less nearly related to S. Carteri, Nich., and 
S. discoidea, Lonsd., and, im a less degree, to S. Hiipschii, Barg., in all of which 
the skeleton-fibre is thick and coarse. From 8. HMiipschii the present species is 
readily distinguished by the much less open reticulation of the skeletal frame- 
work, while the radial pillars and zodidal tubes are not so regular nor so well 
developed. The skeleton-fibre of S. Hiipschii is, moreover, even more coarse than 
that of S. concentrica, while its coenosteum does not grow in latilamine. 8. dis- 
coidea, Lond., also has a thicker skeleton-fibre than that of S. concentrica (} to 


% mm. in diameter as compared with ¢ to 4 mm. in the latter); and is at 


6 

once distinguished from the present species by its extraordinarily developed 
astrorhizal system. S. Cartert, Nich., again, grows in latilamine, but the skeleton- 
fibre is of a finer character than that of S. concentrica (about § or + mm. in 
diameter) and the general reticulation of the skeleton is much more lax and open. 
Moreover, the skeleton-fibre of S. Carteri is more coarsely porous than that of 
S. concentrica. Lastly, S. typica, Rosen, has a skeleton-fibre of about 7 mm. in 
diameter, and the general ccenosteal tissue is much less dense than that of S. con- 
centrica, while the radial pillars and tabulate zodidal tubes are much _ better 
developed than in the latter species. 

I have found it impossible to draw up a satisfactory synonymy of this species, 
owing to the great difficulty of determining the real nature of many of the forms 
described under this name by older writers. The S. concentrica of Michelin 
(‘Iconographie Zodphytologique,’ p. 190, pl. xlix, fig. 4, 1840—47) is quoted 
from both Devonian and Silurian localities, and thus clearly cannot be relied 
upon ; and though his figure might answer very well for that of a fragment of S. 
concentrica, Goldf., it would stand even better for one of Actinostroma stellulatum, 


23 


168 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


Nich. The species described by Lonsdale (‘ Sil. Syst.,’ p. 680, pl. xv, fig. 31, 
1839) as S. concentrica is really Clathrodictyon striatellum, D’Orb. sp. The form 
described under this name by Phillips (‘ Pal. Foss. of Cornwall, &c.,’ p. 18, pl. x, 
fig. 28, 1841) appears to be an example of a hitherto undescribed Stromato- 
poroid which occurs commonly in the Devonian Limestones of Devonshire, and 
which will, I think, prove to be referable to the genus Hermatostroma. At any 
rate, the 8. concentrica of Phillips is certainly quite distinct from the form which 
rightly bears this name. The fossil noted by M‘Coy from the Carboniferous 
Limestone of Ireland (‘Synopsis of the Carb. Foss. of Ireland,’ p. 193, 1844), 
under the name of S. concentiica, Lonsd., is described with extreme brevity and is 
not figured, so that its true nature is wholly doubtful, though it may be taken 
for certain that it is not the present species. On the other hand, the fossil 
described by M‘Coy from the Devonian Limestones of Devonshire as S. concentrica, 
Goldf. (‘ Brit. Pal. Foss,’ p. 65, 1851), is clearly an Actinostroma, and is probably 
identical with A. clathratwm, Nich. The S. concentrica of Bargatzky (‘ Die 
Stromatoporen des rheinischen Devons, p. 54, 1881) is unquestionably the form 
which I have described under the name of Actinostroma clathratum, and has no 
relationship with the S. concentrica of Goldfuss. Under the name of SN. concentrica, 
Goldf., Prof. Ferd. Roemer (‘ Leth. Pal.,’ p. 538, 1883) includes a number of dis- 
tinct species of Stromatoporoids of Devonian age, and it is not possible to deter- 
mine how far his descriptive remarks really apply to the true S. concentrica of 
Goldfuss. The figures which accompany his description (loc. cit., Atlas, Taf. 
xxvi, figs. 3a, 3b) would seem to be probably referable to Actinostroma stellu- 
latum, Nich. The form identified as S. concentrica, Goldf., by Dr. Maurer (‘ Die 
Fauna der Kalke von Waldgirmes,’ p. 108, Taf. u, figs. 12, 138, 1885) is referable 
in reality to Actinostroma stellulatum, Nich., but is very badly preserved. Lastly, 
the form described as S. concentrica, Goldf., by Frech (“‘ Die Korallenfauna des 
Oberdevons,” ‘ Zeitschr. d. deutschen geol. Gesellschaft,’ p. 116, Jahrg., 1885) is 
also an Actinostroma, and is apparently partly referable to A. clathratum, Nich., 
and partly based on A. verrucosum, Goldf. sp. 

Distribution.—Stromatopora concentrica, Goldf., so far as at present known, is 
a purely European species, and is entirely confined to the Devonian Rocks. The 
normal form of the species occurs, not uncommonly, in the Middle Devonian 
Limestones in the neighbourhood of Gerolstein, and occurs also at Sotenich, but 
seems to be absent from the limestones of the Paffrath area. In Britain, the 
typical form of the species occurs in the Middle Devonian Limestones of 
Lummaton, in Devonshire, in strictly characteristic examples. It is also found 
in the Devonian pebbles of the Triassic conglomerates at Teignmouth ;_ but 
it is always a rare form. The form which I have called S. concentrica, var. 
colliculata, is common at Gerolstein, commoner, in fact, than the normal form of 


STROMATOPORA TYPICA. 169 


the species, and it likewise occurs at Sétenich. Examples of this variety also 
occur in the Devonian pebbles of Teignmouth. Lastly, the type which I have 
provisionally designated S. concentrica, var. astrigera, appears to be confined to the 
Devonian Limestones of Devonshire, occurring in the Teignmouth conglomerates, 
and in the limestone of Chinkenwell Quarry, near Marychurch. , 


2, SrromaTopora TyPica, von Rosen. Pl. I, fig. 3; Pl. V, figs. 14and 15; Pl. XXI, 
figs. 4—11; and Pl. XXII, figs. 1 and 2. 


STROMATOPORA TYPICA, von Rosen. Ueber die Natur der Stromatoporen, p. 58, 
Taf. i, figs. 1—3, and Taf. ii, fig. 1, 1867. 
— —  WMicholson. Monogr. Brit. Stromatoporoids, General Intro- 
duction, pl. i, fig. 3, and pl. v, figs. 14 and 
15, 1886 (figured but not described). 


The ccenosteum in this species is typically hemispherical or discoid, more 
rarely laminar, with a flattened or concave base which is covered by a concen- 
trically wrinkled epithecal membrane (Plate XXI, figs. 4 and 5), the organism 
being usually attached to foreign bodies by a limited portion of its lower surface. 
The size of the coenosteum varies from less than two centimétres up to a foot or 
more at its base. 

The mode of growth is always by distinct ‘‘ latilamine,”’ which are not made 
up of recognisable finer concentric lamin, and which are always gently curved or 
bent, the exterior being thus destitute of conspicuous eminences or “ mamelons.”’ 
The surface, in well-preserved examples, shows a minutely vermiculate network 
(Plate XXI, fig. 7), pierced by innumerable small and close-set circular apertures, 
representing the mouths of the zodidal tubes. Astrorhize are always developed 
in great numbers, but are slightly branched, and are of small size, their centres 
averaging about 6 mm. apart. They may be superimposed in vertical systems, 
with a common axial canal to each system ; but this arrangement is rarely distinct, 
each astrorhiza usually showing two or more small apertures at its centre where 
it terminates on the surface. 

As regards its internal structure, the skeleton is completely “ reticulate,” the 
horizontal elements of the ccenosteum (‘‘connecting-arms’’) being indistinctly 
developed as separate from the radial pillars. The skeleton-fibre is about 7mm. 
in diameter, and is minutely porous (Plate XXI, figs. 9 and 10), the network formed 
by its imosculations being of a close and fine character. Vertical sections 
(Plate XXII, fig. 2) show that the radial pillars are quite distinct, and are separated 
by well-developed, approximately vertical zodidal tubes, the cavities of which are 
intersected by numerous transverse partitions or ‘ tabule.’ From six to eight 


170 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


zodidal tubes, with their intervening radial pillars, occupy a space of 2 mm. 
measured at right angles to their length. Tangential sections (Plate XXII, fig. 1) 
show the finely reticulated skeletal network, pierced by the generally round 
openings of the transversely divided zodidal tubes and traversed by the branching 
astrorhizal canals. The latilaminar structure of the skeleton is also well 
exhibited by vertical sections. 

Obs.—The form of the ccenosteum in 8S. typica is essentially discoidal, 
with a basal epitheca, the smallest example seen being 13 cm. in diameter. 
Young specimens (Plate XXI, figs. 4—6) are thin, approximately circular discs, 
fixed basally to foreign objects by a small peduncle of attachment, or, at other 
times, by a large portion of the under surface. In some cases the discoidal or 
laminar form is more or less completely retained throughout life, few latilaminee 
being produced, and these being widely extended laterally. More usually, the 
successively produced latilaminz not only extend beyond the margins of the 
previously formed disc, the coenosteum thus increasing in diameter; but each 
stratum is thicker in the middle than at the periphery, so that the colony assumes 
a hemispherical shape, with a flat or concave base (Plate XXI, fig. 8). Large 
Specimens may exceed a foot in diameter, but the hemispherical form is usually 
more or less closely retained. 

Latilaminar growth is almost as marked a feature as in S. concentrica, Goldf., 
each latilamina consisting of a single layer of zodidal tubes. The latilamine are 
always in gentle curves or slight undulations, conforming with the surface of the 
hemispherical coenosteum. The astrorhize of S. typica are characteristic in their 
ereat numbers, small size, and few straggling branches (Plate XXI, fig. 7). Usually 
their centres are 5 or 6 mm. apart, but they may be more widely spaced than this. 
An arrangement of the astrorhize into vertically superimposed systems, each 
with a common axial canal, can often be made out ; but this is not a conspicuous 
feature, and “‘astrorhizal cylinders”? are never developed, the surface of each 
successive latilamina being thus devoid of eminences or ‘‘ mamelons”’ corre- 
sponding with the astrorhizal centres. 

The skeleton-fibre (Plate I, fig. 3, and Plate XXI, figs. 9 and 10) is minutely 
porous, and this structure is more or less clearly recognisable in all well-preserved 
examples. In some examples, however, the skeleton-fibre appears to have under- 
gone a sort of change, in virtue of which it appears in vertical sections as if 
traversed by innumerable perpendicular and horizontal dark striz. This 
appearance has been figured by Baron von Rosen (‘Ueber die Nat. der Strom.,’ 
Taf. i, fig. 2),and is not uncommonly seen in specimens from Gotland or Esthonia, 
but only in examples which can be otherwise shown to have undergone more or 
less alteration. As has been previously pointed out (p. 145), vertical sections of 
specimens in which the skeleton-fibre has been altered in the way just described 


STROMATOPORA TYPICA. bell 


show a singular resemblance to corresponding sections of Actinostroma astroites, 
von Rosen, sp. 

Owing to the imperfect development of the horizontal elements of the skeleton 
as distinct structures, “‘ concentric lamine,”’ in the strict sense of the term, can 
hardly be said to exist, the skeletal tissue being thoroughly reticulate. Tangen- 
tial sections (Plate XXII, fig. 1) exhibit a close calcareous network, traversed 
horizontally or more or less obliquely by the branching astrorhizal canals, and 
pierced by close-set oval or circular pores, representing transverse sections of the 
zooidal tubes. On the other hand, vertical sections (Plate XXII, fig. 2) show that 
each latilamina consists of a series of closely arranged slightly flexuous radial 
pillars, which probably run from the bottom to the top of the latilamina without a 
break, though they are necessarily so cut in sections as to appear to be more or 
less discontinuous. The radial pillars are connected at intervals by irregularly 
developed horizontal processes, but their individuality is not thereby destroyed. 
Vertical sections, also, always show very distinctly developed and freely tabulate 
zodidal tubes, which, like the radial pillars, are probably really continuous from 
the bottom to the top of each latilamina. 

I have never seen a British example of S. typica in the ‘* Caunopora-state.”’ 
Prof. Ferdinand Roemer has, however, presented to me an example of this species 
from the Drift of Northern Germany, in which the skeleton is traversed by 
numerous minute ‘‘ Caunopora-tubes.”’ I have given a figure of a portion of the 
surface of this specimen (Plate XXI, fig. 11), from which it will be seen that, 
in this case, the “‘ Caunopora-tubes”’ probably belong to a species of Aulopora. 
Professor Lindstrém, moreover, has recently shown (‘ Bihang till k. Svenska Vet. 
Akad. Handlingar,’ Bd. xv, Afd. iv, No. 9, 1889) that the curious fossil described 
by Kunth under the name of Prisciturben is really a kind of *‘ Caunopora,” in 
which the imbedded tubes belong to a Cyathophylloid coral. The original 
specimen of Priscitwrben was derived from the Wenlock Limestone of Sweden 
(apparently from Gotland), and was supposed by Kunth to be a peculiar type of 
Coral (‘‘ Beitrige zur Kenntniss fossiler Korallen,”’ ‘ Zeitschr. d. deutsch. geol. 
Gesell.,” 1870, p. 82). Lindstrém, however, has shown that the supposed 
“coenenchyma”’ of Prisciturben is really a mass of Stromatopora typica, v. Rosen, 
imbedded in which, as in a matrix, are the cylindrical tubes of a Cyathophylloid 
coral. I have carefully examined a specimen of Prisciturben which I collected in 
the Wenlock Limestone of Oesel, and I am able to entirely corroborate Professor 
Lindstrém’s observations on this subject. 

The characters of S. typica, throughout its entire range, remain remarkably 
uniform ; and I am not acquainted with any definite varietal forms of the species, 
unless the Cawnopora Hudsonica of Dawson—to be spoken of immediately—should 
be regarded as one. 


172 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


From 8. concentrica, Goldf., the present species is distinguished by its much 
finer skeleton-fibre and the greater delicacy of the ccenosteal tissue resulting 
from this. The coenosteum is, further, distinguished by its hemispherical or dis- 
coidal form, and the presence of a basal epitheca; while the zodidal tubes are 
closer, more regular, and more abundantly furnished with tabule than is the case 
with the former. From both 8. Miipschii, Barg., and S. discoidea, Lonsd., the 
present species is distinguished, among other characters, by the comparative fine- 
ness of the skeleton-fibre and the greater delicacy of the reticulated skeleton. In 
S. discoidea, moreover, the astrorhizal system is extraordinarily developed. From 
S. Carteri, Nich., lastly, the present species is separated by its more delicate 
skeleton-fibre and the much less lax and open character of the skeletal network ; 
while the former is destitute of astrorhize, or has these structures developed in 
the feeblest manner. 

Stromatopora typica, Rosen, though a very abundant and very widely distributed 
form, seems to have been commonly overlooked by paleontologists, and I have 
therefore little to say as to its synonyms. I have examined von Rosen’s original 
specimens in Dorpat, and I have collected many similar ones in the Silurian Rocks 
of Hsthonia; so that I have no doubt as to the precise species this observer had in 
view, even if his excellent figures had not placed this beyond doubt. My friend 
Mr. J. F. Whiteaves has been good enough to send me a fragment of the original 
specimen of the “‘ Cawnopora”’ Hudsonica, described by Sir J. W. Dawson (‘ Quart. 
Journ. Geol. Soc.,’ vol. xxxv, p. 52, pl. iv, fig. 9, and pl. v, fig. 10, 1879) from 
the Silurian Rocks of Hudson’s Bay, together with another and much better pre- 
served fragment of the same species from the Silurian of Cape Churchill. The 
microscopic examination of these fragments has shown that this form is a true 
Stromatopora, with very close relationships to S. typica, Rosen. The general 
character of the skeletal network is precisely similar to that of S. typica, except, 
perhaps, that it is a shade coarser than is usual in the latter species; while the 
minute structure of the skeleton-fibre is identical in the two. There are, in fact, 
only two apparent points of distinction between S. Hudsonica, Daws. sp., and 
S. typica, Rosen, to which any importance could be attached. One of these is 
that in the former the astrorhize are always regularly superimposed in vertical 
rows, each system being connected with a wall-less axial canal of comparatively 
large size. Hach astrorhiza, therefore, opens on the surface of the latilamina to 
which it belongs by a comparatively large circular aperture, corresponding with 
the axial canal, this aperture being placed at the summit of a minute pointed 
eminence. The surface thus shows numerous small, regularly placed ‘‘ mamelons,”’ 
corresponding each with the centre of an astrorhizal system. In this character, 
as pointed out by Dawson, S. Hudsonica resembles the form described by Hall 
and Whitfield (‘Twenty-third Ann. Rep. on the State Cabinet,’ pl. ix, fig. 3, 


STROMATOPORA TYPICA. 173 


1873) as Canostroma incrustans (Plate III, fig. 6); but it is by no means probable 
that these species are identical. The other point which seems to distinguish 
S. Hudsonica from 8S. typica is that the zodidal tubes of the former seem to be 
provided with very few tabule ; but much stress cannot be laid upon this, as my 
specimens are in a state of poor preservation. Upon the whole, it may at present 
be concluded that S. Hudsonica, Dawson sp., is specifically distinct from 8S. typica, 
Rosen, though certainly nearly related to it. 

Mr. Whiteaves has also supplied me with a fragment of the original specimen 
described from the Guelph Limestones (Niagara Group) of Canada by Sir J. W. 
Dawson under the name of Cewnostroma galtense (‘ Life’s Dawn on Harth,’ p. 160, 
1875, and ‘Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.,’ vol. xxxv, p. 52, 1879). The minute 
structure of this specimen is practically destroyed by dolomitisation, but all its 
general characters would lead to the belief that itis very closely related to S. typica, 
Rosen, and is probably absolutely identical with it. 

Prof. J. W. Spencer has kindly supphed me with a fragment of the species 
which he described from the Niagara Limestone of North America under the name 
of Cenostroma constellatum (‘ Niagara Fossils,’ p. 48, pl. vi, fig. 11, 1884). 
The minute structure of this is also almost wholly destroyed by dolomitisation ; 
but it does not appear to be in any way distinguishable as regards its general 
characters from Cenostroma galtense, Dawson, and I am strongly disposed to think 
that it is really identical with S. typica, Rosen. 

If the above view should prove to be correct, then Cenostroma galtense, Dawson, 
and CU. constellatum, Spencer, must be considered as synonyms of S. typica, 
Rosen. Prof. Spencer, however, identifies his species with the previously described 
Stromatopora constellata of Hall (‘ Pal. N. Y.,’ vol. u, p. 324, pl. Ixxu, fig. 2 a, b, 
1852). If the identity of this last with S. typica, Rosen, should also be proved, 
then Hall’s name should, strictly speaking, have precedence over that of Rosen. 
The real nature of Hall’s Stromatopora constellata could, however, be established 
only by an investigation of the original specimen, if even then; since the 
brief description, with its accompanying figures, is not sufficient to establish 
clearly so much as the generic position of the fossil. Under these circumstances 
it would appear unreasonable to abandon the name of S. typica for that of 
S. constellata, even were the identity of the two to be ultimately proved; since 
Rosen based his species upon well-preserved specimens, and illustrated its 
characters by admirable and thoroughly recognisable figures. 

Distribution.—Stromatopora typica, Rosen, appears to be wholly confined to 
the Silurian (Upper Silurian) Rocks, of which it is by far the commonest and most 
characteristic Stromatoporoid. No Ordovician or Devonian examples of the 
species are known. The species is, in fact, an essentially Wenlock type, and has 
an extremely wide distribution in space. In the Wenlock Limestone of Britain 


174 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


the species is extremely abundant, occurring in numerous localities, as, for 
example, at Ironbridge, Dudley, Dormington, Longhope, and Much Wenlock. 
It is also a common form in the Wenlock Limestone of Gotland, though most of 
the specimens I have seen from this region are more or less altered by crystallisa- 
tion. In Esthonia, in the Upper Oesel formation, it occurs plentifully, specimens 
being abundant at Lode (near Arensburg), Kaugatoma-pank, Kattri-pank, or 
Hoheneichen, all in Oesel. It also occurs in the Drift in Northern Germany. If 
I am right in regarding Cwnostroma galtense, Dawson, and WS. constellatwm, 
Spencer, as identical with S. typica, Rosen, then the species occurs in the Silurian 
Rocks of North America as well as in Europe. 


3. SrromatoporaA Carters, n. sp. PI. I, figs. 6 and 7; and Pl. XXIII, figs. 1—3. 


The coenosteum in this species is of considerable size, massive, irregular in 
shape, and composed of gently undulated or curved latilamine (Plate XXIII, 
fig. 1), which vary from 2 to 4 or 5 mm. in thickness in their central portion. 
The under surface and mode of attachment are not known, but the upper surface 
is without distinct eminences or ‘‘ mamelons,” and shows simply an irregular 
vermiculate tuberculation. Astrorhize are not developed in any recognisable 
form. 

As regards internal structure, the skeleton-fibre is about § mm. in diameter, 
and is coarsely porous (Plate I, figs. 6 and 7). Vertical sections (Plate XXIII, 
fig. 2) show that each latilamima is composed of very distinctly developed radial 
pillars, which are separated from one another by equally distinct zodidal tubes, 
and which really run continuously from the bottom to the top of each latilamina ; 
though they appear to be more or less broken up, if—as in the example figured— 
the plane of the section is slightly oblique. About seven radial pillars, with their 
intervening zodidal tubes, occupy a space of 2 mm., measured transversely. The 
zodidal tubes are furnished with a moderate number of well-developed transverse 
partitions or ‘‘tabule.’’ The radial pillars are connected at varying intervals by 
irregular horizontal or oblique processes, but these do not give rise to distinct 
“concentric lamine,” and the skeleton thus forms a loose and open reticulation, 
in which the vertical elements are far more conspicuous than the horizontal. As 
a result of this, tangential sections (Plate XXIII, fig. 3) show the cut ends of the 
radial pillars, either as separate structures, or, more usually, as united by the 
irregular horizontal processes above spoken of in such a way as to give rise to 
vermiculate and sinuous rows, which inosculate with one another and form a 
lax network. 


Obs.—The specimens upon which I have founded this species, though mode- 


i ee tee 


STROMATOPORA CARTERIT. 175 


rately numerous, are all more or less imperfect, none of them showing the base or 
mode of attachment. The species grows to a large size, and the coenosteum is of 
the massive as distinguished from the laminar or discoidal type, the under 
surface having very possibly been devoid of an epithecal membrane. Latilaminar 
erowth is a very marked feature, and each latilamina, as is the case in 8. typica, 
Rosen, consists essentially of a single stratum of radial pillars which extend 
continuously from its lower to its upper surface, and are united by irregular 
horizontal or oblique connecting processes, these latter not being sufficiently 
regular to give rise in vertical sections to the appearance of definite “‘ concentric 
lamine.”’ The skeleton-fibre in S. Carteri is of medium thickness, being finer than 
that of S. concentrica, Goldf., S. Hiipschii, Barg., or 8. discoidea, Lonsd., but is 
remarkable for its coarsely porous structure, as seen in thin sections (Plate I, 
figs. 6 and 7). <A characteristic feature is the peculiarly loose and open nature of 
the reticulated ccenosteal tissue (Plate XXIII, figs. 2 and 3). Another charac- 
teristic feature is the total or almost total absence of the branched and radiating 
astrorhizal canals, which are so conspicuous in most species of Stromatopora. In 
most examples of the present form no traces whatever of these structures can be 
detected, and in none are these more than the merest indications of their exis- 
tence. The surface, therefore, is simply smooth or gently undulated, and is 
entirely without “‘ mamelons.” 

I am not acquainted with any undoubted varietal forms of this species, nor 
have I ever seen a specimen of it in the ‘‘ Caunopora-state.”’ 

S. Carteri cannot easily be confounded with any other species of the genus 
Stromatopora. It agrees with S. typica, Rosen, and with S. concentrica, Goldf., in 
its conspicuously latilaminar mode of growth; but it is distinguished from both 
these forms by the peculiar character of the skeletal reticulation, as also by the 
absence of astrorhize. By this last feature it is equally distinguished from 
S. Mipschii, Barg., S. Beuthii, Barg., and 8. discoidea, Lonsd., while it is further 
separated from these by the composition of its skeleton out of regular latilamine. 
The only species of Stromatopora with which 8. Carteri, Nich., is really closely 
allied is a form from the Silurian Rocks (Upper-Oesel group) of Oesel, which I 
may provisionally name 8S. borealis. The general structure of the skeleton-fibre 
and of the ccenosteal tissue is the same in these two types, a distinct relationship, 
or, perhaps, an actual identity, being thus indicated. 8S. borealis, Nich., 1s, 
however, distinguished from 8S. Carteri by the fact that the ccenosteum of the 
former has the shape of a thin extended lamina, with a basal epitheca, while 
it is not composed of successively superimposed latilamine. The astrorhizal 
system of S. borealis is, moreover, very well developed. A further point of 
distinction is found in the fact that the zodidal tubes of 8. borealis are more 
abundantly furnished with tabule than is the case in S. Carteri, while these 


D) A, 


176 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


structures are often placed at the same level in adjoining tubes, thus giving rise 
to the appearance of successive continuous concentric lines. 

Distribution.—S. Carter, so far as known, is entirely confined to the Wenlock 
Limestone of Britain; and my specimens have been principally obtained from the 
single locality of Ironbridge, in Shropshire, where the species is not altogether 
uncommon, though vastly more rare than is S. typica, Rosen. The species has 
not hitherto been certainly recognised in the Silurian Rocks of Gotland or 
Esthonia. Mr. Whiteaves has submitted to me for examination a fragment of a 
species of Stromatopora, obtained from a loose boulder on the banks of the 
Hayes River, in Hudson’s Bay Territory, which very closely approaches in its 
characters to 8. Carteri, though my material is not sufficient to justify me in 
asserting that it is absolutely identical with the latter. 


4. Srromatorora Hirscut, Bargatzky sp. Pl. X, figs. 8 and 9; Pl. XXII, figs. 
3—/. 


? STROMATOPORA POLYMORPHA, Phillips. Paleozoic Fossils of Cornwall, &e., p. 18, 
pl. x, fig. 27,1841. (Non Stromatopora 
polymorpha, Goldfuss.) 

P? Caunopora PLacENnTA, Phillips. Ibid., p. 18, pl. x, fig. 29. 

_ = Bargatzky. Die Stromatoporen des rheinischen Devons, 
p- 61, 1881. 

—_ Hipscnu, Bargatzky. Ibid., p. 62, 1881. 

Srromatorora Bruruit, Maurer. Die Fauna der Kalke von Waldgirmes bei 
Giessen, p. 113, Taf. iii, fig. 5,,1885. (Non 
Stromatopora Beuthii, Bargatzky.) 
— InDUBIA, Maurer. Ibid., p. 111, Taf. iii, figs. 1—8. 

iy — macutosa, Mawrer. Ibid., p. 114, Taf. iii, figs. 6 and 7. 

— Hirscuu, Nicholson. Monogr. Brit. Strom., General Introduc- 
tion, fig. 6, a, B, and pl. x, figs. 8 and 9 
(figured but not described). 


The ccenosteum in this species is generally laminar, with a basal epitheca, but 
it is sometimes massive or irregular in form. Laminar examples vary in thickness 
from half a centimétre (young forms) to four or five centimétres, and when fully 
erown are often more or less cake-like in shape. 

Latilamine are not at all, or very imperfectly, developed, though, as in most 
Stromatoporoids, traces of periodic intermissions of growth can be recognised. 
The “concentric lamin,” so far as such can be said to exist, are approximately 
straight, or are gently curved; and the surface is, therefore, devoid of ‘* mame- 
lons,” at any rate in the typical form of the species. When well preserved, the 


a 


STROMATOPORA HUPSCHII. 177 


surface (Plate XXII, fig. 6) exhibits coarse vermiculate ridges, which inosculate 
with one another so as to form a network corresponding with the reticulated 
skeleton, while the elongated or rounded meshes correspond with the apertures 
of the zéoidal tubes. The surface also shows numerous astrorhize of a 
characteristic ramified type, which vary in size and distance, but usually have 
their centres about a centimétre apart. 

As regards internal structure, the skeleton-fibre (Fig. 20, 4 and 8B) is coarsely 
porous, and is unusually stout (about ¢ mm. in diameter, or rather more). The 
coenosteal tissue is of the completely ‘‘ reticulate”’ type, the radial pillars and the 
trabecule of the ‘concentric lamin” being fused into a continuous network. 
Vertical sections (Plate XXII, fig. 3), however, show that the radial pillars exist 
as distinct structures, united at irregular intervals by horizontal or oblique 
connecting-processes, and separated from one another by very well-developed zodidal 


Fig. 20.—A. Tangential section of Stromatopora Hiipschii, enlarged twelve times, showing the 
reticulate skeleton and the porous skeleton-fibre. B. Vertical section of the same, 
similarly enlarged, showing the tabulate zodidal tubes. C and D. Tangential and vertical 
sections of Stromatopora Biicheliensis, similarly enlarged. Middle Devonian. 


tubes (Fig. 20, 8), which are intersected by occasional remote tabule. About five 
radial pillars, with their intervening zodidal tubes, occupy the space of two milh- 
métres measured transversely. Tangential sections (Plate XXII, fig. 4, and 
woodcut, Fig. 20, 4) show the loosely-woven and coarse network of the reticulated 


178 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


skeleton, in which no traces of the radial pillars (as distinct structures) are recog- 
nisable. The apertures in this network correspond with the zodidal tubes, and 
some of these are simply circular, while others are confluent, and thus give rise to 
elongated and sinuous meshes. 

Obs.—The general form of the ccenosteum in this species is that of a thick 
lamina or cake, with an inferior epithecal membrane. Some examples, however, 
are massive in growth and irregular in form, and may not have possessed an 
epitheca. The upper surface is devoid of elevations, though it is probable that 
pointed prominences or “ mamelons”’ corresponding with the astrorhize were 
present in the variety of the species which I shall term S. Miipschii, var. seposita. 
Latilaminar growth is not clearly recognisable, as a rule, and the general skeletal 
structure is very characteristic. The skeleton-fibre (Fig. 20, a) is coarsely porous, 
and is unusually thick, the general ccenosteal reticulation being loose, with 
usually elongated and sinuous meshes. The zodidal tubes, as seen in vertical 
sections (Fig. 20, B), are very clearly developed, but they show comparatively few 
tabulz, or they may be even devoid of these structures. 

Astrorhize (Plate XXII, fig. 5) are very abundantly developed, but are usually 
of small size, while they melt away rapidly at their circumference into the general 
reticulated tissue of the skeleton. In that form of the species which I propose to 
call S. Hiipschii, var. seposita, the astrorhize are superimposed in regular vertical 
systems, which are surrounded by concentrically disposed laming, penetrated 
more or less transversely by the radial pillars, thus giving rise to regular 
*‘astrorhizal cylinders.” The spaces between these cylinders may be simply filled 
by loose reticulated tissue of the type ordinarily characteristic of this species, or 
may be occupied by undulated lamine in a manner similar to what occurs in 
Actinostroma verrucosum, Goldf. sp. (figured in Plate XVI, fig. 1). It is probable 
that in this variety of S. Miipschii each astrorhizal cylinder would project above 
the upper surface of the ccenosteum as a pointed “ mamelon;” but none of my 
examples exhibit the general form or exterior. In its minute structure SN. 
Mipschii, var. seposita shows nothing to distinguish it from the normal form 
of the species. 

Stromatopora Hiipschii very commonly occurs in the “ Caunopora-state.” It 
is, indeed, comparatively rare to meet with an example of this species which is 
not penetrated by ‘‘ Caunopora-tubes.” Such tubes vary considerably in size in 
different examples, but they can be commonly shown to possess funnel-shaped 
tabule in their interior (Plate X, fig. 9), and they sometimes possess radiating 
septal spines in addition. In some specimens, the “ Caunopora-tubes ” are short, 
and give off numerous lateral stolons, reminding one of an Awlopora-colony. In 
other cases, the tubes are straight, regularly parallel, and continuous throughout 
considerable vertical distances, thus reminding one rather of a Syringopora-colony. 


STROMATOPORA HUPSCHII. 179 


I have figured a characteristic example of this latter type from the Devonian 
Limestone of Dartington, in which the tubes are exposed to view as the result of 
weathering (Plate XXII, fig. 7). 

The species with which S. Hiipschii is most nearly allied is undoubtedly S. 
Beuthu, Barg., with which it agrees in the coarsely porous, stout skeleton-fibre, 
as also in the general type of reticulation of the ccenosteal tissue. Well- 
preserved examples of S. Beuthii are readily distinguished from S. Hiipschii by 
the fact that the radial pillars are so far persistent as to be quite recognisable as 
distinct structures ; whereas in the latter the radial pillars have lost their axial 
canals, and are thus irrecognisably incorporated with the general skeletal reticula- 
tion. Hence, in tangential sections of 8. Beuthii (Plate XXIII, figs. 10 and 12) 
the cut ends of the radial pillars are seen within the general coenosteal network 
as distinct, circular, dark or light spaces, usually with a central dot representing 
the axial canal of the pillar; and even in vertical sections the axes of the pillars 
may be more or less clearly recognisable ; whereas no such phenomena are ob- 
servable in sections of S. Hiipschii. It must be admitted, however, that this 
distinction cannot always be made out in practice, since in badly-preserved 
specimens of S. Beuthii all traces of the persistent axes of the radial pillars may 
apparently be lost. Under such circumstances, examples of S. Beuthii can be 
distinguished from those of S. Hiipschii only by the comparatively uncertain tests 
that the general reticulation of the skeleton in the former is not so lax as in the 
latter ; the radial elements of the coenosteum are of stouter build than in VN. 
Thipschii, and are more clearly separated from the horizontal elements ; while the 
zooidal tubes are more abundantly tabulate, and the astrorhize are much less 
developed than is the case in the latter species. 

From 8. concentrica, Goldf., the present species is distinguished by its some- 
what coarser skeleton-fibre, the much looser and more open character of the 
reticulated skeleton, the less perfect circumscription of the astrorhize, and the 
fact that growth of the coenosteum is not effected by distinct latilamine. 

As regards the synonymy of the present species, it Seems very probable, judg- 
ing from the figures given, that the fossils described by Phillips from the Devo- 
nian Limestones of Dartington and Chudleigh as Stromatopora polymorpha, Goldf. 
(loc. cit. supra) are really referable to S. Hiipschu, Barg.; but this cannot be 
asserted positively without an examination of the original specimens. In any 
case, the point is one of comparatively small interest, since | have shown (p. 4) 
that Stromatopora polymorpha, Goldf., probably covered three distinct forms, and 
that this specific name is therefore not worthy of retention. It also seems by no 
means improbable that the Cawnopora placenta of Phillips (loc. cit. supra) was 
based upon a specimen of Stromatopora Hiipschii in the ‘‘ Caunopora-state.”’ 
This is a point of considerable importance, since if this could be established with 


180 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


certainty, the specific name given by Phillips would, strictly speaking, have a claim 
to be retained, and the species would stand as Stromatopora placenta, Phill. sp. 
Upon full consideration, however, I have decided to retain Bargatzky’s name for 
this species upon two grounds—viz. in the first place, that the description and 
figures given by Phillips of his Caunopora placenta are entirely insufficient to 
determine clearly the form which he had under consideration, and, in the second 
place, that the ‘‘ Caunopora-tubes”’ are made an essential part of the diagnosis of 
the species. If the original specimen of Phillips were examined, it is very 
possible that it might prove to be referable to what is here understood as Stromato- 
pora Hiipschii, Barg. It might, however, prove to be a “ Caunoporised”’ example 
of S, Beuthii, Barg., or S. Biicheliensis, Barg., and, indeed, I am rather disposed 
to think that it is to the last-named of these that it really belongs. At any rate, 
the original figures and descriptions would fit the one hypothesis quite as well as 
the other; and under these circumstances it seems to me best to allow the name 
of Cawnopora placenta, Phill., to fall altogether. 

On the other hand, the Caunopora placenta of Bargatzky himself—as I have 
established by an examination of the original specimens—is really identical with 
the Caunopora Hiipschii of the same author ; and in order to avoid confusion with 
the fossil described by Phillips as C. placenta, the second of Bargatzky’s specific 
titles must be retained. As I have shown previously, however, Bargatzky was 
led into a misconception of the true nature of the genus Stromatopora by reason 
of his ignorance of the minute structure of S. concentrica, Goldf., the type-species 
of this genus. The Stromatopora of Bargatzky is thus really what I have named 
Actinostroma, and the Cawnopora of this author is really Stromatopora. The 
present species, therefore, under the circumstances just recounted, may best 
stand as Stromatopora Hiipschii, Barg. sp. 

The Stromatopora Beuthit of Maurer (loc. cit. supra) appears to be founded 
upon a specimen of 8. Hépschii, Barg., without “ Caunopora-tubes,” while the 
S. indubia of the same author seems to be S. Miipschi with ‘* Caunopora-tubes.”’ 
The S. maculosa of Maurer may also be referable to S. Hiipschu, but its preserva- 
tion is bad, and its true affinities are doubtful. 

Distribution.—S. Hiipschu, Barg., appears to be entirely confined to the 
Devonian Rocks, occurring with great frequency in the Middle Devonian Lime- 
stones of both Britain and Germany. In the latter region it occurs abundantly at 
Bichel, in the Paffrath District, but appears to be wanting at Hebborn (where 
S. Beuthii, Barg., is common), while it is a rare species at Gerolstem. In the 
Devonian Limestones of Devonshire it is the commonest of all the forms of 
Stromatopora, occurring usually in the ‘“‘ Caunopora-state.” Large and perfect 
examples are found at Dartington (Pit-Park Quarry), while others are found at 
Bishopsteignton, and the species is exceedingly abundant in the pebbles of 


STROMATOPORA INAIQUALIS. 18] 


Devonian Limestone in the Triassic conglomerates of Teignmouth. 8S. Hiipschii, 
var. seposita, Nich., occurs not very uncommonly at Teignmouth. 


5. STROMATOPORA INAIQUALIS, n. sp. Pl. XXIV, figs. 11 and 12. 


The form, size, and surface-characters of this species are unknown, as also is 
the mode of attachment of the organism. The mode of growth is continuous, and 
not by latilaminz. The skeleton-fibre is thick and coarsely porous, and is woven 
into a loose reticulation, the meshes of which are elongated and sinuous, the 
general characters of the ccenosteal tissue agreeing in all essential respects with 
those distinctive of S. Mipschii, Barg. . Vertical sections show that the radial 
pillars are well developed, while numerous distinct zodidal tubes, intersected by a 
moderately large number of transverse partitions or “ tabule,” are present. The 
astrorhize are exceedingly well developed, and exhibit a distinct division into 
two series, a larger and smaller, which are regularly intermingled with one 
another (Plate XXIV, figs. 11 and 12). The larger astrorhize have a few 
slightly divided branches, their centres being placed from 6 to 12 mm. apart. 
The smaller astrorhize consist of numerous short, hardly divided, radiating 
canals, and occupy the interspaces between the larger ones. 

Obs.—This species is only known to me by polished specimens obtained from 
the Devonian pebbles in the Triassic conglomerates of Teignmouth, and these 
show nothing as to the general form or mode of attachment of the coenosteum. 
Moreover, almost all the specimens I have examined are in the ‘‘reversed’’ 
condition, the actual skeleton being more or less extensively replaced by calcite, 
while the astrorhizal canals and zodidal tubes are more or less completely 
infiltrated with opaque calcareous mud. I have only obtained one specimen in 
which the state of preservation of the skeleton is normal. This specimen shows 
that, as regards general internal structure, there is nothing that would clearly 
distinguish S. inxqualis, Nich., from S. Hiipschii, Barg., and it is possible that 
the former is only a well-marked variety of the latter. The apparently constant 
division of the astrorhize in S. inzqualis into two series of different sizes and 
shapes is, however, so marked a feature (Plate XXIV, figs. 11 and 12), that it 
seems to me advisable to consider this form as a distinct species. If the character 
in question be admitted as of specific value, then there is no other species of the 
genus Stromatopora with which the present form could be confounded. 

Distribution.—S. imequalis is of rare occurrence in the pebbles of Devonian 
Limestone in the Triassic conglomerates of Teignmouth. 


182 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


6. STROMATOPORA FLORIGERA, n. sp. Pl. XXII, figs. 8—10. 


The form, size, and mode of growth of the ccoenosteum in this species are 
unknown. ‘The ccenosteal tissue is not developed in latilamine, and is completely 
reticulated (Plate XXII, fig. 9), the skeleton-fibre being coarsely porous in struc- 
ture, and having an average diameter of from } to § mm. The astrorhize are 
exceedingly numerous and are of small size, their centres being in general about 
4 mm. apart (Plate XXII, fig. 8). The astrorhize are developed in vertically 
superimposed rows, each system being traversed by an axial wall-less canal ; but 
proper “‘ astrorhizal cylinders” are not usually developed. From the condition of 
the astrorhize it may be inferred that the surface exhibited close-set conical 
‘*mamelons”’ corresponding with the centres of the astrorhizal systems. ‘T'an- 
gential sections (Plate XXII, fig. 9) show the completely reticulate character of 
the general skeleton, into which the minute astrorhize melt insensibly at their 
edges. Vertical sections (Plate XXII, fig. 10) show that the radial pillars are 
clearly recognisable, and that well-developed zodidal tubes, traversed by numerous 
transverse partitions or “ tabule”’ are present. Such sections also commonly 
exhibit the axial canals of the astrorhizal systems. About six zodidal tubes, with 
their intervening pillars, occupy a space of 2 mm. measured transversely. 

Obs.—This species is of the same general type as 8S. Hiipschii, Barg., from 
which it is chiefly distinguished by the more delicate character of the skeleton- 
fibre, the much smaller size and greater proportionate number of the astrorhize, 
and the fact that these structures are developed in regular vertical systems. 
From S. Hiipschii, var. seposita, Nich., in which the astrorhize are also developed 
in vertical systems, S. florigera is separated by its more delicate texture, the much 
more closely-set astrorhizee, and the fact that astrorhizal cylinders are usually 
wanting. The zodidal tubes of S. florigera are also furnished with more numerous 
tabulee than is the case with those of 8. Hupschii, Barg. There is no other species 
of the genus Stromatopora with which the present form could well be confounded. 
My material of S. jlorigera is, unfortunately, very limited, and I am unable to 
give any information as to the general form of the ccoenosteum or the condition of 
its surface. | have seen no specimens in the ‘ Caunopora-state,” but examples 
occasionally occur in the “ reversed ’’ condition. 

Distribution.—This species is only known to me as occurring rarely in the 
pebbles of Devonian Limestone in the Triassic conglomerates of Teignmouth. 


STROMATOPORA BEUTHII. 185 


7. Stromatopora Bauru, Bargatzky. Pl. V, figs. 12,13; Pl. XXIII, figs. 8—13; 
and Pl. XXIV, fig. 1. 


Srromatorora Buvrutt, Bargatzky. Die Stromatoporen des rheinischen Devons, 
p. 56, 1881. 
TURGIDECOLUMNATA, Maurer. Die Fauna der Kalke von Wald- 
girmes, p. 112, Taf. iu, fig. 4, 
1885. 
=e Beututt, Nicholson. Monogr. Brit. Strom., General Introduc- 


tion, pl. v, figs. 12 and 18, 1886 (figured 
but not described). 


The ccenosteum of this species is massive, and often attains a considerable size, 
an imperfectly developed latilaminar structure being in some instances recog- 
nisable. The coenosteum is apparently fixed by a small portion of the inferior 
surface, a basal epitheca being absent. The concentric lamine are simply curved, 
and the surface is therefore free from ‘‘mamelons,”’ and merely exhibits a coarse 
vermicular reticulation corresponding with the skeletal framework, and pierced by 
rounded or sinuous apertures representing the mouths of the zodidal tubes. 
Astrorhize are absent, or are irregularly and imperfectly developed. 

The skeleton-fibre is about + mm. in diameter, and has a coarsely porous 
structure (Fig. 21, a—c). The general skeletal tissue is of the reticulated type 
(Plate XXIII, figs. 10 to 12), but the radial pillars retain their individual distinct- 
ness to an extent not seen in any other species of Stromatopora. As a rule, the 
axial canals of the radial pillars are persistent, and the cut ends of these structures 
can be recognised in thin tangential sections (Plate V, fig. 12; and Plate XXIII, 
fies. 10 and 12) as rounded dark or light spaces, sometimes with a dark central 
dot, immersed in the substance of the general coenosteal mesh. Vertical sections 
(Plate V, fig. 13; and Plate XXIII, fig. 11) also exhibit very distinct radial 
pillars, the axial canals of which are likewise occasionally recognisable in well- 
preserved examples (Plate V, fig. 13). The zodidal tubes are very well developed, 
and are intersected by numerous thick and complete horizontal partitions or 
‘““tabule”’ (Plate V, fig. 13; and Plate XXIII, fig. 11). Three or four zodidal 
tubes, with their intervening pillars, occupy a space of 2 mm. measured trans- 
versely. 

Obs.—The ccenosteum of S. Beuthii, Barg., is usually hemispherical or 
spheroidal in shape, and is often of large size. The characteristic surface-features 
of the species are the coarse superficial reticulation, the want of ‘‘mamelons,” 
and the more or less complete absence of astrorhize. A few examples apparently 
referable to this species do, however, exhibit astrorhize; but these are few in 

25 


184 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


number and are irregularly developed. In its coarsely porous and very stout 
skeleton-fibre (Fig. 21), as also in the general character of the coenosteal network, 
S. Beuthii closely approaches S. Miipschii, Barg.; but the skeletal mesh is of a 
closer and less lax type, while the latter species has also a largely developed 
astrorhizal system. The essentially distinctive feature of S. Beuthii, however, is 
to be found in the condition of the radial pillars, these structures being, in good 
specimens, readily recognisable as separate from the general ccenosteal tissue in 
which they are immersed. As a result of this, polished horizontal or vertical 
slices of S. Beuthi (Plate XXIII, figs. 8 and 9) have a close general resem- 
blance to corresponding slices of such a species of Actinostroma as A. fenes- 
tratum, Nich. Vertical slices, in particular, very nearly resemble similar sections 
of an Actinostroma, the radial pillars in such sections constituting an extremely 


Fie. 21. 


Fre. 21.—A. Tangential section of a specimen of Stromatopora Beuthii, Barg., from the Middle 
Devonian of Biichel, showing the axes of the persistent radial pillars as dark spaces in the 
general network. B. Vertical section of the same specimen. C. Tangential section of another 
specimen of S. Beuthii, from the Middle Devonian of Hebborn, showing clearly defined cross- 
sections of the radial pillars immersed in the general reticulation. D. Tangential section of a 
specimen of 8. Hiipschii, Barg., from the Middle Devonian of Biichel, showing the complete 


disappearance of the radial pillars as separate structures. All the figures are enlarged about 
30 times. 


marked feature. On the other hand, thin sections (Fig. 21) show that the radial 
pillars, though apparently so distinct, are really buried in the interior of the 


STROMATOPORA BEUTHII. 185 


general reticulation, the latter having all the characters observable in the other 
species of Stromatopora. In thin tangential sections (Plate V, fig. 12; Plate 
XXIII, figs. 10 and 12; and woodcut, Fig. 21, a and c) the cut ends of the radial 
pillars appear as more or less distinct rounded areas in the general ccenosteal 
network, from which they are usually distinguished by their greater density and 
darker colour. In some instances, as in Plate XXIII, fig. 12, they appear as light 
spaces, with a dark central dot representing the axial canals of the pillars. In 
parts of thin tangential sections—corresponding probably with places where the 
plane of the section traverses an interlaminar space—it is also not unusual 
to find that the reticulated character of the skeleton is lost, and we simply see the 
isolated rounded or oval ends of the transversely divided radial pillars. In such 
cases, as shown in Fig. 21, a (in the lower part of the figure), the radial pillars are 
seen to consist of an external sheath of porous tissue surrounding a central more 
compact core. On the other hand, the horizontal or oblique connecting-processes 
which join the radial pillars with one another, and which constitute the ‘‘ concen- 
tric lamine,” are wholly composed of porous tissue, and have no central core. In 
thin vertical sections (Plate XXIII, fig. 11) the radial pillars are at once 
recognisable, but their central axes are usually but indistinctly seen. In some 
cases, however, as in Fig. 21, 8, the dark central axes of the pillars can be clearly 
made out. 

S. Beuthii, Barg., commonly occurs in the ‘‘ Caunopora-state”’ (Plate XXIII, 
fig. 13; and Plate XXIV, fig. 1), in which condition it is with difficulty separable 
from S. Hiipschii, the distinctive character of the persistent radial pillars being 
much obscured or wholly lost. 

T am not acquainted with any well-marked varietal forms of S. Beuthii. The 
species with which S. Beuthii is most nearly allied is 8S. Hiipschii, Barg., and the 
chief points of distinction between the two have been already pointed out in 
speaking of the latter form. In a general way, and in well-preserved examples, 
S. Beuthii is distinguished from S. Hiipschii by the more clear separation of the 
radial pillars from the general ccenosteal reticulation, and the less loose and open 
character of this latter ; while the astrorhize are incompletely developed or may 
be absent, and the zodidal tubes are more closely tabulate. Badly preserved 
specimens, or “ Caunoporised ’”’ examples of S. Beuthii are, however, hardly to be 
distinguished with certainty from those of S. Hiipschii. There is no species of 
Stromatopora, except the above, with which S. Beuthii could be easily confounded. 

Distribution.—f. Beuthit appears to be wholly confined to the Middle Devonian 
Rocks, occurring in deposits of this age both in Britain and on the Continent of 
Kurope. In Devonshire it is commonly found in the limestones of Pit-Park 
Quarry, Dartington, and of Bishopsteignton, most examples being ‘‘ Cauno- 
porised.” It also occurs with moderate frequency in the Devonian pebbles of the 


186 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


Triassic conglomerates of Teignmouth. In Germany the species is tolerably 
abundant in the Middle Devonian Limestones of Hebborn and Biichel in the Paffrath 
district. A single poorly preserved example, which I collected at Gerolstein, 
differs from the ordinary form of the species in having a laminar coenosteum. 


8. Stromatorora Biicneniunsis, Bargatzky sp. Pl. X, figs. 5—7, and Pl. XXITT, 
figs. 4—7. 


Caunopora BUCHELIENSIS, Bargatzky. Die Stromatoporen des rheinischen Devons, 
p. 62, 1881. 
STROMATOPORA BUCHELIENSIS, Nicholson. Monogr. Brit. Strom., General Intro- 
duction, p. 28, pl. x, figs. 5—7, 
1886 (figured but not described). 


The coenosteum in this species is very variable in form, being mostly either 
massive or lobate, but being sometimes composed of slender cylinders united in 
bundles, or being in rare cases laminar in shape. A basal epitheca is present in 
the laminar examples, as, probably, in the massive specimens also. 

Most specimens show a more or less distinct zonal mode of growth, the suc- 
cessive zones or strata of the coonosteum hardly assuming the character of proper 
**latilamine,” since they are directly continuous with one another, and thus mark 
but incomplete intermissions of growth. 

Whatever may be the form of the coenosteum, the concentric lamine are 
simply curved, and “ astrorhizal cylinders” are not developed, the surface being 
thus free from ‘‘mamelons.” The surface shows a minute reticulation, the 
rounded or oval pores of which represent the apertures of the zodidal tubes. 
Astrorhize are numerous, but are of small size, with few branches, their centres 
being usually placed at distances of 10 mm. or more apart. 

The skeleton-fibre is minutely porous, and has a diameter of } or} mm. The 
coenosteal tissue is of the reticulate type (Plate XXIII, fig. 7; and woodcut, 
Fig. 20, c), the radial pillars being united into a continuous network by horizontal 
or oblique bars of the same thickness as themselves. As seen in cross-sections, 
the coenosteal mesh is close, with narrow and often sinuous interspaces repre- 
senting the transversely divided zodidal tubes. Vertical sections (Plate XXIII, 
fig. 6; and woodcut, Fig. 20, p) show that the radial pillars are distinctly recog- 
nisable, and that the ccenosteum is traversed by numerous narrow zodidal tubes 
which are abundantly furnished with cross-partitions or “ tabule.”’ About seven 
zooidal tubes, with their intervening pillars, occupy a space of 2 mm. measured 
transversely. 

Obs.—The coenosteum of S. Biicheliensis, Barg., is mostly of a lobate or sub- 


STROMATOPORA BUCHELIENSIS. 187 


lobate form (Plate X, fig. 5), and of comparatively small size. Massive specimens, 
however, are not uncommon, and these may attain a diameter of several inches. 
The laminar form of ccenosteum is very rare, but is not absolutely unknown. 
Many specimens, again, consist of elongated, finger-like cylinders (Plate XXIII, 
fig. 4), which may be more or less isolated and separate, or which may be 
partially or wholly enwrapped and bound together by a common sheath of 
coenosteal tissue (Plate XXIII, fig. 5). Hach cylinder has the zodidal tubes 
vertical in the centre, but bent outwards marginally so as ultimately to open on 
the surface more or less nearly at right angles to the axis of the growth. Indi- 
vidual cylinders vary in diameter from 1 to 2 cm. Examples with the peculiar 
mode of growth just described are so characteristic that they may be distinguished 
by a special title as 8. Biicheliensis, var. digitata, Nich. 

The surface of S. Biicheliensis is without eminences or ** mamelons,” and the 
astrorhize are characteristically small and remote. ‘These structures are not 
placed in vertically superimposed systems, nor are astrorhizal cylinders, even in 
the digitated variety of the species, ever developed. As regards its internal 
structure, the present species has the porous skeleton-fibre and the completely 
reticulate coonosteal tissue of all the species of Stromatopora. The skeleton-fibre 
is comparatively slender, and the skeletal network is of a close character, the 
zooidal pores being mostly oval or elongated ; the zodidal tubes are very numerous 
and well developed, and are generally furnished with numerous transverse tabulz 
(woodcut, Fig. 20, p). 

S. Bhicheliensis occurs very commonly in the ‘ Caunopora-state.” The 
*‘ Caunopora-tubes ” are usually very small, perhaps from 3%; to 76 mm. in 
diameter ; but in some specimens the tubes may be as much as from $ to 2 mm. 
in diameter. Very generally the Caunopora-tubes show distinct funnel-shaped 
tabulz, and in some cases they also possess short septal spines. 

S. Biicheliensis is more nearly related to S. Hiipschii, Barg., than to any other 
species of the genus Stromatopora. It is, however, readily distinguished from the 
latter by its much finer skeleton-fibre and the correspondingly closer texture of 
the skeletal tissue; while the astrorhize are more remote and are more definitely 
circumscribed than is the case in 8S. Hiipschii. From XS. typica, Rosen, the present 
species is likewise distinguished by its more delicate skeleton-fibre and the much 
more limited development of the astrorhize. From V8. florigera, Nich., the species 
is readily separated by the remoteness of the astrorhize, as well as by the fact 
that these structures are not placed in regular vertical systems, while the skeletal 
network is also finer and closer. 

Distribution.— S. Biicheliensis, Barg., appears to be wholly confined to rocks 
of Middle Devonian age, and is a common species both in Britain and the 
Continent of Kurope. Both the ordinary lobate or massive forms of the species 


188 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


and the digitated variety occur commonly in the Middle Devonian Limestones of 
Dartington (Pit-Park Quarry), and are found abundantly in the Devonian pebbles 
of the Triassic conglomerates at Teignmouth. In Germany the species is not 
uncommon in the Middle Devonian Limestone of Biichel, in the Paffrath district, 
most examples from this locality being lobate in form. The species does not seem 
to occur at Hebborn, in the same district, and is of rare occurrence at Gerolstein, 
in the Hifel. 


9. Srromaropora DIScoIDEA, Lonsd. sp. Pl. III, fig. 3; Pl. VII, figs. 1 and 2; and 
Pl. XXIV, figs. 2—8. 


PortrEs DIScoIDEA, Lonsdale. Silurian System, p. 688, pl. xvi, fig. 1, 1839. 
Hetionites? piscorpeus, Salter. In Murchison’s Siluria, 3rd ed., pl. xxxix, 
fig. 1, 1859. 
STROMATOPORA ELEGANS, von Rosen. Ueber die Natur der Stromatoporen, p. 63, 
Taf. ii, fig. 8, and Taf. iii, figs. 1 and 2, 
1867. (Non Stromatopora elegans, Carter, 
Ann. and Mag, Nat. Hist., ser. 5, vol. iv, 
1879.) 
Ca@NostroMa biscorpEuM, Lindstrém. Kongl. Svenska Vetenskaps-Akad. Hand- 
lingar, Bd. ix, Taf. i, figs. 6 and 7, 
1870. 
STROMATOPORA DISCOIDEA, Nicholson. Monogr. Brit. Strom., General Introduction, 
pl. iii, fig. 8, and pl. vii, figs. 1 and 2, 1886 
(figured but not described). 


The coenosteum of this species is essentially of the laminar or expanded type, 
and usually has the form of a thinner or thicker disc, attached by a portion of the 
base to some foreign body, and having the rest of the under surface covered with 
a concentrically wrinkled or striated epithecal membrane. In some cases, while 
the same general form is retained, the coenosteum is so thickened as to assume a 
hemispherical shape, the base remaining flat or concave. In the thinner examples 
erowth of the skeleton is continuous, but in the thicker examples more or less 
regular “ latilamine ’’ are observable, indicating periodic pauses in the process of 
erowth. 

The concentric laminz are simply undulated, and the surface is therefore free 
from eminences or “‘mamelons.’’ Astrorhize are extraordinarily developed, 
being not only very numerous, but being of an excessively ramified or arborescent 
type (Plate III, fig. 3; and Plate XXIV, fig. 2). The astrorhize vary in size in 
different mdividuals, their centres being usually from 5 to 7 mm. apart; but in all 
cases they become more or less completely confluent with one another by the 


STROMATOPORA DISCOIDEA. 189 


inosculation of their terminal twigs with those of adjoining systems. As a result 
of this, the entire surface (Plate XXIV, figs. 3 and 4) becomes mapped out into 
innumerable small and irregular polygonal areas, bounded on all sides by the inter- 
lacing astrorhizal canals. These areas, as seen in well-preserved examples, are 
studded with minute rounded pores, which represent the openings of the zodidal 
tubes. The astrorhize are not arranged in vertically superimposed systems. 

As regards the internal structure of the ccoenosteum, the skeleton-fibre (Plate 
XXIV, fig. 5) is minutely porous, and has a diameter of from + to { mm. 
Tangential sections (Plate XXIV, fig. 6) show that the skeletal tissue is 
completely reticulate, while the meshwork—owing to the thickness of the skeleton- 
fibre and the small size of the zodidal tubes—is exceptionally dense. Such 
sections show the repeatedly branched astrorhizal canals—often intersected by 
transverse calcareous partitions (‘“astrorhizal tabule’’)—and also the minute 
rounded openings of the transversely divided zodidal tubes. Vertical sections 
(Plate XXIV, fig. 7) show numerous thick and irregular radial pillars, which are 
separated by the zodidal tubes, and are united at short intervals by stout and 
irregular horizontal or oblique connecting-processes. The zodidal tubes are 
intersected by numerous straight or curved transverse partitions or tabule. 
About five zodidal tubes, with their intervening pillars, occupy a space of 2 mm. 
measured transversely. 

Obs.—The form of the coenosteum in this species is remarkably constant, being 
always that of a thicker or thinner disc-like expansion, with a basal epitheca. 
Average examples vary from 6 or 8 cm. to 10 or 12 em. in diameter, with a 
thickness in the centre of from 1 to 5 cm., but hemispherical examples may be 
considerably thicker than this. 

The surface-features in S. discoidea are essentially conditioned by the form of 
the astrorhize, and are exceedingly characteristic. The astrorhize are exces- 
sively branched, and also anastomose with their neighbours round their entire 
periphery, there being thus no definite boundary between one astrorhiza and 
those next it. Hence the surface is wholly cut up by the astrorhizal grooves into 
irregularly shaped islands of ccenosteal tissue (Plate XXIV, figs. 3 and 4), which 
are pierced by the minute rounded openings of the zodidal tubes. Hven where 
the surface has been much weathered it is generally possible to recognise under a 
lens the peculiar lobulated structure thus produced. Though developed on the 
surface of each successive lamina of the colony, the astrorhize do not form 
regular vertical systems springing from axial wall-less canals, and there are 
therefore no superficial eminences or ‘“‘ mamelons.”’ 

The skeleton-fibre is minutely porous, but the pores are usually infiltrated 
with some dark material, and appear therefore in thin sections as so many 
opaque dots (Plate XXIV, fig. 5). This phenomenon is commonly seen in all 


190 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


the species of Stromatopora, and it is not an unusual thing to find that part of a 
thin section may have the pores simply filled with clear calcite, and therefore 
appearing as rounded vacuities, while another portion of the same has the pores 
infiltrated with opaque material, and appearing as dark spots. The skeleton-fibre 
of S. discoidea is, however, particularly prone to undergo change by mineral- 
isation, and thin sections of altered specimens often show puzzling appearances. 
In Plate VII, figs. 1 and 2, I have figured thin sections of one of these partially 
decomposed specimens, in which the skeleton-fibre has assumed a minutely dotted 
appearance, but in which the characteristic features of the coenosteum are still 
clearly recognisable. In more extreme cases, however, the minute structure of 
the skeleton becomes more or less extensively obliterated, and the diagnostic 
features of the species can with difficulty be recognised in thin sections, or may be 
wholly lost; and it is a curious fact that this highly mineralised condition of the 
coenosteum is often found in specimens in which the preservation of the surface- 
characters may be exceedingly good. It is also to be noted that the most highly 
mineralised examples of S. discoidea yield thin sections which might readily be 
confounded with corresponding sections of altered examples of Actinostroma 
astroites, Rosen sp. 

On the other hand, well-preserved specimens of S. discoidea yield thin sections 
which are quite characteristic. ‘Tangential sections (Plate XXIV, fig. 6) show 
appearances closely conforming with those of the surface, the skeletal network 
having the form of numerous irregular islands of dense ccenosteal tissue, per- 
forated by the minute openings of the transversely divided zodidal tubes, and 
separated by branches of the astrorhize. Vertical sections (Plate XXIV, fig. 7) 
are characterised by the thick radial pillars, and by the presence of well-defined 
and abundantly tabulate zodidal tubes. 

S. discoidea often encrusts or envelops corals or other foreign bodies in the 
course of its growth, but I have never seen a specimen in the “ Caunopora-state.” 
Very commonly the coenosteum contains embedded Spiorbes, which are often 
arranged in vertical rows, as they become successively immersed in the tissue of 
the growing Stromatoporoid. 

From S. typica, Rosen—its nearest ally—as from all other recorded forms of 
Stromatopora, the present species is readily distinguished by the remarkable 
development of the astrorhizal system and the resulting characters of the surface, 
as also by the density and closeness of the coenosteal network. 

Having examined the original specimen of S. elegans, Rosen, as well as thin 
sections of the same, I am satisfied that this name is synonymous with S. discoidea, 
Lonsd. Von Rosen’s specimen of S. elegans is, in fact, an example of S. discoidea, 
Lonsd., in which the skeleton has been largely altered by mineralisation, as shown 
in the tangential section which I have figured (Plate XXIV, fig. 8). 


PARALLELOPORA GOLDFUSSII. 191 


Distribution.—f. discoidea, Lonsd. sp., is entirely confined to the Silurian Rocks, 
and has hitherto been recognised only in the Wenlock Limestone of Britain, 
and in corresponding deposits in Northern Hurope. In the Wenlock Limestone 
of England the species is moderately common, occurring at Ironbridge, Much 
Wenlock, and Dudley; but really well-preserved examples are rare. In the 
Wenlock Limestone of Wisby (Gotland) S. discoidea appears to be a common 
species, the specimens from this region being usually highly mineralised, but 
commonly having the surface well preserved. In Hsthonia the species has 
hitherto been recognised only at the single locality of Kleine Ruhde, occurring in 
limestones belonging to the zone of Pentamerus ehstonus. 


Genus 2.—ParaLLeLovora, Bargatzky, 1881. 


(Introduction, p. 95.) 


1. ParaLLeLopora Gouprussi, Bargatzky. Pl. XI, figs. 7—9; and Pl. XXV, 
figs. 4—9. Woodcuts, figs. 22, 24, 
and 25. 


PARALLELOPORA GoLpFussil, Bargatzky. Die Stromatoporen des rheinischen 
Devons, p. 63, 1881. 


Coenosteum irregularly spheroidal or clavate, from 2 to 7 cm. in diameter, 

with a limited basal attachment, and apparently devoid of an _ epitheca. 
The mode of growth is not distinctively latilaminar, and the concentric lamin 
are simply curved, the surface being free from ‘‘ mamelons.” Where ob- 
served, the surface shows a moderately coarse reticulation, with oval, rounded, or 
vermiculate pores representing the mouths of the zodidal tubes; or it may be 
partially covered by an apparently imperforate calcareous membrane. 
» Astrorhize are present, but are variably developed, being sometimes small 
‘and inconspicuous, and at other times composed of large, few-branched canals. 
‘In the latter case the astrorhize are exceedingly irregular in their distribution, 
being abundant in some specimens and nearly absent in others. The horizontal 
canals of the astrorhize are often furnished with oblique or transverse calcareous 
partitions (“astrorhizal tabule’’); and are sometimes connected with compara- 
tively large, rounded or oval internal cavities, which are scattered through the 
coonosteum, and are also furnished with calcareous partitions or tabula. These 
cavities are not always present, and may possibly be connected with reproduction, 
thus representing the “ ampulle”’ of the Hydrocorallines. 

As regards its internal structure, the skeleton-fibre of Parallelopora Goldfussw 

26 


192 BRITISH S'TTROMATOPOROIDS, 


is from % to + mm. in diameter, and has a peculiar porous or tubulated structure, 
which willbe more fully described hereafter, but the most characteristic feature of 
which is the appearance, in thin sections, of isolated clear spaces of comparatively 
considerable size within the substance of the fibre (Plate XXV, figs. 4—7). The 
skeleton-fibre thus constituted is woven into an irregular network enclosing the 
vertical, straight or flexuous zodidal tubes. In tangential sections (Plate XXV, 
fig. 4) this irregular reticulation is seen to be traversed by the scattered and com- 
monly tabulate branches of the astrorhize, and pierced by the variably shaped aper- 
tures of the transversely divided zodidal tubes. Vertical sections (Plate XXV, 
figs. 5 and 9) show that the coenosteal tissue is composed of thick and irregular 
radial pillars united at intervals by thick horizontal or oblique connecting-pro- 
cesses, the network thus formed enclosing numerous zodidal tubes, which are 
furnished with well-developed transverse tabule. About six zodidal tubes, with 
their intervening pillars, occupy a space of 2 mm. measured transversely. 
Obs.—The coenosteum of P. Goldfussii, Barg., is typically spheroidal, pyriform, 
or clavate in shape (woodcut, Fig. 22), and is usually of small size. The 


Fia. 22. 


Fia. 22.—A small specimen of Parallelopora Goldfussii, Barg., from the Middle Devonian 
of Hebborn, viewed sideways; of the natural size. 


specimens from the Middle Devonian Rocks of Hebborn (Paffrath district) are 
mostly stunted, being usually about 2 to 3 cm. in diameter; whereas those 
from Steinbreche near Refrath, in the same area, are of considerably larger size. 
There is no trace of an epitheca in such specimens as I have seen; and the 
coenosteum often envelops corals and other foreign bodies. The specimens from 
Devonshire, being mostly derived from the Devonian pebbles in the Triassic 
breccias of that region, have no recognisable form as a rule ; but a badly preserved 
example from Dartington, apparently referable to this species, has a massive 
coenosteum of considerable size, with much-undulated laminee. 

The astrorhizal system is remarkably variable in its development in this 
species. Some examples show only very small and scattered astrorhize ; but the ° 
typical state of things is to find irregularly distributed astrorhize consisting of 
a few shghtly branched canals of large size, the internal cavities of these being 


PARALLELOPORA GOLDFUSSII. 193 


generally intersected by calcareous partitions or “ astrorhizal tabule ”’ (Plate XXV, 
fig. 4). In vertical sections the cut ends of these large astrorhizal canals (when 
these structures are present) appear as round or oval apertures of considerable 
size. Apart from these, however, some specimens show numerous irregular, oval 
or rounded cavities of considerable proportionate dimensions, which appear to be 
generally in connection with the astrorhizal canals, though this cannot always be 
demonstrated. Such cavities are commonly crossed by calcareous partitions, and 
are entirely wanting in some specimens. ‘They are more largely developed in the 
allied P. capitata, Goldf. sp., than in the present form, and may perhaps be 
compared with the “‘ampullz ” of the existing Hydrocorallines. Leaving out of 
sight the minute structure of the skeleton-fibre itself, the ccenosteal tissue of 
Parallelopora Goldfussii is built upon the same general plan as that of Stromatopora 
proper. The skeleton-fibre presents, however, very remarkable microscopic 
characters, and it may be as well here to treat of these in some detail, as regards 
not only the present species but also its immediate allies, since upon this alone 
depends any distinction which can be drawn between Parallelopora, Barg., and 
Stromatopora, Goldf. 

The type-species of Bargatzky’s genus Parallelopora is P. ostiolata, Barg., of 
the Middle Devonian of Germany, a form which has not hitherto been recognised 
in Britain, and which does not, therefore, fall to be described here. Only a single 
imperfect specimen of this remarkable type is at present known, and, by the kind- 
ness of Prof. Schliiter, I have been enabled to examine this both macroscopically 
and by means of thin sections. As previously pointed out (Introduction, p. 95), 
the coenosteal tissue of P. ostiolata, Barg., is completely reticulate, and_ is 
traversed by numerous tabulate zodidal tubes (Plate II, figs. 6 and 7), the general 
structure thus entirely agreeing with that of Stromatopora proper. The skeleton- 
fibre is, however, peculiar in being traversed by numerous dark, rod-like bodies of 
very minute size, which have a general direction parallel to the radial pillars, or, 
in other words, at right angles to the surface. As seen in tangential sections 
(Plate II, fig. 6; and woodcut, Fig. 23, a), these rods appear as rounded or oval 
black dots, scattered throughout the fibre, but most abundant round the margins 
of the zodidal tubes. In vertical sections (Plate II, fig. 7; and woodcut, 
Fig. 23, B) the rods in question are seen as dark-coloured vertical lines, connected 
at intervals by similarly dark-coloured transverse beams, thus giving to the fibre 
the appearance of a trellis-like tissue. Bargatzky (op. cit. supra, p. 51, figs. 10 
and 11) interpreted the appearance just described as indicating that the coenosteum 
of P. ostiolata was composed of numerous interstitial tabulate tubes of minute 
size, surrounding and isolating a series of larger tabulate tubes, the structure 
being thus comparable with that seen in some Monticuliporoids (as in Callopora), 
or in Heliolites. Bargatzky’s figures, however, are ideal, and no traces of the 


194. BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


supposed minute coenenchymal tubes of P. ostiolata can be detected in properly 
prepared thin sections. On the contrary, it is quite certain that the large tabulate 
zooidal tubes of P. ostiolata are simply enclosed in a reticulated skeleton, the fibre 


Fia. 23. 


Fra. 23.—A. Part of a tangential section of Parallelopora ostiolata, Barg., from the Middle 

Devonian Rocks of Biichel (Paffrath district), enlarged 80 times. B. Part of a vertical 

section of the same, similarly enlarged. 
of which is traversed by dark and seemingly solid rods. It is quite probable that 
these apparent rods are really the result of the infiltration with opaque matter of 
a system of minute tubuli running in the interior of the reticulated skeleton-fibre ; 
but it may be taken as altogether certain that such tubuli are part of the fibre 
itself, and are in no way comparable with the interstitial tubes (“‘ mesopores ”’) of 
the Monticuliporoids or the ‘ siphonopores”’ of the Heliolitide. 

In Parallelopora Goldfussii, Barg., the appearances presented by the skeleton- 
fibre, as seen in thin sections, differ considerably from those shown by corre- 
sponding sections of P. ostiolata, though the differences observed may be 
largely the result of differences in the mode of preservation, and in the 
extent to which mineralisation has been carried. In a tangential section of a 
well-preserved specimen of P. Goldfussii (Plate XXV, fig. 4; and woodcut, 
Fig. 24) the skeleton-fibre is seen to be thick, and to be completely reticulated, 
while it exhibits in its substance numerous small round or oval spaces, which are 
filled with clear calcite, and thus look like the apertures of transversely divided 
tubuli. As the result of this, tangential sections acquire a characteristic perforate 
or cribriform appearance (Plate XXV, figs. 4 and 8), which differs from the 
uniformly porous aspect presented by corresponding sections of any species of 
Stromatopora proper in so far that the apparent pores in the fibre are few in 
number and comparatively large in size. Vertical sections of a well-preserved 
specimen of P. Goldfussii do not, however, show the presence in the fibre of 
regular vertical tubules, such as would be inferred to exist from the phenomena 
exhibited by tangential sections. On the contrary, such sections (Plate XXV, 


PARALLELOPORA GOLDFUSSII. 195 


figs. 5 and 7; and woodcut, Fig. 25) show that the skeleton-fibre is penetrated by 
clear round spaces or pores similar to those seen in tangential sections, while 
irregular branching canaliculi appear to be also present. The information 


Fia. 24.—Part of a tangential section of a specimen of Fie. 25.—Part of a vertical section of the preceding 
Parallelopora Goldfussii, Barg., from the Middle specimen of Parallelopora Goldfussii, similarly 
Devonian of Steinbreche (Paffrath district), en- enlarged. 


larged 50 times. 


derivable from both sets of sections would thus lead to the belief that the skeleton- 
fibre of P. Goldfussii is traversed by minute and irregular canals, together with 
moderately numerous vesicular cavities of comparatively large size. If this view 
be correct, then the structure of the skeleton-fibre in Parallelopora Goldfussii differs 
from that seen in Stromatopora or Stromatoporella in degree rather than in kind. 
In certain states of preservation, however, the skeleton-fibre of P. Goldfusswi 
presents appearances differing considerably from those described above. The 
skeleton-fibre, namely, often appears in tangential sections as if it were composed 
of nearly transparent calcite, in which are developed dark granular tracts which 
inosculate with one another to form an irregular open network or a close reticu- 
lation (Plate XI, fig. 7, and Plate XXV, fig. 6). In vertical sections (Plate XXV, 
fig. 7) the fibre may show appearances very similar to those seen in tangential 
sections; or the dark tracts in the fibre may assume more or less of a ladder-like 
or trellis-like arrangement (Plate XI, fig. 8). In Parallelopora capitata, Goldf. 
sp., the appearances presented by the skeleton-fibre in thin sections are very 
similar to those shown by P. Goldfussii, Barg.; and in P. dartingtonensis, Cart. 
sp., there are indications that the fibre is similarly constituted, though none of my 


1 This figure (as also fig. 8 of the same plate) is doubtfully referred in the explanation of the 


plate to Parallelopora (Idiostroma ?) capitata, Goldf., but it really belongs to the species here under 
consideration, 


196 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


Specimens are in a state of preservation suitable for the exhibition of the 
characters in question. 

Upon the whole, it would appear that the genus Parallelopora is nearly allied 
to Stromatopora, but that it may be fairly separated from this by the structure of 
the skeleton-fibre. In Stromatopora, Goldf., the skeleton-fibre is minutely porous, 
being traversed throughout by innumerable small vacuities, which are closely 
contiguous. In Parallelopora, Barg., on the other hand, the thick fibre is 
penetrated by irregular canaliculi, and also contains a moderate number of com- 
paratively large vacuities or pores, which are scattered through the fibre at 
intervals. As a result of this, tangential sections show a markedly perforate or 
cribriform character of the fibre, which can commonly be recognised in polished 
specimens even with a hand-lens, while vertical sections show a similarly perforate 
aspect, or may exhibit a lattice-lke structure. 

Putting aside the peculiar structure of the skeleton-fibre, thin sections of 
Parallelopora Goldfussii, Barg., nearly resemble in general type those of various 
species of Stromatopora. The zodidal tubes are excavated in the reticulated 
coenosteal tissue, and appear in cross-sections (Pl. XXV, fig. 4) as rounded or 
oval or sinuous perforations, while they are seen in long sections (Plate XXV, 
fig. 5) to be provided with numerous tabule. The radial pillars are wavy, but 
are approximately parallel, and are connected at irregular intervals by thick 
cross-bars. 

In some instances (Plate XXV, figs. 8 and 9) P. Goldfussii, Barg., occurs in 
the ‘* Caunopora-state,” the ‘“‘ Caunopora-tubes”’ being furnished with funnel- 
shaped tabulee. 

From P. capitata, Goldf. sp., which it nearly resembles in general form, the 
present species is sufficiently distinguished by the much finer texture of the 
skeletal tissue and the smaller and more closely set zodidal tubes. From 
P. dartingtonensis, Cart. sp., on the other hand, the present species is separated 
by its thicker skeleton-fibre, and particularly by the fact that the radial pillars are 
comparatively stout and irregular, whereas in the former these structures are 
narrow, close-set, and straight. Moreover, the ccenosteum in P. Goldfusswi is 
comparatively small and is typically spheroidal in shape, while it is massive or 
laminar in P. dartingtonensis, and may attain a considerable size. 

Distribution.—Parallelopora Goldfussii, Barg., is not uncommon in the Middle 
Devonian Limestones of the Paffrath district, occurring at Hebborn, Hand, and 
Steinbreche (near Refrath), the last locality in particular yielding excellent 
examples. In the Devonian Rocks of Devonshire the species occurs rarely in the 
pebbles of the Triassic conglomerates, and I have a single doubtful example from 
Dartington. 


PARALLELOPORA CAPITATA. 197 


2. PARALLELOPORA capiTaTa, Goldfuss sp. Pl. XXV, figs. 10—138. ‘Woodcuts, 
Figs. 26 and 27. 


Tragos capitatuM, Goldfuss. Petrefacta Germanie, p. 13, Taf. v, fig. 6, 1826. 
Srromaropora capitata, D’Orbigny. Prodr. de Paléontologie, p. 51, 1850. 
= concentRIca, Bargatzky (pars). Die Stromatoporen des rhein- 
ischen Devons, p. 54, 1881. 
Iprostroma capitatum? Nicholson. Monogr. Brit. Strom., General Introduction, 
p. 63, fig. 8, and p. 104, 1886. 


The ccenosteum in this species is of the massive type, and is usually spheroidal 
or pyriform in shape (woodcut, Fig. 26), being attached by a small portion of its 


Fie. 26. 


Fie. 26.—Side view of a small specimen of Parallelopora capitata, Goldf. sp., from the Middle 
Devonian of Hebborn (Paffrath district), of the natural size. 


under surface, and not having a basal epitheca. The ccenosteum did not attain a 
ereat size, most examples being from 2 to 6 cm. in diameter. Growth is 
not distinctly latilaminar, and the concentric lamin are generally simply curved 
or undulated, the surface being thus approximately smooth or simply nodulated. 
When well preserved. the surface shows a coarse vermiculate reticulation, 
corresponding with the form of the skeletal network, along with large and 
irregularly distributed astrorhizal canals (woodcut, Fig. 26), but parts of the 
surface may be concealed beneath an apparently imperforate calcareous membrane. 

Astrorhize are developed in an irregular manner, their tubes (woodcut, 
Fig. 27, cc) being of very large size, and furnished internally with numerous 
transverse calcareous partitions (“ astrorhizal tabule”’), which sometimes assume 
a subvesicular character (Plate XXV, fig. 10). 

Sometimes connected with the astrorhizal tubes, or at other times inde- 
pendently scattered throughout the ccenosteal tissue, are large, lenticular, oval, 
or spherical vesicles, which are apparently destitute of proper walls, and are about 
a millimétre in average diameter. ‘These vesicles are occasionally crossed by one 


198 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


or more calcareous partitions, and may possibly be connected with reproduction, 
and may correspond with the ampulle of the recent Stylasterids. 


Bre 27 


Wau it 
t ! 
Fie. 27.—A. Vertical section of Parallelopora capitata, Goldf. sp., from the Devonian Rocks of Hebborn 
(Paffrath district), enlarged 12 times. B. Tangential section, similarly enlarged. aa. Supposed 
“ampulle.” ec. Large tabulate tubes belonging to the astrorhize. ¢ ¢. The ordinary zodidal tubes. 


The skeleton-fibre is stout, and possesses a tubulated or perforate structure 
(Plate XXV, fig. 13), similar to that previously described in P. Goldfussii, Barg., 
though, owing to the imperfect state of preservation of the majority of specimens, 
this can only be clearly made out in an occasional example. ‘The coenosteal 
tissue, as seen in tangential sections (Plate XXV, figs. 10 and 11; and woodcut, 
Fig. 27, 8), is irregularly reticulated, and is traversed by the irregularly distributed, 
tabulate astrorhizal canals, and by the apertures representing the transversely 
divided zodidal tubes. As seen in vertical sections (Plate XXV, fig. 12; and 
woodcut, Fig. 27, a) the skeleton is composed of stout, approximately parallel 
radial pillars, which are connected at short intervals by thinner or thicker cross- 
bars, tolerably regular and close-set “‘ concentric laminz ” being in this way some- 
times developed. The radial pillars are separated by well-developed zodidal 
tubes, which are intersected by numerous straight or curved “ tabule.” About 
four zodidal tubes, with their intervening radial pillars, occupy the space of 2 mm. 
measured transversely. Vertical sections also show the large rounded apertures 
of the transversely divided astrorhizal tubes as well as the supposed “ ampulle ” 
above spoken of, these structures communicating to such sections (Plate XXV, 
fig. 12; and woodcut, Fig. 27, a) a very characteristic aspect. 

Obs.—I do not feel at all certain as to the identification of this species with the 
Tragos capitatum of Goldfuss ; since no thin sections of the original of the latter 
are in existence, and the preparation of such might very possibly show that the 
form which Goldfuss had in view was really the subsequently described P. Gold- 
fussii of Bargatzky. Owing to the very close general resemblance between the form 


PARALLELOPORA DARTINGTONENSIS. 1199 


now under consideration and that described by Bargatzky as P. Goldfussii, I was 
formerly disposed to think (General Introduction, p. 104) that we had to deal with 
a single species only, for which the specific name given by Goldfuss should be 
retained ; but I am now satisfied that the two are really distinct. This being the 
case, it will be best to retain Bargatzky’s name for the species to which he 
originally gave it, and to apply provisionally to the present species the title given 
by Goldfuss. I was also formerly disposed to think (loc. cit.) that this species 
might be referred to the genus Jdiostroma, Winch.; but a further and more 
complete investigation has shown that the large and irregular tabulate tubes by 
which the ccenosteum is traversed are really of the nature of astrorhizal canals, 
and that the proper place of the species is in the genus Parallelopora. 

In the general form of the coenosteum, the characters of the surface, the 
general structure of the skeletal tissue, the irregular development of the astrorhize, 
and the common presence of scattered lenticular or globular vesicles (ampulle ?) 
of large size, the present species very closely resembles P. Goldfussii, Barg. It 
is, however, distinguished from the latter by the very much coarser nature of the 
coenosteal tissue ; so that even with the aid of a pocket lens only it is usually easy 
to separate examples belonging to these two types. All the specimens of 
P. capitata which I have investigated are more or less highly mineralised ; and in 
most cases the minute structure of the skeleton-fibre has been largely or wholly 
destroyed. It is, therefore, rarely possible to fully determine the characters of the 
skeleton-fibre ; but so far as these can be made out they agree essentially with 
those distinctive of P. Goldfussii. From P. dartingtonensis, Cart. sp., the present 
form is at once distinguished by its greatly more robust fibre and the irregular 
development of the astrorhize. 

Disiribution.—P. capitata, Goldf. sp., occurs commonly in the Middle Devonian 
Limestone of Hebborn (Paffrath district), in association with P. Goldfussii, Bare. ; 
but it appears to be wholly absent at Steinbreche (Refrath), where the latter 
species is very abundant. The species also occurs, though by no means plentifully, 
in the Devonian pebbles in the Triassic breccias of South Devon. 


3. PARALLELOPORA DARTINGTONENSIS, Carter sp. Pl. IV, fig. 1; Pl. XXIV, figs. 13 
—15; and Pl. XXV, figs. 1—3. 


STROMATOPORA ELEGANS, Carter. Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 5, vol. iv, p. 268, 
1879 (non Stromatopora elegans, Rosen). 

— DARTINGTONENSIS, Carter. Ibid., vol. vi, p. 346, pl. xviii, figs. 1—5, 
1880 (fig. 1 of the plate is doubt- 
fully referable to this species, and 
perhaps belongs to Stromatoporella 

eifeliensis, Nich.). 

27 


200 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


The ccenosteum in P. dartingtonensis, Cart. sp., 1s massive or laminar in form, 
and often attains a considerable size; the mode of attachment and condition of the 
under surface is not thoroughly known. The mode of growth is often more 
or less clearly latilaminar, though in many specimens this feature is not con- 
spicuous. The concentric laminz are generally simply curved or slightly 
undulated. The astrorhize (Plate XXIV, figs. 13 and 14) are extensively but 
variably developed, consisting usually of large stellate branching canals, the 
cavities of which are crossed by more or fewer internal partitions (‘‘ astrorhizal 
tabule”’). Commonly the astrorhize are arranged in vertically superimposed 
systems, each system being connected with an axial wall-less canal; but this dis- 
position of parts is not always recognisable. Owing to the curvature of the 
concentric laming, the astrorhizal canals commonly exhibit a more or less 
truncated or irregular disposition in straight tangential sections (Plate XXIV, 
fig. 13), while their cut ends appear at intervals in vertical sections as large 
rounded or oval apertures. The centres of the astrorhize are usually from 
1 to 2 em. apart. The condition of the surface is imperfectly known, but 
it is probable that there were more or less pronounced eminences or ‘‘ mamelons,” 
corresponding with the centres of the astrorhizal systems. 

As regards the minute structure of the skeleton, an examination of the surface 
of polished specimens with a pocket lens clearly shows the skeleton-fibre to 
possess the perforate or cribriform character which distinguishes the species of 
Parallelopora. Owing, however, to the bad state of preservation of most 
specimens, this feature is often more or less completely lost in thin sections ; 
though indications of it may be observed in most examples, and in a few cases the 
structure in question can be clearly observed (Plate XXV, fig. 2). 

When examined in thin tangential sections (Plate XXIV, fig. 15; and Plate 
XXV, fig. 2) the ccenosteal tissue is seen to be essentially of the reticulate type, 
though the reticulation is not so complete as in the species of Stromatopora proper. 
Such sections also commonly show the transversely partitioned astrorhizal canals. 
Vertical sections (Plate XXV, figs. 1 and 3) show the coenosteum to be made up 
of delicate, close-set, and very distinct radial pillars, which are united at short and 
regular intervals by comparatively thin horizontal cross-bars, these latter giving 
rise to the appearance of regular and closely arranged ‘“‘ concentric laminz.” 
About nine or ten pillars occupy a space of 2 mm. measured transversely, and 
about the same number of “concentric lamin” occupy this space measured 
vertically. The spaces between the radial pillars represent the zodidal tubes, and 
these, in well-preserved specimens, exhibit a moderate number of straight or 
curved tabulee. 

Obs.—As regards its larger characters, so far as these are known, Paral- 
lelopora dartingtonensis is chiefly distinguished from the allied P. Goldfussii, 


PARALLELOPORA DARTINGTONENSIS. 201 


Barg., by its massive or laminar mode of growth, and the extensive development 
and comparatively great size of the astrorhize, as well as by the common 
arrangement of these structures in vertical systems. It is, however, essentially by 
the minute structure of the skeleton that the present species is separated from its 
congeners, as well as from the species of Stromatopora and Stromatoporella. The 
principal characteristic features in the internal structure are the distinctness of 
the narrow radial pillars, and the regularity and slender form of the connecting 
processes by which these are united. ‘These characters give to vertical sections 
(Plate XXV, figs. 1 and 3) the aspect of corresponding sections of an Actino- 
stroma rather than of one of the Stromatoporide proper. On the other hand, the 
connecting processes of the pillars are not developed in whorls, as they are in the 
species of Actinostroma ; and tangential sections show nothing, therefore, of the 
*“‘hexactinellid”’ structure so characteristic of the genus Actinostroma. On the 
contrary, tangential sections (Plate XXIV, fig. 15, and Plate XXV, fig. 2) show 
that the skeleton is, in the main, a reticulated one, as it is in the Stromatoporide 
generally. At the same time, owing to the distinctness of the radial piilars, and 
also to the fact that their connecting processes are developed at regular levels, 
the reticulation of the skeleton, as seen in tangential sections, is not so complete 
as in the species of Stromatopora proper. Indeed, where the plane of such a 
section happens to coincide with an interlaminar space (7. e. a space between two 
contiguous sets of connecting processes) the reticulated character of the 
skeleton is lost, and we see only the detached rounded or oval ends of the trans- 
versely divided pillars. It was this phenomenon which induced me in the earlier 
portion of this work to take the view that the present species might possibly find 
a place in the genus Stromatoporella. Upon the whole, however, the characters 
of the skeleton-fibre, so far as these have been ascertained, would show that the 
species is properly referable to Parallelopora, with which genus it also agrees in 
the possession of large “ tabulate’ astrorhizal tubes. 

The form with which the present species seems to be most nearly allied is 
P. Goldfussii, Barg., and this alliance is particularly shown in a variety of the 
species which I may term P. dartingtonensis, var. filitewta. This variety is dis- 
tinguished from the normal form of the species by its more delicate skeleton- 
fibre (Plate XXV, fig. 2), and by the less regular development of the radial 
pillars (Plate XXV, fig. 3), tangential and vertical sections having thus a markedly 
distinctive character communicated to them. In this variety also the peculiar 
perforate character of the skeleton-fibre is more marked, or, at any rate, is more 
conspicuous, than it is in the ordinary form of the species. 

Specimens of P. dartingtonensis often occur in a “ reversed” condition, when 
they are known to the Devonshire lapidaries as “‘stag-horn”’ specimens. In this 
condition (Plate IV, fig. 1) the astrorhizal canals, as well as the other internal 


202 BRITISH STROMATOPOROIDS. 


cavities of the coenosteum, have been filled, as previously explained (p. 31), with a 
more or less opaque calcareous mud, while the real skeleton has been more or less 
extensively converted into transparent calcite. A “ reversed” state of preserva- 
tion is, however, by no means peculiar to the present species, and I have noticed 
it in Stromatopora florigera, Nich., S. mequalis, Nich., and occasionally in S. con- 
centrica, Goldf. 

I have never seen an example of 8S. dartingtonensis in the ‘‘ Caunopora-state,” 
though there is no reason to doubt that it occurs occasionally in this condition. 

Distribution.— Parallelopora dartingtonensis, Cart. sp., has hitherto been recog- 
nised only in the Middle Devonian Limestones of Devonshire. The ordinary form 
of the species is not uncommon at Pit-Park Quarry, Dartington (the original 
locality for the species). Both the normal form of the species and the variety 


filitexta occur not uncommonly in the Devonian pebbles of the Triassic con- 


glomerates of South Devon. 


Genus 3.—StTROMATOPORELLA, Nicholson, 1886. 
(General Introduction, p. 92.) 


1. STROMATOPORELLA GRANULATA, Nich. PI. I, figs. 4 and 5 and 14 and 15; Pl. IV, 
fig. 6; Pl. VI, figs. 5 and 62 eand 
PIX XWils figsdl: 


STROMATOPORA GRANULATA, Nicholson. Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 4, vol. xii, 
p. 94, pl. iv, figs. 8, 3a, 1873. 
_ — — Ibid., ser. 5, vol. xviii, p. 10, 1886. 


The ccoenosteum in this species forms laminar expansions of considerable size, 
which are not incrusting, but are attached basally by a peduncle, and have the 
rest of the lower surface covered by a concentrically wrinkled and striated 
epitheca. The thickness of the coenosteum varies from less than 2 mm. up to 2 
or3cm. ‘The surface (Plate XXVI, fig. 1, and Plate IV, fig. 6) shows a variable 
number of low rounded or conical eminences or “‘ mamelons,” the apices of which 
are usually perforated, each showing in general a single circular opening repre- 
senting the axial canal of one of the astrorhizal systems. From the apices of the 
mamelons radiate more or less conspicuous astrorhizal gutters, and the general 
surface is covered with close-set tubercles of various sizes, the smaller of these 
being imperforate, while the larger ones are pierced at their apices by distinct 
circular apertures (Plate I, fig. 14). In places the surface-tubercles coalesce into 


PLATH XX. 


Fig. 1.—Vertical section of a specimen of Labechia conferta, Lonsd. sp., from 
the Wenlock Limestone of Dudley, enlarged about 10 times. 

Fig. 2.—Tangential section of the same specimen, similarly enlarged. 

Fig. 3.—Small portion of the preceding section, enlarged about 30 times. 

Fig. 4.—Upper surface of a specimen of Labechia scabiosa, Nich., from the 
Wenlock Limestone of Dudley, of the natural size. 

Fig. 5.—Under surface of the same, of the natural size. 

Fig. 6.—Surface-tubercles of Labechia scabiosa, enlarged. 

Fig. 7.—Portion of a polished slab of Labechia stylophora, Nich., from the 
Middle Devonian of Shaldon, Devonshire, of the natural size. 

Fig. 8.—A single cylinder of the same transversely divided, enlarged 5 times. 

Fig. 9.—Vertical section of Labechia canadensis, Nich. and Mur. (?), from the 
Ordovician Rocks of Aldons, near Girvan, enlarged 10 times. Collected by Mrs. | 
Robert Gray. 

Fig. 10.—Polished slab of Stromatopora concentrica, Goldf., cut vertically to 
the surface, of the natural size. From the Middle Devonian, Lummaton, Devon- 
shire. 

Fig. 11.—Tangential section of a specimen of Stromatopora concentrica, Goldf., 
from the Middle Devonian of Lummaton, Devonshire, enlarged 10 times. 

Fig. 12.—Vertical section of a specimen of Stromatopora concentrica, Goldf., 
from the Middle Devonian of Teignmouth, enlarged 10 times. 


we 


" 


+) 


1 
ollicK, 11 


PLATE XXI. 


Fig. 1.—A massive weathered specimen of Stromatopora concentrica, Goldf., 
from the Middle Devonian of Gerolstein, of the natural size. The specimen shows 
excellently the growth of the coenosteum in latilaminz, and is closely similar in 
aspect to the original example of this species described and figured by Goldfuss. 

Fig. 2.—Portion of the skeleton-fibre of Stromatopora concentrica, Goldf., 
enlarged about 40 times, showing the sieve-like and porous structure of the 
fibre. The section is tangential, and taken from a specimen from the Middle 
Devonian of Sétenich, in which the minute structure is unusually well preserved. 

Fig. 3.—Portion of the surface of a large specimen of Stromatopora concentrica, 
Goldf., from the Middle Devonian of Gerolstein, enlarged about 3 times. 
The specimen is traversed by minute ‘“ Caunopora-tubes,” and the surface- 
characters are unusually well shown. 

Fig. 4.—Upper side of a small specimen of Stromatopora typica, Rosen, from 
the Wenlock Limestone of Ironbridge, of the natural size. 

Fig. 5.—Under side of the same, showing the epitheca, of the natural size. 

Fig. 6.—Profile view of the same, of the natural size. 

Fig. 7.—Part of the surface of the same, enlarged about 3 times. 

Fig. 8.—Sketch of a medium-sized specimen of Stromatopora typica, Rosen, 
from the Wenlock Limestone of Dudley, of the natural size. The specimen has 
been bisected, and shows the latilaminar mode of growth of the ccenosteum. 

Fie. 9.—Portion of the skeleton-fibre of another specimen of the same, from 
the Wenlock Limestone of Ironbridge, enlarged about 40 times. The section is 
tangential. 

Fig. 10.—Portion of a vertical section of the preceding, similarly enlarged. 

Fig. 11.—Part of the surface of a specimen of Stromatopora typica, Rosen, of 
the natural size, in which the coenosteum is traversed by numerous irregular 
** Caunopora-tubes,’’ which in this case seem to certainly belong to a species of 
Aulopora. The specimen is from the Drift of Northern Germany, and was 
presented to the author by Prof. Ferdinand Roemer. 


PLATE XXII. 


Fig. 1.—Tangential section of Stromatopora typica, Rosen, from the Weniock 
Limestone of Ironbridge, enlarged about 10 times. 

Fig. 2.—Vertical section of the same, similarly enlarged, showing the tabu- 
late zodidal tubes. 

Fig. 3.—Vertical section of Stromatopora Hiipschu, Barg., from the Middle 
Devonian of Teignmouth, enlarged 10 times. 

Fig. 4.—Tangential section of the same, similarly enlarged. 

Fig. 5.—Surface of a polished specimen of the same from the same locality, of 
the natural size. 

Fig. 6.—Surface of a specimen of Stromatopora HMipschii, Barg., from the 
Middle Devonian of Biichel (Paffrath district), enlarged 5 times, showing the 
mouths of ‘“‘ Caunopora-tubes.”’ 

Fig. 7.—A weathered example of Stromatopora Hiipschu, Barg., in the 
‘“‘ Caunopora-state,” of the natural size. Middle Devonian, Dartington, South 
Devon. 

Fig. 8.—A small polished example of Stromatopora florigera, Nich., of the 
natural size, from the Middle Devonian of Teignmouth. 

Fig. 9.—Tangential section of the same, enlarged 10 times. 

Fig. 10.—Vertical section of the same, similarly enlarged. 


H.A Nicholson_del 


A.T, Hollick,lith 


PLATE XXIII. 


Fig. 1.—Portion of a polished specimen of Stromatopora Curteri, Nich., of the 
natural size, showing the growth of the coenosteum in latilamine. From the 
Wenlock Limestone of Ironbridge. 

Fig. 2.—Vertical section of the same, enlarged about 10 times. 

Fig. 3.—Tangential section of the same, similarly enlarged. 

Fig. 4.—A fragment of Stromatopora Biicheliensis, Barg., var. digitata, Nich., 
of the natural size. Middle Devonian, Pit Park Quarry, Dartington. 

Fig. 5.—Part of a polished transverse section of another specimen of the same 
species from the same locality, natural size. 

Fig. 6.—Vertical section of a specimen of Stromatopora Biicheliensis, Barg., 
from the Middle Devonian of Teignmouth. Enlarged about 10 times. 

Fig. 7.—Transverse section of the preceding specimen, similarly enlarged. 

Fig. 8.—Portion of a polished specimen of Stromatopora Beuthii, Barg., cut 
tangentially, of the natural size. Middle Devonian, South Devonshire. 

Fig. 9.—Portion of a similar polished specimen of the same species, cut verti- 
cally, of the natural size. Middle Devonian, Teignmouth. 

Fig. 10.—Tangential section of Stromatopora Beuthiw, Barg., enlarged about 
10 times. Middle Devonian, Pit-Park Quarry, Dartington. 

Fig. 11.—Vertical section of the same specimen, similarly enlarged. 

Fig. 12.—Tangential section of a specimen of Stromatopora Beuthii, Barg., 
from the Middle Devonian of South Devonshire (Bishopsteignton ?), enlarged 
about 10 times. The section shows, more distinctly than fig. 10, the cut ends of 
the radial pillars immersed in the general reticulation. 

Fig. 13.—Tangential section of Stromatopora Beuthu, Barg. (?), in the 
*“‘Caunopora-state,”’ enlarged about 10 times. In this condition sections of 8. 
Beuthv are hardly, or not at all, distinguishable from similar sections of S. Hiipschii, 
Barg. Middle Devonian, Teignmouth. 


XXIII 


a ree 
Sas tere 
sae ae 


hrc 
Cb Bin te 
ML 


r 


= 


thes 
ee 2a” 
eae 


ane ae 
mi 


‘e 
es 
" 


han 
i 
ut 


H.A. Nicholson del 
A.T. Hollick, lith 


PLATE XXIV. 


Fig. 1.—Vertical section of Stromatopora Beuthvi, Barg. (?), in the ‘* Cauno- 
pora-state,” enlarged about 10 times. Middle Devonian, Teignmouth. 

Fig. 2.—Part of the surface of a specimen of Stromatopora discoidea, Lonsd., 
of the natural size, showing the form and arrangement of the astrorhize. Wen- 
lock Limestone, Dudley. 

Fig. 3.—Small portion of the surface of a specimen of Stromatopora discoidea, 
Lonsd., enlarged 5 times. Wenlock Limestone, Gotland. 

Fig. 4.—Part of the surface of the preceding specimen, still further enlarged. 

Fig. 5.—Skeleton-fibre of Stromatopora discoidea, enlarged about 40 times. 

Fig. 6.—Tangential section of a very well preserved specimen of Stromatopora 
discoidea, Lonsd., enlarged about 10 times. Wenlock Limestone, Ironbridge. 

Fig. 7.—Vertical section of the preceding specimen, similarly enlarged. 

Fig. 8.—Tangential section of the Stromatopora elegans of von Rosen, enlarged 
ten times. This form is in reality based on an example of S. discoidea, Lonsd., 
in a considerably altered state, and the specific name “elegans” must therefore be 
abandoned. The specimen is from the Silurian Rocks of Kleine Ruhde, in 
Esthonia. 

Fig. 9.—Part of a tangential section of Stromatopora concentrica, Goldf., var. 
astrigera, Nich., enlarged 10 times. The specimen is in a much altered and 
partially ‘‘ reversed’’ condition, and the part figured shows the centre of an 
astrorhiza. Middle Devonian, Teignmouth. 

Fig. 10.—Surface of a polished specimen of the preceding, of the natural size, 
showing the form and arrangement of the astrorhize, from the same locality. 
The astrorhize have been drawn for distinctness’ sake as if darker in colour than 
the general skeleton, but they are really lighter. 

Fig. 11.—Portion of the surface of a polished specimen of Stromatopora 
inequalis, Nich., enlarged about twice. Middle Devonian, Teignmouth. 

Fig. 12.—Tangential section of the same, enlarged about 5 times, from the 
same locality. The specimen is in the “ reversed”’ condition. 

Fig. 13.—Portion of a polished tangential section of Parallelopora darting- 
tonensis, Carter sp., of the natural size, showing the astrorhize. Middle Devonian, 
Teignmouth. 

Fig. 14.—Portion of a polished tangential section of a “‘ reversed’’ specimen 
of the same, enlarged twice. Middle Devonian, Teignmouth. The minute struc- 
ture of this specimen, as displayed in thin tangential section, is shown in Plate 
PY, fie. 1: 

Fig. 15.—Tangential section of a specimen of P. dartingtonensis, Cart. sp., 
from the Middle Devonian of Pit-Park Quarry, Dartington, enlarged 10 times. 


ee] 


€ 


ef 


Bre 


Bey ve 


Le 


eS 
oe 


| ep 


OF, 
f< 

to 
Gi 


BO ie 


ia 


& 


+9 
Bad) 
nee Dh 


\ 


del 


2 


.A.Nichoison 


AT. Hollick, lith 


PLATE XXV. 


Fig. 1.—Vertical section of the preceding specimen of Parallelopora darting- 
tonensis, Cart. sp., enlarged 10 times. 

Fig. 2.—Tangential section of P. dartingtonensis, var. filitexta, Nich., from 
the Middle Devonian of Teignmouth, enlarged 10 times. 

Fig. 3.—Vertical section of the preceding specimen, similarly enlarged. 

Fig. 4.—Tangential section of a typical example of Parallelopora Goldfussi, 
Barg., enlarged 10 times, showing the perforate structure of the skeleton-fibre, 
the apertures of the zodidal tubes, and the transversely partitioned astrorhizal 
canals. Middle Devonian, Steinbreche, Refrath. 

Fig. 5.—Vertical section of the same, similarly enlarged, showing the characters 
of the skeleton-fibre, the radial pillars, and the tabulate zodidal tubes. 

Fig. 6.—Tangential section of the skeleton-fibre of a specimen of P. Goldfussu, 
Barg., from the Middle Devonian of Devonshire, enlarged 40 times. 

Fig. 7.—Vertical section of the same, similarly enlarged. (Figs. 7 and 8 of 
Plate XI, erroneously referred to Idiostroma ? capitatum, Goldf., really belong to 
this species.) 

Fig. 8.—Tangential section of the preceding specimen of P. Goldfussi, Barg., 
from the Middle Devonian of Devonshire, enlarged 10 times. The specimen is in 
the ‘‘ Caunopora-state.” 

Fig. 9.—Vertical section of the same, similarly enlarged. The section shows 
the infundibuliform tabulee of the ‘‘ Caunopora-tubes.”’ 

Fig. 10.—Tangential section of a specimen of Parallelopora capitata, Goldf. 
sp., from the Middle Devonian of Teignmouth, showing the tabulate astrorhizal 
tubes, enlarged 10 times. 

Fig. 11.—Tangential section of another specimen of the same from the same 
locality and formation, similarly enlarged. 

Fig. 12.—Vertical section of the preceding specimen of Parallelopora capitata, 
Goldf. sp., showing tabulate zodidal tubes and supposed ‘‘ ampulle,” enlarged 10 
times. 

Fig. 13.—Tangential section of a specimen of Parallelopora capitata, Goldf. 
sp., from the Middle Devonian of Hebborn, showing the structure of the skeleton- 
fibre, enlarged 10 times. 


Camb. S 


& 


Laith.& Imp 


lith 


ollick, 


y 
me 


Nicholson del 


as 


> 
7 


PALAMONTOGRAPHICAL SOCLETY. 


INSTITUTED MDCCCXLVIL. 


VOLUME FOR 1890. 


MDCCCXCI. 


A MONOGRAPH 


ON THE 


BRITISH FPOSssiL 


ECHINODERMATA 


FROM 


THE CRETACEOUS FORMATIONS. 


VOLUME SECOND. 


PE) AS iO i Dn eAy 


BY 


W. PERCY SLADEN, F-L:s, F-G:S:, &e:, 


SECRETARY OF THE LINNEAN SOCIETY. 


PART FIRST. 


Paces 1—28; Puates I—VIII. 


LONDON: 
PRINTED FOR THE PALHONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. 
1891, 


PRINTED BY 
ADLARD AND SON, BARTHOLOMEW CLOSE. 


A MONOGRAPH 


ON THE 


FOSSIL ECHINODERMATA 


OF THE 


CRETACEOUS FORMATIONS. 


THE ASTEROIDEA. 


INE RODUCTORY. REMARKS: 


Ir was the intention of the late Dr. Thomas Wright to have continued his 
magnificent series of Monographs on the British Fossil Echinodermata of the 
Oolitic and Cretaceous Formations, which have already appeared in the volumes of 
the Palezeontographical Society, by the publication of a Monograph on the Creta- 
ceous Asteroidea. With this object in view anumber of plates had been prepared 
under Dr. Wright’s directions, and some preparatory notes for the letterpress had 
been written, when the work was cut short by the lamented death of the author. 
Subsequently the Council of the Palzontographical Society did me the honour of 
inviting me to undertake the memoir. The plates and notes above mentioned 
were placed at my disposal, but the latter proved to be for the main part merely 
summaries or transcripts of descriptions already published, and were unfortunately 
unsuitable to form part of the letterpress. For the whole of the latter I am 

1 


2 FOSSIL ASTEROIDEA. 

therefore responsible. The plates which were drawn on stone have all been 
utilised, although the specimens illustrated were not in every case those which I 
should have selected, nor the order in which the figures are associated on some of 
the plates that which I should have followed. This, however, is a comparatively 
small matter, and the remark is not intended in any way as disparaging the 
excellence of the illustrations. Indeed, I would here bear unqualified testimony 
to the careful and accurate way in which the fossils have been delineated by 
Mr. A. H. Searle. His plates are monuments of patient study of morphological 
detail, and of exquisite technical execution as examples of lithographic drawing. 

In his Monograph on the Oolitic Asteroidea, Dr. Wright gave as an intro- 
duction a general account of the structure of the main divisions of the Asteroidea 
then known, recent as well as fossil, with special reference to the calcareous 
framework ; and he also gave a summary of the different systems of classification 
which had been formulated by previous writers on the subject. It would there- 
fore, in my opinion, be out of place, and in a certain measure superfluous, to preface 
the present memoir with a similar introduction; but, as the knowledge of recent 
Starfishes has been considerably extended since the date of Dr. Wright’s contribu- 
tion, [ propose to give in an appendix to this monograph my views on the classi- 
fication of the Asteroidea, with special reference to the fossil forms. 

At the commencement of his splendid Monograph on the Cretaceous 
Hchinoidea—to which the present memoir is a sequel—Dr. Wright gave a valuable 
stratigraphical summary of the Cretaceous Formations in Britain. It is conse- 
quently altogether needless to burden the pages of the Society’s publications with 
a repetition of these details. I shall, however, if necessary on the completion of 
my work, give a synopsis of the distribution in time of the various species dealt 
with, together with such remarks on their occurrence and associations as occasion 
may require. 


FOSSIL ASTEROIDEA. 


DESCRIPTION OF THE CRETACEOUS SPECIES. 


Sub-class—EKUASTEROIDEA, Sladen, 1886. 
Order—PHANEROZONTA, Sladen, 1886. 
Family—PENTAGONASTERIDA, Perrier, 1884. 


Phanerozonate Asterids, with thick and massive marginal plates, which may 
be either naked, or bear granules or spiniform papille. Disk largely developed. 
Apical plates often increscent. Abactinal surface tessellate, with rounded, poly- 
gonal or stellate plates, which may be tabulate or paxilliform. Actinal imter- 
radial areas largely developed, covered with pavement-like plates, which may be 
naked or covered with membrane, or may bear granules or spinelets. 


The family Pentagonasteride, as defined by Prof. Edmond Perrier’ in 1884, 
was separated from a larger and more comprehensive group of genera which had 
been previously recognised by him’ as constituting the family Goniasteride. The 
name Goniasteridz was not retained for any of the groups or families into which 
that incongruous series of genera was divided. Previous to 1875, even the generic 
name of Goniaster had been very loosely and incorrectly applied. The vaguest 
notions as to the limits or characters of the genus seem to have been held. The 
mere form of the body, and the applicability of the significant name, irrespective 
of structural details, appear to have alone determined the reference of a large 
number of the species which have at different times borne the generic name of 
Goniaster. 


1 «Nouv. Archives Mus. Hist. Nat.,’ 2e série, 1884, t. vi, p. 165. 
2 «Révis. Stell. Mus.,’ p. 25 (‘ Archives de Zool. expér.,’ 1875, t. iv, p. 289). 


4 FOSSIL ASTEROIDEA. 


M. Perrier showed that none of the recent species ranked as Goniaster pre- 
vious to 1875 had any right to be so called. He consequently employed the name 
in a new and restricted sense, taking the Asterias obtwsangula of Lamarck as the 
type of the genus. No other species is at present known which can be regarded 
as congeneric with that form. 

A large number of fossil Starfishes have been named as species of CGoniaster, 
but none of them present characters which justify their reference to that genus 
in its new sense, and none of them invalidate the course taken by Prof. Perrier. 
It will therefore be unnecessary in the following pages to discuss in each case 
separately the reasons for removing the large number of species which have 
from time to time been ranked under the name of Gomaster. 


Subfamily—PENnvaGonasterIna, Sladen. 


PENTAGONASTERIN®, Sladen. Zool. Chall. Exped., part li, Report on the Aste- 
roidea, 1889, pp. xxxi, 262. 


Pentagonasteride with the abactinal area paved with rounded, polygonal, or 
paxilliform plates. Granules or spinelets when present co-ordinated. 


Genus—CALLIDERMA, Gray, 1847. 


CaLLIDERMA, Gray. Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond., part xv, 1847, p. 76; Ann. and Mag. 
Nat. Hist., 1847, vol. xx, p. 198; Synop. Spec. Starf. 
Brit. Mus., 1866, p. 7. 


Marginal contour stellato-pentagonal. General form depressed. Disk large 
and flat. Rays moderately elongated and tapering. Marginal plates forming a 
broad border to the disk, and may be united along the median abactinal line of 
the ray throughout [or, in some fossil species, may be separated by one or more 
series of medio-radial plates, at least at the base of the ray]. The marginal 
plates of both series are granulated. [In recent species the supero-marginal 
plates bear some small papilliform spinelets on the margin where the abactinal 
and lateral surfaces of the plate unite; and the infero-marginal plates have a 
number of similar, but larger and more fully developed, spinelets irregularly dis- 
tributed amongst the granulation of the actinal surface.] Abactinal area of the 
disk covered with small and regularly arranged plates, hexagonal in the radial 
areas, bearing co-ordinated granules, and some with a larger, globular, central, 


CALLIDERMA. 5 


tubercle-like granule. Actinal interradial areas large, confined to the disk. 
Actinal intermediate plates large, covered with granules [and in the recent species 
bearing one or occasionally two compressed acute papilliform spinelets]|.. Arma- 
ture of the adambulacral plates arranged in longitudinal series. 


This genus was established by Dr. J. E. Gray for the reception of a recent 
Starfish, the type of which is preserved in the British Museum. It was described 
under the name of Calliderma Kmima. In his remarks which follow the diagnosis, 
Dr. Gray observes' that “there is a fossil species, very like the one here 
described, found in the chalk, and figured in Mr. Dixon’s work on the fossils of 
Worthing, which I propose to call Calliderma Dixvonii.” Ihave not been able to 
trace which of the fossil species is here referred to, but that is a circumstance of 
no great importance, as the forms figured in Mr. Dixon’s work on ‘ The Geology 
of Sussex’ were described and named by the late Prof. Edward Forbes. Itis inter- — 
esting, however, to note that the resemblance of some of the Cretaceous forms to 
the genus Calliderma had actually been observed by the author of that genus. 

Thanks to the careful study and critical insight of Mr. J. Walter Gregory, of 
the British Museum, a number of the examples which now form part of the 
National Collection have been correctly, as I think, referred to the genus Calli- 
derma, and already bear that name upon the manuscript labels attached by him to 
the specimens. 

There are, however, some differences between the fossil forms and the recent 
type. The most notable perhaps being the character presented by the spinulation 
of the marginal, the abactinal, and the actinal intermediate plates in the recent 
species, as compared with the fossil examples, whose state of preservation does not 
permit of our positively asserting whether the same character was present in their 
case or not. I am inclined to think that this uncertainty does not necessarily 
invalidate the reference of the fossil forms to the genus, and I consider it highly 
probable that species might exist which did not bear incipient spinelets on the 
plates in which they are found in the solitary existing species with which we are 
acquainted. The peculiar pits found upon the plates in some of the fossil examples 
may indicate the former presence of these spinelets, although, for my own part, I 
am more disposed to believe that in the majority of cases the depressions in 
question are structures associated with a pedicellarian apparatus. (See, for ex- 
amples Ell, figs. la, 16; le, bd; Pl. Il, fig. 3¢;, Pl. V, figs. 2a, 26, 2d.) 
In other cases it is certain that little spinelets did exist, as in the tip of the ray 
shown in PI. VIII, fig. 2 a; also, but perhaps more doubtfully, in Pl. VII, figs. 
4a, 4c. 

1 «Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond.,’ part xv, 1847, p. 76; ‘Synop. Spec. Starf. Brit. Mus.,’ London, 
1866, p. 7. 


6 FOSSIL ASTEROIDEA. 


Another point of difference is to be found in some of the fossil forms which are 
referred in the following pages to the genus Calliderma; and this consists in the 
separation of the supero-marginal plates, at least at the base of the ray, by one or 
more series of medio-radial plates. It is a character whose importance is not to be 
under-estimated, but too little as yet is known of the morphological plasticity of 
the genus to justify in my opinion the separation of the forms on this ground 
alone. I prefer, therefore, to regard this extension of the abactinal plating as a 
transitional character, and I believe that this opinion is warranted by the range of 
plasticity observed in other genera of recent Asteroidea. 


1. Caniiperma Smitatm, Forbes, sp. Pl. I, figs. 1 a—1f; Pl. VIII, figs, 2 a—2c. 


GontasTEeR (AsTrogonium) Smirutt, Forbes, 1848. Memoirs of the Geological 
Survey of Great Britain, vol. ii, 
p. 474. 

— — —_ — 1850. In Dixon’s Geology and 
Fossils of the Tertiary and Cre- 
taceous Formations of Sussex, 
London, 4to., p. 334, pl. xxii, 
figs. 1 and 2. 

— — Smirurz, Morris, 1854. Catalogue of British Fossils, 
2nd ed., p. 80. 

ASTROGONIUM SMITHII, Dujardin and Hupé, 1862. Hist. Nat. Zooph. 
Wehin. (Suites 4 Buffon), p. 399. 

GoNIASTER SMITHI, Quenstedt, 1876. Petrefactenkunde Deutsch- 
lands, I. Abthl., Bd. iv, p. 64. 

_ (AsrRocgonium) SmiruHia#, Forbes, 1878. In Dixon’s Geology of Sussex 
(new edition, Jones), p. 367, 
pl. xxv, figs. 1, 2, 2a. 


Body of large size. General form depressed. Abactinal area probably capable 
of shght inflation, and more or less flexible: a slight carination being present in 
the radial abactinal regions. Actinal surface flat. Marginal contour stellato- 
pentagonal, the major radius measuring rather more than twice the minor radius. 
Rays broad at the base and tapering gradually to the extremity. Interbrachial 
arcs well rounded and forming a regular curve. Margin thick, with a well-defined 
channel traversing the line of junction of the supero-marginal and infero-marginal 
series of plates, formed by the tumid character of the marginal surface of both 
series of plates. 


The infero-marginal plates are about twenty or twenty-one in number, counting 


CALLIDERMA SMITHIA. 7 


from the median interradial line to the extremity. ‘They form a broad conspicuous 
border to the actinal area, the breadth of which diminishes gradually from the 
median interradial line to the extremity. The largest infero-marginal plates near 
the median interradial lme measure 9 mm. in breadth, and 4 mm. in length; the 
length increases a little between this point and the base of the ray, where it is 
again 4mm. ‘The breadth decreases step by step from the median interradial line, 
and at the base of the ray is less than 4 mm., and further out the breadth of the 
plates is less than the length. The height of the infero-marginal plates as seen in 
the margin is greater than the length of the plate, the proportions near the 
median interradial line being as 3: 2 approximately. The proportion of the 
height decreases at the extremity of the ray. ‘The infero-marginal plates are 
slightly convex on their actinal surface and distinctly tumid on their marginal 
surface. The whole superficies is covered with small, hexagonal, closely-placed 
punctations, upon which granules were previously borne, probably uniform in size 
and compactly placed. On a number of the plates are one or more subcircular or 
irregular shallow concavities, quite irregular in size, position, and occurrence, 
which I believe to have been caused by the presence of a pedicellarian apparatus, 
perhaps the cavities of ordinary foraminate pedicellariz enlarged by weathering. 
These are seen in Pl. I, figs. 1 a, 1 6, 1 c, 1d. Iscarcely think that they are the 
marks left by tubercles or enlarged granules. In the example, however, figured 
on Pl. VIII, fig. 2 a, small spinelets were undoubtedly present. 

The adambulacral plates are broader than long, their dimensions at a short 
distance from the mouth being 3°25 mm. broad and 1°75 mm. long. They bear 
upon their surface four or five ridges, parallel or sub-parallel to the ambu- 
lacral furrow, each with five or six articulatory elevations upon which spines had 
previously been borne. A number of these spines are still preserved, irregularly 
strewed over the surface of the plates. They are short, tolerably robust, slightly 
flattened, slightly tapering and abruptly rounded at the tip. The longest 
measures about 1°5 mm. in length, or a little more; their surface is finely striate, 
in fact so fine that the character is perhaps mainly due to the effect of weathering 
upon the structural texture of the spine. 

The actinal interradial areas are large and are covered with a great number of 
small, regular, quadrangular or rhomboid intermediate plates, which are arranged 
in series parallel to the ambulacral furrow, and form a compact tessellated pave- 
ment. The average size of the plates is about 2 mm. in diameter, but the plates 
of the series adjacent to the adambulacral plates are somewhat broader, and the 
plates near to the infero-marginal plates become smaller and irregular. The plates 
extend at the base of the ray to about the eighth infero-marginal plate, counting 
from the median interradial line. The surface of the plates is covered with large, 
rather widely spaced, hexagonal punctations—the marking left by the granules 


8 FOSSIL ASTEROIDEA. 


previously borne upon the plates, which appear to have been rather large and 
uniform. 

Very few, if any, pedicallariz appear to have been borne on the actinal inter- 
mediate plates. 

The character of the mouth-plates and their armature cannot be made out in 
any of the examples I have examined. 

The supero-marginal plates are only exposed in the marginal view of the 
example under description. Their height is seen to be less than that of the 
infero-marginal plates, and they are also rather smaller both in length and breadth ; 
about twenty-two appear to be present between the median interradial line and the 
extremity of the ray. In their general character and ornamentation they resemble 
closely those of the infero-marginal series. 

From another example, also contained in the British-Museum Collection, and 
bearing the registration mark “ H. 2037,” in which the abactinal surface is shown, 
the following details are supplemented. 

The abactinal area is covered with small, regular, hexagonal plates or paxillar 
tabula, which are slightly rounded superficially, and a little bevelled on the 
margin of the tabulum. The surface of the tabulum is covered with punctations 
or marks left by the granules originally borne on the plate, and here and there 
small pedicellarian foramina may be seen, usually near the margin of the plate. 
The plates (or paxille) of the median radial series are broader than any of the 
others, the largest measuring about 2 mm. in breadth, and a little more than 1 
mm. in length. The other tabula are true hexagons, measuring about 1 mm. in 
diameter or a trifle more, and they are arranged in longitudinal series parallel to 
the median radial series. Hight or nine series are present on each side of the 
median radial series on the disk. Opposite the eighth supero-marginal plate, 
counting from the median interradial line, only the median radial series and one 
lateral series of tabula on each side of it are present. The median radial series 
then extends alone and is present at the fourteenth plate, where the ray is broken 
in the example under description—and looks like continuing further—pro- 
bably reaching to the extremity of the ray. 


Dimensions.—In the type specimen (figured on Pl. I) the major radius is 
98 mm., the minor radius 48 mm., the thickness of the margin from 9 to 10 mm. 
The breadth of a ray between the fifth and sixth infero-marginal plates measures 
about 28 mm. 


Locality and Stratigraphical Position—The specimen figured on PI. I is from 
the Lower or Grey Chalk at Burham, in Kent. The species has also been ob- 
tained from the Upper Chalk at Brighton (Coll. Brit. Mus.) ; and it is sometimes 


CALLIDERMA MOSAICUM. 9 


found in ferric sulphide at Amberley Pit, Sussex. The fragment figured on 
Pl. VIII, figs. 2 a, 2b, 2c, is from the Lower Chalk of Dover. 


History.—The type specimen, from which this species was originally described 
by the late Edward Forbes in 1848, formed part of the collection of Mrs. Smith, of 
Tunbridge Wells. It is now preserved in the British Museum. It was first 
figured in Dixon’s ‘Geology and Fossils of the Tertiary and Cretaceous Forma- 
tions of Sussex,’ London, 1850. Pl. I of the present memoir is a faithful draw- 
ing of the same beautiful specimen. 


2. CALLIDERMA MosalcuM, Forbes, sp. Pl. V, figs. 2a—2e; Pl. VI, figs. 1 and 2 
a, 0, ¢; Pl. VIL, fies. 4 a, 0, ¢: 


GontasteR (AsTROGONIUM) Mosaicus, Forbes, 1848. Memoirs of the Geological 
Survey of Great Britain, vol. ii, 

p. 475. 
= _ mMosaicus, Forbes, 1850. In Dixon’s Geology and 
Fossils of the Tertiary and Cre- 
taceous Formations of Sussex, 
London, 4to., p, 334, pl. xxiv, 


fig. 26. 
= — mosaicus, Morris, 1854. Catalogue of British Fossils, 
2nd ed., p. 80. 
ASTROGONIUM MOSAICUM, Dujardin and Hupé, 1862. Hist. Nat. 
Zooph. Kchin. (Suites 4 Buffon), 
p. 399. 


GontasTEeR (Astrogontum) Mosaicus, Forbes, 1878. In Dixon’s Geology of Sussex, 
(new edition, Jones), p. 367, 
pl. xxvii, fig. 26. 

GoONTASTER MOSAICUS, Etheridge, 1885. In Phillips’s Manual of 
Geology (new edition), part ii, 
by R. Etheridge, p. 560. 


Body of large size. Disk large. Rays narrow at the base and well produced. 
General form depressed and thin. Abactinal area probably capable of slight 
inflation, and more or less flexible; some carination present in the radial abactinal 
regions. Actinal surface flat. Marginal contour stellato-pentagonal, the major 
radius measuring more than twice anda half the minor radius. Rays narrow, 
the supero-marginal plates being united in the median radial line. Interbrachial 
ares wide and with their curvature more or less flattened, which gives a distinctly 
pentagonal character to the disk. Margin rather thin, and with the lateral wall 
perpendicular. 


10 FOSSIL ASTEROIDEA. 


The supero-marginal plates are about twenty-eight in number, counting from 
the median interradial line to the extremity. (This number is taken from the 
fragment figured on Pl. VII, fig. 4 a; in the larger example drawn on PI. V, 
fig. 2 a, twenty-two may be counted up to the place where the ray is broken.) 
They form a well-defined, conspicuous border, but the breadth of this is distinctly 
less in proportion to the size of the disk when compared with the breadth of the 
marginal plates in Calliderma Smithiz. The largest supero-marginal plates in the 
specimen figured on PI. V, fig. 2 a,near the median interradial line, measure 5°25 mm. 
in breadth and 3°25 mm. in length. The breadth diminishes very slightly as 
the plates approach the base of the ray, but from that part outward the length of 
the plates becomes much reduced—the breadth remaining the greater dimension 
throughout the ray. 

The supero-marginal plates are comparatively flat on the abactinal surface and 
only slightly depressed along their margins of juncture. The general surface of 
the whole series has the character of sloping at a small angle to the margin of the 
disk, to which it gives a slightly bevelled appearance. The marginal surface of 
the plate is almost vertical, the junction of the abactinal and marginal surfaces is 
well rounded but not tumid, and there is very slight, if any, convexity on the 
marginal surface, at least along the disk. The height of the plates as seen in the 
margin is only a little greater than the length, and the diminution in height is 
only very trifling as the plates proceed along the ray. The whole superficies of 
the plates is covered with small hexagonal punctations upon which granules were 
previously borne. Small foraminate pedicellariz are occasionally present here 
and there upon the plates; the foramen is small and oval, and is surrounded by a 
definite margin or lip. Sometimes more than one are present on one plate. 
The example figured on PI. VII, fig. 4 a, is remarkable for the presence of the 
prominent teat-like eminences, in the centre of which the pedicellarian foramen is 
situated. These eminences at first sight look like tubercles for the articulation of 
spines (see Pl. VII, figs. 4a, 4c). A similar character is also seen in the example 
drawn on Pl. V, fig. 2 a, but is less strongly marked (see fig. 2 d). 

The abactinal area of the disk is covered with small, regular, hexagonal and 
tetragonal plates or paxillar tabula; those in the radial areas being regularly 
hexagonal and larger than those in the intermediate regions, which are rhomboid, 
and all diminish in size as they approach the margin. The abactinal plates or 
paxillz do not appear to extend beyond the twelfth supero-marginal plate, counting 
from the median interradial line ; the supero-marginal plates of the two sides of 
the ray meeting in the median radial line beyond this point. The plates or paxille 
of the median radial series are larger and broader than any of the others; they 
are succeeded on each side by five or six longitudinal series of hexagonal plates, 
those of the second or third series from the median series measuring about 1°5 mm. 


CALLIDERMA MOSAICUM. 11 


in diameter. The remaining plates which occupy the intermediate areas are 
tetragonal or rhomboid. All the plates have their surface marked with rather 
widely-spaced punctations—the impressions of the granules previously present. 
Small foraminate pedicellariz are also frequently present here and there, usually 
near the margin of the plate. 

The madreporiform body is flat, distinct, and polygonal in outline; itis situated 
near the centre of the disk. Its surface is marked by fine straight striez, which 
radiate regularly centrifugally from the centre to the margin (see Pl. V, fig. 2 e). 

Other specimens show that the infero-marginal plates in this species are more 
nearly subequal to the supero-marginal series than in Calliderma Simithiz, that the 
actinal intermediate plates are relatively larger than in that species and a good 
deal larger than the abactinal paxillar plates or tabula. The actinal intermediate 
plates originally bore granules only, judging from the character of the punctations 
with which their surface is ornamented. <A fragment belonging to the British 
Museum Collection (which bears the register number ‘‘ E373 ”’), in which the spines 
that formed the armature of the adambulacral plates are preserved, indicates that 
these spines are smaller, shorter, and perhaps more numerous than in Calliderma 
Smithiz. 

In the example drawn on Pl. VI, fig. 2 a, the supero-marginal plates are pre- 
served, but the whole of the abactinal plating has been removed, leaving exposed 
the inner surface of some of the actinal intermediate plates and the adambulacral 
plates. Magnified details of these plates are given, and they represent the cha- 
racters of the structures preserved better than any verbal description. 


Dimensions.—The large example figured on Pl. V, fig. 2 a, has the following 
measurements :—Major radius 82 + mm. (all the rays are broken and imperfect, 
and the full dimensions cannot therefore be given); minor radius 36 mm.; thick- 
ness of the margin about 8mm. Breadth of a ray between the eighth and ninth 
supero-marginal plates about 15 mm., or a trifle more. 


Locality and Stratigraphical Position.—The example figured on Pl. V, fig. 2 a, 
is labelled from the Lower Chalk, but the locality is not recorded. It formed 
part of one of the old collections preserved in the British Museum. Other 
examples in the British Museum are from the Grey Chalk or Chalk Marl of Dover, 
from the Lower Chalk of Glynde in Sussex, and from the Lower Chalk of 
Amberley Pit, Arundel. There is also a magnificent specimen in the Museum of 
Practical Geology, Jermyn Street, from the Lower Chalk of Dover. 


12 FOSSIL ASTEROIDEA. 


3. CALLIDERMA LATUM, Forbes, sp. Pl. II, figs. la—le, 2a—2d; Pl. IIL, 
figs. la—le, 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b. 


GonrasTER (AsTROGONIUM) LaTUS, Forbes, 1848. Memoirs of the Geological 
Survey of Great Britain, vol. ii, 
p. 474. 

_ _— — -- 1850. in Dixon’s Geology and 
Fossils of the Tertiary and Creta- 
ceous Formations of Sussex, 
London, 4to., p. 333, pl. xxii, 
figs. 4, 5. 

— — — Morris, 1854, Catalogue of British Fossils, 
2nd ed., p. 80. 

ASTROGONIUM LATUM, Dujardin and Hupé,1862. Hist. Nat. Zooph. 
Echin. (Suites 4 Buffon), p. 399. 

GontasTER (AstRoGoNIUM) LATUS, Forbes, 1878. In Dixon’s Geology of Sussex 
(new edition, Jones), p. 367, 
pl. xxvi, figs. 4, 5. 


Body of large or moderate size. General form depressed. Abactinal surface 
probably capable of some degree of inflation. Actinal surface flat. Marginal 
contour stellato-pentagonal, the major radius probably not exceeding the minor 
radius by more than one half. Rays narrow at the base, short, not greatly pro- 
duced, and probably tapered to a pointed extremity. Interbrachial ares very 
wide and flattened, which gives a strongly marked pentagonal outline to the disk. 
Margin of uniform thickness. 


The infero-marginal plates are more than sixteen in number, counting from the 
median interradial line to the extremity (the tip of the ray being broken in all the 
specimens examined). They forma remarkably broad margin to the actinal area of 
the disk, which diminishes rather rapidly in width at the base of the rays, and then 
slightly to the extremity. The largest infero-marginal plates near the median 
interradial line measure about 13 mm. in breadth and 45 mm. in length. The 
length is nearly uniform throughout, or at any rate till well out on the free part 
of the ray ; but the breadth diminishes until the plates at the base of the ray are 
6°5 mm., and the diminution proceeds to a certain extent along the ray. The 
infero-marginal plates are slightly convex along their line of breadth, by which 
means the separate plates are distinctly marked. They are well rounded at the 
junction of the actinal and lateral surfaces, and are slightly tumid in the margin. 
The outline of their inner or adcentral edge is also rounded. The height of the 


CALLIDERMA LATUM. 13 


infero-marginal plates as seen in the margin is a little greater than their length. 
The height of the supero-marginal plates is, however, somewhat greater. 

The whole superficies of the plates is covered with circular punctations of 
irregular size rather than hexagons, as in the other forms, and the irregularity 
caused by the presence of larger punctations here and there is remarkable. This 
character seems to indicate the former presence of an irregular-sized granulation. 

The supero-marginal plates are similar in character to the infero-marginal 
series, but the large irregular punctations are larger and more numerous. 

The adambulacral plates are broader than long, and they bear upon their 
surface five or six ridges parallel or subparallel to the ambulacral furrow, each with 
prominent well-defined granulations or elevations, all uniform and closely placed, 
upon which the adambulacral armature of spines was previously borne (see Pl. II, 
Heke; Pl. 111, fig. 2d). 

The actinal interradial areas are large, and are covered with comparatively 
large polygonal and rhomboid intermediate plates, which are arranged in series 
parallel to the ambulacral furrow, and originally formed a compact tessellated 
pavement. Ina number of the fossils of this species, however, these plates are 
often separated and displaced, which leads to the inference that in life the plates 
were not so intimately connected as in other species, and that membrane or con- 
nective tissue was more largely developed. The one or more series of plates 
adjacent to the adambulacral plates are much larger than the others, and none of 
the intermediate plates extend beyond the base of the ray. The surface of the 
plates is covered with large, irregular, and rather deeply sunken pits, the 
character of which leads to the inference that the granulation originally present 
was also somewhat irregular in size and coarse in character (see Pl. I, fig. le; 
eel fie. Le). 

In some examples (notably in that figured on PI. III, fig. 2 a) small oval fora- 
minate pedicellariz, distinctly lipped at the margin of the foramen, are present on 
the actinal intermediate plates. 

The mouth-plates are elongate, about three times as long as broad, triangular 
in shape, with the two outer sides subequal. Their surface is covered with large, 
coarse, irregular, tuberculose elevations (see Pl. II, fig. 1 ¢), which suggest the 
inference that the armature of the mouth-plates consisted of large, irregular, 
papilliform granules. 

In some examples a portion of the actinal floor has been removed, exposing the 
inner surface of the abactinal floor. In these cases the stellate base of the abac- 
tinal plates or paxille are seen (see Pl. II, figs. 2a, 2d; Pl. III, figs. 3a, 3b). It 
will be noticed that there is a difference in the form of the stellate bases in these 
examples, which may indicate a specific or varietal difference, but I do not feel 
justified from this character alone in recognising either of these fragments as the 


14. FOSSIL ASTEROIDEA. 


type of a distinct species. More material is needed before such a step would be 
warranted. 


Dimensions. —The large example figured on PI. II, fig. 1 a, has a major radial 
measurement of from 80 to 95 mm. or more, with a minor radius of about 52 mm. 
The breadth of the ray between the sixth and seventh infero-marginal plates, 
counting from the median interradial line, is about 17 or 18 mm. 


Locality and Stratigraphical Position.—This species appears to be confined to 
the Lower Chalk. Examples have been collected from Washington, Amberley, 
Southerham, and Glynde, in Sussex. Also from the Lower Chalk of Folkestone, 
and the Chalk Marl of Dover. 


History.—T wo examples of this species were first figured by Forbes in Dixon’s 
‘Geology and Fossils of the Tertiary and Cretaceous Formations of Sussex,’ 
London, 1850, pl. xxiii, figs. 4 and 5. Both these specimens are now preserved 
in the British Museum. One example, which is from Amberley, is drawn on 
Pl. III, fig. 1a. The other, which is from Washington, is accurately represented 
by fig. 3 a of the same plate. 


Variations.—In addition to the difference noted above in the form of the 
stellate bases of the abactinal plates or paxille, other minor differences may be 
observed. In some examples the breadth of the border formed by the marginal 
plates on the disk area is not relatively so great as in other examples, and the 
proportions of length to breadth, as well as the amount of tumidity of the 
component plates, are subject to variation. In some examples, again, the irregu- 
larity in the granulation of the marginal plates, arising from the former presence 
of coarser granules interspersed amongst the average granulation, is more marked 
than in others. These differences will be more readily noticed by turning to the 
figures given on PI. IT and Pl. III than by a lengthy verbal description. Some of 
the examples come from different beds and different localities—circumstances 
which I consider to be sufficient to account for the variation. 


Genus—NYMPHASTER, Sladen, 1885. 


Nympuasrer, Sladen. In Narr. Chall. Exp., 1885, vol. i, p. 612; Zool. Chall. 
Exped., part li, Report on the Asteroidea, 1889, p. 294. 


Disk large and flat. Rays elongate, slender, tapering, and almost square in 
section. Marginal plates forming a broad border to the disk, and either united 


NYMPHASTER COOMBII. 15 


along the median abactinal line of the ray throughout, or separated only by a single 
series of medio-radial plates. The marginal plates of both series are granulated, 
and bear no spines (normally, but occasional incipient spinelets may be present). 
Abactinal area of the disk covered with large and regularly arranged plates, those 
in the radial areas well separated, usually hexagonal, more or less tabulate and 
paxilliform, and frequently bearing an excavate or entrenched pedicellaria. 
Actinal interradial areas large, confined to the disk. Actinal intermediate plates 
well defined, covered with uniform granules, and occasionally bearing pedicellarize. 
Armature of the adambulacral plates arranged in longitudinal series. Madre- 
poriform body exposed and situated within one third of the distance from the 
centre to the margin. Large entrenched pedicellariz are frequently present on 
the marginal plates in some species. 


This genus includes a number of recent species brought to light by the deep- 
sea explorations of late years. It has been found in the Atlantic, the Pacific, and 
the Hastern Archipelago. The Atlantic species pass into the abyssal zone, but 
those inhabiting the Pacific and Eastern Archipelago do not, so far as at present 
known, extend beyond the continental zone, or in other words they live in depths 
of less than 500 fathoms. 

The structure and character of the Cretaceous species described in the 
following pages, so far as they can be made out from the fragmentary condition 
of the fossils, appear to me to warrant their inclusion in the genus Nymphaster. 


1. Nymenaster Coomsn, Forbes, sp. Pl. VII, figs. 1—3; Pl. VIII, figs. la, 18. 


Gontaster (AsTrogonIUM) Coompit, Forbes, 1848. Memoirs of the Geological 
Survey of Great Britain, vol. u, 
p. 474. 
= = — — 1850. In Dixon’s Geology and 
Fossils of the Tertiary and Cre- 
taceous Formations of Sussex, 
London, 4to., p. 384, pl. xxi, 
fig. 6. 
— — — Morris, 1854. Catalogue of British Fos- 
sils, 2nd ed., p. 80. 


AstTrogontum ComBtt, Dujardin and Hupé, 1862. Hist. Nat. 
Zooph. Kehin. (Suites 4 Buffon), 
p. 399. 


GontastER (AsTROGONIUM) CoomBil, Forbes, 1878. In Dixon’s Geology of 
Sussex (new edition, Jones), 
p. 367, pl. xxvi, fig. 6. 


16 FOSSIL ASTEROIDEA. 


Body of medium size. Disk moderately large. Rays well produced, rather 
broad at the base and tapering to the extremity. General form depressed and 
thin. Marginal contour stellato-pentagonal, the major radius measuring more 
than twice and a half the minor radius. Marginal plates broad, the supero- 
marginal series of the two sides of the ray meeting in the median radial line. 
Interbrachial arcs deeply indented and well rounded. Margin rather thin. 


The infero-marginal plates are more than fifteen in number, counting from the 
interradial line to the extremity. They form a broad conspicuous border to the 
actinal area, which is relatively broad in proportion to the size of the disk. The 
largest infero-marginal plates near the median interradial line measure about 
5°) mm. in breadth, and about 2°5 to 2°75 mm. in length. The breadth decreases 
slightly from this point as the plates approach the base of the ray, and then 
much more rapidly, the plates on the outer part of the ray having the length 
considerably in excess of the breadth. The plates are tumid and roundly 
bevelled at the lateral edges, but are flatly rounded at the margin of the disk, and 
without tumidity there. The whole superficies of the plate is covered with large, 
rather deeply depressed, hexagonal punctations, closely placed, which give 
somewhat of a honeycomb appearance to the plate (see Pl. VIII, fig. 16). These 
are the marks left by the granules previously borne upon the plate. Upona 
number of the plates in the example figured on Pl. VIII, fig. 1 a, the granules are 
still preserved in situ. They are large and closely placed. The punctations, 
and consequently the granules, in this species are coarser than in any of the other 
Cretaceous forms known to me. I have not been able to assure myself of the 
presence in this example of any pedicellariz on the infero-marginal plates. 

The adambulacral plates are broader than long, except on the outer part of the 
ray, and their armature appears to have consisted of five or six regular series of 
spimelets. This is indicated by the presence upon the surface of the plate of that 
number of ridges, running parallel or subparallel to the ambulacral furrow, each 
having four or five articulatory elevations and intervening pits upon which 
spinelets had previously been borne. The spinelets were probably short, and 
similar to those described in Calliderma Smithie and Calliderma mosaicum, but I 
have not found any preserved in specimens which I consider to be undoubted 
examples of Nyinphaster Coombii. 


Dimensions.—In the type specimen, figured on PI. VIII, fig. 1 a, the major 
radius is more than 56 mm., and the minor radius 23mm. The breadth of the ray 
between the fourth and fifth infero-marginal plates measures about 15 mm. 


Locality and Stratigraphical Position.—The specimen figured is from the Lower 
Chalk of Balcombe Pit, Amberley. The species has also been obtained from the 


NYMPHASTER COOMBII. a7 


Lower Chalk of Glynde, Sussex; as well as from the Lower Chalk of Dover and 
the Isle of Wight. Other specimens of Nymphaster, as to the reference of which 
to N. Coombii I am more or less doubtful, which show certain differences in 
structural details, are from the Grey Chalk of Folkestone and Dover, and from 
the Lower Chalk of Betchworth. Several examples in the Museum of Practical 
Geology, Jermyn Street, are labelled from the “ Upper Chalk,” but I am inclined 
to think that their reference to that horizon is more or less doubtful. 


History.—The type of this species was found by Mr. G. Coombe at Balcombe 
Pit, Amberley, and formed part of Mr. Dixon’s collection. It is now preserved in 
the British Museum. It was first figured by Edward Forbes in Dixon’s ‘ Geology 
and Fossils of the Tertiary and Cretaceous Formations of Sussex,’ London, 1850, 
pl. xxii, fig. 6. The same specimen is carefully represented on Pl. VIII, figs. 1a, 
1 6 of this memoir. 


Doubtful Examples of this Species.—Three specimens are figured on Pl. VII, 
which I only place provisionally and with very great doubt under this species. I 
do not, therefore, at present propose to describe them in detail, or to definitely 
assign the characters they present as supplementary to those already given as 
belonging to Nymphaster Coombi. 

1. An example from the Lower Chalk of Betchworth, in which a portion of the 
actinal surface is preserved (Pl. VII, figs. 1 a—1e). This specimen shows large 
infero-marginal plates somewhat longer in proportion to their breadth than in the 
type specimen, and their surface is covered with an extremely fine uniform puncta- 
tion. The latter character is altogether unlike that of examples which I consider 
to be true forms of Nymphaster Coombii. But from this character alone, which 
recent forms show to be one subject to considerable variation, I shrink from 
taking any more definite step, at least until further materialis available for study. 
This example has some of the adambulacral plates and actinal intermediate plates 
well preserved. ‘I'he adambulacral plates (see Pl. VII, fig. 1 ¢) conform to the 
description given above. The actinal intermediate plates are rhomboid in form, 
and their surface is covered with deep, large, well-spaced pits, which indicate the 
former presence of a coarse uniform granulation. These plates are shown on 
Pl. VII, fig. le. The margin of this example is quite characteristic of Nym- 
phaster Coombii. The infero-marginal plates are seen to be low and more or less 
bevelled or sloping towards the margin; whilst the supero-marginal plates are 
relatively rather higher and more abruptly bent at the junction of the actinal and 
lateral surfaces (see Pl. VII, fig. 1 5). 

2. This is a badly preserved specimen from the Grey Chalk of Folkestone, in 
which nothing but the supero-marginal plates and the general outline are available 

3 


18 FOSSIL ASTEROIDEA. 


for determination (see Pl. VII, figs. 2 a, 2b). The marginal plates resemble in 
character those of the specimen just mentioned, and they are like them covered 
with a very fine punctation, unlike that of the typical Nymphaster Coombii. There 
are also fewer plates in that portion of the interbrachial are which may be said to 
belong to the disk than in Nymphaster Coombii, but as the example is smaller, this 
may probably be only a question of age ; or it may, like the punctation of this and 
the preceding example, be attributed to variation, which I am disposed to consider 
a not improbable reason for the differences, when regard is had to the horizon 
from which the fossils were obtained, and consequently the changed conditions of 
existence in which those Asterids probably lived. 

3. This specimen (figured on Pl. VII, figs. 3 a, 3b) is from the Lower Chalk 
of Glynde, Sussex, and I consider that its reference to Nymphaster Coombit is less 
doubtful than that of either of the two preceding examples. The fragment repre- 
sents a portion of the abactinal surface. The supero-marginal plates are large, 
and are covered with the characteristic coarse punctation of Nyimphaster Coombit 
(see Pl. VII, fig. 3). The supero-marginal plates of the two sides of a ray 
meet in the median radial line from the very base of the ray, distinctly charac- 
teristic of the genus Nymphaster. Comparing this example with the typical form 
of the species, there appear to be a much smaller number of supero-marginal 
plates in the interbrachial are belonging to the true disk, and on these grounds I 
hesitate from accepting it positively as an undoubted example of this species until 
further material is forthcoming to throw light upon the amount of plasticity 
which may be accredited to this species. 


2. NympHasrer marainatus, Sladen. Pl. VIII, figs. 4a, 4 0. 


Body of medium size. General form depressed. Marginal contour stellato- 
pentagonal. Rays well produced, rather broad at the base, and tapering gradu- 
ally to a pointed extremity. Interbrachial arcs deep and rounded, the sweep of 
the curve from the tip of one ray to the tip of the neighbouring ray being of a 
paraboloid character. Margin rather thin. 


The supero-marginal plates form a broad and massive border to the abactinal 
area of the disk. There are six plates on each side of the disk counting from the 
base of one ray to the base of the neighbouring ray. All the succeeding plates 
along the ray meet the corresponding plate of the opposite side of the ray in the 
median radial line. The abactinal surface of the ray is thus occupied entirely by 
the supero-marginal plates throughout its length. 


NYMPHASTER OLIGOPLAX. 1s) 


All the supero-marginal plates are of uniform height, excepting the normal 
diminution towards the extremity of the ray ; and all have the breadth greater 
than the length. The plates on each side of the median interradial line measure 
about 4 mm. in breadth and about 2 mm. in length; and this length is maintained 
with very slight diminution until about midway between the base and the extre- 
mity of the ray, where the length is 1°75 mm., and the breadth is between 2°75 
and 3mm. Sixteen supero-marginal plates are preserved in the longest ray of 
the specimen under description, counting from the median interradial line to the 
broken extremity. A few plates are apparently missing. Measured in the 
marein, the height of the plates is about 2°5 mm. 

All the supero-marginal plates are distinctly convex in the direction of their 
median line of breadth, by which each plate is very clearly marked out, and a 
highly ornate character is given to the species. The plates are also tumid and 
well rounded on their marginal surface. The whole surface of the plates is 
covered with rather large, widely spaced punctations or pits, which have a pecu- 
larly isolated appearance, unlike that of any other species (see Pl. VIII, fig. 4 0). 
I have not detected the presence of any pedicellariz upon this example. 

The remains of a few isolated plates are preserved on the abactinal area of the 
fossil figured. They are all small and out of position, and are not available for 
description. 


Dimensions.—The specimen figured on Pl. VIII, fig. 4 a, has a minor radius of 
about 12 mm.; and the longest fragment of a ray preserved measures about 
35mm. ‘The extremity is wanting. The thickness of the marginis 45mm. The 
breadth of the ray at the base between the third and fourth supero-marginal 
plates counting from the median interradial line is from 8 to 8°5 mm. 


Locality and Stratigraphical Position—The example described is from the 
Upper Chalk near Bromley. It is preserved in the British Museum, and bears the 
registration number 35,484. 


3. NyMPHAsTER oLicoriax, Sladen. Pl. VIII, figs. 3a, 30. 
Body of medium size. General form depressed and thin. Marginal contour 


stellato-pentagonal. Rays narrow at the base and produced. Interbrachial arcs 
wide and rounded. Margin thin. 


The supero-marginal plates form a broad border to the abactinal area of the 


20 FOSSIL ASTEROIDEA. 


disk. There are only three (or possibly four) supero-marginal plates between the 
median interradial line and the base of the ray—that is to say, about six plates on 
each side of the disk. The fourth (or perhaps the fifth) plate counting from the 
median interradial line, and all the succeeding plates along the ray, appear 
normally to meet the corresponding plate of the opposite side of the ray in the 
median radial line. The abactinal surface of the ray is thus occupied entirely by 
the supero-marginal plates throughout its length. In one of the rays preserved 
there appear, however, to be traces of a few abactinal plates which interfere with 
the union of the supero-marginal plates in the median radial line near the base of 
the ray. As to how far this is normal I am unable to say. 

All the supero-marginal plates are comparatively low and flat. The plates on 
each side of the median interradial line are 3°5 mm. in breadth, and from 3 to 
3°5 mm. in length, and are thus practically square. Their abactinal surface is 
slightly convex; and their height as seen in the margin is less than the length, 
and the abactinal surface is gradually bevelled to the inferior margin which abuts 
upon the infero-marginal plates. The other plates which form the border of the 
disk-area are of the same size and character as those adjacent to the median inter- 
radial line. The supero-marginal plates along the ray have the breadth greater 
than the length, the fifth plate counting from the median interradial line 
measuring about 3°75 mm. in breadth and 2°5 mm. in length. Their character is 
similar to that of the plates above described. The surface of the plates is covered 
with small well-spaced punctations, and there is a distinct smooth border on the 
inner and two lateral margins of each plate on which no punctations or pits are 
present. 

Large trench-like pedicellariz, which are nearly the length of the plate, are 
present in this species; they occur more frequently on the infero-marginal plates 
than on those of the superior series ; in fact, only one or two are present on the 
latter series of plates in the example under description. 

No other portions of this fragment are available for description. 


Dimensions.—The fragment figured in Pl. VIII, fig. 3 a, has a minor radius of 
about 15 mm. The longest portion of the major radius preserved is about 
33 mm., and the ray is broken off abruptly. The thickness of the margin is 
between 4and5 mm. The breadth of the ray at the base is about 8 mm. 


Locality and Stratigraphical Position.—The fragment described, which is, 
unfortunately, all that I have seen, is from the Upper Chalk of Bromley. It is 


preserved in the British Museum, and bears the registration number 40,178. 


Remarks.—The character of the marginal plates, as regards both their form 


PYCNASTER ANGUSTATUS. 21 


and their ornamentation, as well as the presence of the peculiar pedicellarie, 
and indeed the whole facies of this fossil, lend strong support to the presumption 
that this species may ultimately need to be placed in a distinct genus, but I do 
not feel warranted in taking that step on the basis of such scanty material. 


Genus-—-PYCNASTER, Sladen. 


Disk relatively small and pentagonal. Abactinal surface more or less convex, 
and was probably somewhat inflated during life. Margin thick, and highest 
in the region of the disk. Rays elongate, narrow, and robust. Marginal plates 
forming a broad border to the disk, and united along the median abactinal line of 
the ray throughout. The marginal plates are high and very robust, those of the 
superior series being prominently convex abactinally in the median line of breadth 
and height, which imparts a well-rounded character to the ray. ‘The marginal 
plates of both series are finely granulated, and probably bore no spines. Actinal 
intermediate plates large, covered with uniform granules. Armature of the 
adambulacral plates arranged in longitudinal series. Foraminate pedicellariz 
with radiating channels may be present on the marginal plates. 


The fragmentary state of the fossils which I have referred to this type 
unfortunately does not permit of a complete diagnosis of the genus being drawn 
up. The characters above given appear, however, to me to be sufficient to 
warrant the recognition of the possessors of them as the representatives of a 
distinct genus. The small high disk, the massive convex marginal plates, 
and the large actinal intermediate plates, together with the form of the rays, 
produce a facies alone sufficient to stamp its individuality, irrespective of other 
details of structure. 


1. Pycnaster ancustatus, Forbes, sp. Pl. IX, figs. 1 a, 1. 


Gonraster (ASTROGONIUM) ANGuUsTATUS, Forbes, 1848. Memoirs of the Geolo- 
gical Survey of Great Britain, 
vol. 1, p. 474. 

—_ — 1850. In Dixon’s Geology and 
Fossils of the Tertiary and 
Cretaceous Formations of 
Sussex, London, 4to., p. 335, 
pl. xxiii, fig. 10. 


22 FOSSIL ASTEROIDEA. 


GontastER (ASTROGONIUM) ANGUsTATUS, Morris, 1854 Catalogue of British 
Fossils, 2nd ed., p. 80. 


AsSTROGONIUM ANGUSTATUM, Dujardin and Hupé, 1862. Hist. Nat. 
Zooph.Kchin.(Suitesa Buffon), 
p- 399. 


GoNIASTER (ASTROGONIUM) AaNGuSTATUS, Forbes, 1878. In Dixon’s Geology of 
Sussex (new edition, Jones), 
p. 368, pl. xxvi, fig. 10. 


Disk of medium size or relatively small and pentagonal. Rays elongate, 
narrow, robust, and, though tapering, nearly uniform in breadth throughout. 
Marginal contour stellate. Interbrachial arcs more or less flattened, which 
emphasises the pentagonal outline of the disk. Margin thick and robust, much 
highest in the region of the disk. Abactinal surface more or less convex, and was 
probably somewhat inflated during life. Actinal intermediate plates very large, 
covered with uniform granules. 


The supero-marginal plates are thick and massive, and they form a high and 
broad border to the disk. There are only three supero-marginal plates between 
the median interradial line and the base of the ray—that is to say, six plates on 
each side of the disk. The fourth plate counting from the median interradial 
line, and all the succeeding plates along the ray, meet the corresponding plate of 
the opposite side of the ray in the median radial line. The abactinal surface 
of the ray is thus occupied entirely by the supero-marginal plates throughout 
its length. 

The supero-marginal plates which form the border of the disk are much larger 
in the direction of height than any of the others. The plates on each side of the 
median interradial line are about 4°75 mm. in breadth as seen on the abactinal sur- 
face, and about the same measurement in length. They are convex abactinally, 
and well rounded at the junction of the abactinal and lateral surfaces. Measured 
in the margin their height is 8 mm., and their lateral surface (which forms the 
vertical wall of the margin) is distinctly convex or pulvinate, but to a less degree 
than their abactinal surface. 

The supero-marginal plates of the ray are not so high as those of the disk, 
although their height is greater than their length. The height of the sixth plate 
from the median interradial line is about 5mm. Their abactinal and lateral sur- 
faces form together a true segment of a circle, and this imparts a well-rounded 
character to the ray. The plates are deeply bevelled at their junction with the 
adjacent plates, and consequently distinctly pulvinate in the median line of breadth 
and height. The surface of the plates is covered with minute punctations, but 


PYCNASTER ANGUSTATUS. 23 


these are so extremely faint that they are seen with difficulty. They are probably 
weather-worn in the example under notice. 

The infero-marginal plates, as seen in the direct lateral view of the margin, are 
much smaller in height than the supero-marginal series in the type specimen. 
The plates which form the margin of the disk are higher than long, the height 
being about 5 mm. and the length about 3:25 mm. in those adjacent to the 
median interradial line; the succeeding plates on the margin of the disk are each 
less in height than the preceding plate, the third or fourth plate, counting from 
the median interradial line, having the height and length about equal. The infero- 
marginal plates along the ray have the length greater than the height. The 
surface of the infero-marginal plates resembles that of the superior series in the 
character of its punctation. 

Traces of small excavate pedicellariz are present on occasional plates, but 
these appear to have been very few in the example under description. 

On the abactinal surface of the disk a few isolated and displaced plates are 
present. Some of these seem rather thick and tuberculous in character, but the 
state of the preservation of this part of the fossil is unfortunately quite unfitted 
for description. 

There is a fine fragment of this species preserved in the Museum of Practical 
Geology, Jermyn Street, from the Upper Chalk of Bromley, which shows part of 
the actinal surface. The infero-marginal plates in the disk are very high in this 
example, and five of them in an interbrachial arc bear a small foraminate pedi- 
cellaria. This is situated near the upper margin of the plate, about equidistant 
from that margin and the lateral margins of the plate, and consists of a small 
round foramen situated in the middle of a very shallow concavity, and with five 
or six faint channels radiating from the foramen to the margin of the concavity, 
gradually thinning and dying out there. The channels radiate like the spokes of 
a wheel, or a five-rayed star, and produce a facies unlike that of any other pedi- 
cellarian apparatus with which I am acquainted. The actinal intermediate plates 
are very large, and not more than three series are present. The plates of the 
series next to the adambulacral plates are much larger than the others, and are 
broader than long, The adambulacral plates are broader than long, and their 
surface is marked with three or four ridges parallel to the furrow, upon which 
spinelets were previously borne. The furrow series consists of about five 
spinelets. A few of these spinelets are preserved, and they are rather short, 
cylindrical, and slightly tapering. The mouth-plates are very small and narrow. 


Dimensions.—The specimen figured on Pl. IX, fig. 1 a, has a minor radius of 
about 23 mm. The longest portion of a major radius preserved is 53 mm. ; the 
ray is broken abruptly, and there is very slight diminution in the breadth at the 


24: FOSSIL ASTEROIDEA. 


broken extremity as compared with the breadth at the base; there would appear to 
be every indication that only a small part of the ray is preserved. 

The thickness of the margin at the median interradial line is 13 mm., and 
at the base of the ray 8°5 mm. The breadth of the ray at the base is about 
12 mm. 


Locality and Stratigraphical Position.—The example above described, which has 
been drawn on PI. IX, fig. la, was obtained from the Upper Chalk in Kent, but 
unfortunately the exact locality is unknown. It is preserved in the British 
Museum. A fine fragment preserved in the Museum of Practical Geology, 
Jermyn Street, was obtained from the Upper Chalk of Bromley. The species has 
also been found in the Upper Chalk of Sussex. 


History.—The type of this species was first described by Forbes under the 
name of Goniaster (Astrogonium) angustatus, and was afterwards figured by him in 
Dixon’s ‘Geology and Fossils of the Tertiary and Cretaceous Formations of 
Sussex,’ London, 1850, pl. xxiu, fig. 10. That illustration does not, however, 
give a good idea of the facies of the species. 


Genus—PENTAGONASTER, Linck, 1733. 


PENTAGONASTER, Linck. De Stellis marinis, 1733, p. 20. 
— Schilze. Betrachtung der versteinerten Seesterne und ihrer 

Theile, Warschau u. Dresden, 1760, p. 50. 

Gonraster (pars), L. Agassiz. Prod. Mon. Radiaires, Mém. Soc. Sci. Nat. 
Neuchatel, 1835, t. i, p. 191. 

ASTROGONIUM (pars), Miller and Troschel. System der Asteriden, 1842, p. 52. 

Gontopiscus (pars), Miller and Troschel. Ibid., 1842, p. 57. 

Hosta (pars), Gray. Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., 1840, vol. vi, p. 279. 

Tosta, Gray. Ibid., 1840, vol. vi, p. 281. 


Body depressed and pentagonal in contour, or with the rays slightly produced. 
Marginal plates smooth or granular, ordinarily few in number. Supero-marginal 
plates form a broad border to the disk, and, when the ray is produced, are sepa- 
rated throughout by abactinal plates. Abactinal area covered with rounded or 
polygonal plates, which may either be smooth or bear co-ordinated granules. 
Actinal intermediate plates and infero-marginal plates smooth or granulose, devoid 
of prominent spinelets. 


Much diversity of opinion has existed, unnecessarily it seems to me, as to the 


PENTAGONASTER LUNATUS. 25 


character and limits of this genus. Two species were originally referred to 
Pentagonaster by its founder. The type of one of these is now lost, and its identi- 
fication rests only on surmise. The second species, however, Pentagonaster semi- 
lwnatus, is a well-known and widely distributed recent form, about which there is 
no doubt. I therefore consider that this form has every claim to be regarded as 
the type of the genus. The existing species of Pentagonaster are found in the 
Atlantic, the Pacific, the Indian and the Southern Oceans, and in the Hastern 
Archipelago ; and the bathymetrical range of the genus extends from 20 to 1500 
fathoms or more. 


1. PenraconastrEer Lunatus, Woodward, sp. PI. IV, figs. la—1e. 


ASTERIAS LUNATUS, Woodward, 1833. An Outline of the Geology of Norfolk, 
p- 52, pl. v, fig. 1. 
TosIa LUNATA, Morris, 1843. Catalogue of British Fossils, p. 60. 
_— — Bronn, 1848. Index Paleontologicus, Nomenclator, p. 1274. 


Body of medium size. General form depressed. Abactinal and actinal areas 
flat. Marginal contour stellato-pentagonal, the major radius measuring nearly 
twice the minor radius. Rays short and moderately produced, rather narrow at 
the base and tapering to the extremity. Interbrachial arcs deeply indented and 
well rounded. 


The infero-marginal plates are twelve (or more) in number, counting from the 
median interradial line to the extremity. They form a broad border to the actinal 
area of the disk, the breadth of which diminishes rather rapidly plate by plate as 
they recede from the median interradial line. The largest infero-marginal plates 
adjacent to the median interradial line measure about 5°25 mm. in breadth and about 
3 mm. or a little more in length. The length and breadth decrease as each plate 
proceeds outward until about midway on the ray, where these dimensions are 
subequal. On the outer part of the ray the length is greater than the breadth. 
The infero-marginal plates are distinctly convex on their actinal surface in the 
direction of the median line of breadth, and are slightly tumid at the margin. 
Their surface is covered with small, uniform, closely placed, and deeply sunken 
moniliform punctations, upon which small granules were previously borne, probably 
uniform in size and closely placed (see Pl. IV, fig. 1c). I am not aware that 
traces of any pedicellariz have been detected on these plates. 

The adambulacral plates are small and oblong, and bear on their surface ridges 

4 


26 FOSSIL ASTEROIDEA. 


of alternating granuliform eminences and depressions, upon which the spinelets 
constituting the armature of the adambulacral plates were originally borue. 

The actinal interradial areas are small, and are covered with regular pentagonal 
or rhomboid intermediate plates, which are arranged in series parallel to the 
ambulacral furrow, and form a compact, mosaic-like pavement. The actinal inter- 
mediate plates are moderately large in relation to the size of the disk. The plates 
of the series adjacent to the adambulacral plates are sensibly larger than any of the 
others, and the plates of the next series are also larger than those which form the 
rest of the pavement. Near the infero-marginal plates the actinal intermediate 
plates become small and more or less irregular. The intermediate plates extend 
at the base of the ray to about the fifth infero-marginal plate, counting from the 
median interradial line. The surface of the plates is covered with rather large, 
widely spaced, and deeply sunken punctations, upon which granules were pre- 
viously borne, and these would appear to have been comparatively large in size and 
uniform (see Pl. IV, fig. 1 5). 

From what is visible of the margin of this example it is seen that the supero- 
marginal series of plates are nearly of the same height as the infero-marginal 
series, and are similar in structure. 

Unfortunately no other portions of this fragment are available for description. 


Locality and Stratigraphical Position—The specimen upon which this species 
was founded was collected by Mr. Samuel Woodward, from the Upper White 
Chalk, near Norwich. 


Dimensions.—In the type specimen (figured on Pl. IV, fig. 1 a) the major 
radius is about 35 mm., and the minor radius about 18 mm. Breadth of the ray 
between the fifth and sixth infero-marginal plates about 10 mm. 


History.—The type specimen was figured by Woodward in his ‘ Outline of the 
Geology of Norfolk,’ pl. v, fig. 1, and is now preserved in the collection of the 
Norfolk and Norwich Museum. It was kindly lent by the committee of that 
institution to Dr. Wright for the purpose of this monograph. It has been 
carefully drawn on Pl. IV, figs. 1 a—1 c. An admirably executed cast of this 
specimen is in the British Museum. Iam not at present aware of the existence 
of any other examples of this rare form. 


Remarks.—The example referred by Forbes to this species, and figured by 
him in Dixon’s ‘Geology and Fossils of the Tertiary and Cretaceous Formations 
of Sussex,’ London, 1850, pl. xxiii, fig. 9, belongs to a distinct species, which I 
have named Pentagonaster megaloplaw.. A number of other specimens in other 


PENTAGONASTER MEGALOPLAX. 27 


collections have, following Forbes, been erroneously referred to Pentagonaster 
lunatus, which are in reality examples of Pentagonaster megaloplax. This is 
unfortunate, for the latter form has thus become comparatively well known under 
the name of Pentagonaster lunatus, a name which they must now cease to bear, as 
the real Pentagonaster lunatus is quite a different form, and there is no doubt 
whatever either as to the type (which is preserved in Norwich) or the priority. 
The differences between the two species will be further noticed under the descrip- 
tion of Pentagonaster megaloplax. 


2. PENTAGONASTER MEGALOPLAX, Sladen. PI. IV, figs. 2—4. 


GonrasTER (AsTROGONIUM) LUNATUS, Forbes, 1850. In Dixon’s Geology and 
Fossils of the Tertiary and Cre- 
taceous Formations of Sussex, 
London, 4to., p. 353, pl. xxi, 
fig. 9 (non Asterias lunatus, 
Woodward, 1833). 


Body of medium size. General form depressed. Abactinal and actinal areas 
flat. Marginal contour stellato-pentagonal, the major radius measuring a little 
more than once and a half the minor radius. Rays short and not greatly pro- 
duced, tapering gradually to the extremity. Interbrachial arcs regularly rounded, 
curving gradually from the tip of one ray to that of the adjacent ray, which gives 
a distinctly lunate character to the disk. Margin of uniform thickness. 


The infero-marginal plates are only five or rarely six in number, counting from 
the median interradial line to the extremity. They form a very broad border to 
the actinal area of the disk in relation to its size, and the breadth is maintained 
until near the extremity. The largest infero-marginal plates adjacent to the median 
interradial line measure 7 mm. in breadth, and about 6°5 mm. or nearly 7 mm. in 
length ; they are consequently almost square. The proportion of breadth dimin- 
ishes in the succeeding plates as they recede from the median interradial line. 
The infero-marginal plates have a more or less pulvinate appearance actinally, 
consequent on being rounded or bevelled at the edges; and they are slightly 
tumid in the margin. Their whole actinal surface is covered with large, weli- 
spaced, deeply sunken pits, in the centre of which is a slight eminence—a struc- 
ture which has almost the character of a granule surrounded by a scrobicule (see 
Pl. IV, fig. 2 6). On the surface which stands in the margin the punctations 
are fewer and more widely spaced on the upper half of the surface—that is to say, 


28 FOSSIL ASTEROIDEA. 


the half adjacent to the supero-marginal series (see Pl. IV, fig. 4c). I have not 
found any pedicellariz on these plates. 

The adambulacral plates are broader than long, except on the outer part of 
the ray, and bear on the surface four or five ridges with granuliform eminences, 
upon which the spinelets constituting the adambulacral armature were originally 
borne. In one well-preserved specimen these small articulatory tubercles are seen 
to have each a small microscopic central puncture (see Pl. IV, fig. 3c), but I am 
not certain whether this is always present. 

The actinal interradial areas are small, and are covered with a comparatively 
small number of large pentagonal or tetragonal intermediate plates, which are 
arranged in series parallel to the ambulacral furrow, and form a compact 
tessellated pavement. The actinal intermediate plates are larger in relation to the 
size of the disk than in the species above described. The plates of the series 
adjacent to the adambulacral plates, and a few of the plates of the succeeding 
series within the angle towards the mouth, are larger than the others. The 
intermediate plates do not extend beyond the second, or at most a short distance 
along the margin of the third infero-marginal plate, counting from the median 
interradial line. The surface of the intermediate plates, excepting a border 
round the margin of the plate, is covered with large punctations, which are nearly 
confluent, and in some cases almost give the appearance of a coarse reticulate 
superficial ornamentation; the border round the margin of the plate above 
mentioned is marked with a concentric crenulation (see Pl. IV, fig. 3). Within 
the pits are more or less definite elevations. In other examples the reticulate 
character is less marked, and the margin of the pit is then prominently lipped, 
and the marginal crenulation is not so strongly shown (see Pl. IV, fig. 4 e). 

In the marginal view of the type specimen the supero-marginal plates are seen 
to be higher than the infero-marginal plates, and that their height is greater than 
their length, whereas in the infero-marginal series of plates the height is less than 
the length (see Pl. IV, fig. 2c). 

In other examples the mouth-plates are preserved. These are rather small, 
triangular, and covered with rather large, irregular, tuberculose eminences for 
the attachment of the mouth-plate armature. 


Variations.—Three examples of this species are figured on Plate IV. ‘These 
present a number of minor differences, which will be readily noticed on referring 
to the figures. 

The example which is shown in fig. 3a has the marginal border of the infero- 
marginal plates rather less broad than in the type form, and it is especially 
remarkable for the peculiar retiform and crenulated ornamentation of the actinal 
intermediate plates already noticed. The disposition of the armature of the 


PLATE I. 
CALLIDERMA Smitaim, Morbes, sp. (P. 6.) 


From the Lower Chalk. 
Fira. 
la. Actinal aspect; natural size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 
b. Lateral view of the margin ; natural size. 
c. Infero-marginal plates ; magnified 2 diameters. 
d. Lateral view of the marginal plates ; magnified. 
e. Adambulacral plates; magnified. 
jf. Actinal intermediate plates; magnified 3 diameters. 


AH Searle del.et hth 


Mat 


Fia. 

. Actinal aspect; natural size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 

. Infero-marginal plates; magnified 2 diameters. 

. Actinal intermediate plates; magnified 3 diameters. 
. Adambulacral plates ; magnified. 


PLATE II. 
CALLIDERMA LATUM, Morbes, sp. (P. 12.) 


From the Lower Chalk. 


. A mouth-plate; magnified. 
. Actinal aspect of another example, with a portion of the actinal floor removed, 


showing the stellate bases of the abactinal plates or paxille ; natural size. 
(Coll. Brit. Mus.) 


. Actinal surface of part of the ray ; magnified 13 diameters. 
. Infero-marginal plates; magnified 3 diameters. 
d. 


Stellate bases of the abactinal plates or paxillz; magnified 4 diameters. 


AH.Searle delet lith 


P] 


mt 


i et 


* 


Fre. 

. Actinal aspect of an example from Amberley ; natural size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 
. Lateral view of the margin ; natural size. 

. Lateral surfaces of the marginal plates ; magnified. 

. An infero-marginal plate ; magnified. 

. An actinal intermediate plate ; magnified. 

. Actinal aspect of an example from the Chalk Marl of Dover ; natural size. 


PEATE i, 
CaLLIDERMA LATUM, Forbes, sp. (P. 12.) 


From the Lower Chalk. 


(Coll. Brit. Mus.) 


. An adambulacral plate ; magnified . 
. Actinal aspect of an example from Washington, with a portion of the 


actinal floor removed, showing the stellate bases of the abactinal plates or 
paxille ; natural size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 


. Stellate bases of the abactinal plates or paxille ; magnified. 


tl 


PI 


3b. 


Hanhart ime 


PLATH TV: 


PENTAGONASTER LUNATUS, Woodward, sp. (P. 25.) 


From the Upper Chalk. 


. Actinal aspect of the type specimen; natural size. (Coll. Norfolk and 


Norwich Mus.) 


. An actinal intermediate plate ; magnified. 
. An infero-marginal plate ; magnified. 


PENTAGONASTER MEGALOPLAX, Sladen. (P. 27.) 


From the Lower Chalk. 


. Actinal aspect of the example figured by Forbes, under the name of Gontaster 


(Astrogonium) lunatus ; natural size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 


. An infero-marginal plate ; magnified 3 diameters. 

. Lateral view of the margin; natural size. 

. Actinal aspect of another example ; natural size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 

. An actinal intermediate plate ; magnified 6 diameters. 

. Adambulacral plates ; magnified 6 diameters. 

. Actinal aspect of an example from the Upper Chalk of Bromley; natural 


size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 


. Lateral view of the margin; natural size. 

. Lateral surface of an infero-marginal plate ; magnified. 
. An infero-marginal plate ; magnified. 

. An actinal intermediate plate ; magnified 6 diameters. 


AH Searle del.et hth 


Hanhart imp 


F ia. 


ro Qa ore 


PEAR Ve 
ToMIDASTER suLcATUS, Sladen. 


From the Grey Chalk. 


. Actinal aspect; natural size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 
. Actinal intermediate plates; magnified. 
. Adambulacral plates ; magnified 3 diameters. 


CaLLIDERMA MosaioumM, Forbes, sp. (P. 9.) 


From the Lower Chalk. 


. Abactinal aspect ; natural size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 

. Lateral view of the margin; natural size. 

. Abactinal plates; magnified. 

. Supero-marginal plates ; magnified. 

. Madreporiform body and surrounding plates; magnified. 


1A 


fa 


Boicer ia 


rnaanees age 


PLATE YI. 
CALLIDERMA MosArIcuM, [orbes, sp. (P. 9.) 


From the Grey Chalk. 
Fria. 
1. Abactinal aspect of an example from which the abactinal plates have been 
removed ; natural size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 
2a. Abactinal aspect of another example from which the abactinal plates have 
been removed, showing the inner surface of some of the actinal intermediate 
plates and adambulacral plates ; natural size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 
b. Adambulacral plates, seen from within ; magnified. 
c. Actinal intermediate plates, inner surface ; magnified. 


Pl. VI 


: 5 Hanhart imp 
AH Searle del.et ith 


PLATE, Vit. 
(?) Nympaaster Coomsu, Forbes, sp. (P. 15.) 


From the Lower Chalk. 


. Actinal aspect; natural size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 

. Lateral view of the margin; natural size. 

. Adambulacral plates ; magnified. 

. An infero-marginal plate ; magnified. 

. Actinal intermediate plates ; magnified. 

. Abactinal aspect of an example from the Grey Chalk at Folkestone; natural 


size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 


b. A supero-marginal plate; magnified. 


. Abactinal aspect of an example from the Lower Chalk of Glynde ; natural 


size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 


. A supero-marginal plate ; magnified. 


CaLLiperMA MosatcumM, Forbes, sp. (P. 9.) 


From the Lower Chalk. 


. Abactinal aspect; natural size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 
. Lateral view of the margin; natural size. 
. A supero-marginal plate; magnified. 


PISVal 


tlanhart 


AH Searle del. et lith 


PLATE VIII. 
Nymenaster Coomst, Forbes, sp. (P. 15.) 
From the Lower Chalk. 
Fia. 


la. Actinal aspect of the type specimen; natural size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 
b. An infero-marginal plate; magnified 3 diameters. 


CaLuipERMA Smrruia#, Forbes, sp. (P. 6.) 
From the Lower Chalk. 


2a. Profile view of a fragment of a ray; natural size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 
b. Actinal view of the same; natural size. 
c. An adambulacral plate; magnified 6 diameters. 


NYMPHASTER OLIGOPLAX, Sladen. (P. 19.) 
From the Upper Chalk. 


3a. Abactinal aspect ; natural size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 
b. A supero-marginal plate; magnified. 


NyYMPHASTER MARGINATUS, Sladen. (P. 18.) 
From the Upper Chalk. 


4a. Abactinal aspect; natural size. (Coll. Brit. Mus.) 
6. A supero-marginal plate ; magnified 4 diameters. 


Pl. VI . 


AH.Searle del.et lith 


re n t Imp 


 PALONTOGRAPHICAL SOCTETY. 


INSTITUTED MDCCCXLVIL. 


VOLUME FOR 1890. 


MDCCCXCI. 


A MONOGRAPH 


ON THE 


INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES 


THE BRITISH ISLANDS. 


BY 


S. S BUCKMAN, F.GS. 


PART YW, 


Paces 225—256; Prares XXXVII—XLIV. 


LONDON: 
PRINTED FOR THE PALZONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. 
1891. 


PRINTED BY 
ADLARD AND SON, BARTHOLOMEW CLOSE. 


HUDLESTONIA. 225 


Family—Anrietipm, Hyatt. 


Genus—Huptestonta,! S. Buckman. 


(Type—Hvpestonra aFFinis, Seebach sp.) 


1878. Ama.tnueus, Meumayr. Unvermittelt auftretende Ceph.; Jahrbuch k.-k. 
geol. Reichsanstalt, Bd. xxviii, Heft 1, p. 61 

group Oxynoti in part). 
1884. Oxynorriceras, Zittel (non Hyatt). Ceph.; Handbuch der Pal., Bd. i, 
Abth. 2, Lief. 3, p. 450 (in part). 
1889. PrnEecoceras, S. Buckm. (non Hyatt). Cotteswold, &., Sands; Quart. 


Journ. Geol. Soe., vol. xlv, 
p- 450, &e. 
1890. — —_ — This Monograph, antea. 


Adult: Discoidal, compressed, fairly involute. Whorls broad, sloping to 
form an acute ventral area. Suture-line very simple, lobes short and broad, 
denticulations very slight. Young: Whorls ornamented with radii some- 
times bifurcating to form primary and secondary ribs. Ventral area more 
pronounced, with a small (hollow ?) carina. Sutures with lobes more pronounced. 

Only a few species are included in this genus. They are mostly deficient in 
ornamentation, and are separable one from another chiefly by the amount of 
involution or the extent of compression attained. As may be seen from the plate, 
the material with which I have had to deal has been most unsatisfactory; and, 
therefore, it is impossible to be very definite in my remarks. 

The species included in this genus have undergone several changes in regard 
to their generic classification. Originally placed in the genus Amaltheus—a 
genus with which they have nothing in common except a sharpened ventral area, 
a character of no generic value at all—they were removed by Zittel to the genus 
Oxynoticeras. With this genus they have many points in common ; but the inner 
whorls of the specimens indicate a certain difference of origin, and I have conse- 
quently proposed a new generic name. At onetime I thought that they might be 
the species for which Hyatt created the genus Pelecoceras, the description of 
which seemed to fit them fairly well; but correspondence with Prof. Hyatt has 


resulted in my ascertaining that this genus was proposed for something quite 
different.” 


1 In compliment to my kind friend Mr. W. H. Hudleston, F.R.S., &e. 
2 Prof. Hyatt writes to me that ‘‘ Pelecoceras attenuatum, Hyatt, is, if not identical, very 


similar to the Am. malagma of Dum.” (see pp. 142, e¢ seg.). On my pointing out to Prof. Hyatt 


29 


226 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. 


The descent of the genus Hudlestonia is very uncertain, because of the paucity 
of the badly-preserved material which I have had to examine; but the general 
shape and the suture-line suggest affinity with Orynoticeras. Now, Hyatt derives 
Oxynoticeras directly from Agassiceras striaries, and places the genus in the family 
Arietidxe.' I am almost inclined to think that there is an intermediate stage of 
development, of which all trace is omitted in Oxynoticeras on account of the very 
early inheritance of Oxynoticeratan characters ; and this stage may be mentioned as 
Amm. obtusus— stellaris—impendens—Oollenoti, Wright—Collenotu, d’Orbigny 
(Simpsoni, Wright)—ovynotus. The changes in this series are increase of involu- 
tion and consequent broadening of lateral area—decrease of ribbing—compression 
of ventral area, with consequent gradual loss of ventral furrows, ending in an 
acute carina. 

The development of the genus Hudlestonia seems to be almost parallel 
to this, and appears to furnish strong evidence in support of the above view con- 
cerning Oxynoticeras. Hudl. Sinon may be taken as analogous to Am. Collenotii, 
Wright, in the matter of its ribbing, &c.; but Hudl. serrodens, which is analogous 
to Oxynot. owynotum, shows no trace of this ribbing, &c.,? in its inner whorls—in 
fact, the Sinon-stage is omitted in Hudl. serrodens on account of the very early 
inheritance of the smooth characters. The inner whorls of Hudl. affinis (PI. 
XXX VIIT) show the connection of Hudl. serrodens with Hudl. Sinon, and indicate 
that Hudlestonia was derived from an Ammonite bearing considerable resemblance 
to Ainioceras except in lacking furrows ; and the absence of furrows may of course 
be due to development. 

Further than this it is impossible to go with the poor material at command ; 
but I think there is sufficient evidence to warrant the conclusion that Hudlestoma 
is a developed form of a branch of the Arietidz, say Arnioceras, and is analogous 
to Oxynoticeras—in other words, that it is a later development from the same or 
nearly similar stock whence Oxynoticeras was derived, and that it went through 
very similar phases of development with similar results. The young forms of the 
genus show by their ribbed whorls and, comparatively-speaking, large umbilicus 
that Hudlestonia is not descended directly from Ozxynoticeras ; and the umbilicus, 
again, prohibits the idea that they come from Am. Guibali, whose ancestors, by the 
that practically his genus Pelecoceras and my genus Haugia are identical, he kindly wrote in reply, 
“T noticed that you had separated the Variabilis-group from Hammatoceras by name of Haugia. 

It is curious that while I separated Pelecoceras I did not separate Variabilis itself from 
Hammatoceras. I do not think, therefore, that my name Pelecoceras has any proper title to super- 
sede your Haugia.” I take this opportunity to tender my sincere thanks to the learned Professor 
for his constant courtesy. 

1 « Genesis of the Arietide,”’ ‘Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge’ (4to.), vol. xxvi, p. 214, 
1889. 

» That is according to Quenstedt’s figure. I can say nothing from my own specimens. 


HUDLESTONIA SINON. 227 


way, were probably not the same as those of Oxynot. oxynotum. It is on these 
grounds, as I have said, that I create the genus Hudlestonia. 

The broad, shallow, little-denticulated lobes of this genus distinguish it at once 
from any of the previously described genera; and this feature separates Hudl. 
Sinon from either Gramm. aalense, Ludwigia Murchison, or any other species which 
are ornamented with bifurcate radii. The suture-line of this genus, it may be 
remarked, is decidedly Arietan in character ; and its shallow lobes—which become 
more shallow as development proceeds—are caused by the extension of the lateral 
area, producing, as it were, a stretching of the suture-line. 

The British species of Hudlestonia have been derived from one particular 
horizon, namely, the Jurense-zone ; and in the Cotteswolds they are confined to 
the Dumortieria-beds. A form from the Opalinum-zone—“ upper part of T’rigonia- 


997 


navis-beds or lower part of beds with Am. Murchisonx”’ ‘—namely, Am. Fredericii, 
Branco, which is almost identical with Am. serrodens, is the only species of the 


genus which I cannot record in this Monograph. 


Hopesronia Srnon (Bayle). Plate XXXVIII, figs. 13—16. 


1846. Ammonites Murcuisona, Schmidt (non Sowerby). Petrif.-Buch, pl. xxxv, 
figs. 2a, b (not 2¢, d). 
1874. _ costuLA, Dumortier (non Reinecke). Etudes pal. Bassin 
Rhone, iv, pl. li, figs. 1, 2. 
1878. Lupwrera Sinon, Bayle. Explic. carte géol. France, vol. iv, pt. 1, 
pl. Ixxxiu. 
1885. Harpoceras Sinon, Haug. Beitr. Monogr. Harpoceras; Neues Jahrbuch 
fir Mineral., &c., Beil.-Bd. iii, p. 669. 


Discoidal, compressed, carinate. Whorls broad, ornamented with subsig- 
moidal, ventrally-inclined, primary and secondary radii; primary radii situated on 
the inner third of the whorls, and bifurcating or trifurcating to form the secondary 
radii; radii disappear in adult. Ventral area undefined, slightly carinate on core 
(no hollow carina ?); in adult age no ventral area, the compression of the sides 
forming a carina. Inner margin sloped, slightly convex. Inclusion about two- 
thirds. 

One extremely poor cast is all the material I have seen. It is even doubtful 
if it exactly represent Bayle’s species ; but his figure is certainly the nearest form. 
As this specimen only differs in certain minor points, I could not think of mak- 
ing a new species on such material; but the following points should be noticed. 
Bayle’s fig. 1 has a slightly smaller umbilicus than the specimen before me; its 


1 Branco, “ Unt. Dogger Deutsch-Lothringen,” ‘ Abh. z. geol. Spez.-Karte,’ Bd. ii, pl. iii, 1879. 


228 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. 


inner margin is represented as slightly concave; and its sutures have a longer 
superior-lateral lobe. No front view is given; but the front view of his fig. 3 
certainly seems to represent a thicker fossil. 

Taking Zieten, pl. vi, fig. 1, as the type of Mayer’s Am. opalinoides, there is 
certainly considerable resemblance between “ opalinoides” and ‘‘ Simon,” but the 
ventral area of the latter is evidently much more acute, and the ribs are stronger. 

The most interesting fact about Hudl. Sinon is the manner in which its outer 
whorl prefigures the other species of the genus. It is easy to imagine Hud. 
serrodens as the descendant of this species, although it is more probably derived 
from Hudl. affinis. The specimen figured (Pl. XXXVIII, figs. 13—16) is im the 
collection of Mr. W. H. Hudleston, F.R.S., who kindly lent it, and others, for this 
work. It came from the Grey Sands, Blue Wyke, Yorkshire. 


Houp.estonia AFFinis' (Seebach). Plate XXXVIII, figs. 1—8. 
1864. Ammonites arrinis, Seebach. Der bannoverische Jura, pl. viii, figs. 4a, 0. 


Adult : Discoidal, compressed, carinate. Whorls with strongly gibbous sides, 
their convexity interrupted near the ventral edge by a slght depression. 
Ventral edge narrow, slightly rounded. No defined inner margin. Inclusion 
apparently about three-fourths of preceding whorl. Sutures simple with broad 
lobes. 

Young: Whorls ornamented with subsigmoidal, ventrally-inclined radii, which 
are sometimes united on the inner area, forming a coarser rib. Ventral area 
more pronounced, with a carina on the core. 

The material of this species is not only lamentably fragmentary, but is in the 
form of poor casts. In sectional view the whorls differ somewhat from Seebach’s 
figure, being less convex altogether, and especially near the inner margin. In 
Seebach’s figure the whorls are more pear-shaped in section; in our specimens 
they are almost lanceolate. 

The forms figured by Brauns and Schloenbach’ do not seem to me to 
represent Seebach’s species. Schloenbach’s figure, especially, appears to be much 
too compressed and too involute, and in this respect closely resembles Hudl. 
serrodens. Brauns’ figs. 1, 2, appear to have the same features; but his outline 
fig. 3 is rather gibbous, although not so gibbous as Seebach’s. Of course, as 
Hudlestonia serrodens 1s probably only the compressed, involute development of 


1 The name “ affinis,” “near to,” probably refers to its relationship to dm. serrodens. 
* See the synonyms of Hudl. serrodens. 


HUDLESTONIA SERRODENS. 229 


Hudlestonia affinis, it is quite possible that Brauns’ specimen may be, to a certain 
extent, intermediate. 

There seems to be some indication of such facts in the specimens now before 
me. The large fragment from Penn Wood, Gloucestershire (Pl. XX XVIII, fig. 1), 
is certainly somewhat more gibbous than the specimens from Yorkshire, and 
possibly more umbilicate. Whether it be actually more umbilicate than Seebach’s 
specimen, it is really impossible to say with such material. 

The great difference which exists between the young and the adult of this 
species, as shown in the Yorkshire specimens (fig. 4), 1s a poimt well worthy of 
notice. The young, of course, represent the ribbed stage of Hudl. Sinon, only that 
their ornaments are finer altogether ; and presumably these ornaments were lost at 
a much earlier age. The young, however, show that Hudl. affinis and Sinon 
were derived from the same source, but that the former is rather more developed 
—it assumes the senile characters at an earlier age. I do not derive Hudl. affinis 
directly from Sinon, because Hudl. Sinon does not seem to foreshadow the gibbous 
whorl of Hudl. affinis ; but it is unsafe to say much with such poor material. The 
outer whorls of Hudl. affinis show the connection with Hudl. serrodens. 

The Dumortieria-beds (Jurense-zone) of Penn Wood, near Stroud, have yielded 
the large fragment depicted in outline. The “ Yellow and Grey Sands below 
Dogger” of Blue Wyke, Yorkshire, have afforded Mr. Hudleston other examples, 
which he has kindly sent me for examination. They are smaller and rather 
thinner than the Gloucestershire fragment, and hence may be considered slightly 
transitional to Hud. serrodens. 

Pl. XXXVIII, fig. 1, is the outline of a very poorly preserved fragment, and 
its sectional view is shown in figs. 2 and 3. Fig. 4, showing the difference 
between the young and adult of this species, is a specimen from Yorkshire; fig. 5 
is the front view of the inner whorls, and fig. 6 is the outline of the aperture of 
the outer whorl. In figs. 7 and 8 are two views of a young example, which has 
had to be more or less restored to show its true characters. 


Hup.EstTonia suRRODENS (Quenstedt). Plate XX XVIII, figs. 9—12. 


1846. AMMONITES SERRODENS, Quenstedt. Ceph., pl. viii, fig. 14. 
1858. — — — Der Jura, pl. xl, fig. 6, p. 282. 
1866. — AFFINIS, Brauns (non Seebach). Die Stratigr. und Pal. des S.-O. 
Theiles der Hilsmulde; Paleeonto- 
graphica, xiii, pl. xxv, figs. 1, 2,4 (3?). 
1866. — _ Schloenbach (non Seebach). Jurass. Amm.; Palzon- 
tographica, xiii, pl. xxviii, fig. 1. 


230 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. 


1874, AMMONITES sERRODENS, Dumortier. Etudes pal. Bassin Rhone, pl. lviii, 
figs. 2, 3. 

1885. = — Quenstedt. Amm. Schwabischen Jura, pl. xlviii, 
figs. 15—17. 


Discoidal, compressed, carinate. Whorls sloping from the upper edge of the 
inner margin to form a sharp, knife-like ventral area. Inner margin fairly steep. 
Inclusion nearly the whole whorl. Umbilicus smalland rather deep. Suture-line 
simple, the lobes broad with very small denticulations. 

The specimens are very poorly preserved, and lack the test entirely. They are 
also decidedly inferior as casts—there is no sharpness about them; they are 
generally more or less crushed, and a whole whorl is a rarity. On account of 
these reasons I have contented myself with outline figures, which will convey 
sufficient idea of the shape. The test was apparently ornamented with fine 
arcuate growth-lines, but there are only occasional indications of them upon the 
cast. The smaller umbilicus and the absence—judging from Quenstedt’s figure— 
of ribs in the inner whorls are the features which separate this species from 
Hudl. affinis. 

From Am. Fredericii, Branco, which, however, is for all practical purposes the 
same species, it only differs by its less pronounced inner margin. Branco cites the 
simpler lobes as a character distinguishing his species ; but they do not possess 
much value, because the lobes of Hudl. serrodens become simpler as the specimens 
become older or more developed. Dumortier’s figure of serrodens (loc. cit.) is 
evidence on this point. 

From Ovynoticeras ovynotum of the Lower Lias, and from Ammonites discus of 
the Cornbrash, to both of which it bears considerable external resemblance, Hud. 
serrodens may be known by its suture-line, as well as by other features. It may 
possess a certain collateral relationship to the first named, but must be very 
remote from the latter. The inclusion of these and many other similar-shaped 
species in the same genus was caused by a failure to observe that they were poly- 
genetic—that they were, in fact, nothing more than forms resulting from senile 
degradation of different branches. 

Quenstedt’s figures represent Hudl. serrodens without any ribs on the inner 
whorls. If this be correct, it means that, by very early inheritance of the smooth 
character of Hudl. Sinon or Hudl. affinis, this species has omitted the ribbed stage 
altogether. From which of the two above-mentioned species this one is derived 
cannot be stated with any degree of certainty ; but it is true enough that in Hudl. 
Sinon, affinis, serrodens, we have, in this order, three stages of development; and 
the amount of development is indicated by the ever earlier period at which the 
smooth, senile character is introduced. 

The upper part of the Jurense-zone (Dumortieria-beds) is the horizon of this 


DUMORTIERIA. 231 


species in the Cotteswolds. The specimen from which the outlines (figs. 9, 10) 
were taken came from Penn Wood, near Stroud; and fragments have been 
collected at Cam Down, North Nibley, and Wootton-under-Kdge. 

From the Dispansum-beds of White Lackington, near Ilminster, I obtained a 
poor fragment. 

Pl. XXXVIII, fig. 9, is the outline of the side view of a very inferior 
specimen of this species; fig. 10 is its aperture; and fig. 11 its suture-line. It 
came from Penn Wood, near Stroud. Fig. 12 shows the aperture of a fragment 
from Cam Down, near Dursley. This aperture differs somewhat in shape from 
fig. 10, but then the specimen is much smaller. 


Family—Potymorpuipa, Haug. 
Genus—DvumortigRia, Haug. 
(Type—Dumortieria LevesQvet, d’ Orbigny sp.) 


1885. Dumorrierta, Haug. Beitr. Monogr. Harpoceras; Neues Jahrbuch fiir 
Mineral., &c., Beil.-Bd. iii, p. 666. 

1887. = a “ Polymorphide ;” Neues Jahrbuch fiir Mineral., &c., 
Bd. ii, p. 147. 


Discoidal, compressed, fairly evolute. Whorls ornamented with ribs, straight 
or nearly straight on the lateral area,’ slightly projected forwards on the ventral 
area. Ventral area more or less carinate. Mouth furnished with a long lateral 
process and a slight pointed ventral projection. Suture-line fairly ornate, lobes 
rather long and saddles rather deep. The inner part of the suture-line, including 
the rather small inferior lateral lobe, somewhat dependent—that is, the lobes 
pointing across the whorl] towards the carina. 

The species of Ammonites which compose the genus Dumortieria appear to me 
to possess unusual interest ; and yet they have attracted but little attention in this 
country. I attribute this want of notice, first, to their generally inferior preserva- 
tion, as well as comparative scarcity ; and secondly, to their having probably 
passed as belonging to other species of Ammonites—species now separated into 
the genus Grammoceras. 


! These ribs will be described as direct (= straight) or subdirect (= nearly straight) ribs, 
ventrally inclined—that is, with a short ventral projection, not a long ventral projection (= ventrally 
projected) as in Grammoceras. 


232 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. 


One of the most interesting points in connection with the genus Dumortieria 
is what may be called the ‘‘ archaic’? character of the “less-developed ”’ shells. 
The more or less rounded whorls, the straight ribs, and the slightly-carinate 
ventral area take us back to the much earlier (Lower-Lias) forms of Ophioceras ;" 
and Hyatt rightly enough appreciated this when he placed Am. Levesquei in the 
genus Ophioceras.’ 

The genera Dumortieria and Grammoceras have, superficially, a very great 
resemblance; but their descent is certainly distinct. This, however, is a matter 
which can only be learnt by the examination of a large series of species. When 
dealing with single specimens, and wishing to determine their genus, the reader 
should consult page 162, and remember that the characteristics of Dumortieria are 
ribs straight on the lateral area and very little projected ventrally, long siphonal 
and superior lateral lobes, the inner portion of the suture-line brought down 
obliquely (dependent).’ 

The origin of the genus Dumortieria may be traced to a smooth species, say 
Agassiceras miserabile* in the Obtuswm-zone. This species gave rise to the smooth 
Polymorphites polymorphus, which passed into Pol. polymorphus lineatus with fine 
ribs, and into Pol. polymorphus costatus with stronger and more distant ribs. 
This development, carried on in the same manner, would produce Catulloceras 
Vernose (Zittel), a species with well-marked ribs but no carina. Now, this species 
occurs in the Margaritatus-zone; and it should be noticed that its development 
from the smooth Pol. polymorphus is exactly parallel to the changes which, in the 
Lower Lias, produced such species as Am. carusense, d’Orbigny, or Am. planicosta, 
Sowerby, from a smooth ancestral form. 

Between Catulloceras Vernose of the Middle Lias, and the species of Catullo- 
ceras and Dumortieria of the Jurense-zone, is a break, during which no species of 
the genus can be recorded; and, therefore, the changes necessary to produce the 
Jurense-zone species from the Middle-Liassic ancestor must be matters of hypothesis. 
The great similarity between Dumortieria prisca and Catulloceras Dumortiert 
favours the view of their derivation from a common, and not very remote, source. 
The addition of a carina on the ventral area cutting across the ribs would convert 
Catulloceras Vernose into Catull. Dumortiert. To evolve Dum. prisca, however, 
more changes must have taken place. First, the mbs of Catull. Vernose are 
coarser and more distant on the outer than on the inner whorls, and the supposed 

! See Aeg. liassicum, intermedium, Belcheri, figured by Dr. Wright, ‘ Lias Amm., Pal. Soc.,’ pl. xv. 
These species are now described as Caloceras ; Hyatt, “ Genesis of Arietide,’’ ‘Smithsonian Contribu- 
tions to Knowledge’ (4to.), vol. xxvi, p. 141, 1889. 

® Hyatt, ‘ Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool.,’ No. 5, p. 98. 

3 At p. 162, line 23 from top, “ practically no inferior lateral lobe” is not quite correct. It is 


better to say ‘small inferior lateral lobe.’ 
' See, however, Haug, “‘ Polymorphide,’’ ‘ Neues Jahrbuch fiir Mineral.,’ &e., Bd. ii, 1887. 


DUMORTIERIA. 233 


descendants must have continued to accentuate this feature until, on their outer 
whorls, something resembling the distant ribbing of the inner whorls of Dum. 
prisca was produced. Secondly, either simultaneously or subsequently, a quicker 
mode of coiling must have been adopted; while thirdly, either simultaneously or 
subsequently—it 1s impossible to say which without examining the inner whorls of 
Dum. prisca, a small carina must have been produced, while the ribs must have 
become obsolete on the ventral area. 

Such are the changes necessary to produce Dum. prisca from Catull. Vernose ; 
and therefore Dum. prisca 1s a more developed form than Catull. Dumortieri ; but 
the evolution of either may be said to be analogous to the production of Oaloceras 
from forms possessing the Planicostan abdomen.’ 

Dum, prisca, Dum. costula, Dum. sparsicosta, and Dum. Levesquet may all be 
said to be analogous to Caloceras ; and the inner whorls of the other species of 
Dumortieria show their connection with these forms. These other species, 
however, assume, when adult, a totally different appearance—the effect, solely, 
of continued lateral compression of the whorl; but this causes a convergence 
between Grammoceras and Dumortieria. Dum. striatulo-costata, radians, Moorei, 
&¢c., all show this Grammoceratan-like-stage, and only differ from one another in 
that the more they are developed the earlier they assume this stage. Unlike Gram- 
moceras, these species of Dumortieria have apparently taken on this stage without 
passing through what may be called the Arietan stage,’ that is, a period of sulcate 
and carinate ventral area. The inner whorls of Dum. striatulo-costata (Pl. XL) 
seem to indicate this fact clearly. 

It is very curious that, while the smooth ancestral form splits up into two 
branches, one of which at the commencement of the Liassic period developed into 
Caloceras (Ophioceras), the other should have waited until the commencement of 
the Middle Lias, and should then have started on a career of similar changes. 
But the resemblance is even more pecuhar than this. While Caloceras evolved 
the Arietide, first by producing a carina on its ventral area, and then by gradually 
broadening its ventral area—adding a furrow on each side of the carina,—the 
same thing should happen in certain species of the later Catulloceras- and Dumor- 


tieria-branches. But so it is. Catulloceras Vernose has an uncarinate ventral 
area, Dum. prisca and Dum. Levesquer add a small carina, while Dum. arata and 
Catulloceras Dumortiert have developed small furrows each side of the carina 
in the same manner as obtains in the Arietide. Still more curious than this, how- 

1 «The crossing of the ubdomen by the pile . . . iscommonin the young of Caloceran forms” 
(Hyatt, “Genesis of the Arietide,’’ ‘Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge,’ vol. xxvi, p. 142). 
It may therefore be concluded that the abdomen crossed by pile, which Hyatt bas previously tersely 


> was a feature of the adult ancestors of Caloceras. 


* In Grammoceras the Arietan-stage may be said to be obsolescent; in Dum. arata and Catull. 


called “ the Planicostan abdomen,’ 


Dumortieri are signs of nascent Arietan-like characters. 


30 


234 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. 


ever, 1s the fact that in Catulloceras scissum the ventral area is a sunken furrow 
which the ribs do not cross; and this feature had appeared long previously in 
Schlotheimia angulata—a species which can only be traced to a much older branch 
of the stem which produced Caloceras and the Arietide.' 

The manner in which Haug has derived the genus Dwmortieria’ differs in one 
particular from what I have stated, namely, that he interposes Am. Jamesoni* 
between Polymorphites polymorphus and Catulloceras Vernose. That Pol. polymor- 
phus gave birth to Pol. Bronni and Pol. confusus—species with a carina, and with 
knobs on the outer end of their ribs—which in turn gave birth to Am. Jamesoni, 
I can readily imagine, but not that Dumortieria or Catulloceras is derived from 
Am. Jamesoni, because, as I have before remarked (pp. 161, 162), I cannot see the 
reason for the alteration of the complicated sutures of the adult Am. Jameson 
(Hang, op. cit., p. 125) to the simpler sutures of Am. Levesquei. Haug also says 
that the chief difference between Dum. Vernose and Am. Jamesoni is that the former 
ismuch more strongly evolute. Both these facts are inversions of the usual process, 
which is a constantly increasing involution accompanied by a gradual progress in 
complexity of the sutures. 

The similarity which exists between Dumortieria and Am. Jamesoni I very 
readily admit; but I account for this similarity by the fact that both are derived 
from acommonancestor. In effect, Haug’s derivation of Dumortieria is more com- 
pleated than mine; because he makes out that the ancestral line has passed 
through two more stages, namely, the Pol.-Bronni-stage, and then, what is 
practically a reversion, the Am.-Jamesoni-stage, before it evolved the true 
Dumortieria. In my opinion Dumortieria came more directly from Polymorphites 
polymorphus, or perhaps from Pol. peregrinus ; and the changes necessary to 
evolve it consisted only in the gradual production of coarser and coarser ribs (Duin. 
Vernose), and in time also a keel (Dum. prisca and Levesquet). 

Such, then, are my views concerning the descent of Dumortieria ; with which 
the genus Catulloceras may, for the present, be bracketed. I consider it preferable 
to treat of all the different species of these two genera in detail, and then in a 
postscript to add a few notes upon their evolution from one another. 

The extraordinary convergence between certain species of Dumortieria and 
Grammoceras—a convergence which culminates in the two deceptively similar 
species Dum. Moorei and Gramm. mactra—renders it very necessary that the 
descent of Dumortieria and Grammoceras should be clearly traced. Taking only 


1 Hyatt, “Evolution of Arietidw,” ‘Proc. Boston Nat. Hist. Soce.,’ vol. xvi, fig. 73, p. 166, foot- 
note ; also ‘‘ Genetic Relations of the Angulatide,” ibid., 1874, p. 16; also “Genesis of Arietide,” 
‘Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge,’ vol. xxvi, 1889. 

2 Haug, ‘ Polymorphide,”’ ‘ Neues Jahrbuch fiir Mineralogie, &c.,’ 1887, Bd. 11, p. 120. 

3 Haug includes Am. Jamesoni in the genus Dumortieria, but I omit it. 


DUMORTIEFRIA. 23% 


or 


the ventral area, there are in the Dumortieria-ancestry the following changes: 
smooth, ribbed, carinate; but in the Grammoceras-ancestry, smooth, ribbed, cari- 
nate, carinate and sulcate (Arietan), degenerating into carinate. 

If anyone trace the gradual mutations expressed by Dum. prisca—Levesquet 
striatulocostata—radians—Moorei, and compare them with the mutations Gramm. 
toarcense—striatulum—mactra, he will find that the species of each line run almost 
insensibly one into another in the order stated. Further, he will find that though 
the earlier forms of the two genera—Dum. prisca and Levesquei and Gramm. toar- 
cense—are very dissimilar, yet the later forms, Dum. Moorei and Gramm. mactra, 
are almost indistinguishable. It is very important to bear in mind the differences 
between the earlier species : first, the total absence of hereditary sulci—or of that 
flattened ventral area betokening the former existence of the same—in Dum. prisca 
and Dum. Levesquet, and the presence of this character in Grammoceras toarcense 
and so many other species of that genus; secondly, the suture-line—and no better 
comparison can be made than between the sutures of Dum. Levesquei (Pl. XX XVII, 
fig. 5) and Gramm. toarcense (Pl. XXVIII, fig. 6). It is by the loss of ventral 
furrows that Grammoceras converges to Dumortieria ;' while it is by the gradual 
modifications or reduction of the salient points of its suture-line’-—the long 
siphonal and inferior lateral lobes, deep siphonal and superior lateral saddles, 
dependent inferior lateral and auxiliary lobes—that Dumortieria converges to 
Grammoceras. Further, Dumortieria converts a rounded, little-carinate ventral 
area into an acute carinate area; Grammoceras converts a carinate and sulcate 
ventral area into an acute carinate area; and so convergence is accentuated. 

The geological position of the genera Dumortieria and Catulloceras (from which 
I exclude Am. Jamesoni) extends from the Margaritatus- until the Concavum-zone 
inclusive. ‘The majority of the species, however, are to be found in the Jurense- 


and Opalinum-zones—particularly in the top of the former (Dumortieria-beds) and 
in the base of the latter (Moorei-beds) ; and these genera, like Gramimoceras, help 
to bind these two zones intimately together, and to show that the Lias-Oolite divi- 
sion of the German paleontologists is, after all, extremely arbitrary. 

It is in the Jurense- and Opalinuwm-zones that the genus Dumortieria undergoes 
that peculiar metamorphosis which causes it to converge towards Grammoceras ; 
and the species in these two zones are all very intimately connected together. 
The isolated species Dum. grammoceroides, which occurs in the Concavum-zone, 
is just commencing the metamorphosis. It is merely a slight and normal muta- 
tion of Dum. Levesquei; but in general aspect it has a peculiar resemblance to 
certain non-spinous species of Sonninia which occur in the same bed. 

1 This is excluding the isolated form Dum. arata; but see foot-note, p. 233. 

2 The reduction of the suture-line can be traced through the Plates XXXVII and XXXIX— 
XLIV, and it will be seen to correspond with a broadening of the whorl-area, 


236 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. 


Chief among the literature dealing with Dumortieria and its ally Catulloceras I 
must mention Haug’s excellent work, ‘“‘ Ueber die Polymorphide, eine neue 
Ammonitenfamilie aus dem Lias,”’ ‘ Neues Jahrbuch fiir Mineralogie, &c.,’ Beil.-Bd. 
i, 1887. Commencing with the Lower Lias, it treats of Agassiceras and different 
branches which have sprung therefrom (including Dwmortieria) in a very complete 
manner. Its two plates contain figures of certain new species of the genus; and 
numerous tracings of suture-lines are given in the text. Another work to be con- 
sulted is Branco’s ‘ Untere Dogger ;’ but see p. 169. 


Doumortrerta prisoa,’ S. Buckman. Plate XX XVII, figs. 9—11. 


Discoidal, evolute, carinate. Whorls almost circular, ornamented with coarse, 
distant, irregularly placed, direct ribs, which become smaller and closer-set on the 
last. Ventral area not defined, convex, divided by a very small carina, which is 
met almost at right angles by extremely obscure ribs. No inner margin. Inclu- 
sion about one-third or less. Umbilicus open, with gibbous-sided whorls orna- 
mented with coarse, unequal-sized, unequally placed, distant ribs. Suture-line with 
a well-marked superior lateral lobe, and a markedly dependent inner portion. 

The form, the ornamentation, and the sutures of this species are extremely 
suggestive of Caloceras (Ophioceras), especially of such a species as Cal. liassicum. 
These characteristics indicate that this is a little-developed form—that, in fact, 
this species from the Juwrense-zone has only attained the same stage of development 
as these species of Caloceras at the base of the Lower Lias. The development of 
the ancestors of this species must have been greatly retarded ; and it is not a little 
singular that when they did develop they should so copy the Lower-Liassic 
derivations from the ancestral stock (Caloceras). It ison account of this likeness to 
an ancient form that I have given this species the name of “ priscus,”’ old-fashioned. 

Of course this species is the ancestor of Dum. Levesquet. Its outer whorl, 
where the ribs become smaller and closer-set, comparatively, and which has a 
slightly less circular section than its predecessors, foreshadows the features which 
are peculiar to Dum. Levesque ; and just in the same manner the outer whorls of 
Dum. Levesquei foreshadow the features which are peculiar and much more deve- 
loped in Dum. striatulocostata, Dum. pseudoradiosa, or Dum. radians. 

I believe that this species is undescribed. It is most interesting as supplying 
a link in the genealogy of Dum. Levesquei; and it indicates whence are derived 
those coarse irregular ribs to be seen in the innermost whorls of all species of 
Dumortieria, unless obliterated by the encroachment of senility. 


1 « Priscus”? = old-fashioned. 


DUMORTIERIA COSTULA. 237 


The only species which at all approach this are Dum. sparsicosta, Haug, and 
Dum. costula (Reinecke). Both of them are doubtless its direct descendants. 
The former differs in having considerably more compressed, broader, and more 
ventrally-sharpened whorls, greater inclusion, and fewer turns in the umbilicus ; 
while the latter differs very much in the same features, but has a more gibbous 
ventral area than sparsicosta. 

The specimen figured is the only example known to me. It was collected by 
Mr. Darell Stephens, F.G.S., &c., and, as is the case with his specimens, its 
locality is accurately recorded. The label says, “The Sands, Hendford Hill, 
Yeovil;” and its horizon, therefore, is the lower part of the Yeovil Sands—in 
other words, the Dumortieria-beds (Jurense-zone). 

Pl. XXXVII, figs. 9,10, give two views of this specimen, and fig. 11 illustrates 
the characteristic suture-line. 


Dumortigria costuna (Reinecke). Plate XX XVII, figs. 12—15. 


1818. Navrrnvus costuta, Reinecke. Maris protogei, figs. 33, 34. 

1846. AMMONITES RADIANS COSTULA, Quenstedt. Ceph., pl. vii, fig. 11. 

1858. — AALENSIS COSTULA, Quenstedt. Der Jura, pl. xl, fig. 11. 

1884, Harpocrras Muniert, Haug. Nouv. Amm.; Bull. Soe. géol. France, 
8e série, t. xii, pl. xiii, fig. 3. 


1885. — — — Beitr. Monogr. Harpoceras ; Neues Jahr- 
buch fiir Mineral., &c., Beil.-Bd. iii, 
p. 668. 


1885. AMMONITES STRIATULO-CcOsTATUS, Quenstedt. Amm. Sechwabischen Jura, 
pl. lu, fig. 8 only. 


1885. — COSTULA, Quenstedt. Ibid., pl. liv, figs. 1O—14 only. 
1885. _ FALCOFILA-SPARSICOSTA, Quenstedt, Ibid., pl. liv, fig. 85 only. 
1887. Dumortrerta Munizri, Haug. ‘“ Polymorphide,’ Neues Jahrbuch fiir 


Mineralogie, &e., Bd. 1, p. 132. 
Non Am. costula, Dumortier, Branco, Bayle, Vacek, &c. (see next page). 


Discoidal, compressed, carinate. Whorls elliptical in shape, with gibbous 
sides, ornamented with distant, but not very prominent, unequally-spaced, direct, 
ventrally-inclined ribs. Between the ribs are indications of faint radii upon the 
core; but on the test are very fine strie. Ventral area undefined, very slightly 
carinate. No inner margin. Inclusion about one-third. 

The small specimen figured seems to me to agree with Reinecke’s somewhat 
dubious figure better than anything else I possess. The larger specimen appears 
to differ from the smaller only in being somewhat less carinate; and possibly its 
whorl at the same size is a little more gibbous. This larger specimen, however, 


238 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. 


agrees exactly with Quenstedt’s delineation of Am. radians costula,’ which was his 
interpretation of Reinecke’s figure. Haug® appears to have had two or three 
species mixed as Harp. costula ; for, while he recognised Quenstedt’s figure as the 
young, he considered Dumortier’s figure (see below) as the adult, and he also 
quoted Branco’s figure as a synonym. Besides this, he had just previously (see 
synonyms) figured a specimen which to my mind agrees exactly with Quenstedt’s 
Am. radians costula, and had called it Harp. Munieri. Ina letter recently received 
from my friend he admits the agreement between Munieri and Am. radians 
costula, and observes “‘ that if Quenstedt’s specimen be really identical with 
Reinecke’s species the name ‘ Munieri’ must fall into the synonymy.” It seems to 
me that this is what must happen at present. If, however, the smaller specimen 
figured—which is Reinecke’s costula—should prove not to be the young of the 
larger specimen—which is certainly Dr. Haug’s “ Munieri,’’—then the latter name 
may stand. 

Very different are the species which have been identified with Reinecke’s Am. 
costula. As the chief of them I may notice the following: 


1849. AM. RADIANS CosTULA, Quenstedt. Ceph., pl. vii, fig. 11. 


1858. — AALENSIS CosTULA, Quenstedt. Der Jura, pl. xl, fig. 11 (the same as 
above). 
1874. — cosruLa, Dumortier. (See Hudlestonia Sinon, p. 227.) 


1878. Lupwier1a costuLa, Bayle. Explic. carte géol. France, pl. lxxix, fig. 5; 
a Grammoceras closely allied to Gramm. 


aalense. 
1879. Harpoceras costuLa, Branco. See Gramm. costulatum, p. 197. 
1884. — — Wright. Lias Amm., pl. Ixxxii, fig. 5. Fig. 6 is 


perhaps G. distans, p. 196. 
1885. AMMONITES CosTULA, Quenstedt. Amm. Schwibischen Jura, pl. liv, figs. 7 
—9 and 49, see Gramm. costulatum, 
p. 197; figs. 10O—14 probably belong 
to this species; fig 50, see Dwm. sub- 
undulata. 

1886. Hanrpoceras costuta, Vacek. Ool. Cap San Vigilio; Abh. k. k. geol. Reichs- 
anstalt, Bd. xii, No. 3. The young of 
this species are very similar to Bayle’s 
costula, but the adult form seems to indi- 
cate that the species belongs to Harpo- 
ceras, sensu stricto. 


The small specimen figured is not unlike Gramm. distans (Pl. XXXIII, figs. 
1,2; see p. 196), but differs by its more gibbous whorls, its more distant, more 
direct ribs less ventrally-projected. These are just the points in which it agrees 
with Reinecke’s Am. costula. 


1 ¢Ceph.,’ pl. vii. 
2 « Harpoceras,” ‘Neues Jahrbuch fir Mineral., &.,’ 1885, Beil.-Bd. ii, p. 664. 


DUMORTIERIA SPARSICOSTA. 239 


From Dum. Levesquei this species differs in having rather more gibbous whorls 
and a smaller umbilicus. Its more distant and more irregular ribs, and the fine 
growth-lines on the test, are also distinctions. 

It seems to me that this species is descended directly from Dum. prisca, from 
which it differs in having fewer whorls of a more elliptical shape, and a different 
arrangement of ribbing. Haug says, however, that “in the upper part of the 
Jurense-zone of Swabia all the intermediate forms between the typical Dum. 
Levesquei and Dum. Munieri are found together.’”! 

The horizon of this species 1s, according to the above remarks, in the Jurense- 
zone; and the little specimen came from the division Dumortieria-beds of Cam 
Down, Gloucestershire. The larger specimen I purchased from the Wright Collec- 
tion. Its locality is not recorded, but judging from its matrix I infer that it 
came from Yorkshire—probably from Blue Wyke, and from the beds known as the 
“ Striatulus-shales.” 

The species is rare, and, generally, poorly preserved. The Long and Penn 
Woods, near Stroud, and Stinchcombe Hill, have yielded examples in addition to 
those figured. 

Pl. XXXVII, figs. 12, 13, give two views of a small specimen from Cam 
Down, Gloucestershire, which I consider to agree with Reinecke’s figure of 
“ Nautilus costula.” Figs. 14, 15, furnish two views of what is presumably a 
larger example of the same; and this agrees exactly with Haug’s ‘* Harpoceras 
Mumeri.” It probably came from Blue Wyke, Yorkshire. 


Dumortierta sparsicosta, Haug. Plate XLV, figs. 17—20. 


1885. Harroceras (Dumortiertia) costuta, Haug. Beitr. Monogr. Harpoceras ; 
Neues Jahrbuch fiir Mineralogie, 
&e., Beil.-Bd. in, p. 664, pars 
(teste Haug). 

1885. AMMONITES FALCOFILA SPARSICOSTA, Quenstedt. Amm. Schwibischen Jura, 

pl. liv, fig. 29 (?). 

1887. Dumorrirrta sparsicosta, Haug. “ Polymorphide,’’ Neues Jahrbuch 
fir Mineral., &c., Bd. uu, p. 181, 
pl. v, fig. 3, and woodcut, fig. 6 6. 


Discoidal, compressed, carinate. Whorls with convex sides, ornamented with 
subdirect, irregularly distant, rather inconspicuous ribs, which disappear on the 
outer third, Ventral area hardly defined, with a small carina. Inner margin 
fairly defined, steep, flattish. Inclusion about two-fifths. Umbilicus deeper in 


1 Haug, ‘ Polymorphide,’ p. 1382. 


24.0 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. 


the centre than outside, ornamented with coarse, rounded, unequal-sized, irregu- 
larly distant ribs. Suture-line with rather short superior lateral lobe. 

Only one specimen is known to me, but it agrees exactly with Haug’s delinea- 
tions except in the matter of the suture-line. This is not quite characteristic of 
the genus ; it has shorter lobes and a less dependent inner portion than in Haug’s 
drawing, and therefore appears more like the suture-line of a Grammoceras. These 
discrepancies, however, may possibly be explained by the fact that the sutures visible 
on my specimen are the last three; and, as they exhibit a decided reduction—the 
last being simpler than the penultimate, and this again than the antepenultimate, 
it is possible to infer that perhaps at half a whorl further back the suture-line would 
agree with Haug’s delineation, which shows a characteristic Dumortieria-lobe-line. 

Another point about this species which makes it resemble Grammoceras is the 
slight. bending of the ribbing on the lateral area. It lacks, however, the strong 
forward ventral bend of Grammoceras. The ribs, it is true, disappear on the outer 
area, but their direction may be seen by following the fine growth-lines visible on 
the crystalline test. 

Analogy, too, points strongly to the fact that my specimen is a Duwmortieria, 
and is correctly identified, therefore, with Haug’s species. Its inner whorls 
(diameter about 12 lines) conform so exactly in appearance with Dumortierta prisca 
(reaching 21 lines)—the same coarse irregular ribs are seen in the inner whorls of 
both species, only that they are not continued so long a time in Dum. sparsicosta. 

A generally greater compression, and a sharper, more carinate ventral area, 
easily distinguish Dum. sparsicosta trom Dum. prisca, its ancestor ; while an umbi- 
licus slightly more slowly-coiled, a whorl less gibbous ventrally, and numerous 
differences of ribbing distinguish it from its “cousin,” Dum. costula. The 
characters of its ribs separate it completely from Dum. Levesquet. 

Under the name ‘ falcofila sparsicosta’”’? Quenstedt figured two species in his 
‘Schwab. Amm.’ One (fig. 35) is Dum. costula; the other (fig. 29) is a small 
specimen, and might be the young of several species of Dumortieria, as, for 
instance, of Dum. prisca, Dum. costula, Dum. Levesquei, Dum. striatulo-costata, or 
this species. Haug having given a good figure and description of the present 
species under the present name, I consider Dum. sparsicosta to be founded on his 
authority, and that Quenstedt’s figures may be left out of account altogether. 

Only one specimen of this easily recognisable species have I had the good 
fortune to meet with. It came from the Moorei-beds (Opalinuwm-zone) of Buckholt 
Wood, and, for a Cotteswold specimen, is in very good preservation. 

Pl. XLV, figs. 17, 18, exhibit two views of the above-mentioned specimen. 
Fig. 19 illustrates the aperture, and fig. 20 shows the penultimate and antepenulti- 
mate suture-lines from the same fossil. 


DUMORTIERIA LEVESQUEI. 241 


Domoxrtierta Levesquet (@’Orbigny). Plate XXXVII, figs. 6—8; Plate XLV, 
figs. 15, 16. 


1824. AMmMmonires unpuULaTos, Stahl (non Smith). Correspbl. wiirttemberg. 
landw. Ver., Bd. vi, p. 49, fig. 16 (?).} 


1830. — —= Zieten. Verstein. Wiirtt., pl. x, fig. 5. 

1830. — soLaRis, Zieten (non Phillips?). Ibid., pl. xiv, fig. 7. 

1842. — LevesQuet, a’Orb. Ceph. jurass.; Pal. Frang., pl. lx, p. 230 
(inscribed on the plate as Am. solaris, 
Phillips). 

1853. — — Chapuis et Dewalque. Foss. Luxembourg ; Mém. 


cour. et Mém. des sav. étrang., tom, 
xxv, pl. xi, fig. 2. 

1874. — UNDULATUS, Dumortier. Bass. Rhone, iv, p. 65. 

1885. Harpoceras Lrvesquet, Haug. Beitr. Monogr. Harpoceras; Neues 
Jahrbuch fiir Mineral., &c., p. 662. 

1885. AMMONITES FALCOFILA, Quenstedt. Amm. Schwab. Jura, pl. liv, figs. 28, 

; 30, 31. 

1885. — cf. UNDULATUS, Quenstedt. Ibid., pl. liv, fig. 27. (A form 
transitional to Dum. pseudo- 
radiosa.) 

1887. Dumorrrerta LevesQuel, Haug. “ Polymorphide ;’ Neues Jahrbuch fir 

Mineral., &c., Bd. ii, p. 129. 


Discoidal, slightly compressed, carinate. Whorls ornamented with somewhat 
distant, direct, ventrally-inclined ribs. Ventral area somewhat flattened, divided 
by a small rounded carina. Inner margin not defined, convex. Inclusion, about 
one-third. Suture-line with long siphonal and superior lateral lobes, causing a 
deep siphonal saddle. 

As this is the typical species of the genus, | much regret that I have not been 
able to obtain any better material for figuring. The fragment, depicted PI. 
XLV, figs. 15, 16, agrees exactly with d’Orbigny’s representation, except that its 
ribs are a little closer. 

The complete specimen, figured P]. XXXVII, figs. 6—8, differs from 
d’Orbigny’s in certain respects ; but it agrees exactly with Zieten’s delineation of 
Am. solaris (non Phillips). It is a more advanced form than d’Orbigny’s—its 
ribs are closer together, and have a more forward inclination—its whorls are 


1 T am indebted to Dr. Haug’s “ Polymorphidex ”’ for this reference, which I have not been able to 
verify (see p. 242). 

2 Am. solaris, Phillips, ‘Geol. Yorks,’ 1st ed., pl. iv, fig. 29, has all the appearance of Pleuro- 
ceras spinatum. 


31 


242 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. 


thinner, and yet have more convex sides—its outer area is more pinched, making 
the ventral area narrower, and the carina more prominent—its inner margin is 
certainly less marked, and, as a consequence, its umbilicus is much flatter and less 
eraduated—the suture-line has a somewhat differently-shaped, and shorter superior 
lateral lobe.' 

This form almost deserves a separate name. It is to a certain extent transi- 
tional to Dum. radians, especially to the form figured Pl. XLII, figs. 11, 12. 
If the various figures be arranged in the following order they will, in a great 
measure, show all the stages of progression from Dum. Levesquei to Dum. Mooret 
—that is, from a gibbous, coarse-ribbed, evolute whorl to a compressed, fine- 
ribbed, rather involute whorl :—Pl. XLV, figs. 15, 16; Pl. XXXVII, figs. 6, 7; 
Pl. XLIT, figs. 11, 12; Pl. XLII, figs. 6, 7; Pl. XLIV, figs. 7, 8. ‘Whissemesie 
exactly parallel to the series Gramm. toarcense, Gramm. striatulum, Gramm. mactra. 

I quite agree with Dr. Haug when he remarks that d’Orbigny’s name 
** Levesquei”’ is better known, and not likely to lead to mistakes, as would be the 
case with the name “ undulatus.’ The latter name was first used by Smith, in 
1817, for Ammonites falcifer, Sowerby ;? and, in 1824, Stahl’ apphed it to an 
Ammonite doubtfully identified with the present species. I make the above 
remarks upon the authority of Dr. Haug (see foot-notes), because all my efforts 
to procure Stahl’s work have failed. 

The Ammonite which Zieten figured as ‘‘ widulatus”’ is probably this species ; 
but the figure is very poor. Dumortier undoubtedly referred to this species by 
the name ‘‘ undulatus.” 

This species 1s very scarce, and I have only been able to obtain inferior 
fragments from Long Wood and Buckholt Wood near Stroud, and from Wotton- 
under-Edge, Gloucestershire. Mr. Darell Stephens, F.G.S., procured the species 
from the vicinity of Yeovil Junction. 

The type form is illustrated by a poor fragment depicted in Pl. XLV, figs. 15, 
16; and the variety, about which I have remarked above, is shown in Pl. XX XVII, 
figs. 6—8. 


! Dr. Haug tells me that this form is identical with the examples found in the Rhéne-basin. 
* Haug, “ Harpoceras;” ‘Neues Jahrbuch fiir Mineralogie, &c.,’ Beil.-Bd. iii, p. 662, 1885. 
° *Correspbl. wiirttemb. landw. Ver.,’ Bd. vi, p. 49, fig. 10. 

4 Haug, “ Polymorphide,” ‘Neues Jahrbuch,’ Bd. ii, p. 130, 1887. 


DUMORTIERIA STRIATULO-COSTATA. 243 


DUMORTIERIA STRIATULO-CosTaTA, Quenstedt. Plate XXXVII, figs. 16 and 17; 
Plate XL, figs. 1—12. 


1879. HarpocrErRAS SUBUNDULATUM, varietit EXTERNE-cosTATUM, Branco. Unt. 
Dogger; Abh. geol. Spez.-Karte Elsass- 
Lothringen, Bd. ii, pl. ii, fig. 3 only 


(not 4, 5). 
1884. — — Haug. Nouvelles Amm., Lias sup.; Bull. 
Soc. Geol. France, 3e sér., t. xii, pl. xiii, 
fig. 2. 
1885. — — var. EXTERNE-CosTtaTuM, Haug. Beitr. 


Monogr. Harpoc.; Neues Jahrbuch fiir 
Mineralogie, &c., Beil.-Bd. iii, p. 663 (pars). 
1885. AMMONITES STRIATULO-CosTATUS, Quenstedt. Amm. Schwabischen Jura, 
pl. li, fig. 7 only (not 8, 9, 10). 
1887. DuMorTIERIA SUBUNDULATA, varietit STRIATULO-cosTaTa, Haug. ‘“ Poly- 
morphide ;” Neues Jahrbuch fiir Mine- 
ralogie, &c., Bd. ii, p. 135, pl. v, fig. 4. 


Adult: Discoidal, compressed, carinate. Whorls flattened, ornamented with 
subdirect, ventrally-inclined ribs. Ventral area narrow, ornamented with a small, 
distinct carina. Inner margin convex, but scarcely defined. Inclusion about one- 
half. Umbilicus open, rather flat, and scored with straight, distant ribs. 

Immature: Up to a diameter of about 9 lines the whorls are strongly gibbous, 
scarcely carinate, and ornamented with direct ribs strongly marked on the lateral 
area, slightly inclined but inconspicuous on the ventral area. Ventral area 
almost smooth, convex, slightly carinate. 

What Haug calls the polymorphism of this species is rather remarkable. The 
Ophioceratan- or Caloceratan-like form lasts until the example is about 9 or 10 lines 
in diameter (Pl. XL, figs. 3, 4). Im about another half-whorl a complete change 
takes place—the Grammoceratan-like form is assumed—the gibbous whorl] becomes 
flattened, the convex ventral area becomes pinched and sharpened, the almost 
circular aperture becomes elliptical (Pl. XL, figs. 5, 6). A still greater progress 
of the Grammoceratan-like character is shown in another half-whorl, and conse- 
quently there is an extraordinary difference in the features of this and of the 
preceding whorl. I have had figs. 3—8 in Pl. XL expressly arranged to illustrate 
these changes. All the figures are taken from one specimen which was broken up 


so as to show the inner whorls; and fig. 7 is a correct view of this specimen when 
joined together. These changes are important, because, while the inner whorls 
are so totally different from the inner whorls of Grammoceras, the outer whorls are 


244 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. 


so curiously alike ; and when the gibbous inner whorls are covered by the flattened 
outer whorls the whole appearance of the species is changed. 

The adult specimen, Pl. XL, figs. 1, 2, illustrates this matter exactly. Appa- 
rently it differs but little from Grammoceras doerntense (Pl. XXIX, figs. 1, 2) or 
from Gramm. aalense (Pl. XXXII, figs. 1, 2); but its young (Pl. XL, figs. 3—6) 
differs very appreciably from the young of either Gramm. doerntense (Pl. XXIX, 
figs. 6, 7) or Gramm. aalense (Pl. XXXII, fig. 3). 

Dumortieria striatulo-costata is evidently a further development of Dwi. 
Levesquet. Practically speaking, its inner whorls (Pl. XL, figs. 3, 4) are Dum. 
Levesquet 1n miniature ; and it is not until it has passed a diameter of 10 lines that 
the specific characters peculiar to D. striatulo-costata are developed. 

Under the name striatulo-costatus, Quenstedt combined a series of four species, 
as Dr. Haug has already noticed.’ For Quenstedt’s fig. 7 alone Haug retained the 
name ‘ striatulo-costatus ;’ but he reserved it as a variety of Branco’s ‘ subundu- 
latus.’ IT agree with Dr. Haug as to the form to which the name striatulo-costatus 
shall be applied, though I extend its range somewhat to include certain others, and 
give it specific rank; but for certain reasons (see article on Dum. subundulata) I 
reserve Branco’s name “‘ subundulata”’ for his pl. in, fig. 4. 

Of the present species there are several varieties illustrating a gradual change 
of form due to development in the normal manner. First there is Quenstedt’s 
wide-centred form, which retains the ancestral—the Levesquei—stage to a late 
period of growth. Of this I have only poor examples, not good enough to figure. 
Next there is the form figured by Branco (his pl. in, fig. 3 only) and by Haug 
(“‘ Polymorphide,”’ pl. v, fig. 4), each of which has a smaller centre than Quen- 
stedt’s. I have not a specimen sufficiently good for delineation ; but they only 
differ from those I have had depicted (Pl. XL, figs. 1—9) and from Haug’s figures 
of subundulatum (‘ Nouv. Amm.,’ pl. xiii, fig. 2) in not beg so much pinched 
ventrally. I doubt if it be worth while to distinguish between these two forms. 
I fancy they may be united as var. a; while var. ( differs in being much more 
compressed, and in losing the Levesquei-stage at a very much éarlier age. Var. 6 
is illustrated by two slightly different forms—one a south-country specimen, PI. 
XXXVI, figs. 16, 17 ; the other a Cotteswold specimen, Pl. XL, figs. 10—12. 

Taken altogether, the whole series indicates gradual development from the 
evolute ancestor Dum. Levesque to the more involute, compressed Dum. striatulo- 
costata, var. (3, and this series is parallel to the Levesquei-Moorei series (p. 242). 

To return to the species figured by Quenstedt under the name “ striatulo- 
costatus.” His fig. 7,as I have said, may be taken as the type of the present species; 
fig. 8 is Dum. costula (p. 237); to the form depicted in fig. 9 Haug has given the 


1 « Polymorphide,” ‘ Neues Jahrbuch fiir Mineralogie, &c.,’ Bd. ii, p. 185, 1887. 


DUMORTIERIA STRIATULO-COSTATA. 245 


name Dum. suevica ;' and fig. 10 is Dum. Mooret. Dum. suevica, which apparently 
differs from Dum. radians in nothing except the absence of a carina on the 
ventral area, is the only one of these species which I am unable to record in this 
Monograph. 

Dumortieria striatulo-costata is a rather scarce species; and very rarely is it 
found in anything like good condition. The type and var. a are characteristic of 
the Dumortieria-beds (Jurense-zone) of the Cotteswolds ; while var. 6 belongs to 
the Moorei-beds (Opalinum-zone), both in the Cotteswolds and in the south. Of 
the type-form I have a few very inferior specimens from Buckholt Wood and the 
Long Wood near Stroud, and from Wotton-under-Hdge. Of var. a I possess 
better specimens, which came from Penn Wood; and of var. 6B I have fair 
specimens from the Moorei-beds (Opalinum-zone) of the same locality, and from the 
same horizon (Yeovil Sands) of Stoford (Yeovil Junction), Somerset. 

Pl. XL, figs. 1, 2, show two views of a fine adult specimen of this species 
(var. a) from Penn Wood, near Stroud. Figs. 3, 4, are inner whorls, to be compared 
with Dum. prisca, to which they bear great resemblance; figs. 5, 6, are the same 
with about half a whorl added, and they may be compared with Dum. Levesquei ; 
while figs. 7, 8, illustrate the completed specimen, showing the assumption of 
Grammoceratan-like characters. Fig. 9 is the suture-line taken from another 
specimen. 

Pl. XXXVII, figs. 16, 17, illustrate two views of a specimen of var. 8 from 
the Dorset-Somerset district ; while Pl. XL, figs. 10, 11, give two views of a 
somewhat finer-ribbed Cotteswold specimen, of which fig. 12 1s the suture-line. 


DoumortieRia, sp. Plate XXXVII, figs. 18, 19. 


This specimen bears considerable resemblance to the specimen of Dum. 
striatulo-costata depicted on the same plate; but its ribs are more distant, its 
whorls are more compressed, and its umbilicus, which is very flat, is a trifle larger. 
The specimen is only in poor preservation, so that I cannot say much; but it 
seems to be distinct from any of the species of the genus. It was collected by 
Mr. Darell Stephens, F.G.S., and is labelled ‘* Yeovil Junction.” Presumably it 
came from the shell-beds of the Yeovil Sands, Moorei-beds (Opalinum-zone). 

Pl. XXXVII, figs. 18, 19, give two views of this specimen. 


1 « Polymorphide,” p. 189; see also Dum. exigqua, p. 252. 


246 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. 


DumortigRiIA PsEUDORADIOSA (Branco). Plate XLI, figs. 1—3, 9, 10. 


1879. Harpocrras psevporabiosuM, Branco. Unt. Dogger; Abh. geol. Spez.- 
Karte Elsass-Lothringen, Bd. 
i, pl. ii, fig. 1 only. 
1881. Ammonites Moors, J. Buckman. Terminations Inf. Ool. Amm.; Quart. 
Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. xxxvii, p. 65, 
fig. 7. 
1885. — UNDULATUS, Quenstedt. Amm. Schwabischen Jura, pl. liv, fig. 26. 
1887. Dumorrrerta PSEUDORADIOSA, Haug. “ Polymorphide ;’ Neues Jahrbuch 
fiir Mineral., &c., Bd. ii, p. 141. 


Discoidal, compressed, carinate. Whorls with sides somewhat flattened, 
ornamented with well-marked, somewhat distant, direct, ventrally-inclined ribs. 
Ventral area rather broad, fairly defined, ornamented by a small, distinct carina. 
Inner margin smooth, convex, fairly defined. Inclusion about one-third. Umbi- 
licus deep in the centre, but more open and flat towards the outside. 'Termina- 
tion a plain sigmoidal bend, with a rounded ventral process. 

Branco observed that Dumortier’s figures of Am. vadiosus did not agree with 
Seebach’s; and he consequently figured three specimens under the name “ #H. 
pseudoradiosum,” quoting Dumortier’s figures as synonyms. I cannot, however, 
allow that Branco’s specimens agree with Dumortier’s figures ; for, excepting fig. 3, 
they have fewer and broader whorls, greater inclusion, and coarser ribs. - Neither 
do Branco’s specimens seem to agree with one another. The specimen depicted in 
figs. 2, 2a, is not only finer ribbed, but has a smaller umbilicus than fig. 1. The 
specimen shown in fig. 3 certainly agrees more nearly with Dumortier’s fig. 2 
in side view, and yet it agrees rather better with certain fine-ribbed forms of 
Dum. subundulata. As no front view is given this point must remain uncertain. 

It is necessary to restrict Branco’s name ‘ pseudoradiosum” to his fig. 1; 
but unfortunately no front view of this specimen is given, and so I cannot be per- 
fectly certain whether my identification be correct. 

The ribs of Dui. pseudoradiosa vary in their size and distance apart. At first 
they are large and distant, then they are small and approximate, and finally they 
are coarser and distant again. Branco noticed this fact (p. 77), and my speci- 
mens both show a fine-ribbed period, though it is a very short one, succeeded by 
a coarser-ribbed period. This character, however, is of little specific value, for it 
is not confined to this species. As now defined, Dumortieria pseudoradiosa does 
not differ very greatly from Dum. radians, especially from the south-country 
specimens (p. 249). It is, however, of much coarser build altogether, and its 
whorls are considerably thicker. Judging from the very depressed centre of 


DUMORTIERIA PSEUDORADIOSA. 247 


the specimen depicted in PI]. XLI, fig. 1, the inner whorls must have been very 
much stouter than any specimens of Dum. radians ; and in figs. 9, 10, of the same 
plate is shown what is most probably a fragment of the inner whorls. The com- 
parison with Dum. radians is made more difficult because figs. 9, 10, Pl. LXI, are 
the only example of the young Dum. pseudoradiosa that I can give; but the 
thicker and broader whorls, and the more depressed, slightly narrower umbilicus 
are the points to be relied upon. 

Between the adult Dum. pseudoradiosa and adult Dum. striatulo-costata, Pl. XL, 
figs. 1, 2, there is apparently great similarity. The whorls of the latter, however, 
are distinctly narrower ventrally ; and the ventral area is more acute, more sloped, 
and consequently not so well defined. The sides of the whorls also slope towards 
the ventral area, instead of being almost parallel as in Dum. pseudoradiosa. How- 
ever, the great distinction is the coarse ribs in the inner whorls of Dum. striatulo- 
costata ; and this introduces the young of the two species, when the differences are 
shown to be more accentuated. A comparison of similar-sized young specimens, 
Pl. XL, figs. 5, 6, and Pl. XLI, figs. 9, 10, will be sufficient to show this without 
any comments of mine. 

Of the derivation of this species I do not feel certain. It seems to be too 
thick in the inner whorls to have come from Dum. Levesquei, but it certainly has 
originated from some coarser-ribbed species. 

The grand specimen which forms the subject of Pl. XLI, figs. 1, 2, is to the 
best of my knowledge the finest British representative of this species. I have 
known the specimen for the last ten years, and it has had a rather eventful 
history. Formerly in the collection of my friend Mr. T. C. Maggs, F.G.S., it was 
borrowed by my father to illustrate his paper on ‘‘ Terminations of Ammonites,’ 
and its mouth was depicted. Some years afterwards it passed, with the rest of 
Mr. Maggs’ collection, to Mr. Damon, of Weymouth. Being broken, it was put 
aside with the fragmentary and inferior specimens ; but after considerable search 
I fortunately rescued it from such company during my visit to that town, and it 
now forms one of the treasures of my collection. 

The Yeovil Sands of Yeovil Junction! and Bradford Abbas, Dorset, have 
yielded the figured examples of this species. The Duwimortieria-beds (Jurense-zone), 
the middle of the so-called ‘* Cotteswold Cephalopoda-bed,” have afforded some 
poor specimens at Wotton-under-Edge, and Penn Wood, near Stroud, Gloucester- 
shire. 

Pl. XLI, figs. 1, 2, give two views of a fine example possessing the mouth- 


1 The locality “Yeovil Junction” has been applied somewhat loosely. Yeovil Junction is in the 
county of Dorset, and many specimens have been obtained from the sandy, calcareous beds in the 
sands behind the station. Other specimens have been obtained from a quarry in the sands about a 
quarter of a mile distant ; but this quarry is in the county of Somerset. 


248 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. 


border complete; fig. 3 exhibits the ventral area of the end of the last whorl, 
showing the fine strize crossing a degraded carina. Figs. 9, 10, show two views 
of a fragment of a young example. 


Dumortigria RADIANS (Reinecke). Plate XLI, figs. 4—8; Plate XLII, figs. 1—12; 
Plate XLIII, figs. 1—4. Woodcut in text, 
p. 187; fie. 2: 


1818. Navrinus rapians, Reinecke. Maris protogei Nautilos, &., figs. 39, 40. 
1846. AMMONITES RADIANS DEPRESSUS, Quenstedt. Ceph., pl. vii, figs. 5, 6 only. 


1858. — _ Quenstedt. Jura, pl. xl, fig. 9. 
— AALENSIS, Quenstedt. Ibid., pl. xl, fig. 12. 
1874. — RADIOSUS, Dumortier (non Seebach). Etudes Pal. Bassin Rhone, 


iv, pl. xiv, figs. 2—5. 

1879. Harpocreras suBcomPTuM, Branco. Unt. Dogger; Abh. geol. Spez.-Karte 
Elsass-Lothringen, Bd. u, pl. v, 
fig. 3 only (see p. 198). 

1885. Ammonires, cf. AALENSIS, Quenstedt. Amm. Schwabischen Jura, pl. liv, 


fig. 18 only. 
1885. = cf. comprus, Quenstedt. Ibid., pl. liv, fig. 46. 
1885. — RADIANS, Quenstedt. Ibid., pl. liv, fig. 44. 
1887. Dumorrierta raopanica, Haug. “ Polymorphide ;’ Neues Jahrbuch fir 


Mineral., &c., Bd. ii, p. 138. 


Discoid, compressed, carinate. Whorls elliptical, the sides convex, and orna- 
mented with direct, ventrally-inclined, sharply-marked ribs. Ventral area acute, 
not always defined, divided by a small, distinct carina. Inner margin convex, 
not defined. Inclusion from one-third to one-half. 

Reinecke’s figure of ‘‘ Nautilus radians”? certainly leaves much to be desired, 
and it is evidently not altogether exact. The carina is certainly too prominent ; 
while the sectional view does not agree with the length of the aperture as shown 
in the side view, for it is much too short. It is impossible to determine whether 
this is a mistake of the artist, or whether the sectional view was taken from else- 
where on the shell ; but when measured by compasses this section will be found to 
agree with the breadth of the whorl at the bottom of Reinecke’s fig. 39 (see p. 187). 

In spite, however, of its mistakes, Reinecke’s figure can, as I pointed out at 
pp. 186, 187, be recognised not only as a Dumortieria on account of its ribbing, but 
as illustrating the specimens which I have figured under that name; and this view 
of the interpretation of Reinecke’s figure is just the one taken by Quenstedt, only 
that he included as ‘‘ radians’ several other forms which have nothing to do with 
the present species.’ 


1 For a synopsis of species to which the name “ radians” has been applied see pp. 188 et seq. 


DUMORTIERIA RADIANS. 249 


Of the specimens which I have had delineated none agree absolutely with 
Reinecke’s figure, because they do not possess so strong a carina (p. 186). The 
specimen depicted in Pl. XLI, figs. 7, 8, seems to me to agree in every other 
respect. This specimen is from the south of the Mendips;' and the fossil exhibited 
in the same plate by figs. 4, 5, which is also from the same district, and which agrees 


exactly with Dumortier’s figs. 3, 4, of ‘* Am. radiosus,” 


is either a larger example 
of the same form, or is very closely related. The Cotteswold specimens differ 
shghtly from these south-country examples, because they have generally a more 
compressed whorl, and a slightly sharper ventral area (figs. 2, 9, 10, Pl. XLII, 
are exceptions), but notably because their whorls are proportionately broader, and 
are not so numerous as in Reinecke’s figure—in fact, the Cotteswold specimens 
are a trifle quicker-coiled. It is in this matter of coiling that the specimen de- 
picted in Pl. XLI, fies. 7, 8, is so noticeable. 

In the matter of compressed whorl] the specimen figured in Pl. XLII, figs. 6, 
7, goes furthest; and what with this, and its more occluded whorls and finer 
ribbing, it differs from the typical Dum. radians, and is, in fact, a link connecting 
this species with Dum. Moorev. 

All the specimens agree with Reinecke’s figure in one important respect, 
namely, in the “direct” ribbing. This shows that it is a mistake to identify 
Reinecke’s figure with any species of Grammoceras. 

If the species of Dumortieria be compared with the series of specimens of the 
genus Grammoceras illustrated in this Monograph, it will be seen that the 
manner in which the ribs cross the lateral area distinguishes the species of the 
two genera throughout. This direct rib of Dumortieria is, however, more im- 
portant in another way, because it is the outward index, as it were, of a different 
suture-line—a fact most noticeable, however, in the less-developed species of 
Dumortieria (Pl. XXXVII). Further, the direct rib is an indication of a different 
stage of development, for the direct rib is common to the ancestors of Dwmor- 
tieria and of Grammoceras; but Grammoceras itself, which has passed through 
more changes than Dumortieria, has acquired a more sigmoidal style of ribbing 
(pp. 159 et seq.). 

Ammonites radians is a species which has been quoted with very great fre- 
quency ; and, owing possibly to the poorness of Reinecke’s figure, the specific name 
“radians”? has been applied by different authors to a large number of species 
ranging from the Middle Lias to the Inferior Oolite. The synopsis given at 
pp. 188—190 is an attempt to grapple with the subject; and it shows which 
of the various figures of Ammonites called radians belong to the species as now 


1 The Dorset-Somerset basin formed part of the Paris basin, and was cut off from the 
Cotteswold area by an extension of the Mendip axis. See ‘Proc. Cotteswold Club,’ vol. ix, pt. iv, 
pp. 874-—887. 

o2 


250 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. 


identified, and which must be excluded as belonging not only to different species, 
but to different genera. The synonyms given at the heading of this article will 
further supplement this list by indicating which species described under other 
names must be united under the name “radians.” 

Under the name Am. rudiosus Dumortier (loc. cit.) gave figures of two speci- 
mens, one of which (figs. 3, 4) is practically identical with Reinecke’s figure of 
Am. radians. The only difference observable is that the aperture of fig. 4 is 
longer and more compressed. Most of my specimens show the same difference ; 
but the value of this difference is diminished when it is remembered that Dum. 
radians was, like the other species of the genus, gradually assuming a more and 
more elliptical whorl. The elliptical whorl, therefore, is merely a sign of progress ; 
and, further, much depends on where the section of the whorl is taken. How 
great a difference half a whorl may make in this matter is amply illustrated by 
Pl xii, figs. 2) 14, 

Branco’ recognised that Dumortier’s Am. radiosus was not the same as 
Seebach’s, and he bestowed the name “‘ H. pseudoradiosum” on fossils of which he 
gave a figure, while he quoted Dumortier’s figures in the synonymy; but Branco’s 
figures do not agree with Dumortier’s (see p. 246). 

Haug also recognised that Dumortier’s figures did not represent Seebach’s 
Am. radiosus ;?> and he consequently bestowed a new name, “rhodamca.” This 
name must now fall as one of the synonyms of “ radians.” 

According to my interpretation Dumortieria radians is very variable; the size 
and distance of the ribs, the amount of inclusion of whori, and the compression of 
the whorl giving rise to great variety of form. As the immediate progenitor of 
this species—say Dum. Levesquei—possessed widely-separated ribs, therefore such 
ribs are to be found in the inner whorls of Dum. radians. In fig. 1, and in fig. 8, 
Pl. XLII, it may be seen that they are superseded at an early date by the finer 
and closer ribbing—the ribbing of “ radians.” Fig. 11 of the same plate is again 
a rather abnormal form, wherein the coarse ribs are continued to the end, but 
only after a period of finer ribbing. 

The compression of the whorl varies considerably, as may be seen by 
comparing Pl. XLII, figs. 7 and 10; and the shape of the whorl varies very 
much in the same specimen. The more developed the specimen the more com- 
pressed is the whorl; and figs. 3 and 6 show that the compressed specimens not 
only have finer ribbing, but have superseded the coarse ribbing—the ancestral 
character—at so early an age as to almost obliterate it. 

That Dumortieria radians is descended from Dumortieria Levesquei there can 
be little doubt; and Dr. Haug says that intermediate forms bind the two species 


' «Untere Dogger ;” ‘Abh. z. geol. Spez.-Karte von Elsass-Lothringen,’ Bd. ii, p. 77, 1879. 
* © Ueber Polymorphide ;’ ‘ Neues Jahrbuch fiir Mineral., &c.,’ Bd ii, p. 188, 1887. 


DUMORTIERIA RADIANS. 25] 


together (“‘ Polymorphide,” p. 138). The Levesquei-stage may be more or less 
detected in figs. 11 and 12 of Pl. XLII; but in the other specimens it has been 
superseded at an earlier age, and is therefore inconspicuous. 

The morphology of Dum. radians is given in Pl. XLIII, figs. 1—4. The 
smooth stage suggesting Agassiceras miserabile and Polymorphites polymorphus 1s 
clearly shown, and persists up to a diameter of 1} lines. Then follows a ribbed 
stage suggesting the change from the smooth Pol. polymorphus to the ribbed Pol. 
polymorphus costatus, and parallel to the process which produced Am. Johnstone 
from a smooth ancestral form. As yet the ventral area is uncarinate; but later 
observable at top of fig. 3,b. This may be said to com- 
mence the Levesquei-stage, and is parallel to the change which produced carinate 
species of Caloceras from uncarinate species. After the Levesquei-stage succeeds 
the finer ribbing of ‘radians; and Plate XLILI, fig. 4, shows the process com- 
plete. ‘The gradual reduction of the gibbosity of the whorl from fig. 1 to fig. 4 
should be noticed. 

From both Dum. Levesquei and Dum. striatulo-costata, Dum. radians differs in 


on a keel is produced 


its finer ribbing, and especially from the latter in the early age at which it com- 
mences these fine ribs. From the fine-ribbed variety of Dum. striatulo-costata it 
differs by its more open umbilicus and less occluded whorls; and thus shows that 
it is not a descendant of this form, but came directly from Dum. Levesquet. 

South of the Mendips Dumortieria radians is a rare fossil. I have specimens 
from the Sand-rock of the Yeovil Sands (Jurense-zone, Dumortieria-beds) of 
Bradford Abbas, Dorset, and have noted fragments at Ham Hill, Somerset, and 
other places. From the so-called ‘“‘ Upper Lias”’? of Down Cliff, near Bridport, 
Dorset—the blue clay which overlies the beds with Am. bifrons, communis, &c., and 
underlies the Yeovil Sands—I have obtained undoubted examples.’ 

The Cotteswold specimens, which differ slightly from the south-country 
examples, but differ much among themselves, are certainly more numerous. ‘They 
do not occur in the Cotteswold Sands, but in the overlying lmestone capping. 
Cam Down, near Dursley, and Penn Wood, near Stroud, are the principal 
Gloucestershire localities ; Buckholt Wood and Sodbury have also yielded examples. 
P]. XLI, figs. 4—8, illustrate two south-country specimens; Pl. XLII, figs. i—12, 
give the chief Cotteswold varieties of this species; while Pl. XLIII, figs. 1—4, 
exhibit the inner whorls of a specimen broken up in order to show development. 


1 Their presence in this clay shows that the clay is of much later date than would be supposed, and 
is not equivalent to certain similarly-situated clays in other parts of England (see pp. 167, 168). It 
the Cotteswold Sands and Cephalopoda-bed be reckoned as belonging to the “Inferior Qolite 
series,” this clay must be reckoned there also. But see “ On Cotteswold, &c., Sands,” ‘ Quart. Journ. 
Geol. Soc.,’ vol. xlv, and ‘So-called Upper-Lias Clay of Down Cliffs,” ‘ Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.,’ 
vol. xlvii, pt. 3. 


252 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. 


The woodcut, fig. 2 in the text (p. 187), is a copy of Reinecke’s original figures 
given for comparison with the examples depicted in the Plates. 


DUMORTIERIA RADIANS, var. ExIauA, S. Buckman. Plate XLIII, figs. 11—13; Plate 
XLIV, figs. 1—3. 


1830. AMMONITES STRIATULUS, Zieten (non Sowerby). Verstein. Wirtt., pl. xiv, 
fig. 6. 
1885. — cf. RADIANS, Quenstedt. Amm. Schwabischen Jura, pl. liv, 
fig. 19. 


Zieten’s figure represents this form exactly, except that it is a little thicker in 
the aperture than my examples. These fossils differ from Dum. radians in 
combining a more compressed form with a rather large umbilicus and very slight 
inclusion of the whorls. The size of the umbilicus separates them particularly 
from the specimen depicted, Pl. XLII, figs. 6, 7, which resembles them in being 
much compressed. 

‘The larger umbilicus and the coarser radii separate this form from 
Dum. Moorei. 

Dr. Haug tells me that these specimens have great resemblance to his Dum. 
rhodanica (see p. 250), but are a trifle thinner. ‘his, I think, is just the point 
which is noticeable ; but they also have finer ribs. Dr. Haug recognises figs. 6— 
12, Pl. XLII, as rhodanica; but the specimens there depicted I have admitted as 
radians, and this variety differs from them in the manner just noticed. 

Haug (‘* Polymorphide,” p. 139) cited the reference to Zieten as a synonym of 
his Dum. suevica, only he expresses some doubt in the matter. Dum. suevica is, 
according to Haug, a keelless form, and is very much thicker, judging from 
Quenstedt’s figs. 9, 10, pl. li (Schwab. Amm.’), upon which Haug has founded his 
species; and it is therefore essentially different from the present form. 

Dumortieria radians, var. eaigua, is a scarce fossil. I have obtained it at 
Penn Wood, and Buckholt Wood, near Stroud, and at Sodbury, Gloucestershire. 
Pl. XLII, figs. 11, 12, represent a specimen from Penn Wood; and fig. 13 is a 
suture-line from another specimen.' Pl. XLIV, figs. 1, 2, show a larger example 
from the same place; while fig. 3 is the suture-line of this specimen. 


1 The specimen from which this suture-line was traced has been mislaid, so that I do not know 
the reason for the discrepancy between this and fig. 3, Pl. XLIV. 


DUMORTIERIA RADIOSA. 253 


Dumortrerta rapiosa (Seebach). Plate XLII, figs. 13—15; Plate XLIII, figs. 5—7. 
Woodcut in the text, fig. 3, p. 187." 


1864, AmMoNITES RADIOSUS, Seebach. Hannoverische Jura, pl. ix, figs. 2a—e. 
1875. — Mooret, Lepsius. Beit. Kennt. Juraf. Unter-Elsass, pl. ii, fig. 6. 
1885. Harpoceras rapiosuM, Haug. Beitr. Monogr. Harpoceras; Neues Jahr- 
buch fiir Mineral., &c., Beil.-Bd. ii, 
p. 665. 
1887. Dumorrrerta rapiosa, Haug. Polymorphide ; Neues Jahrbuch, &c., Bd. 
li, p. 140. 


Discoidal, compressed, carinate. Whorls ornamented, first, with coarse distant 
ribs, later with very fine growth-lines. Ventral area with small, inconspicuous 
carina. No inner margin. Inclusion about one-third. Umbilicus with somewhat 
tumid whorls. 

Dr. Haug” writes to me that he entirely approves my identification of the 
specimen depicted in Pl. XLILI, figs. 5, 6; but Iam somewhat inclined to think 
that it 1s not only a trifle more compressed than Seebach’s figure, but that its 
umbilicus is too large. 

The differences between this species and the Cotteswold forms of ‘‘ radians ”’ 
are very small, and I was at one time inclined to treat radiosus as a synonym 
thereof. The whorls are, however, just a trifle broader, and the specimen is 
slightly quicker-coiled—in fact, in this matter they differ from the Cotteswold 
forms of radians about as much as the latter differ from the south-country forms. 
Possibly the best distinction is the coarse ribs in the inner whorls changing so 
suddenly to the fine striz; because this feature probably indicates that Dum. 
radiosa is a direct mutation of Dum. Levesquei, and is not a variety, but is a 
“cousin” of Dum. radians. The Levesquei-stage may be clearly seen in Pl. XLII, 
figs. 13, 14. 

Dum. vadiosa is arare species; and I have only met with it at Cam Down, near 
Dursley, and Penn Wood, near Stroud. It came from the Moorei-beds of the 
latter place ; but | am not certain that it was not found in the Dumortieria-beds 
of the former locality. These two horizons—the top of the Jurense-zone 
and the bottom of the Opalinum-zone—are very intimately united in several 
places. 

Pl. XLII, figs. 13, 14, illustrate a small specimen showing the sudden change 

1 This specimen is probably more typical of Dum. radiosa than the British examples depicted in 
the plates. 


2 I take this opportunity to thank my friend for his kind and critical remarks upon my proof 
plates. These remarks have been of the greatest assistance to me in checking my determinations. 


254 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. 


in ribbing ; fig. 15 is the suture-line. Pl. XLII, figs. 5, 6, give a larger example 
with similar features ; fig. 7 is the suture-line. 


DUMORTIERIA RADIOSA, Var. GUNDERSHOFENSIS, Haug. Plate XXX, fig. 18; Plate 
XLV, figs. 18, 14. 


18380. AMMONITES LINEATUS, Zieten (non Schlotheim). Verstein. Wiirtt., pl. ix, 
figeehe 
1879. Harpoceras PsEUDORADIOSUM, Branco. Unt. Dogger; Abh. z. geol. Spez.- 
Karte v. Elsass-Lothringen, Bd. 
ii, pl. ii, figs. 2, 2 @ only. 
1884, — AALENSE, Wright (non Zieten). Monogr. Lias Amm.; Pal. 
Soc., vol. xxxvii, pl. Ixxxii, figs. 1, 2 only. 
1887. DUMoRTIERIA RADIOSA, var. GUNDERSHOFENSIS, Haug. Polymorphide; 
Neues Jahrbuch fiir Mineral., &c., Bd. i, 
p. 140, pl. iv, fig. 7. 


Discoidal, compressed, carinate. Whorls broad, ornamented with subdirect, 
ventrally-inclined radu. Ventral area sloping, fairly defined, ornamented with a 
small, distinct carina traversed by fine growth-lines. Inner margin convex, 
slightly defined, scored by the ends of the radii. Inclusion about two-fifths. 

Dr. Haug remarks that the typical form of Dum. radiosa has fine’ ribs in 
youth, and in old age extremely fine, closely-set growth-lines ; but the variety 
gundershofensis has in youth what may be called either large growth-lines or fine 
ribs, and in old age blunt, distant ribs. The point, however, is that the variety 
gundershofensis 1s ornamented just the reverse to what obtains in the type, or 
among other species of Dumortieria. Instead of having coarse ribs becoming 
finer, it has fine ribs becoming coarser. 

I faney that the variety gundershofensis deserves to rank as a separate 
species much more than Dum. radiosa; and I do not feel at all sure that it 
is a variety of that form. I should be more inclined to consider it a mutation 
of *‘ radians.” However, my material of radiosa and its variety being scanty, I 
leave the matter as Dr. Haug placed it. 

The specimen, Pl. XXX, fig. 18, exactly bears out Dr. Haug’s remarks con- 
cerning the ornamentation ; but the larger example has coarse ribs, at first, for 
some time, then a period of half-a-whor!l of fine ribs, and then commences the more 
distant ribs. This specimen is thinner than Haug’s outline-figure 7 c, which, 
however, does not appear to me to correspond to his fig. 7 b, because the whorls 
are represented too narrow (from back to front) and too thick. ‘The specimen 
agrees in all respects with 7 a, b. ; 


1 My specimens have coarse ribs. 


DUMORTI¢RIA MOORETL 255 


Branco’s Harpoceras pseudoradiosum, in his pl. ii, fig. 2, exhibits exactly the 
characters of ribbing described by Haug, and it agrees in all other respects. 
As the name pseudoradiosum is restricted to his fig. 1, Haug’s name can apply 
to the present form. 

Dumortieria radiosa var. gundershofensis, is a very rare form, only the two 
figured specimens being known to me. PI. XXX, fig. 18, gives the side view of a 
small specimen from the Opalinwm-zone (Moorei-beds) of Coaley Peak, Gloucester- 
shire. Pl. XLV, figs. 13, 14, furnish two views of a specimen from the Yeovil 
Sands. Its locality is not recorded, but in all probability it came from Bradford 
Abbas, Dorset. 


Domortigrta Mooret (Lycett). Plate XXX, figs. 15—17,19; Plate XLIV, figs. 4—9. 


1851. AMMoNITES OPALINUS, Bayle et Coquand (non Reinecke). Foss. sec. Chili ; 
Mém. de la Soe. Géologique de 
France, 2e série, vol. iv, pt. 1, 
plo i, fig. 1: 
1857. — Mooret, Lycett. Cotteswold Hills, pl. i, fig. 2.@ (not 20). 
1879. Hanrrocreras Macrra, Branco (non Dumortier). Unt. Dogger; Abh. geol. 
Spez.- Karte Elsass- Lothringen, pl. i, fig. 10. 


1881. — Mooret, 8. Buckman. Inf. Ool. Amm.; Quart. Journ. Geol. 
Soe., vol. xxxvil, p. 605 (pars). 
1884. — AaLENSsE, Wright (non Zieten). Lias Amm.; Pal. Soc., pl. Ixxx, 


figs. 1, 2 only (not 3, nor 5).! 
1885. AMMONITES STRIATULO-CosTatusS, Quenstedt. Amm. Schwabischen Jura, pl. 
lii, fig. 10 only (not 7, 8,9), 

p. 413. 


Discoidal, compressed, carinate. Whorls broad, much flattened, ornamented 
with direct, ventrally-inclined striz. Ventral area acute, furnished with a small 
inconspicuous carina. Inner margin smooth, distinct, flattened. Inclusion about 
one-third. Umbilicus flat, with coarse ribs in the centre. Termination a sub- 
arcuate bend with a bluntly-pointed ventral process. 

Lycett’s original specimen of this species is contained in the Museum Pract. 
Geol., marked VI,’;. It resembles his figure in almost every particular, except 
that it is nearly twice as large. It possesses the mouth-border as given on the plate, 
but the ventral portion is more curved forwards. The suture-line shown in his 
fig. 2b could not have been taken from this specimen ; because only a portion of its 
suture-line was visible until Mr. Newton removed a piece of test to allow of its 
complete exposure. (The result is depicted, Pl. NLIV, fig. 9.) 

Dr. Wright’s figure, which is quoted above under the name Harpoceras 
Aalense, has a marked resemblance to Lycett’s original specimen of Ammonites 

1 See ‘Geol. Mag.,’ dec. ii, vol. ii, p. 443, 1886. 


256 INFERIOR OOLITE AMMONITES. 


Moorei. It struck me that the words ‘‘My Collection,’ which occur in the 
explanation of Plate LX XX, figs. 1—3, in the ‘ Monograph of the Lias Ammonites,’ 
might have been written by accident. In answer to my inquiries, Mr. H. T. 
Newton, F.G.S., of the Museum of Practical Geology, wrote that ‘‘ we have 
always been under the impression that the specimen VI.3;, figured by Dr. Lycett, 
was refigured by Dr. Wright; but on comparing the specimen with the figures I 
find that, although the agreement in size and character is exact, there are points 
about the mouth which differ.”” Mr. G. C. Crick, F.G.S., of the British Museum, 
informs me that no specimen answering to Dr. Wright’s figures was met with in 
the collection of the type specimens of “ the Lias Ammonites”’ which the British 
Museum obtained from a dealer after that gentleman’s death. Such is the 
evidence obtainable; but it is only right to remark that, as the whole of Dr. 
Wright’s Collection was not acquired by the British Museum, it is possible the 
figured specimen may have been lost sight of. In any case, for all practical 
purposes, Dr. Wright’s figures may be considered as a representation of Dr. 
Lycett’s original specimen ; and this is an important matter, for the figure of the 
latter author is so much reduced as to be misleading. Dr. Wright's figures agree 
exactly in size with Dr. Lycett’s specimen, but differ in the following trivial points, 
viz. that the lower ventral area is too acute, the mouth a trifle too compressed 
at top, and the ribs of the inner whorls not coarse enough. 

I have the following notes made from an examination of Lycett’s original 
specimen :—‘‘ In the inner whorls the ribs are coarse and somewhat wide apart, 
while the whorls themselves are slightly gibbous. The outer whorls are nearly 
flat, and the radi become much finer until on the end of the body-chamber they 
are merely very fine growth-lines. he radu are very little curved on the lateral 
area, and not much curved forwards on the ventral area. (Lycett’s description 
differs from this, but he probably had specimens of Dum. Moorei and Gramm. 
mactra mixed together: his figure is correct.) The carina is little more than a 
sharpening of the ventral area. It is continued on to the body-chamber.” 

It was in 1857 that Lycett named this species Am. Moorei, in compliment to 
Charles Moore, F'.G.S.; but the same name was used by Oppel (‘ Juraformation,’ 
p. 476) in the same year. I donot know which species has priority ; but it makes 
no difference now, as Oppel’s species belongs to the genus Perisphinctes. 

In 1874, however, Dumortier recognising the difficulty, and considering that 
Lycett’s Am. Mooret and what he figured as Am. mactra (see p. 176) were identical, 
superseded the name Am. Moorei by that of Am. mactra (‘ Bassin Rhone,’ iv, p. 252). 

In 1879 Branco gave an excellent figure of Am. Moorei under the name Harpo- 
ceras mactra, and he quoted Lycett’s figure as a synonym. 

In 1884 Wright figured Am. Moorei under the name Harp. aalense (Zieten). 
In 1885 Haug placed Am. Moorei, Lycett, as a synonym of Am. mactra, Dumortier, 


PLATE XXXVII. 


Jurense-zone. 
Figs. 1—5.—Ponyprectus DIscorpEs (Zieten). 


Fig. 1.—Suture-line of a specimen from White Lackington, Somerset, to show the accessory tuft 
to the siphonal lobe, the forceps-like ending (f') to the superior lateral lobe, and the accessory lobe 
(aa) to the siphonal saddle nearly equal in size to the inferior lateral lobe—the last detail being 
different from d’Orbigny’s delineation. The suture is of natural size, and is copied from a drawing of 
mine. (Page 219.) 

Fig. 2.—Side view of a small specimen from Milhau, Aveyron, France. (Page 215.) 

Fig. 8.—Front view of the same specimen to show the view of the chamber-wall with its lobes 
and saddles, demonstrating the existence of a well-marked accessory lobe (aa) in the siphonal saddie, 
a point omitted in d’Orbigny’s and Wright’s figures. 

Fig. 4.-—The terminal branch (much enlarged) of the siphonal lobe when the side of the whorl is 
33 lines broad. 

Fig. 5.—The same when the side is 5$ lines broad. The letters a—e indicate the same points in 
each figure, and show their development. 


Figs. 6—8.—Dvumortierta Luvesaguet (d’Orbigny). 


Fig. 6.—Side view of a well-preserved, but not quite typical specimen. From the Yeovil Sands, 
Yeovil Junction (? Stoford, Somerset). Collected by Mr. Darell Stephens, F.G.S. (see Pl. XLV) 
(Page 241.) ; 

Fig. 7.—Front view of the same specimen. 

Fig. 8.—Suture-line of the same specimen, showing the deep siphonal and inferior lateral saddles, 
and the dependent inner portion,—characteristic features of the lobe-line of this genus. 


Figs. 9—11.—Dvumortrertia prisoa, 8. Buckman. 


Fig. 9.—Side view of a fairly well-preserved specimen. Yeovil Sands, Hendford Hill, Yeovil, 
Somerset. Collected by Mr. Darell Stephens, F.G.S. (Page 236.) 
_ Fig. 10.—Front view of the same, showing the almost circular aperture and the very small 
carina. 
Fig. 11.—Suture-line from the same specimen. 


Figs. 12—15.—Dumortieria costuua (Reinecke). 


Fig. 12.—Side view of a small example comparable to Reinecke’s figure. Cam Down. My 
Collection. (Page 237.) 

Fig. 18.—Front view of the same. 

Fig. 14.—Side view of a larger specimen without test,except a piece at the top showing fine lines. 
This is exactly the Dumortieria Munieri, Haug. I purchased it out of the Collection which belonged 
to the late Dr. Wright. The locality is unrecorded, but the black stony matrix suggests the 
‘ Striatulus-shales’’ of Blue Wyke, Yorkshire. 


Fig. 15.—Front view of the same. 
Opalinum-zone (Moorei-beds). 
Figs. 16, 17.—DuMorriEria STRIATULO-cosTaTA (Quenstedt), var. B. 
Fig. 16.—Side view of an example with complete test. Shell-beds of the Yeovil Sands, 


Stoford, Somerset (labelled Yeovil Junction). Collected by Mr. Darell Stephens, F.G.S. (Page 
243.) 
Fig. 17.—Front view of the same. 


Figs. 18, 19.—Dumorrierta, sp. 


Fig. 18.—Side view of a rather poorly-preserved specimen. Shell-beds of the Yeovil Sands, 
Stoford, Somerset (labelled Yeovil Junction). Collected by Mr. Darell Stephens, F.G.S., &e. 
(Page 245.) 

*Fig. 19.—F ront view of the same. 


A. Gawan. del. et lith 


Mintern 


PLATE XXXVIII. 
Jurense-zone (Dumortieria-beds). 
Figs. 1—8.—Hoptesvosia avrinis (Seebach). 


Fig. 1.—This figure, from the end to about the top part of fig. 4, is an outline 
taken from a large, very rough fragment. (‘The circumference beyond this point, 
and the centre-lines have been filled in to convey an idea of the complete 
Ammonite.) Penn Wood, near Stroud. My Collection. (Page 228.) 

Fig. 2.—Outline of the aperture of the large end. 

Fig. 3.—Outline at the small end. On account of the wretched preserva- 
tion of the specimen these outlines are only approximately exact, especially 
ventrally. 

Fig. 4.—Side view of a fragment, showing the smooth outer whorl, and the 
ribbed inner whorls attached to it, but apparently not in correct position. This 
fragment has been so placed on the plate to give an idea of the whorl of fig. 1. 
‘The Yellow and Grey Sands below Dogger, Blue Wyke,’’ Yorkshire. In the 
Collection of Mr. W. H. Hudleston, F.R.S., &c. 

Fig. 5.—Front view of the inner whorls of fig. 4. 

Fig. 6.— Aperture of the outer whorl of fig. 4. 

Fig. 7.—Side view of another specimen. ‘‘ Grey Sands, Blue Wyke,” York- 
shire. In the Collection of Mr. W. H. Hudleston, F.R.S. 

Fig. 8.—Back view of the same. (Figs. 7 and 8 have been restored by the 
artist to the best of his ability at my desire, so as to give an idea of the specimen 
as it should be. The original is distorted, broken, and poorly preserved.) 


Figs. 9—12.—HupLEsToNIA SERRODENS (Quenstedt). 


Fig. 9.—Outline of the side view of a poorly-preserved specimen. Penn 
Wood, near Stroud. My Collection. (Page 229.) 

Fig. 10.—Aperture of the same. 

Fig. 11.—Aperture of another specimen. Cam Down, near Dursley. My 
Collection. 

Fig. 12.—Suture-line of the same. 


Figs. 13—16.—Houp.eston1a Sinon (Bayle). 


Fig. 13.—Side view of a fragmentary and poorly-preserved example. ‘‘ Grey 
Sands, Blue Wyke,” Yorkshire. In the Collection of Mr. W. H. Hudleston, 
F.R.S. (Page 227.) 

Fig. 14.—Portion of ventral area of the same. 

Fig. 15.—Aperture of the same as nearly as it can be determined. 

Fig. 16.—Suture-line of the same. 


Imp 


Vinte: 


A. Gewan del. et lith 


PLATE XXXIX, 


Zone uncertain (Jurense ?). 


Figs. 1—2 a.—Domortreria anata, S. Buckman, var. 


Fig. 1.—Side view of a variety with greater portion of test, but it is rather 
ill-preserved. The locality is not recorded; but presumably the specimen came 
from the Marly Limestone which underlies the Yeovil Sands, Trent, Somerset. 
Collected by my father. 


Fig. 2.—Front view of the same, showing the furrows beside the carina. 
Fig. 2a.—Suture-line of the same specimen. 


Jurense-zone (Dumortieria-beds). 


Figs. 83—5.—Domoriieria arava, S. Buckman. 


Fig. 3.—Side view of a fragmentary specimen which lacks the test. Penn 
Wood, near Stroud. My Collection. 


Fig. 4.—Back view of the same specimen. 
Fig. 5.—Suture-line of the same specimen. 


Figs. 6—9.—Catottoceras Doumortieri (Thiolliére). 


Fig. 6.—Side view of a specimen without much test, and not well preserved. 
The occasional deeper furrows separating the ribs (periodic constrictions) are to 
be noticed. Found in a fallen block of calcareous sandstone (Yeovil Sands) on 
the beach at Burton Bradstock by Mr. J. EH. Clark, F.G.S., who very kindly 
presented it to me on the spot. 


Fig. 7.—Front view of the same specimen. 


Fig. 8.—Ventral portion of the same specimen towards the end of the whorl, 
to show the ribs ending short of the carina, thus producing a faint furrow, and 
also to exhibit the influence of a constriction. 


Fig. 9.—Suture-line of the same specimen. 


Figs. 10, 11.—Cartutiocrras Lersperci (Branco). 
Fig. 10.—Side view of a very poorly-preserved example. Wotton-under-Edge. 
My Collection. 
Fig. 11.—Front view of the same. 


Figs. 12—14.—CatTuLLoceras INSIGNI-SIMILIS (Brauns). 


Fig. 12.—Side view of a fragment. Stinchcombe Hill, Gloucestershire. My 
Collection. 


Fig. 13.—Back view of the same. 
Fig. 14..-_Aperture of the same. 


{ 


A. Gawan 


del.et hth. 


PLATE XXXIX. 


Mintern Bros. imp. 


PLATE XL. 
Jurense-zone (Dumortieria-beds). 
Figs. 1—9.—Domortieria STRIATOLO-costaTa (Quenstedt), var. a. 


Fig. 1.—Side view of a fine adult example. Penn Wood, near Stroud. My 
Collection. (Page 243.) 

Fig. 2.—Front view of the same specimen. 

Fig. 3.—Side view of the inner whorls broken out of the specimen depicted in 
Fig. 7. 

Fig. 4.—Front view of the same, to show the almost uncarinate ventral area, 
and nearly circular whorls. Compare with Dum. prisca, Pl. XXXVII, fig. 10. 

Fig. 5.—Side view of the same specimen with an additional half-whorl. 

Fig. 6.—Front view of the same, showing elliptical aperture. Compare with 
Dum. Levesquei, Pl. XX XVII, fig. 7. 

Fig. 7.—Side view of the same example complete. Penn Wood, near Stroud. 
My Collection. 

Fig. 8.—Aperture of the same. 

Fig. 9.—Suture-line from another specimen. 


Opalinum-zone (Moorei-beds). 


Figs. 1O—12.—Dumortineia sTRIATULO-costTatTa (Quenstedt), var. p. 


Fig. 10.—Side view, showing the greater inclusion. Penn Wood. My Collec- 
tion (see Pl. XXXVII, fig. 16). (Page 24:3.) 

Fig. 11.—Front view of the same. 

Fig. 12.—Suture-line of the same. 


fintern Bros. im, 


A. Gawan del. et lith. : 


PLATE XLI. 
Jurense-zone. 
Figs. 1—3.—Dvmorrisria pseuporapIosa (Branco). 


Fig. 1.—Side view of a very fine adult specimen, with the mouth-border and 
most of the test preserved. It was collected by Mr. T. C. Maggs, F.G.S., from 
the Yeovil Sands, Yeovil Junction; and its mouth was figured in the ‘ Quart. 
Journ. Geol. Soc.,’ vol. xxxvii. It is now in my cabinet. (Page 246.) 

Fig. 2.—Front view of the same specimen. 

Fig. 3.—The ventral area of the end of the whorl with part of the mouth. 


Figs. 4—8.—Dvmortieria Rapians (Iteinecke). 


Fig. 4.—Side view of a fairly-preserved example. Yeovil Sands, Bradford 
Abbas. Collected by my father. (Page 248.) 

Fig. 5.—Front view of the same. 

Fig. 6.—Suture-line of the same. 

Fig. 7.—Side view of an example to compare with Reinecke’s figure. Locality 
unrecorded ; probably Yeovil Sands, Bradford Abbas. Collected by my father. 

Fig. 8.—Front view of the same. 


Figs. 9, 10.—Doworvieria pseuporabiosa (Branco). 


Fig. 9.—Side view of a fragment. Yeovil Sands, Bradford Abbas, Dorset. 
My Collection. (Page 246.) 

Fig. 10.—View of the ventral area of the same, comparable with figs. 5 and 8, 
to show greater thickness. 


Jath 


Mir 


PLATE XLII. 
Jurense-zone (Dumortieria-beds). 
Figs. 1—12.—Dumortizria RADIANS (Reinecke). 


Fig. 1.—Side view of a specimen, to compare with Reinecke’s figure. Penn 
Wood, near Stroud. My Collection. (Page 248.) 

Fig. 2.—Front view of the same. 

Fig. 3.—Side view of a fine-ribbed variety without test. Penn Wood. My 
Collection. 

Fig. 4.—Front view of the same. 

Fig. 5.—Suture-line of the same. 

Fig. 6.—Side view of a compressed variety. Cam Down, near Dursley, 
Gloucestershire. My Collection. 

Fig. 7.—Front view of the same. 

Fig. 8.—Side view of a thick variety. Cam Down. My Collection. 

Fig. 9.—Back view of the same. 

Fig. 10.—Aperture of the same. 

Fig. 11.—Side view of a variety with distant ribs. Cam Down. My Collec- 
tion. 

Fig. 12.—Front view of the same. 


Figs. 13—15.—Dumortieria rapiosa (Seebach). 


Fig. 13.—Side view of aform showing inner whorls comparable to Dum. prisca 
or Dum. Levesquei, and outer whorl with fine ribbing. Cam Down. My Collec- 
tion. (Page 253.) 

Fig. 14.—Front view of the same, showing the variation in the shape of the 
whorls at different times. 

Fig. 15.—Suture-line of the same specimen. 


einen serteel oe 


Fig.7. 


A. Gawan del. et lith 


PLATE XLIII. 
Jurense-zone (Dumortieria-beds). 
Figs. 1—4.—Domortieria rapians (Reinecke). 


Fig. 1.—Inner whorls, natural size. Fig. 1a, side view enlarged three times, 
showing the commencement of the ribbing; 14, front view, showing the smooth, 
rounded ventral area and circular aperture; 1c, suture-line. (Page 251.) 

Fig. 2.—Inner whorls (fig. 1 with a piece added), natural size. Fig. 2a, 
side view enlarged three times ; 25, front view; 2c, suture-line. 

Fig. 3.—Inner whorls with additional pieces, natural size. Fig. 3 a, side view, 
enlarged twice, showing finer ribbing ; 30, front view, showing more compressed 
whorls with commencement of carina. 

Figs. 4a, b.—Side and front views of the complete specimen, by breaking up 
of which the specimens for figs. 1, 2, 3, were obtained. Cam Down. My 
Collection. 


Opalinwm-zone (Moorei-beds). 
Figs. 5—7.—Doumortierta rapiosa (Seebach). 


Fig. 5.—Side view of a large specimen showing coarse ribs in the inner 
whorls, which whorls are somewhat tumid. Penn Wood. My Collection. 
(Page 253.) 

Fig. 6.—Outline of the front view. 

Fig. 7.—Suture-line of the same specimen. 


Opalinum-zone (Moorei-beds). 
Figs. 8—-10.—Dumortigria suBpunDULATA (Branco), var. 


Fig. 8.—Side view of a fine example with greater portion of test preserved. 
Shelly beds of the Yeovil Sands, Stoford, Somerset (Yeovil Junction). From my 
father’s Collection. (For other examples see Pl. XLV.) 

Fig. 9.—Front view of the same specimen. 

Fig. 10.—Suture-line of the same specimen. 


Figs. 11—13.—Domorrierta rapians, var. Exicua (S. Buckman). 


Fig. 11.—Side view of a specimen with test. Penn Wood. My Collection. 
(Page 252.) 

Fig. 12.—Front view in outline. 

Fig. 13.—Suture-line from another specimen. 


A. Gawan del et lith 


PLATE XLIV. 
Dumortieria- or Moorei-beds. 
Figs. 1—3.—Dumortippia RADIANS, var. BxiGua, S. Buckman. 


Fig. 1.—Side view of a specimen without test. Penn Wood. My Collection. 
(Page 252.) 

Fig. 2.—Front view of the same. 

Fig. 3.—Suture-line of the same. 


Opalinum-zone (Moorei-beds). 
Figs. 4—9.—Domortinria Moorst (Lycett). 


Fig. 4.—Side view of a specimen with very fine striw. Little of the very 
thin test remains, but the test shows the fine striz, while the core has faint ribs. 
From the shell-beds of the Yeovil Sands, Stoford, Somerset. My Collection. 
(Page 255.) 

Fig. 5.—Front view of the same. 

Fig. 6.—Suture-line of the same specimen. 

Fig. 7.—Side view of a more involute form with the mouth-border. Buck- 
holt Wood. My Collection. 

Fig. 8.—Front view of the same. 

Fig. 9.—Suture-lines taken from Lycett’s original specimen, now preserved 
in the Museum of Practical Geology. 


Figs. 1O—12.—Dumortisria sopunpuLata (Branco), var. 


Fig. 10.—Side view of a rather involute form with the test and the mouth- 
border; but the lateral lappet is incomplete. Frocester Hill (Coaley Peak). My 
Collection. 

Fig. 11.—View of ventral area, showing the short ventral process and the 
angle at which the ribs cross the carina, indicating that the specimen is a 
Dumortieria. 

Fig. 12.—Suture-line of the same specimen. 


A Gawan del.et ith 


7 


PALAMONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. 


INSTITUTED MDCCCXLVIL. 


VOLUME FOR 1890. 


MDCOCXCI. 


A MONOGRAPH 


OF THE 


DEVONIAN FAUNA 


OF THE 


SOUTH OF ENGLAND. 


BY 


G. F. WHIDBORNE, M.A., F.G:S. 


PART III. 


THE FAUNA OF THE LIMESTONES 


OF 


LUMMATON, WOLBOROUGH, CHIRCOMBE BRIDGE, AND CHUDLEIGH. 


Paass 155—250; Purares XVI—XXIV. 


LONOON: 
PRINTED FOR THE PALHONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. 
1891. 


PRINTED BY 
ADLARD AND SON, BARTHOLOMEW CLOSE. 


. 


NOTE. 155 


Lower Dunscombe, near Chudleigh, whose fossils correspond with those of Adolf 
and Oberscheld, and which should therefore be placed at the base of the Upper 
Devonian and immediately below the Saltern-Cove series. From this place Prof. 
Rémer’ records Goniatites intumescens, G. multilobatus, Beyr. (= G. sagittarius, 
Sandb.), and Orthoceras acuariwm,.Mimst.?; and Dr. Kayser’ adds to these 
Goniatites acutus, Minst., and G. simplex, von Buch. 

Dr. Holl,* in his paper on Devonshire, enumerates twenty-four South Petherwyn 
species, viz. Orthoceras cinctum, Sow., O. laterale, Phill., O. striatum, Sow., O. 
ludense, Sow., O. striatulum, Sow., O. Phillipsii, V@Orb., Poterioceras fusiforme, 
Sow. ?, Cyrtoceras rusticum, Phill., Goniatites bifer, Phill., G. vinctus, Sow. (=G. 
insignis, Phill.), G. linearis, Miinst., G. subsulcatus, Bronn, Nautilus megasipho, 
Phill., and eleven Clymenie. 

In the first volume of his ‘ British Museum Catalogue’ Foord describes ten 
Orthocerata, one Actinoceras, and two Cyrtocerata from Devonshire, though in 
many cases the poorness of the specimens prevented him from giving them specific 
names. Three of these species, Orthoceras laterale, Phill.?, O. ? tentaculare, Phill., 
and O. Vennense, Foord (=O. cylindraceum, Sow. and Phill., not Fleming), are 
from Mudstone Bay. He also doubtfully refers a specimen from Lower Dunscombe 
to Actinoceras striatum, Sow., sp. 

The number of Devonian Cephalopods given in Etheridge’s ‘ Catalogue,’ 
excluding three repetitions, is fifty-seven. 

1 1880, F. Romer, ‘ Geol. Mag.,’ dec. 2, vol. vii, p. 145. 


2 1889, Kayser, ‘ Neues Jahrbuch ftir Min.,’ Band i, p. 179. 
3 1868, Holl, ‘ Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc.,’ vol. xxiv, p. 418. 


CORRIGENDUM. 


Pl. V, fig. 1. This large specimen belongs to Mr. Vicary, and not, as erroneously stated in the 
Explanation of the Plate, to the Torquay Museum. 


156 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


Ciass.—_GASTEROPODA, Goldfuss, 1820. 


The Gasteropoda have yielded a much greater variety of species from the 
localities now under notice than have any other class of fossils. They are, 
however, very unequally represented in them. By far the largest number come 
from Wolborough, except in the case of one family, the Capulidw, which is very 
abundant both individually and specifically at Lummaton. From Chircombe 
Bridge there are hardly any to record. The small group of species from 
Chudleigh, on the other hand, includes several shells which are of peculiar interest. 
These occur chiefly in the Keswell Quarry in a decomposed matrix which has 
allowed them to be extracted almost uninjured and entire. They are all very rare, 
with the exception of Murchisonia turbinata, Schlotheim, which has been obtained 
in very large numbers. This shell is remarkable for the amount of specific 
variation which it displays. The specimens of it are hardly ever exactly alike, 
and their great abundance permits us to range under the one species fossils 
which otherwise we should be obliged to regard as specificially or even generically 
distinct, and thus enables us to surmise that it is possible that, if we were equally 
fortunate in some other cases, we might be able to unite several forms which at 
present we are forced to consider as separate species. 

The number of Univalves described by Phillips was 24, viz. 23 from Newton, 
1 from Barton, and 1 from Chudleigh—one of which, however, he treated as a 
Cephalopod. Besides these, eight shells described by him from other places are 
found to have occurred in the present localities ; but, on the other hand, I have 
been unable to meet with any examples of one or two of his Newton species, 
while two or three of the remainder must, as it seems to me, be removed from the 
list as synonyms. 

The number of species is now raised to about 113, which are divided between the 
genera Dirhachis (1), Macrochilina (10), Loxonema (7), Michelia (1), Spanionema 
(1), Littorina (2), Naticopsis (1), Natica (3), Strophostylus (1), Platyostoma (3), 
Capulus (15), Orthonychia (2), Holopella (5), Scoliostoma (2), Antitrochus (1), 
Philoxene (3), EHuomphalus (10), Phanerotinus (3), Plagiothyra (2), Rotellina 
(1), Liotia (1), Flemingia (1), Hlasmonema (1), Turbo (8), Pleurotomaria 
(19), Murchisonia (6), Odontomaria (1), Bellerophon (5), Porcellia (1), Helmin- 
thochiton (1). 

It is of course very often impossible to fix with any degree of certainty the 
biological position of these shells, for the mouth is generally obscured or defective ; 
and the arrangement of the genera is rendered all the more difficult by the fact 
that under the best of circumstances the shell only gives indirect information of 


DIRHACHIS. 157 


the character of the animal, and that among the Gasteropoda there is so much 
similarity in the shells of many widely different organisms that it is very hard to 
settle by analogy the real position of any genus which is represented only by 
extinct species. 


Orper.—PULMONATA, Hhr., 1831. 
I. Family.—Avricutipa, Blainville. 
1. Genus.—Dirnacuis,' gen. nov. 


Shell elongate, elevated, spiral. Whorls convex, ornamented with spiral ridges 
reticulated by oblique threads. Mouth small, widely ovoid, with continuous lips. 
Inner lip bearing two large folds or teeth, which appear to be continued within 
the shell. Outer lip smooth, bevelled, and slightly crenulated within the margin. 
Shell-structure massive. 

This genus is formed for a single species, which, as pointed out to me by Mr. 
H. A. Smith, very nearly approaches Plectotrema. It differs from it in having a 
smooth outer lip, and only two teeth on the inner lip, as well as in some other 
particulars. 


1. Drrwacuis atavus, n. sp. Pl. XXV, fig. 15. 


Description.—Shell small, elevated, conical, spiral. Spire large, rather slowly 
increasing, of three or more convex, very broad, much-exposed volutions. Suture 
rather wide and deep, irregular. Whorls regularly and flatly convex, bearing seven 
or eight sharp elevated spiral ridges, divided by broad shallow grooves, crenulated 
by more numerous transverse, regular, close threads or growth-lines. Body-whorl 
small; in section sloping rather convexly from the suture to the lower part (which 
is the widest) and there curving round rapidly to form an oblique base; ornamented 
by eleven ridges similar to those in the upper whorls, but broken into tubercles by 
thicker and coarser growth-lines ; the ridge next the suture being the most promi- 
nent, and those on the lower part being smaller and closer, and gradually vanishing 
on the base. No umbilicus. Mouth small, elongate, pyriform, pointed above, 
rounded below. Outer lip dilate, moderately convex, sharp. Peristome slightly 


1 From dis, twice, and payis, a spine or ridge. 


158 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


crenulated within. Inner lip straight, continuous, thickened, elevated, bearing on 
the side of the aperture two distinct rounded teeth, which seem to be continued as 
ridges within the shell. Shell-structure massive. 

Size.—Height 13 mm., width 10 mm. 

Locality.—There is a single specimen from Chudleigh in the Woodwardian 
Museum. 

Remarks.—This small shell is somewhat crushed, but otherwise it is in a 
beautiful state of preservation. Iam not certain whether a shell which I have 
seen in Mr. Champernowne’s collection belongs to the same species, but otherwise 
I know nothing else like it from the present localities. The dentition of the 
mouth is peculiar. 

Affinities.—Externally it comes very near to Turbo mutabilis, F. A. Romer, 
but it has more numerous spiral ridges and a much smaller apical angle, and is 
generically separated from it by the teeth of its inner lip. 

From Cyclonema Guillieri, Ehlert, as given by Barrois,’ it differs in the shape of 
its mouth, in its longer spire, smaller body-whorl, and strong longitudinal strie. 


Orper.— PROSOBRANCHIA, Milne Edwards, 1848. 
I. Family.—Pssupomeraniupa, Fischer, 1887. 
1. Genus.—Macrocuitina, Bayle, 1880. 


This genus comprises spirally ovoid or buccinoid shells, which are not 
umbilicated, and have a slightly twisted or folded columella. It is either smooth 
or longitudinally striated. Its mouth is ovoid, simple, and effuse below. It 
extends from the Devonian to the Trias. 

It differs from Lovonema in its more ovoid shape, its fewer whorls, and its 
folded columella. 

The genus was first established by Phillips in 1841 under the name 
Macrocheilus ; but de Koninck® points out that that name had been previously 
apphed by F. W. Hope in 1838 to a group of insects. Therefore, although 
Zittel and Fischer both retain Phillips’s name, it appears necessary to follow 
de Koninck in employing the term Macrochilina, which was proposed for it by 
Bayle* at his suggestion. 

1 1850, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 1, p. 36, pl. v, fig. 21. 

* 1889, Barrois, ‘ Faun. Cale. d’Ebray,’ p. 220, pl. xv, figs. 12 a, b. 

8 1881, de Koninck, ‘ Ann. Mus. Roy. H. N. Belg.,’ vol. vi, pt. 3, p. 36. 
* 1880, Bayle, ‘ Journ. de Conch.,’ ser. 3, vol. xix, p. 35. 


MACROCHILINA. 159 


1. Macrocuitina susoostata, Schlotheim, sp. Pl. XVI, figs. 1—6. 


1821. Buccinires suscostatus, Schlotheim. Petrefakten-Kunde, p. 130, pl. xii, 
fig. 3. 
1827. Buccrnum ImBricatuM, Sow. (pars). Min. Conch., vol. vi, p. 127, pl. dlxvi, 
fig. 2, right-hand figure only. 
1840. — — _ Geol. Trans., ser. 2, vol. v, pt. 3, 
pl. lvui, fig. 23a only. 
1841. MacrocHeILus arcutatus, Phillips. Pal. Foss., p. 139, pl. 1x, fig. 194. 


~~ 


1841. — ELONGATUS, Phillips. Ibid., p. 104, pl. xxxix, fig. 195. 
P 1841. — IMBRICATUS, Phillips (pars). Ibid., p. 104, pl. xxxix, fig. 
194 a only (not Phil. Geol. York), 
1842. a ScuiorHeErMi, d’Archiac and de Verneuil. Geol. Trans., 


ser. 2, vol. vi, pt. 2, p. 354, pl. xxxui, fig. 2. 
1843. Loxonema Puruuipst, F. A. Romer. Verst. Harz., p. 30, pl. viii, fig. 9. 
1843. — ADPRESSUM, F. A. Romer. Ibid., p. 30, pl. vii, fig. 10. 
1844. Buccrnum arcuLatum, Gioldf. (pars). Petref., vol. iii, p. 28, pl. elxxii, 
fig. 15 b only. 
1849. MacrocHertus suscostatus, @’Orbigny. Prodrome, p. 63. 
1849, PHASIANELLA ADPRESSA, d’Orbigny. Ibid., p. 68. 
1854. MacrocHerLus iMBRicaTUS, Morris (pars). Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 256. 
1854. — suBcostaTus, Morris. Ibid., p. 256. 
1854. — ELONGATUS, Morris. Ibid., p. 256. 
1884. Loxonema Puiuuipst, Clarke. Neues Jahrb. f. Min., Beil.-Band iii, p. 364. 
1887. MacrocueEILus suscostatus, T'schernyschew. Mém. Com. Géol. Russ., 
vol. ii, No. 8, p. 171, pl. v, figs. 6a, b. 


1888. — AkCULATUS, Etheridge. Foss. Brit., vol. i, Pal., p. 163. 
1888. — ELONGATUS, Etheridge. Ibid., p. 163. 

1888. — suBcosTaTUS, Htheridge. Ibid., p. 164. 

1889. — — Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


Description.—Shell large, turriculated, fusiform ; mucronate at the apex, more 
or less inflated about the body-whorl, somewhat contracted at the base. Spire 
consisting of about six or seven broad, slightly convex volutions. Suture shallow, 
facing outward. Aperture ovate, narrow, very contracted at the upper angle. 
Inner lip covered by a wide, flattened, spiral callosity, which is keeled above, 
and extends round the columella. Body-whorl occupying about two-thirds the 
height of the shell, flattened or slightly convex above, and becoming rather sud- 
denly convex below. Shell-structure thin. 

Surface of the body-whorl covered with numerous, strong, low, distant, 
transverse, overhanging, acute ridges, facing away from the mouth, starting perpen- 
dicularly downwards from the suture, and almost immediately arching backwards 


160 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


for about one-sixth of their length, after which they again become perpendicular to 
the suture until near the base, when they again sweep rapidly backwards until they 
are merged in the fold of the inner hp. Minor ornamentation consisting of fine 
irregular strie following the course of the larger markings. Surface of upper 
whorls with similar ridges, truncated halfway down by the suture-line of the 
succeeding whorl. 

Size—A specimen from Wolborough measures about 70 mm. in height and 
about 40 mm. in width. 

Localities.—From Lummaton there are two well-preserved fragments in 
my Collection. From Wolborough there are five specimens in Mr. Vicary’s 
Collection ; five in the Museum of Practical Geology ; five in the Torquay Museum ; 


one in the Woodwardian Museum; and one in the British Museum. In the 
Torquay Museum is a small specimen from an unknown locality which is replaced 
by beekite. 

Remarks.—This fine species does not appear to be uncommon. It is repre- 
sented in museums, as seen above, by many fine specimens, which show most of 
its details, although they are rarely sufficiently perfect to give its exact dimensions. 
The outer lip is in every case defective or destroyed. They are often crushed or 
contorted, and this is probably due to the thinness of the shell-walls. These 
specimens appear to present some variability in the length of the spire and the 
number of the whorls, but their general facies is so similar that there can be little 
doubt that they all belong to one species. 

Two of Phillips’s figured specimens are among those in the Museum of 
Practical Geology. One of these is the type of his species M. elongata, and this 
at first sight appears to differ from the rest in being a more spindle-shaped shell 
with a much longer columella. These differences, however, are deceptive, being 
entirely due to the imperfection of the specimen. It has been longitudinally 
fractured, as indicated in his figure, and this fracture was caused by the shell 
having been subjected to lateral crushing, which has given the appearance of 
greater length to the shell and of greater obliquity of the suture-line, as well as 
bringing the inner lip into undue prominence. Moreover, the outer lip has been 
broken off straight down the perpendicular from the apex, so as to make it simu- 
late a long siphuncle, whereas in all likelihood there was originally no elongation 
of the base at all. In fact, several of the other specimens, which are crushed, look 
on the one side exactly like this shell, while on the other side they agree exactly 
with Phillips’s figure of his M. arculata, except that they are even broader. Hence 
it is clear that the species M. elongata cannot be retained, but must be reunited to 
the present form. It may be noted that Phillips’s figure is rather larger than 
life-size. 

‘The other figured specimen in the same Museum is Phillips’s type of 


MACROCHILINA. Aeil 


his M. arculata; and this he describes as coming nearer to M. arculata, 
Schlotheim sp. (young state), than to any other shell he knew. This fossil per- 
fectly agrees with the general run of our specimens, though it is much smaller than 
some of them, and is probably a young shell. It bears just below the suture a 
low and indistinct spiral thread. It cannot, however, be classed with the true 
M. arculata of Schlotheim. In company with Mr. T. Roberts I compared it with 
the figures of that shell given by Schlotheim,' by Goldfuss,’ and by d’Archiac and 
de Verneuil,’ and also with that of M. acuta, Sow. sp., in the ‘Min. Conch.,’ and 
we then came to the conclusion that it was distinct from any of them, except one of 
Goldfuss’s figures which seems to differ from the rest. Moreover, a fine typical 
German specimen of M. arculata shows the same; its body-whorl is narrower, 
the ridges of its surface are much less defined, and it has the flat angulated 
shoulder of that species, of which there are no signs in these Devonshire fossils. 

On the other hand, Schlotheim’s figure of his other species, M. subcostata, 
fairly represents our specimens, and there is every reason to suppose that they 
belong to it. His figure is almost exactly like the Torquay Museum specimen 
(Pl. XVI, fig. 4) when viewed from a different aspect from that figured. It 
has its upper whorls more convex, and is a broader shell, than is usual in the 
' English fossils. D’Archiac and de Verneuil figure this species under the 
name of M. Schlotheimi, and distinguish it from M. arculata by the absence of any 
flat horizontal area below the suture, and by other features. Their figure appears 
only to differ from our shells by having a shorter body-whorl and more obscure 
ornamentation, and they assert it to be the same as Schlotheim’s M suwhcostatus. 
As they state the species to be very variable, and as the English fossils le between 
Schlotheim’s form and their own, we have here a confirmation of their identity. 
They change Schlotheim’s name for reasons which are insufficient. 

Lowonema Phillipsi, F. A. Romer,* seems from his description to be identical 
with our shell; and Loxvonema adpressum, F. A. Romer,’ though it appears to be 
much more elongate, is probably only a variety or contorted example of it. 

Affinities.—Clarke® gives a better figure of the specimen figured by F. A. Romer? 
as Lovonema imbricatum, which shows that its ornament consists of fine imbrica- 
tions, and therefore that it is not, as Goldfuss supposed, identical with the present 


species. 


! 1820, Schlotheim, ‘ Petrefact.,’ p. 128, pl. xiii, figs. 1 a, d. 

? 1844, Goldfuss, ‘ Petref.,’ vol. iii, p. 28, pl. elxxii, fig. 15 (exclude 15 4). 

3 1842, d’Archiae and de Verneuil, ‘ Geol. Trans.,’ ser. 2, vol. vi, pt. 2, p. 854, pl. xxxii, fig. 1. 
4 1843, F. A. Romer, ‘ Harz.,’ p. 30, pl. viii, fig. 9. 

5 1843, ibid., p. 30, pl. viii, fig. 10. 

6 1884, Clarke, ‘ Neues Jahrb. f. Min.,’ Beil.-Band iii, p. 367, pl. v, figs. 19, 20. 

7 1843, F. A. Romer, ‘ Harz.,’ p. 30, pl. viii, fig. 11. 


162 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


2. Macrocuiuina arcutata, Schlotheim, sp. Pl. XVI, figs. 8, 8a, 9, 9a. 


1820. Buccrnires arcunatus, Schlotheim. Petrefacten-Kunde, p. 128, pl. xiii, 
figs. La, b. 
1842. Macrocueinus arcunatus, d’Archiae and de Verneuil. Geol. Trans., 
ser. 2, vol. vi, pt. 2, p. 354, pl. xxxii, fig. 1. 

1844. BuccinuM ARCULATUM, var. VENTRICOSUM, TOROSUM, and CARINATUM, 
Goldfuss. Petref., vol. iii, p. 29, pl. elxxii, 
figs. 15 a, c, d, and e (only). 

1844. — OceEant, Goldfuss. Petref., vol. iii, p. 29, pl. elxxiii, fig. 1. 

1849. Macrocuettus Ocrant, d’Orbigny. Prodrome, p. 63. 

1852. Buccrnum arcuLatuM, Quenstedt. Handb. Petref., p. 416, pl. xxxiii, fig. 17. 

1876. Macrocnerius arcunatus, F. Romer. Lethea Pal., pl. xxxii, fig. 6. 

1881. -- — Zittel. Handb. Pal., pt. 1, Band u, p. 239, 

fig. 820. 


Description.—Shell large, turriculated, fusiform, mucronate at the apex, more 
or less inflated about the body-whorl, somewhat contracted at the base. Spire 
consisting of about six or seven broad, slightly convex volutions. Suture shallow, 
facing upwards. -Whorls rising from the suture to form a small rounded or 
flattened shoulder, and thence proceeding downwards in a slightly convex curve. 
Aperture ovate, narrow, very contracted above. Inner lp covered by a wide 
flattened callosity, which is keeled above and extends round the columella. Body- 
whorl occupying about two-thirds the height of the shell, shouldered above, 
flattened or slightly convex in the upper parts, and becoming rather suddenly 
convex below. Shell-structure rather thin. Surface of body-whorl marked with 
very numerous, low, distant, unequal, longitudinal ridges, divided by shallow 
furrows, starting perpendicularly from the suture, then arching backwards, and 
then becoming again perpendicular, until near the base they again sweep rapidly 
backwards till they are merged in the fold of the inner lip; irregularly covered 
and partially obscured by more numerous finer ridges. Surface of upper whorls 
similar, but truncated halfway down by the succeeding whorls. 

Size.—A specimen measures 70 mm. im height by 37 mm. in width. 

Locality.—Chudleigh. There are several fine specimens in Mr. Vicary’s Collec- 
tion, and one in the British Museum. 

Remarks.—This species is very similar to M. subcostata, which has frequently 
been confounded with it. D’Archiac and de Verneuil have, however, distinguished 
them, and a comparison of the English specimens with Schlotheim’s figures of the 
two species leads me to think that the French authors are right in their 
conclusions. ‘he Chudleigh fossils are generally shorter and stouter shells than 


MACROCHILINA. 163 


those from Wolborough, and their whorls are more or less shouldered or folded 
over at the top instead of proceeding in a straight convex curve down from the 
suture. This feature is, however, much obscured in them by the matrix, and is 
less prominent than it is in Schlotheim’s type and in many other German shells. 
There also appears to me to be a constant difference in the ornament, that in the 
Chudleigh fossils being finer and more irregular than that in the other English 
shells. I therefore believe that they must be regarded as distinct, and as 
respectively belonging to Schlotheim’s two species, which are both described as 
very variable. 

Goldfuss has united these two species, dividing them, however, into several 
varieties, among which he figures shells which agree with each. 

Buccinwm Oceani, Goldfuss,' appears from the very poor specimen figured to 
be more elongate, and to have a higher spire and broader whorls. I am, however, 
inclined to think that these differences are due to contortion and to its being a 
cast, and that it probably belongs to the present shell. 


3. Macrocwitina tinora, Phillips, sp. Pl. XVI, fig. 10. 


1841. Loxonema nincta, Phillips. Pal. Foss., p. 100, pl. xxxviii, figs. 185, b. 
1854. — — Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 255. 
1888. — — Hth. Foss. Brit., vol. i, Pal., p. 163. 


Description.—Shell small, conical, of about five volutions. Suture linear, 
crenulated by the ornament. Whorls narrow, adpressed so as to form a fine 
hem or beading round the suture, otherwise moderately concave. Body-whorl about 
equal in height to the rest of the spire. Surface covered with fine and prominent, 
arched, longitudinal ridges, separated by similarly-shaped furrows, sloping back- 
wards from the bead below the suture, becoming perpendicular over the central 
parts of the whorl, and then curving gently backwards again in the lower part of 
the body-whorl. Mouth not shown except in its upper part, which is wide and 
acute ; apparently short. 

Size.—Height of a specimen wanting the lower part of the mouth 15 mm., 
width 9 mm. 

Locality.—Barton ; a single specimen is in the Lee Collection in the British 
Museum. 

Remarks.—The one specimen of this shell known to me is unfortunately 
imperfect at its base, so that only part of the body-whorl and of the mouth can be 
seen. I believe that it belongs to the species described by Phillips under the name 
of ‘* Loxonema lincta,”’ though in several particulars it is unlike his figure. Thus it 


1 1844, Goldfuss, ‘ Petref.,’ vol. iii, p. 29, pl. elxxiii, fig. 1. 


164 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


is slightly more slender in shape, the whorls are rather flatter, the striz are more 
oblique, and the edges of the whorls overlap the suture to a greater degree. 
Nevertheless the general aspect of the shell is very similar, and the enlarged 
pattern which Phillips gives exactly corresponds and shows the beading. Upon the 
whole, Mr. Lee’s specimen is quite as much like Phillips’s figure as are many of his 
other types to the figures which he gives of them; and as many of his originals 
from Barton were in Mr. Lee’s Collection, I am strongly of opinion that the present 
fossil was the actual shell from which Phillips drew his figure and described this 
species. It is to be noted that there is every appearance of imperfection about 
the base of his figure, which is just the place where the present fossil is defective. 

We may therefore, I think, take it for granted that the present species, as 
represented by the shell in the British Museum, is the Lovonema lincta of Phillips ; 
and we have next to observe that Phillips, although placing it under the genus 
Loxonema, suggests that Buccinum imbricatum, Sow., and B. arculatum, Goldfuss, 
should be referred to the same genus as this shell: these latter he ultimately 
included in his new genus Macrocheilus, and it is evident that Mr. Lee’s shell 
belongs to that genus. This gives another argument for its identity with Phillips’s 
shell, as he speaks of “ the disproportion of the whorls (owing to the last including 
and concealing so much of the penultimate);”’ and this feature, not seen in his 
figure, would remove one of the differences we have noted above. 

Affinities.—From M. subcostata, Schloth., sp., the present shell is separated by 
its much larger spire and shorter body-whorl, and by the simpler character of its 
ornamentation. From the other accompanying species it is distinguished by not 
being smooth, and from most of them by the shortness of its body-whorl. 


4. Macrocuitina mprtcata, Sowerby, sp. Pl. XVII, figs. 1—4. 


1827. Buccrinum imBricatum, Sowerby. Min. Conch., p. 127, pl. dlxvi, fig. 2 
(left-hand figure only). 

1840. _ acutuM, Sowerby. Geol. Trans., ser. 2, vol. v, pt. 3, pl. lvii, 
fig. 23 (not Min. Conch.), fide M‘Coy. 

1854. Macrocnerus mmBricatus, Morris (pars). Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 256. 

1855. Macrocninus venrricosus, Sedgw. and M‘Coy. Brit. Pal. Foss., p. 399. 

1857. Buccrnum Leve, Hichwald. Bull. Soc. Nat., Moscow, p. 173 (young). 

1860. Macrocuettus Lavis, HLichwald. Lethea Rossica, p. 1118, pl. xlii, figs. 

7 a, b (young). 


1888. — IMBRIcCATUS, Htheridge. Foss. Brit., vol. i, Pal., p. 164. 
1888. — VENTRICOSUS, Htheridge. Ibid., p. 164. 
Description.—Shell large, smooth, conical-ovoid, of five or six volutions. Spire 


ratber small and short, rapidly tapering. Suture simple, linear, rather shallow. 


MACROCHILINA. 165 


Whorls rather narrow, adpressed round the suture, moderately convex, but 
flattened about their centre. Body-whorl nearly two-thirds the height of the shell, 
voluminous, being much larger, more swollen and convex than the rest of the 
spire, gently arching below round the base of the shell. Columella long, rounded, 
straight, tapering, apparently somewhat twisted. No umbilicus. Mouth large, 
pointed above, extended below. Inner lip diffuse. Shell-structure thick. Surface 
marked with irregular growth-lines. 

Size.—Height 45 mm., width 26 mm. 

Localities. —There are three specimens from Wolborough in Mr. Vicary’s 
Collection, and four others from the same locality, chiefly very poor, in the Museum 
of Practical Geology. In the Torquay Museum are two other much smaller 
specimens from Barton or Lummaton, and another from Wolborough; and a still 
smaller specimen from Chudleigh is in Mr. Vicary’s Collection. Three specimens 
in the Woodwardian Museum from Plymouth, which have been described by M‘Coy, 
belong, I believe, to the same species. 

Remarks.—This species appears to be distinguished from the others that ac- 
company it by its shortish ovoid form, its small, rapidly increasing spire of few 
convex whorls, its large, long body-whorl, long columella, and large mouth. Mr. 
Vicary’s largest Wolborough example is very fine, but, having suffered from an 
almost obliterated fracture, its shape is rather misleading, while its surface is not 
sufficiently preserved to show whether it was smooth. It may be noticed that to 
its apex a small specimen of Davidsonia Vernewillii, Bouchard, is attached, though 
this is not shown in the figure. Of the shells figured by Phillips it most resem- 
bles Macrocheilus imbricatus, Phill., Pl. XX XIX, fig. 194 6, not Sow., but it is 
much more elongate and has a more conical spire and larger body-whorl than that 
fossil. Mr. Roberts was inclined to identify it with Macrochilina subcostata, 
Schlotheim, when we examined it together, chiefly on account of the flattening 
about the sutures; but I am not convinced of the correctness of this view, as it 1s 
a distinctly shorter shell with more convex whorls; and if it agrees, as I believe it 
does, with the other specimens with which I have classed it, it certainly cannot 
belong to Schlotheim’s species. 

The specimen in the Torquay Museum is the one which agrees best with those 
M‘Coy described. That from Chudleigh is a very small shell, and in it the body- 
whorl is proportionately smaller and the sutures shallower. The former difference 
is, however, probably due to its youth, and the latter may be accounted for by its 
having preserved the outer layer of the test, which is more or less wanting in the 
other specimens. I am inclined to think that the above examples all belong to 
the same species, and that they are distinct from the other shells of the same 
genus that accompany them. 

Sowerby, in the ‘ Min. Conch.,’ figures under the name of Buccinuwm imbricatum 


166 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


two shells from the ‘‘ Carboniferous Limestone of Bradley, near Newton Abbot,” 
which appear to me to belong to two different species: one, I think, is a specimen 
of this species ; and the other of M. subcostata. His description is not specifically 
identifiable. 

M‘Coy says, “ The greater abrupt convexity of the middle part of the body- 
whorl, and the contracted, more slender spire easily distinguish this species from 
the Carboniferous Buccinum imbricatum or acutum, Sowerby, with which it has 
been confounded.” He does not, however, seem to have observed that Sowerby’s 
original B. imbricatum, though described as Carboniferous, came from ‘ Bradley,” 
which probably means Wolborough, and therefore that they were Devonian 
shells. 

The minute shell described by von Hichwald as M. levis seems to me so similar 
to the smallest of our figured specimens, that I think it must be regarded as in all 
likelihood the fry of this species. 

Affinities.—I have been in much doubt whether this species agrees with Phasia- 
nella ventricosa, Goldfuss ;' but I am inclined to think it must be separated on ac- 
count of its shorter spire, its larger and higher body-whorl, and the much greater 
elongation of its mouth. On the other hand, it seems somewhat like Ph. ovata, 
Goldfuss,” but differs from it by being a broader shell, so that I hardly think it 
can be the same shell. Sandberger*® unites these two species under the name of 
M. ventricosus, but neither of his figures resembles the English shells. 

Macrochilus imbricatus (Sow.), F. A. Rémer* and Clarke,° differs in having a 
smaller spiral angle, and a finely imbricated surface. 


5. Macrocwiina susimMBricata, @’Orbigny, sp. Pl. XVII, figs. 5—7. 


1841. Macrocuerrrts impricatus, Phillips (pars). Pal. Foss., p. 104, pl. xxxix, 
fig. 194 6 (only). 

1849. — SUBIMBRICATUS, d’Orbigny (pars). Prodrome, p. 63. 

1889. — TUMESCENS, Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


Description—Shell large, turbinated, smooth, acuminate. Spire elevated, 
conical, of five or six rapidly and regularly increasing volutions. Sutures linear, 
simple. Whorls somewhat convex, adpressed against the suture above. Body- 
whorl very convex, and rather more prominent laterally than the other whorls 

1 1844, Goldfuss, ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 113, pl. exeviii, fig. 14. 

* Ibid., p. 113, pl. exeviii, fig. 15. 

3 1853, Sandberger, ‘ Verst, Rhein. Nassau,’ p. 233, pl. xxvi, figs. 15, 15 a. 

* 1848, F. A. Romer, ‘ Harz.,’ p. 30, pl. v, fig. 11. 

* 1884, Clarke, ‘ Neues Jahrb. f. Min.,’ Beil.-Band iii, p. 367, pl. v, figs. 19, 20. 


MACROCHILINA. 167 


of the spire, measuring somewhat more than half the height of the shell and 
rounding rapidly in to form its base. Surface smooth or only marked by 
indistinct growth-lines. Shell-structure rather thin. 

Size.—Height about 30 mm., width about 25 mm. 

Localities—From Wolborough there are three specimens in Mr. Vicary’s 
Collection, and one in the Museum of Practical Geology; and from Lummaton 
there is a specimen in my Collection. 

Remarks.—These fossils appear to Mr. Roberts and myself to agree accurately 
with one of the figures (194 b) which Phillips gives of his so-called Macrochilus 
imbricatus, Sowerby, but not with Sowerby’s original species. The only difference 
is that in Phillips’s figure the sutures are rather deeper and the mouth is more 
perfect than in our specimens. The former difference may be due to his shell 
being in the condition of a cast, or slightly injured round the suture, as is, in fact, 
my specimen from Lummaton. There can, however, be no question about the 
identity of these shells. 

But under the head of M. imbricatus, Sow., Phillips figures two shells which, as 
he himself suggests, belong evidently to two distinct species, and of which, more- 
over, neither belongs to the Buccinum imbricatum of Sowerby. His smaller figure 
is avery different shell, which is more elongate, and has a much larger body-whorl ; 
but his larger figure evidently, as we have just seen, belongs to the present 
species, and this he also doubtfully refers to the Buccinwm acutwm of Sowerby. 

Affinities.—This species differs from all the other species that accompany it by 
being shorter, and by having a shorter and more convex body-whorl. 

It is something like Ampullaria nobilis, Sow.,' of the Carboniferous Limestone, 
but is a wider and smaller shell, and has not the prominent growth-ridges seen in 
that form. 


6. MacrocHiLina vENTRICOSA, Goldfuss, sp. Pl. XVII, figs. 8, 8 a, 9. 


? 1844, PHASIANELLA vENTRICOSA, Gloldfuss. Petref. Germ., vol. iii, p. 113, 
pl. exeviii, fig. 14. 


Description.—Shell rather large, fusiform, somewhat elongate, of six or seven 
volutions. Apex acuminate. Spire elongate, nearly half the height of shell, 
consisting of whorls which increase in a progressive proportion, so that the sides 
of the spire are somewhat concave. Suture linear, almost invisible. Whorls 
strongly adpressed along the suture, otherwise moderately convex. Body-whorl 
short, wide, convex, curving rapidly in round the base. Columella short, straight, 


1 1826, Sowerby, ‘ Min. Conch.,’ p. 39, pl. dxxii, fig. 1. 
Mi P P 


168 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


thickened, rapidly tapering. Mouth pointed above, dilate, rather produced and 
rounded below. Outer lip convex, meeting the columella at a right angle. Shell- 
structure thin. 

Size.—Height 34 mm., width 21 mm. 

Locality.—W olborough. Thereare three specimens in the Museum of Practical 
Geology, a fine and exactly similar specimen in the Torquay Museum, and a 
specimen in Mr. Vicary’s Collection. 

Remarks.—This shell seems to me exactly to agree with Phasianella ventricosa, 
Goldfuss, except that the mouth is not so produced in front, and this appearance 
may be due to the imperfection of the German specimen. 

Affinities —These shells differ from the species next described, by their 
much greater breadth, their more expanded mouth, and their shorter columella ; 
from Macrochilus ventricosus, Goldf., as given by M‘Coy, by their longer spire 
and less swollen body-whorl; and from Macrochilina elevata by their shorter 
and slighter spire. A distinctive feature in the species seems to be the form of 
the spire, the enveloping angle of which increases downwards, so that it is more 
tapering at the top than near the body-whorl. WM. ventricosus, Barrois,’ is a 
narrower shell with a larger body-whorl. 


7. Macrocainina, aff. acura, Sowerby, sp. Pl. XVII, figs. 10, 10 a. 


? 1853. Macrocuitus ovatus, Sandberger. Verst. Rhein. Nassau, p. 234, pl. xxvi, 
figs. 16, 16 a (not Goldfuss). 


Description.—Shell rather small, elongate, slender, of about six volutions. 
Apex sharp or acuminate. Sutures simple, linear. Spire elongate, more than 
half the height of the shell, regularly increasing, and very conical. Whorls 
adpressed against the suture, otherwise moderately and evenly convex. Body- 
whorl nearly half the height of the shell, moderately convex, curving in somewhat 
rapidly round the base of the shell. Inner lip flattened, diffuse, probably callous. 
Columella elongate, straight, tapering, rounded, about a quarter the height of the 
shell. Mouth elongate, large, pointed above, extended below. Outer lip convex, 
with its curvature increasing downwards, and meeting the end of the columella 
almost at a right angle. 

Size—Height 28 mm., width 15 mm. 

Locality.—Wolborough. There is a single specimen in Mr. Vicary’s Collection. 

ltemarks.—This specimen is distinguished from the others that accompany it 


1 1889, Barrois, ‘ Faun. Cale. d’Ebray,’ p. 222, pl. xv, figs. 11a, bd. 


MACROCHILINA. 169 


by its elongate slender form, by its narrow spire, which is about the same height 
as the body-whorl, by the extension of the mouth below, and by its long straight 
columella. It is very closely allied to M. ventricosa (fig. 8), from which it chiefly 
differs by its much more slender shape. 

In general shape it very closely corresponds with Macrochilus ovatus, Sand- 
berger, but, its surface being absent, it is impossible to say whether it bore any 
striz, as given by that author. 

Affinities —From M. elevata it is distinguished by its larger body-whorl and 
smaller spire, and from M. subimbricata, d’Orb., sp., by its smaller body-whorl, 
larger spire, and more conical or fusiform shape. It very closely resembles M. 
ovatus, F. A. Romer,’ but is a much larger and more acute shell than that 
species. 

The shell, which Sowerby states to be common in the Plymouth Limestone, 
and quotes in the ‘ Geological Transactions’ as Buccinum imbricatum, bears much 
resemblance to this species, but I am inclined to think that his figure really 
represents a worn specimen of M. subcostata, Schlotheim, sp. 

I have been in much doubt whether this was the shell described by Goldfuss 
as Phasianella fusiformis,”’ but I now believe that it is to be distinguished by its 
convex whorls and broader form, and that Goldfuss’s figure belongs to the 
species which will be described on the next page, and which is certainly distinct 
from the present form. 

It only differs from Macrochilus acutus, Sow.,> as given by De Koninck,* in 
having less convex or globose whorls, and I am very doubtful if it can be 
separated from that Carboniferous shell. 

Macrochilus Dunkeri, Holzapfel,’ differs, according to Clarke,° in being a 
slighter shell, with a deeper suture and much broader and more convex whorls. 

Subulites priscus, Kichwald,’ is a much slighter and a beautifully imbricated 
shell, with lips of a different character. 


1 1850, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 1, p. 35, pl. v, fig. 16. 

2 1844, Goldfuss, ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ p. 113, pl. exeviii, fig. 16. 

3 1827, Sow., ‘Min. Conch.,’ vol. vi, p. 127, pl. dlxvi, fig. 1 (not Sow., ‘Geol. Trans.,’ ser. 2, 
vol. v, pt. 3, pl. lvii, fig. 23). 

4 1842-4, De Koninck, ‘ Desc. Anim. Foss.,’ p. 473, pl. xl, figs. 10a, 6, and pl. xh, figs. 18 a, d. 

5 1882, Holzapfel, ‘ Gon.-Kalk von Adorf. ;’ ‘ Paleontographica,’ vol. xxviii, p. 250, pl. xviii, fig. 4. 

6 1884, Clarke, ‘ Neues Jahrb. f. Min.,’ Beil.-Band iii, p. 367, pl. v, figs. 22, 23. 

7 1860, Hichwald, ‘ Lethea Ross.,’ p. 1128, pl. xliii, figs. 8 a, 8. 


170 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


8. MacrocuiLina ELEVATA, n. sp. Pl. XVII, figs. 11, lla, 12, 12 a. 


Description.—Shell small, elongate, spirally conical, of five or six volutions. 
Spire considerably more than half the height of shell, regularly increasing. 
Suture shallow, obtuse. Whorls broad, flatly convex except at base, where they 
slightly overhang the lower suture. Body-whorl small, curving in rapidly below. 
Mouth widely ovate. 

Size.—Height 17 mm., width 9 mm. 

Localities.—There is a specimen in the Museum of Practical Geology from 
Wolborough, and another in my Collection from Lummaton. 

Remarks.—The materials for describing this species are very poor and scanty, 
the Wolborough specimen being much worn away, while the other is so obscured 
with matrix that it is difficult to decipher its form. Nevertheless the shell differs 
so much from the accompanying species that it certainly must be regarded as 
distinct from them, and I am not aware of any other fossil with which it could be 
united. 

It is distinguished by its regular conical form, its large spire, its small body- 
whorl, and apparently by the comparative flatness of its base. 

I have given a name to this species with much hesitation on account of the 
poorness of the available specimens. It must be regarded as only tentative, 
although my strong impression is that further material will prove it to be distinct 
from any described form of the genus. 


9. MacrocuHiLina gsEcTA, n. sp. Pl. XVII, fig. 13. 


1844, PHASITANELLA FUSIFORMIS, Goldfuss (not Sowerby). Petref. Germ., vol. iii, 
p. 118, pl. exeviii, figs. 15 and 16. 


Description.—Shell small, rather elongate, spirally conical, of four or five 
volutions. Suture linear, shallow, oblique. Whorls broad, almost flat, rapidly 
increasing. Body-whorl large, more than half the height, flat and sloping in the 
upper half, then becoming gently convex, as it turns through almost a blunt 
angle to form the oblique base. Columella long, twisted. Mouth large, some- 
what lozenge-shaped. Surface smooth. 

Size —Height 12 mm., width 6 mm. 

Localities—From Barton there is a small but perfect specimen in the Lee 
Collection in the British Museum, and from Wolborough there are two imperfect 


MACROCHILINA. Via 


examples in the Museum of Practical Geology, and two very poor specimens 
which appear to belong to the same species in Mr. Vicary’s Collection. 

Remarks.—This species seems sufficiently distinct. It is marked by the 
almost conical form of the spire, caused by the flatness of the whorls and their 
regular decrease in size, and by the large body-whorl, which is symmetrical with 
the whorls of the spire. The species which most nearly approaches it is 
Macrochilina elevata, but that shell has a longer spire and more convex whorls. 

These Devonshire shells seem specifically identical with Ph. fusiformis, 
Goldfuss; but totally differ from the Ordovician Buccinwm fusiforme, Sow.,' 
whose whorls are as wide as high, and which appears to belong to this genus. 
M. ventricosus, Sandberger,’ appears to have a longer spire, more convex whorls, 
and a shorter and wider body-whorl. Sandberger’s two figures, however, seem 
rather different. 

In general shape it agrees exactly with Lovonema fusiforme, F. A. Romer,® and 
L. ovatum, F. A. Romer,* but it differs in being smooth instead of striated. 
Clarke’s’ description shows that it only differs from L. fusiforme, F. A. Romer, in 
not bearing striee. 


10. Macrocuinina oyctostoma, n. sp. Pl. XXVII, fig. 1. 


Description.—Shell small, elevated, conical, of five or six whorls. Apex 
acuminate. Suture wide, moderately deep. Whorls decidedly and evenly 
convex, much exposed. Body-whorl about two-fifths the height of the shell. 
Mouth subcircular. Outer lip convex and much expanded. Inner lip concave, 
oblique below, callous, somewhat thickened. Surface smooth. No umbilicus. 

Size.—Height 9 mm., width 6 mm. 

Locality.—Lummaton (?). There is a single small specimen in the Torquay 
Museum. 

Remarks.x—Much cannot be said about the little fossil here described, the 
single specimen of it which I know being so embedded in the matrix that only 
one side of it is exposed. I was at first inclined to place it in the genus Turbo or 
Phasianella, on account of the shape of its mouth. It differs from the species of 
Macrochilina which accompany it in this particular, and in the exposure and 
1839, Sowerby, in Murchison’s ‘ Sil. Syst.,’ p. 642, pl. xx, fig. 19. 

1853, Sandberger, ‘ Verst. Rbein. Nassau,’ p. 233, pl. xxvi, figs. 15, 15a. 
1850, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 1, p. 35, pl. v, fig. 18. 

#Tbid.; p: 35, pl. v, fig. 16: 

® 1884, Clarke, ‘ Neues Jahrb. f. Min.,’ Beil.-Band iii, p. 366. 


eo Oo 


172 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


convexity of its whorls and the shortness of its body-whorl. Other species, 
however, of this genus described by de Koninck and other authors appear to 
approach it in these characters much more nearly, and to permit it to be included 
within the generic bounds; and I therefore temporarily place it here, pending 
more hght being thrown upon it by the discovery of further specimens. 

Affinities.—It appears exceedingly like the Carboniferous Macrochilina Phillip- 
stana, de Koninck.' The shape and size of its mouth is almost the same as in 
that shell; the inner lip is callous and continuous, ard the slope of the columella 
is similar, but its whorls are fewer and broader, and their curvature shows a 
greater amount of convexity near the suture. Macrochilus Dunkeri, Holzapfel,” 
is a wider shell with a rather shorter spire, and with a large though very similar 
body-whorl, which is more than half the height of the shell. 


2. Genus.—Loxonema, Phillips, 1841. 


Long spiral shells with simple apertures, effuse below, with no umbilicus, 
and with sharp, more or less curving striz, belong to this genus, which extends 
from the Silurian to the Trias. 

Where, as in our fossils is often the case, the mouth is defective, it is often 
very difficult to say whether shells should belong to this genus or to Holopella. 


1. Loxonema Raemeri, Kayser. Pl. XVII, figs. 18, 18a, 19. 


21885. Rissoa? Leresuril, Léveille. Mém. Soc. Géol. Fr., vol. ii, pt. 1, p. 40, 
pl. ii, fig. 25. 
1840. TrREBRA NEXILIS, Sowerby (pars). Geol. Trans., ser. 2, vol. v, pt. 3, 
pl. liv, fig. 17 (smaller figure only). 
? 1853. LoxonreMa oBLiqurarcuatum, Sandberger. Verst. Rhein. Nassau, p. 231, 
pl. xxvi, figs. 12, 12 a. 
1866. Hoopes susurata, F. A. Romer. Beitr., pt. 5, p. 8, pl. ii, fig. 4 (not 
F. A. Romer, Harz., p. 31, pl. viii, 
fig. 12). 
1878. LoxonemMa Remeri, Kayser, Abhandl. Geol. Specialk. Preuss., Band ii, 
pt. 4, p. 108, pl. xvii, figs. 3, 3a. 


" 1881, de Koninck, ‘ Ann. Mus. Roy. H. N. Belgique,’ vol. vi, pt. 3, p. 36, pl. iv, figs. 4, 5. 
2 1882, Holzapfel, ‘ Paleontographica,’ vol. xxviii, p. 250, pl. xlviii, figs. 4, 4a, 4d. 


LOXONEMA. 173 


1879. Loxonrma sicuLa, Hail. Pal. New York, vol. v, pt. 2, p. 43, pl. xxviii, 
figs. 1—3. 
1882. -—- ANGULOSUM, Barrois. Mém. Soe. Géol. Nord, vol. ii, No. 1, 
p. 278, pl. xin, fig. 5. 


Description.—Shell small, very elongate, subulate, acuminate, of very many 
whorls. Whorls rather broad, being in height about two-thirds the diameter of 
the shell at that point; moderately and evenly convex. Suture simple, shallow. 
Ornamentation consisting of strong, regular, slightly arched, sharp ridges, 
concave towards the mouth, their curvature being greatest on the shoulder, and 
on the whole tending rather forwards from apex to base; divided by wider 
furrows; about twenty or thirty ridges on each whorl. 

Size.—A specimen in the Museum of Practical Geology, consisting of the 
seven upper whorls, is 18 mm. in length. 

Localities.—There is a specimen from Wolborough in the Museum of Practical 
Geology, and another from Lummaton in my Collection. A specimen from 
South Petherwyn is in the Woodwardian Museum. 

Remarks.—This was evidently a very beautiful shell. Its transverse ridges 
are just visible to the naked eye. They appear to have increased gradually in 
number as it advanced in age, the new ridges sometimes starting in the centre of 
the whorl, and thus causing a variation in the amount of arching in the neigh- 
bourhood. My specimen from Lummaton is very poor and much obscured 
by the matrix, which may account for the divergency of shape which is seen 
in it. 

The specimen in the Woodwardian Museum is the smaller of the two shells 
figured by Sowerby as Li. newile. It evidently differs very widely from his other 
specimen, which has generally been accepted as the type of that species, and it 
therefore remains without a name. It consists of two apical whorls in a beautiful 
state of preservation, 

Sandberger’s figure of his Lovonema obliquiarcuatum' seems only to differ 
from the English fossils in being slightly less elongate, and in having slightly 
more numerous strize bent more forward. I am rather inclined to believe 
that it may be the same species, but the difference in height prevents me from 
uniting them decisively at present, or from using Sandberger’s name for our 
English fossils. It is perhaps intermediate between this species and L. newile. 

Lowonema sicula, Hall,’ also seems to agree exactly in shape and ornament with 
the present shell. The only difference discernible, which does not seem of 
specific impurtance, is a narrow flat band below the suture in the American shell. 


1 1853, Sandberger, ‘ Verst. Rhein. Nassau,’ p. 231, pl. xxvi, figs. 12, 12a. 
2 1879, Hall, ‘ Pal. N. Y.,’ vol. v, pt. 2, p. 43, pl. xxviii, figs. 1—3. 


174 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


i. Remeri, Kayser, though a much smaller fossil, also seems the same. 
Kayser distinguishes his shell, which is the same as L. swhulatwm, Romer, ‘ Beitr.,”’ 


92 


from L. subulatwm, Romer, ‘ Harz.,” which is a very different shell, being much 
more elongate and having much broader whorls. 

L. angulosum, Barrois (not F. A. Romer), is also evidently the same shell. 

Affiities.—L. nevile differs from this species by having twice as numerous 
and more recurved ridges, and broader whorls. 

L. angulosum, F. A. Romer,’ differs in being slightly keeled above, in having 
fewer striz, and in being a very much shorter shell. 

L. funatum, F. A. Romer,* has the striz much more twisted and prominent. 

L. reticulatum, Phillips,’ is distinguished by its shorter spire, greater apical 
angle, and by its spiral threads. 

Holopella moniliformis, F, A. Romer,’ seems only to be distinguished by its 
having considerably longer whorls. 

Loxonema terebra, F. A. Romer,’ has much broader whorls, coarser striae, and 
apparently a much more elongate form. 

Lowonema terebra, Hall,® chiefly differs in having its striz more numerous and 
recurved. Whether Hall, who does not quote Rémer, intended, by using the 
same name, to identify this species with the German shell I cannot say; but, after a 
careful comparison of the figures of the English, American, and German (Rémer’s) 
shell, I think that there is reason to believe that the latter (which is very poor 
and indistinct) represents a different species from either of the former. 

A Carboniferous shell, Rissoa ? Lefeburii, Leveillé,’ is, judging from Leveillé’s 
figure, so similar that it might well be identical; but it does not seem safe to 
assume this, or to use Leveillé’s name for the Devonshire shell, for as figured by 
Goldfuss this Belgian species is a much shorter shell with finer striz, and it has 
been united by Bronn” and others, with Melania subsulcosa, Phillips," which 
differs from our Devonian shell in the same respects. 


1 1866, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 5, p. 8, pl. ii, figs. 4a, 6. 

2 1843, F. A. Romer, ‘ Harz.,’ p. 31, pl. viii, fig. 12. 

3 1850, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 1, p. 3, pl. i, fig. 5. 

+ 1855, ibid., pt. 8, p. 14, pl. iii, fig. 18. 

5 1841, Phillips, ‘ Pal. Foss.,’ p. 139, pl. lx, fig. 187*. 

6 1866, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 5, p. 8, pl. 1i, figs. 5 a, b. 

7 1850, ibid., pt. 1, p. 35, pl. v, fig. 15. 

8 1876, Hall, ‘ Illustr. Dev. Foss. Gast.,’ pl. xiv, figs. 6,7; and 1879, ibid., ‘ Pal.N. Y..,’ vol. v, 
pt. 2, p. 48, pl. xiv, figs. 6, 7. 

® 1835, Leveillé, ‘Mém. Soe. Géol. Fr.,’ vol. ii, pt. 1, p. 40, pl. ii, fig. 25. 

10 1848, Bronn, ‘ Handbuch,’ vol. iii, p. 288. 

11 1836, Phillips, ‘ Geol. Yorks.,’ vol. ii, p. 228, pl. xvi, fig. 1 a. 


Or 


LOXONEMA. My 


2. Loxonema nexiue, Sowerby, sp. 


1840, TEREBRA NEXILIS, Sowerby (pars). Geol. Trans., ser. 2, vol. v, pt. 3, pl. liv, 
fig. 17 (larger figure only). 

1840. Mevanta arcuata, MWiinster. Beitr., p. 88, pl. xv, fig. 2. 

1841. Loxonema nexiuis, Phillips. Pal. Foss., p. 99, pl. xxxviii, figs. 183 a—e. 


1849. = ARcuATtA, d’Orbigny. Prodrome, p. 63. 

1854. — NEXILIS, Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 254. 

1855. — — M‘Coy. Brit. Pal. Foss., p. 399. 

1873. — arcuatuM, Kayser. Deutsch. geol. Gesell., vol. xxv, p. 636, 
pl. xxi, fig. 6. 

1880. — communis, Maurer. Neues Jahrb. f. Min., Beil.-Band i, p. 30, 
pli, figs; 10,041. 

1887. — NExILis, @hlert. Bull. Soc. d’Etud. Sci. d’ Angers, p. 11, 
pl. vii, fig. 2. 

1888. — - Etheridge. Foss. Brit., vol. i, Pal., p. 163. 


Description.—Shell rather small, very elongate, of numerous whorls. Whorls 
very broad, being in height about three-quarters the diameter of the shell at that 
point, rather flatly convex. Suture simple, shallow. Ornamentation consisting 
of fine, strong, regular, rather arched ridges, divided by similar furrows, concave 
towards the mouth except on the lowest part of the body-whorl, where they 
become slightly convex, tending rather forwards from apex to base, and meeting 
at the suture at an obtuse angle, immediately below which each ridge bears a 
small tubercle ; between forty or fifty ridges on each whorl. 

Size.—Height of a specimen retaining rather more than two whorls about 14 
mm., width 8 mm. 

Localities.—There is a fragmentary specimen in the Battersby Collection of 
the Torquay Museum, which is probably from Lummaton. Sowerby’s type, from 
South Petherwyn, is in the Woodwardian Museum. 

Remarks—The specimens of this shell which I] have examined are very 
defective, and give few data for determining its characters. They appear, 
however, to agree accurately with the shell described almost synchronously by 
Sowerby and Munster. As Phillips, who wrote only a year later, gives the 
priority to the former author, I have followed him in adopting Sowerby’s name. 
Kayser’s figure has decidedly finer strize and more convex whorls, so that I have 
some hesitation in regarding his shell as identical. 

Under the name L. exile, however, Sowerby has figured two specimens, which, 
as M‘Coy points out, clearly belong to two distinct species. M‘Coy takes the larger 
of the two as the type of the species, as Phillips had evidently done before him, and 
it is this specimen only that agrees with Miimster’s shell and with our specimen. 


176 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


L. commune, Maurer, agrees perfectly with Phillips’s upper figure, and I have 
no doubt of its identity with this species. 

L. nexile, Hhlert, seems to be the same from his description, though his figure 
(perhaps from its roughness) appears rather more coarsely striated. 

Affinities —There is very little to distinguish the figures of Loxonema 
Hennahianum, Sowerby,’ from the present species, and if we judged by them alone 
we should be obliged to unite the two. However, Sowerby describes the former 
as having distinctly finer and straighter strize than the present shell, and with 
this clue differences may be made out in the drawings. Most probably the 
ornamentation in the figure of L. Hennahianum has been represented roughly, and 
therefore does not appear to be so fine as it is in reality. The whorls also in that 
shell seem narrower, and the spire is decidedly shorter. We shall see that there 
is every reason to identify with that species a shell from Lummaton, which differs 
widely from the present form in the points which we have just enumerated, and 
which in all probability belongs to the genus Holopella. 

From Loxonema sinuosum, Sowerby sp.,” the present species is easily distin- 
guished by its much broader whorls and straighter ridges, which meet at a 
definite angle at the suture instead of forming continuous sinuations across the 
whorls. That shell was originally described by Sowerby from the Aymestry 
Rock, and is, as I believe, correctly identified by Phillips’ from South Petherwyn. 
A beautiful example of it from the latter locality is in the British Museum, which 
shows admirably the sinuous character of the striz, and proves that M‘Coy was 
wrong in supposing the L. sinwoswm of Phillips to be the same as L. newile. 

L. obliquiarcuatum, Sandberger,* approaches our shell very nearly, but is a 
decidedly shorter shell with narrower whorls, and has coarser ridges. 

L. costatum, Goldfuss sp., MS., as described by Sandberger,* is much shorter, 
has much narrower whorls, and is much more obliquely striated. 

L. angulosum, ¥. A. Romer,’ differs in being much shorter and having much 
fewer and less arched strie. 

L. funatum, F. A. Romer,’ has much coarser strive with a different curvature, 
forming a reversed “*S”’ with a very small upper lobe. 

In Turritella lineata, Minster,’ the whorls are decidedly broader and the 

1 1840, Sowerby, ‘Geol. Trans.,’ ser. 2, vol. v, pt. 3, pl. lvii, fig. 22; and 1841, Phillips, ‘ Pal. 
Foss.,’ p. 99, pl. xxxviu, fig. 184. 

2 1837, Sowerby, in Murchison’s ‘Sil. Syst.,’ p. 619, pl. viii, fig. 15. 

3 1841, Phillips, ‘ Pal. Foss.,’ p. 99, pl. xxxviii, fig. 182. 

4 18538, Sandberger, ‘ Verst. Rhein. Nassau,’ p. 231, pl. xxvi, figs. 12, 12 a. 

5 Tbid., p. 230, pl. xxvi, figs. 11, lla. 

6 1850, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 1, p. 3, pl. i, fig. 5. 

7 1855, ibid., pt. 3, p. 14, pl. i, fig. 18. 

8 1840, Minster, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 3, p. 89, pl. xv, figs. 21 a, b. 


LOXONEMA. Lit 


suture much deeper. The striae also seem to arch in the reverse direction, though 
it may be questioned how far their figure accurately depicts them. 

Holopella subulata, F. A. Romer,’ as given in his later work, has fewer and 
straighter strize and shorter whorls. It has been renamed L. Rameri by Kayser, 
as Romer’s earlier figure represented a totally different species. 

Lovonema pexatum, Hall,’ L. Hamiltonix, Hall,’ L. rectistriatwm, Hall,‘ and 
I. delphicola, Hall,’ are all very kindred species, but differ in having much shorter 
whorls. It is quite possible, however, that L. Hamiltonix may be, as Hall at 
first thought, a variety of Sowerby’s Loxonema newile.® 


3. LoxoneMA RETICULATUM, Phillips. Pl. XVIII, figs. 1—3. 


1841. Loxonema RETICULATA, Phillips. Pal. Foss., p. 139, pl. lx, fig. 187*. 


1841. —  ? prarerita, Phillips. Pal. Foss., p. 100, pl. xxxviii, figs. 187 a, b 
(not ec). 
21844. Mevanta peperpita, Goldfuss. Petref. Germ., vol. iii, p. 109, pl. exevii, 
fig. 12. 

1853. Loxonrema rericunata, Sandberger. Verst. Rhein. Nassau, p. 231, pl. xxvi, 
figs. 13, 18.4. 

1854, _— RETICULATA, Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 255. 

1857. — sTRIATA, Hichwald. Bull. Soc. Nat. Moscow, p. 160. 

1860. Macrocnitus striatus, Hichwald. Lethea Rossica, p. 1118, pl. xliv, 
figs. 14 a, b. 


? 1887. Loxonema, sp., Tschernyschew. Mém. Com. Géol. Russ., vol. iii, No. 8, 
p. 171, pl. v, figs. 12, 13. 
1888. — RETICULATA, Htheridge. Foss. Brit., vol. i, Pal., p. 163. 
1888. — PRETERITA, Mtheridge. Ibid., p. 163. 


Description.—Shell large, spiral, many-whorled, turreted, elongate, pointed. 
Whorls seven or eight, regularly increasing, evenly convex, slightly flattened 
immediately below the suture, covered by numerous sigmoidal, perpendicular, 
distant threads, which are crossed by similar and equally distant spiral threads, 
so as to form a rough reticulation clearly visible to the naked eye. Body-whorl 
rapidly rounding in below. Aperture subcircular. Columella straight, some- 
what produced below. Suture simple, shallow, thread-like. Shell-structure 
thick. 

1 1866, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 5, p. 8, pl. ii, figs. 4a, b. 

2 1879, Hall, ‘Pal. N. Y.,’ vol. v, pt. 2, p. 42, pl. xiii, figs. 13, 16, 18. 
3 Ibid., p. 45, pl. xiii, figs. 15 and 17. 

4 Tbid., p. 130, pl. xxviii, figs. 9, 9 a. 

5 Ibid., p. 47, pl. xiii, figs. 19—25, and pl. xiv, figs. 1, 2. 

6 1843, Hall, ‘Geol. N. Y. Surv. 4th Geol. Dist.,’ p. 201. 


178 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


Size-—A specimen in Mr. Vicary’s Collection measures 90 mm. in height, 
and 33 mm. in width. 

Localities.—Wolborough, Chudleigh. There are two specimens from Wol- 
borough in Mr. Vicary’s Collection, and two from the same locality in the 
Museum of Practical Geology, one of which is Phillips’s figured type. There are 
also two specimens in the Museum of Practical Geology, which are Phillips’s 
types of his species L. preteritum. 

Remarks.—This is a very well-defined and large species. Phillips’s original 
specimen is of a comparatively small example, and other specimens are much 
larger, and show that the shell-structure generally became extremely massive in 
old age. Phillips’s figs. 187 a and b of his L. preteritum are very roughly and 
inaccurately drawn. ‘lhe two specimens are moulds in relief lying in slabs, in 
which the outline of the shell itself is marked by a white line of calcareous spar, 
which from its position seems to give an exaggerated appearance of thickness to 
the shell-structure. They present few points available for specific determination, 
but as far as can be seen they so closely resemble the other specimens of JL. 
reticulatum that I have little doubt of their belonging to the same species. 
Phillips’s third figure of his L. preteritwm, which is in the same Museum, is from a 
poor and crushed specimen of a much smaller shell from Hope’s Nose, and I am 
at present inclined to regard it as specifically distinct. 

Goldfuss gives the name of Melania deperdita to a large cast which seems to 
me to correspond with the casts of this species. 

Macrochilus striatus, Kichwald, is described from a single fragmentary specimen, 
which appears to be just similar to the upper whorls of the English shells. 

The large casts of Lovonema figured by T'schernyschew are very similar, but 
are perhaps more elongate with fewer whorls. They are, however, apparently 
much distorted. 

One of Mr. Vicary’s specimens, though very large, has a comparatively thin 
shell, and the ornament is much finer than is usual in this species. 


4, Loxonema? sp. Pl. XVIII, fig. 4. 


Description.—Shell of moderate size, spiral, somewhat elongate, conical, of 
several whorls. Sutural angle rather great, variable. Whorls probably five or six, 
short, convex above, flat below. Suture rather deep. Surface ornamented near 
the suture with indistinct threads sloping obliquely backwards. Body-whorl 
rather large. Mouth somewhat produced below. Shell-structure thin. 

Size—Height probably about 80 mm., width 12 mm. 


LOXONEMA. 179 


Locality.— Wolborough. There are two poor specimens in Mr. Vicary’s 
Collection, and a third in the Torquay Museum. 

Remarks.—The figured specimen is extremely worn, and very little can be 
learned from it. Only at one point immediately below the suture has it any 
remains of the surface, and there a few indistinct obliquely transverse lines are 
visible under a lens. As its form, however, seems different from any of the 
known Gasteropods of our localities, it is figured here in the hopes that this may 
ultimately lead to its identification. 

Afinities.—It differs from Lowonema scalarixforme, Holzapfel, sp., by its much 
narrower whorls and finer markings. 


5. LoxoNEMA sCALARIMF0ORME, Holzapfel, sp. Pl. XVIII, fig. 5. 


1867. LoxoneMa ruGireruM, Zrenkner (not Phillips). Paliont. Novit., pt. 1, 
p: 11, pl. 7, fig. 19: 
1867. — vaGireruM, Trenkner. Ibid., in the explanation of plate only 
(probably misprint). 
1882. HonopELLa sCALARTZFORME, Holzapfel. Paleontographica, vol. xxviii, 
p- 250, pl. xlvii, fig. 2. 
1884. LoxoneMA RUGIFERUM, Clarke. Neues Jahrb. f. Min., Beil.-Band iii, 
p. 366, pl. v, figs. 24, 25. 


Description.—Shell moderate in size, elongate, turreted, many-whorled. Suture 
deep and wide, apparently indented by the ridges of the ornament. Whorls 
broad, convex, crossed by strong, sharp, distant, prominent, straight, transverse 
ridges, inclining slightly forward from above, and apparently vanishing upon the 
lower part of the body-whorl, which curves rather rapidly inwards to form the 
base of the shell; each whorl containing about sixteen ridges. 

Size—About 13 mm. in width. 

Locality.—A specimen from Wolborough is in Mr. Vicary’s Collection. 

Remarks.—The specimen described above is unfortunately in very poor and 
defective condition, but it clearly belongs to a well-marked species, which is very 
distinct from anything else occurring in the same localities. It has been labelled 
by Salter “ Lovonema not rugifera,”’ and in that opinion I entirely agree. It 1s cer- 
tainly quite unlike the shell described by Phillips in the ‘ Geology of Yorkshire’? 
under the name of Melania rugifera. His figure and the specimens from the 
Mountain Limestone in the British Museum show that that shell has much narrower 
whorls which are more swollen below, and that the ridges are much more oblique, 
and are only prominent on the lower part of the whorl. Ido not believe that the shell 


1 1837, Phillips, ‘ Geol. Yorks.,’ pt. 2, p. 229, pl. xvi, fig. 26. 


180 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


from Brushford described in the ‘Pal. Foss.’ under the name of ‘* Loxonema 
rugifera,” Phillips,’ belongs to the same species as the Yorkshire shell. It is much 
more similar to the present form, but, as Mr. Roberts agrees with me in thinking, 
quite distinct from it. Its whorls are narrower and more convex, the ridges appear 
fewer, and there are varices present of which there are no indications in the 
Wolborough fossil. Holzapfel, on the other hand, describes under the name of 
Holopella scalarizformis a shell from Adorf, which is very defective, consisting of 
a single whorl in poor condition, but which, as far as can be seen, there is every 
reason to regard as agreeing with our English specimen. It seems, moreover, 
exactly to correspond with the shell described by Trenkner and Clarke under the 
name of L. rugiferum. 

Affinities —Loxonema funatum, F. A. Roémer,* differs from it in having its 
transverse ridges much arched and oblique, instead of being straight and almost 
parallel to the apical perpendicular. 

In Loxvonema angulosum, F. A. Rémer,* the ridges are more arched and much 
more numerous, and the whorls more evenly convex. 

Chemnitzia rugifera, de Koninck,‘ agrees with the Yorkshire and not with the 
present species. 


6. LoxoneMa conicom, n. sp. Pl. XVIII, figs. 7, 7 a, 8. 


Description.—Shell large, spiral, very elongate, many-whorled. Suture small, 
simple, hardly indenting the outline of the side. Whorls very broad, overlapping 
the suture, with almost flat sides. Body-whorl curving in very suddenly below to 
form the base of the shell. Aperture apparently not much expanded or produced 
below. Surface finely reticulate, having sharp and irregularly distant longitudinal 
lines sloping rather backward from above, and rather smaller and more numerous 
sharp spiral lines. Base of shell apparently smooth. 

Size.— Height of specimen containing three whorls 37 mm., width 19 mm. 

Locality —There is a fine, though characteristically worn, specimen from 
Wolborough in the Battersby Collection of the Torquay Museum, which consists 
of the three lower whorls ; and two smaller specimens from Lummaton (?) in the 
same Museum, which have entirely lost the shell and are somewhat crushed, but 
which probably belong to the same species, though they might almost as well 
belong to Holopella. 

1 1841, Phillips, ‘ Pal. Foss.,’ p. 101, pl. xxxviii, fig. 188. 

? 1855, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 3, p. 14, pl. iii, fig. 18. 

3 1850, ibid., pt. 1, p. 3, pl. i, fig. 5. 

* 1842-4, de Koninck, ‘ Dese. Anim. Foss.,’ p. 462, pl. xh, fig. 2. 


LOXONEMA. TS 


Remarks.—This shell approaches Lovonema reticulatwm in its general shape and 
its markings, but it differs in having hardly any indentation at the suture, and in 
its whorls being almost flat and much broader. Its mouth also appears to be 
smaller and less produced below, and its ornamentation seems somewhat 
coarser and sharper. Mr. Roberts and I, on examining it together, came to the 
conclusion that in all probability it is a distinct species. The material, however, at 
our command is very scanty and difficult to decipher, so that it is quite possible 
that these differences may ultimately prove to be due to accident or specific 
variation. At the same time, as far as can be at present seen they appear 
so numerous and distinctive, that it seems unwise to include it as a variety in 
Phillips’s species. The existing whorls would lead to the supposition that it 
was much more elongate than that species, and had still more numerous whorls. 


7. Loxonema priscum, Minster, sp. Pl. XVIII, figs. 17—19. 


? 1837. TurRRiTELLA oBsoLeta, Sowerby. Murchison’s Sil. Syst., p. 603, pl. iii, 
fies. 7 a, 12,f. 

? 1837. — GREGARIA, Sowerby. Ibid., p. 603, pl. iii, fig. 1f. 
1840, Menanta Prisca, Minster. Beitr., pt. 3, p. 83, pl. xv, fig. 1. 
1853. HoLopeLna PILIGERA, Sandberger. Verst. Rhein. Nassau, p. 228, pl. xxvi, 

figs. 9, 9a—e. 
1881. LoxonemMa DEORNATUM, de Koninck. Annales Mus. Royal H. N. Belg., 
vol. vi, p. 47, pl. iv, figs. 24, 25. 

1882. HonopreLta PILIGERA, Holzapfel. Paleeontographica, vol. xxviii, p. 249. 
1889. — — Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


Description.—Shell small, elongate, slender, spiral, of many volutions. Sutural 
angle small, constant. Suture linear, deep. Whorls nine or ten, smooth, broad, 
regularly convex. Body-whorl rather larger and broader in proportion than the 
penultimate whorl, slightly flattened in the middle, curving rather suddenly to 
form the base of the shell. Aperture subcircular, rather large. Columella strong, 
straight, rather long, being about half the length of the mouth. Inner lip diffuse, 
callous. Outer lip semicircular. Surface smooth. 

Size.—Height 21 mm., width 5 mm. 

Localities—From Wolborough there are two or perhaps three specimens in 
Mr. Vicary’s Collection, one in the Museum of Practical Geology, and one in the 
Torquay Museum. From Lummaton there are two specimens in the Battersby 
Collection of the Torquay Museum. 

Remarks.—The type specimen of the present species as occurring in Devon- 
shire is the fine example figured in Pl. XVIII, fig. 19. Most of the other speci- 


182 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


mens are poor and give few specific marks apart from their general shape, but 
on the whole they appear to belong to the same species. Mr. Vicary’s two 
specimens were labelled by Salter ‘‘ Holopella piligera, Sandberger,”’ and to the 
broader variety of that species they present so close a resemblance that there 
would be no doubt of their identity were it not that the whorls of our type 
specimen have the appearance of being perfectly smooth, whereas Sandberger’s shell 
appears to be marked with very fine and indistinct transverse threads. In the basal 
part of our specimen, however, there are some very faint indications of similar 
markings, and therefore it appears best to regard it as at most a smooth variety of 
the German shell. The circular mouth, the strong columella, and the expanded 
body-whorl seem to be distinctive features ; it is possible, on the other hand, that 
the bottom of the shell though appearing perfect may be really defective, and 
that its true termination may be gone. 

Melania prisca, Mimster,' is a smooth shell which is remarkably similar in 
general appearance. It chiefly differs in being somewhat more elongate and in 
having broader whorls. The mouth in Minster’s figure is evidently either defec- 
tive or misdrawn, and hence it is impossible to say whether the two shells belong 
to the same genus, but their general appearance would lead to the supposition 
that they did so; and, as the specimens which Sandberger figures of his shell vary 
far more in their elongation and the breadth of their whorls than would cover the 
distance between the English shell and Miinster’s specimens, the only remaining 
point in question is the smoothness. In that the English shell agrees with 
Miinster’s, and therefore it appears needful to regard them as the same species. 

Affinities.—This shell differs from its accompanying congeners in its slender 
shape and its smoothness, as well as in the other points just mentioned. Sand- 
berger remarks that his shell comes very near to, and perhaps may be identical 
with, Turritella obsoleta and gregaria, Sowerby. ‘These shells from Horeb Chapel 
are certainly very similar to ours, and are described as smooth; but they 
are in the form of casts, and it is therefore not very easy to be certain whether 
they are identical or not. The chief differences appear to be that their whorls are 
decidedly more convex, and that their shape seems broader. I am, however, very 
doubtful whether they would prove distinct if the original specimens were 
compared. Sandberger also compares his species with Melania subangulata, M. 
deperdita, M. absoluta, and M. antiqua, four badly preserved species, described by 
Goldfuss’ in the ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ which, however, all distinctly differ. 


1 1840, Minster, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 3, p. 83, pl. xv, fig. 1. 
2 1844, Goldfuss, ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ p. 109, pl. exevii, figs. 11—14. 


LOXONEMA—MICHELIA. 183 


8. Loxonema priscum, Minster, sp., var. ? 


A most imperfect specimen from Wolborough in Mr. Vicary’s Collection seems 
to agree in general shape with the most elongate of Sandberger’s figures of his 
Holopella piligera (fig. 9 only), which we regard as a synonym of this shell. 
The ornament is gone, the whorls are worn and partially broken away, and only 
part of the spire is visible; hence it is perfectly impossible to identify it specifi- 
cally, and it can only be said that it either belongs to this species or to some other 
at present unrecorded from these beds. 


3. Genus.—Micaettia, Ff. A. Romer, 1852. 


This genus was founded by F. A. Rémer for a group of shells which are 
subulate or spirally conical, with flattened sides, and with longitudinal strize that 
slope backwards over the whorls until, just above the suture, they turn sharply 
and suddenly forwards. Their shape is much like that of an elongated top-shell. 
The mouth is short and subquadrate. They are very like Chemnitzia in general 
appearance, and except for the angulated character of the striation might probably 
be taken as equivalent with the group of shells separated by Pictet under the 
name of Pseudomelania, of which the well-known Chemnitzia Heddingtonensis, 
Sow., is an example. These shells, in common with the genera Macrochilina and 
Loxonema, are separated from the Pyramidellide by the simpler character of the 
nucleus. 

De Koninck described in 1877 a genus under the name of Mitchellia, which 
hardly seems intended to be the same ; but whether it is so or not, some confusion 
appears to have been caused by authors not having noticed the difference between 
the English and French way of spelling the name, and hence referring to 
de Koninck a genus which had long before been founded by Romer. 


1. Micueuia, sp. Pl. XVIII, fig. 6. 


? 1852. Micweria exatrata, FA. Romer. Beitr., pt. 2, p. 74, pl. xi, fig. 17. 


Description —Shell of moderate size, elongate, spiral, conical, of many whorls. 
Sutural angle small, rather variable. Suture small, shallow. Whorls eight or 
more, very narrow, increasing rather rapidly, almost flat over the greatest part of 


184 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


their surface, shghtly convex near the sutures, and slightly overhanging the 
lower suture. 

Size.—A fragmentary specimen measures about 33 mm. in height and about 
16 mm. in diameter. 

Locality.—Wolborough. There is a specimen in the Museum of Practical 
Geology, another in the Torquay Museum, and a third in Mr. Vicary’s Collection. 

Remarks.—These fossils are all very defective, and preserve no trace of either 
the surface-markings, or the base, or the aperture, so that it is impossible to deter- 
mine whether any part of the body-whorl remains. Their shape, however, is 
peculiar, and quite different from any of the other fossils that occur in these 
localities. They are distinguished by their conical form and their flattish narrow 
whorls. The specimen in the Torquay Museum appears to be deformed, as the 
apical part of it 1s considerably recurved, so that the perpendicular from the apex 
perhaps fell actually outside the circumference of the base. The nucleus is present, 
and is rather larger than the proximate whorl, which is very irregular, and 
accounts for much of the deformity. The whorls in this specimen seem 
narrower and more convex than those of the other, so that I am not certain 
whether it belongs to the same species, but it is in such a poor state of preserva- 
tion that but little can be made of it. 

Melania subangulata, Goldfuss,’ has a much wider and deeper suture. 

As far as can be judged from the cast, this shell comes very close to Michelia 
exaltata, F. A. Romer.’ It has about the same apical angle, but is specifically 
distinguished by having somewhat broader and more convex whorls, although not 
nearly so much so as Michelia distracta, F. A. Romer.* It is, however, so similar 
that it most probably belongs to the same genus as do those shells. 


4. Genus.—SPAaNIONEMA,* gen. nov. 


Shell very elongate, turriculated, of many almost wholly exposed, narrow, 
convex whorls. Mouth subcircular, produced below. Surface probably smooth, 
bearing occasional discontinuous varices. Umbilicus minute. 

The position of this genus (or perhaps sub-genus), which is formed for the species 
described below, seems to me at present doubtful. In general shape it approaches 
Loxonema, two or three species of which have been described as bearing varices ; 
and near this genus, by the advice of Mr. Etheridge, I have provisionally 

1 1844, Goldfuss, ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 109, pl. exevii, fig. 11. 
? 1852, F. A. Romer, ‘ Harz.,’ pt. 2, p. 74, pl. xi, fig. 17. 

3 Ibid., pt. 2, p. 74, pl. xi, fig. 18. 

4 From omdvos, rare, and vijua, a thread. 


SPANIONEMA. 185 


classed it. From that genus, however, it is distinguished by the possession of a 
minute umbilicus, and by the greater separation of the whorls, which might 
suggest some relationship to Scalaria, and especially to its recent sub-genus 
Crossea, Adams ;' from which, however, it is widely separated by the shape of its 
mouth and other important particulars. 

As will be seen, the shape of the front part of the mouth cannot be satis- 
factorily ascertained, and until this is known the true position of the genus 
cannot be positively decided. 


1. SPANIONEMA sOALAROIDES, Whidborne, sp. Pl. XVII, figs. 16, 16a, 17. 
1889. LoxoneMa scaLARrorpEs, Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dee. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


Description.—Shell very elongate, many-whorled, turriculated, of moderate 
size. Suture deep. Spire slightly fusiform at the summit. Whorls eight or 
more, moderately and evenly convex, narrow, the diameter of a whorl being 
nearly twice its height. Surface smooth, with occasional, very large, straight, 
discontinuous varices, sloping obliquely backwards at a high angle from the 
suture, and bluntly wedge-shaped in section. Mouth somewhat expanded, 
with the suture-line somewhat deflected upwards at its upper corner, and the 
lips extended below. Inner lip straight, longitudinally grooved. Umbilicus very 
small and deep. Outer lip unseen. 

Size.—A specimen retaining the four lower whorls is 22 mm. high, and 
15 mm. in diameter. 

Locality —Wolborough. There are two specimens in Mr. Vicary’s Collection, 
and two others in the Torquay Museum (the best of which is in the Battersby 
Collection). A fragment in the Museum of Practical Geology possibly belongs to 
the same species. 

Remarks.—The present is a very remarkable and distinctive species, and no 
other shell that accompanies it is at all similar. The mouth is too obscured in 
the only specimen that preserves it to enable us to decide its actual shape. As 
shown by that specimen, it appears to have an anterior channel or siphonal canal, 
but this appearance is doubtless deceptive, and is caused by the fracture of the 
outer lip. The varices seem to be much fewer than are the whorls, and occur at 
irregular intervals. 

Affinities —This species somewhat resembles Lowonema ranelleforme, F. A. 
Romer,” but it has more convex and much shorter whorls, and has no longitudinal 
1 1882, Tryon, ‘Structural and Systematic Conch.,’ vol. ii, p. 221, pl. Ixvii, fig. 47. 

2 1850, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 1, p. 35, pl. v, fig. 14. 


186 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


strie. Romer identifies that shell with Phasianella subclathrata, ¥. A. Romer,! 
which differs from our shell in its shortness, the apparent absence of an 
umbilicus, the shape of the inner lip and of the body-whorl, and the possession 
of longitudinal striz. It does not, I think, belong to the same genus, for the 
possession of varices is almost the only point in common. 

Scalaria antiqua, Minster,’ is a much shorter shell, and has no varices. 

Lowonema rugiferum, Phillips,’ ‘ Pal. Foss.’ (not ‘Geol. Yorkshire’), appears to 
be something of the same shape and to have a few varices, but it also has very 
strong and numerous longitudinal ridges. 

Lowonema leve, F. A. Romer,* which according to Clarke’ bears varices, differs 
in having fewer and very much broader whorls. 


Il. Family.— Lirrorinipa, Gray. 
1. Genus.—Lirtorina, Férussac, 1821. 


I have had the advantage of submitting several of the Devonian shells 
described below to Mr. E. A. Smith of the British Museum, and he agrees with 
me that there is no reason for separating them from the recent genus. Of course 
there is a possibility that these shells might be referred to the Turbinide, 
as it is impossible to say that they were not nacreous. But there is no reason 
for supposing that they were so, and I know of no case in which a shelly 
operculum that might belong to them has occurred in our Devonian rocks. 


1. Lrrrorina pEvontca, Whidborne. Pl. XIX, figs. 5, 5a. 
1889. Lrirrortna DEvontca, Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


Description.—Shell small, fusiform, turreted, ovoid, turbiniform, of few (three 
or four) volutions. Spire rather large, obtuse. Apex blunt. Suture obtuse and 
shallow. Whorls convex, very rapidly increasing, ornamented with spiral lines 
of nodules becoming ridges on the front part of the shell, crossed by numerous 
close irregular growth-lines, tending obliquely backwards from the rear to the 
front of the whorl. Ornament of the body-whorl consisting of a small high hem, 

1 1843, F. A. Romer, ‘ Harz.,’ p. 31, pl. viii, fig. 15. 

2 1839, Minster, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 1, p. 61, pl. xiii, fig. 1. 

3 1841, Phillips, ‘ Pal. Foss.,’ p. 101, pl. xxxviii, fig. 188. 

4 1850, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 1, p. 35, pl. v, fig. 17. 

5 1884, Clarke, ‘ Neues Jahrb. f. Min.,’ Beil.-Band iii, p. 365, pl. v, fig. 12. 


LITTORINA. 187 


bounded by a short groove immediately behind the suture, followed first by a row 
of large indistinct distant tubercles; then, after a wide interval, by a row of 
closer and clearer longitudinal tubercles; then, after a less interval, at the widest 
part of the shell by another row which has almost become linear; and then, after 
a similar interval, by six small close linear ridges, only made nodulous by the growth- 
lines, and gradually becoming indistinct and vanishing in front, so that the lower 
third of the whorl has no other marks but the growth-lines. Upper whorls haying 
only the first three of the above-described nodulous growths exposed, which have, 
moreover, become less nodulous as they have decreased in size. Mouth pear- 
shaped, entire, sharply pointed behind, rounded in front, edentulous; outer lip 
gently convex, sharp; inner lip slightly diffuse, rather convex on the side of the 
aperture, flattened and thickened as it curves round the front of the mouth. 
Shell-structure very thick. No umbilicus. . 

Size.—Height 17 mm., transverse diameter 14: mm. 

Locality.—Chudleigh. There are nine specimens in Mr. Vicary’s Collection. 

Remarks.—It is rarely that we find Devonian Gasteropods in so fine a state 
of preservation as are these little shells. They are entirely free from matrix, and 
some of them are so lifelike that it is difficult to separate at a glance a small 
recent shell which Mr. Vicary has purposely placed in the tray which contains 
them. '‘I'here appears to be some small degree of variability in the different 
individuals, especially in regard to the length of the spire, but the species is, 
upon the whole, exceedingly well marked. 

This species appears to have all the characters of the genus Littorina as far as 
the shell is concerned, and I have therefore placed it under that genus, although, 
according to Zittel, it has not been established below the Chalk. On my showing 
a specimen of it to Mr. EH. A. Smith he independently referred it to the same genus. 
It is evidently closely allied to, and belongs to the same genus as, the shell 
which is next to be described. 

Affinities. —Natica margaritifera, d’ Arch. and de Vern.,’ is more globose, has 
a shorter spire, and its ornamentation is uniform all over the whorl. 

Trochus quinquecinctus, Goldfuss,’ seems almost exactly to correspond in its 
markings, but it appears to differ generically as well as specifically, being a 
shorter, less fusiform shell, with a flatter, broader base, a more circular mouth, 
and a distinct though small umbilicus. 

Turbo armatus, Goldfuss* and Romer,‘ is very similar, but it has a much more 
elevated spire, a smaller body-whorl, a smaller mouth, and coarser ornamentation. 


1 1842, d’Arch. and de Vern., ‘ Geol. Trans.,’ ser. 2, vol. vi, pt. 2, pl. xxxiv, figs. 4, 4a. 
2 1844, Goldf., ‘ Petref.,’ vol. iii, p. 48, pl. elxxviii, figs. 3 a, b. 

3 1844, ibid., p. 89, pl. excii, figs. 2 a—e, and pl. exciii, fig. 17. 

4 1876, F. Romer, ‘ Leth. Pal.,’ pl. xxxii, fig. 5 


188 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


Turbo celatus, Goldf.,’ is more globular, has a flat band following the suture, 
which makes the mouth more square above, and its ornament is uniform. 


2. Lirrorina UssHert, n. sp. Pl. XIX, figs. 6—8. 


Description.—Shell rather small, short, globose, oblique, smooth. Suture simple, 
obtuse, shallow. Spire short, obtuse, convex, of about four narrow, little exposed, 
and rapidly increasing whorls. Apex acuminate. Whorls rather broad, convex, 
rather flatter on the back, gently and obliquely rounding in to the base. Mouth 
entire, continuous, oblique, pear-shaped, rather elongate, pointed above, roundly 
convex and rather produced below. Outer lip moderately convex. Inner lip nearly 
straight, thick, diffuse, flattened, spreading over and partially or wholly covering 
the umbilicus with a callosity, bearing a broad, low, flat, very indistinct tooth in 
the centre of the aperture, in front of which it trends in an oblique curve round 
the front of the mouth, and has along its centre a distinct, shallow, rounded groove. 
Surface covered with multitudinous, indistinct, microscopical, transverse striz or 
growth-lines, so fine that the shell appears smooth to the naked eye. Shell- 
structure thick. 

Size.—Height 13 mm., width about 11 mm. 

Localities.—There is a large specimen in my Collection from Lummaton, and 
four small specimens in Mr. Vicary’s Collection from Chudleigh. 

Remarks.—It is with some doubt that I place these specimens together, as 
they present some differences, and it is possible that better specimens may prove 
them to belong to two distinct though closely allied species. My specimen, which 
wants is much the spire, the largest shell; it shows the low tooth on the inner lip, 
and the covered umbilicus; and the front part of the inner lip seems perhaps 
shorter and less distinctly grooved than it is in Mr. Vicary’s fossils. In these latter 
the lip shows hardly any trace of a tooth, and its callosity is less defined and 
extends further over the base of the shell. It is, however, possible that these 
differences may be due to age or contortion from which the Chudleigh specimens 
have considerably suffered, and at all events the material at hand is quite 
insufficient to show them to be distinct. 

Affinities. —From Naticopsis primigenia, Eichwald,’ this species differs in being 
more oblique, and in having a stouter shell, a smaller and less circular mouth, a 
spreading inner lip, and a longitudinal groove. 

From Plagiothyra archon, mihi, it differs by being of a more globose form, 
with a smaller spire and a much more elongate and differently formed mouth. 


1 1844, Goldf., ‘ Petref.,’ vol. iii, p. 90, pl. excii, figs. 3a—e. 
? Eichwald, ‘ Leth. Ross.,’ p. 1106, pl. xliv, figs. 6 a, b. 


LITTORINA—NATICOPSIS. 189 


Turbo inflatus, Minster,’ has a much larger spire, a smaller apical angle, and a 
shorter body-whorl. 

Ampullaria Ponti, Goldf.,’ differs in being more globose and minutely striated, 
in having the lips disjoined, and in the inner lip not being callous. 

Natica striolata, F. A. Romer,’ and Natica spirata, F. A. Romer,* are some- 
what similar forms, but are striated. 

Natica marginata, F. A. Rémer,’ and Natica inflata, F. A. Romer,’ also seem 
similar, but they are striated, longer, and less oblique. The former, however, 
which has a shorter spire and is a smaller shell than the latter, looks very much 
like our species. Clarke,’ however, states that it is distinguished by a spiral 
depression on the whorls below the suture. 

Turbo inflatus, Miinster,® according to Tietze,’ seems to be a more globose shell 
with a rather higher spire. It comes very close to the present form in general 
shape, but is certainly, if Miinster’s original figure is to be trusted, distinct from it. 


Ill. Family.—Naticipx, Forbes. 


1. Genus.—Naticorsis, M‘Coy. 


The shells in this genus are very similar in general shape to the true Natice. 
They are frequently of large size, and are generally smooth, but occasionally are 
longitudinally striated. They are not umbilicated. The lips are continuous, and 
the inner lip is often very diffuse and callous. They extend from the Devonian to 
the Trias. 


1. Naricopsis HaRPULA, Sowerby, sp. Pl. XIX, figs. 3, 3 a, 4. 


1827. Murex narpota, Sowerby. Min. Conch., vol. vi, p. 152, pl. dlxxviii, fig. 5. 
1832. Nerira suscostata, Goldfuss. In De la Beche’s Handbook (German 
edition), p. 532. 


1 1840, Minster, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 3, p. 90, pl. xv, fig. 25. 

2 1844, Goldf., ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 114, pl. exevin, figs. 17 a, b. 
3 1850, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 1, p. 33, pl. v, figs. 7 a, 6. 

4 Thid., pt. 1, p. 34, pl. v, fig. 10. 

5 1843, F. A. Romer, ‘ Harz.,’ p. 27, pl. vii, figs. 6 a, b. 

6 Ibid., p. 27, pl. vii, figs. 8 a, 6 

7 1884, Clarke, ‘ Neues Jahrb. f. Min.,’ Beil.-Band iii, p. 354. 

8 1840, Minster, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 3, p. 90, pl. xv, fig. 25. 

® 1870, Tietze, ‘Dev. Schicht. Ebersdorf,’ p. 39, pl. ii, fig. 24. 


t 


190 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


1840. Murex narpuna, Sowerby. Geol. Trans., ser. 2, vol. v, pt. 3, pl. lvii, 
fig 
1841. MacrocuHerILus Harpua, Phillips. Pal. Foss., p. 105, pl. xxxix, fig. 197. 
1842. Narica suscostata, d’Archiac and de Verneuil. Geol. Trans., ser. 2, 
vol. vi, pt. 2, p. 366, pl. xxxiv, figs. 5, 6. 

1844. — — Goldfuss. Petref. Germ., vol. iii, p. 116, pl. exeviii, 
figs. 22 a—e. 

1849. MacrocHeinus HarPuLa, d’Orbigny. Prodrome, p. 63. 

1849. TurzBo suscostatus, d’Orbigny. Ibid., p. 66. 

1854. Macrocnritus HarpuLa, Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 256. 

1876. Natica supcostata, F. Rimer. Lethea Pal., pl. xxxii, fig. 8. 

1888. MacrocHEILus HARPULA, Htheridge. Foss. Brit., vol. 1, Pal., p. 163. 

1889. Lirrortna suscosrata, Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 

1889. Turso suscostatus, Micholson. Manual of Paleontology, 2nd edition, 
vol. i, p. 775, fig. 668. 


Description.—Shell small, globose, of few (two or three) very rapidly increasing 
whorls. Sutures wide. Whorls starting convexly from the suture, somewhat 
obliquely flattened on the back, so that the lower part of the whorl is widest, and 
there curving evenly round the front of the shell to form the base; ornamented 
by coarse, round, transverse ribs, separated by interstices of a similar width, which 
start from the suture and proceed obliquely backwards about one-third the breadth 
of the whorl, when they divaricate and bend for a short distance still more backward, 
so that the front part of the whorl has twice as small and numerous ribs as the upper 
part. Mouth’ entire, large, oval, produced in the antero-exterior direction. No 
umbilicus. Shell-structure very massive. Apex acute. 

Size.—A large specimen measures about 52 mm. in height. A more perfect 
small specimen measures 9 mm. in height and 10 mm. in width. 

Locality.—Chudleigh, ‘‘ Bradley, Plymouth.” There are three specimens from 
the first locality in Mr. Vicary’s Collection, one of which is as large as d’Archiac’s 
type, and another small but very perfect. 

Remarks.—There can be no question about the identity of these Chudleigh 
fossils with the German species described by d’Archiac and de Verneuil, 
Goldfuss, &c., as they correspond with it in every particular. Its name was 
given originally in MS. by Goldfuss, and is quoted without description by von 
Dechen in his German edition of De la Beche’s ‘ Handbook.’ 

There is more doubt whether the fossil described by Phillips under the name of 
Macrocheilus harpula (Sow.) belongs to the present species. In general appearance 
and markings it closely resembles it, but Phillips’s description presents some diver- 
gences ; e.g. according to it, the spire is more elongate, the base of the columella is 
more thickened, and there is a plain longitudinal band running along the centre 


1 1841, Phillips, ‘ Pal. Foss.,’ p. 105. 


NATICOPSIS—NATICA. 191 


of the back and separating the two groups of striew. As, however, I have been 
unable to discover Phillips’s original specimen, it is impossible to say how far these 
points may not be due to accident, through the imperfection of the specimen or 
inaccuracy of drawing, and upon the whole his figure is so similar to Mr. Vicary’s 
largest specimen (which seems more elongate than the others) that in all 
probability they are identical. 

Sowerby’s' original figure and description are very imperfect, and certainly do 
not at first sight at all convey the impression of the present species. It is, 
however, to be observed that his specimen, though called Carboniferous, comes 
from “ Bradley,” 7.e. it was a Devonian, and probably a Wolborough fossil, 
and, moreover, he mentions the splitting of the longitudinal ridges upon the 
lower part of the shell. I believe, therefore, that he intended to represent the 
present species. ‘I'he fossil which he identifies as its young form in the ‘ Geol. 
Trans.,’* although, as Phillips points out, not very like his earlier figure, evidently 
belongs to the shell now under consideration. 

Goldfuss and d’Archiac and de Verneuil give views of its aperture, which 
is not well shown in any English specimen I have seen. The former author 
most accurately represents it. 

Bronn’® and Giebel* appear to have confounded it with Buccinites subcostatus, 
Schlotheim ;° but it is totally different from that shell, and there is no reason to 
suppose that Goldfuss regarded it as the same, while d’Archiac and de Verneuil 
certainly did not do so. 

In the British Museum are two fine specimens from Paffrath, both showing 
the aperture; and they prove, in the opinion of Mr. Etheridge and myself, that 
it belongs to the genus Naticopsis. They also preserve the colour-markings— 
three rows of large black spots or splashes, each at the rate of nine or ten to a 
whorl. 


2. Genus.—Natica, Lamarck. 


No reason appears at present for separating the Devonian species described 
below from this well-known and widely spread recent genus, but as the aperture is 
unknown they cannot be allocated to it with any degree of certainty. 


1 1827, Sowerby, ‘ Min. Conch.,’ vol. vi, p. 152, pl. d]xxviii, fig. 5. 

2 1840, Sowerby, ‘ Geol. Trans.,’ ser. 2, vol. v, pt. 3, pl. lvii, fig. 21. 
3 1848, Bronn, ‘ Handbook,’ p. 788. 

4 1866, Giebel, ‘ Repertorium,’ p. 108. 

5 1820, Schlotheim, ‘ Petrefact.,’ p. 130, pl. xii, fig. 3. 


188 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


Turbo celatus, Goldf.,’ is more globular, has a flat band following the suture, 
which makes the mouth more square above, and its ornament is uniform. 


2. Lirrorina Ussueri, n. sp. Pl. XIX, figs. 6—8. 


Description.—Shell rather small, short, globose, oblique, smooth. Suture simple, 
obtuse, shallow. Spire short, obtuse, convex, of about four narrow, little exposed, 
and rapidly increasing whorls. Apex acuminate. Whorls rather broad, convex, 
rather flatter on the back, gently and obliquely rounding in to the base. Mouth 
entire, continuous, oblique, pear-shaped, rather elongate, pointed above, roundly 
convex and rather produced below. Outer lip moderately convex. Inner lip nearly 
straight, thick, diffuse, flattened, spreading over and partially or wholly covering 
the umbilicus with a callosity, bearing a broad, low, flat, very indistinct tooth in 
the centre of the aperture, in front of which it trends in an oblique curve round 
the front of the mouth, and has along its centre a distinct, shallow, rounded groove. 
Surface covered with multitudinous, indistinct, microscopical, transverse strize or 
growth-lines, so fine that the shell appears smooth to the naked eye. Shell- 
structure thick. 

Size.—Height 13 mm., width about 11 mm. 

Localities.—There is a large specimen in my Collection from Lummaton, and 
four small specimens in Mr. Vicary’s Collection from Chudleigh. 

Remarks.—It is with some doubt that I place these specimens together, as 
they present some differences, and it is possible that better specimens may prove 
them to belong to two distinct though closely allied species. My specimen, which 
wants is much the spire, the largest shell ; it shows the low tooth on the inner lip, 
and the covered umbilicus; and the front part of the inner lip seems perhaps 
shorter and less distinctly grooved than it is in Mr. Vicary’s fossils. In these latter 
the lip shows hardly any trace of a tooth, and its callosity is less defined and 
extends further over the base of the shell. It is, however, possible that these 
differences may be due to age or contortion from which the Chudleigh specimens 
have considerably suffered, and at all events the material at hand is quite 
insufficient to show them to be distinct. 

Affinities—From Naticopsis primigenia, Eichwald,’ this species differs in being 
more oblique, and in having a stouter shell, a smaller and less circular mouth, a 
spreading inner lip, and a longitudinal groove. 

From Plagiothyra archon, mihi, it differs by being of a more globose form, 
with a smaller spire and a much more elongate and differently formed mouth. 


1 1844, Goldf., ‘ Petref.,’ vol. iii, p. 90, pl. excii, figs. 3 a—e. 
2 Eichwald, ‘ Leth. Ross.,’ p. 1106, pl. xliv, figs. 6 a, b. 


LITTORINA—NATICOPSIS. 189 


Turbo inflatus, Mister,’ has a much larger spire, a smaller apical angle, and a 
shorter body-whorl. 

Ampullaria Ponti, Goldé.,? differs in being more globose and minutely striated, 
in having the lips disjoined, and in the inner lip not being callous. 

Natica striolata, F. A. Rémer,® and Natica spirata, F. A. Romer,’ are some- 
what similar forms, but are striated. 

Natica marginata, F. A. Romer,’ and Natica inflata, F. A. Romer,’ also seem 
similar, but they are striated, longer, and less oblique. The former, however, 
which has a shorter spire and is a smaller shell than the latter, looks very much 
like our species. Clarke,’ however, states that it is distinguished by a spiral 
depression on the whorls below the suture. 

Turbo inflatus, Miinster,® according to Tietze,’ seems to be a more globose ahell 
with a rather higher spire. It comes very close to the present form in general 
shape, but is certainly, if Mimster’s original figure is to be trusted, distinct from it. 


Ill. Family.—Naticiwa, Forbes. 


1. Genus.—Naticorsis, M‘Coy. 


The shells in this genus are very similar in general shape to the true Natice. 
They are frequently of large size, and are generally smooth, but occasionally are 
longitudinally striated. They are not umbilicated. The lips are continuous, and 
the inner lip is often very diffuse and callous. They extend from the Devonian to 
the Trias. 


1. Naricopsis HARPULA, Sowerby, sp. Pl. XIX, figs. 3, 3 a, 4. 


1827. Murex narputa, Sowerby. Min. Conch., vol. vi, p. 152, pl. dixxviii, fig. 5. 
1832. Nerira suscostata, Goldfuss. In De la Beche’s Handbook (German 
edition), p. 532. 


1 1840, Minster, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 3, p. 90, pl. xv, fig. 25. 

2 1844, Goldf., ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 114, pl. exevin, figs. 17 a, b. 
3 1850, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 1, p. 33, pl. v, figs. 7 a, b. 

4 Tbid., pt.1, p. 34, pl. v, fig. 10. 

5 1843, F. A. Romer, ‘ Harz.,’ p. 27, pl. vii, figs. 6 a, b. 

6 Ibid., p. 27, pl. vii, figs. 8 a, 6. 

7 1884, Clarke, ‘ Neues Jahrb. f. Min.,’ Beil.-Band iii, p. 354. 

8 1840, Minster, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 3, p. 90, pl. xv, fig. 25. 

® 1870, Tietze, ‘ Dev. Schicht. Ebersdorf,’ p. 39, pl. ii, fig. 24. 


190 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


1840. Murex narpuna, Sowerby. Geol. Trans., ser. 2, vol. v, pt. 3, pl. lvii, 
fiom 2il, 
1841. MacrocueriLus Harpua, Phillips. Pal. Foss., p. 105, pl. xxxix, fig. 197. 
1842. Narica susBcosrata, d’Archiac and de Verneuil. Geol. Trans., ser. 2, 
vol. vi, pt. 2, p. 366, pl. xxxiv, figs. 5, 6. 

1844. — — Goldfuss. Petref. Germ., vol. iii, p. 116, pl. exeviii, 
figs. 22 a—e. 

1849. Macrocuernus narputa, d’Orbigny. Prodrome, p. 63. 

1849. TurzBo suscostatus, d’Orbigny. Ibid., p. 66. 

1854. Macrocuritus narpuna, Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 256. 

1876. Natica suscostata, Ff. Rémer. Lethea Pal., pl. xxxii, fig. 8. 

1888. MacrocHrILus HARPULA, Htheridge. Foss. Brit., vol. i, Pal., p. 163. 

1889. Lirrorina suscostata, Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 

1889. Turso suscostatus, Wicholson. Manual of Paleontology, 2nd edition, 
vol. i, p. 775, fig. 668. 


Description.—Shell small, globose, of few (two or three) very rapidly increasing 
whorls. Sutures wide. Whorls starting convexly from the suture, somewhat 
obliquely flattened on the back, so that the lower part of the whorl is widest, and 
there curving evenly round the front of the shell to form the base; ornamented 
by coarse, round, transverse ribs, separated by interstices of a similar width, which 
start from the suture and proceed obliquely backwards about one-third the breadth 
of the whorl, when they divaricate and bend for a short distance still more backward, 
so that the front part of the whorl has twice as small and numerous ribs as the upper 
part. Mouth’ entire, large, oval, produced in the antero-exterior direction. No 
umbilicus. Shell-structure very massive. Apex acute. 

Size.-—A large specimen measures about 32 mm. in height. A more perfect 
small specimen measures 9 mm. in height and 10 mm. in width. 

Locality.— Chudleigh, ‘‘ Bradley, Plymouth.”* There are three specimens from 
the first locality in Mr. Vicary’s Collection, one of which is as large as d’Archiac’s 
type, and another small but very perfect. 

Remarks.—There can be no question about the identity of these Chudleigh 
fossils with the German species described by d’Archiac and de Verneuil, 
Goldfuss, &c., as they correspond with it in every particular. Its name was 
given originally in MS. by Goldfuss, and is quoted without description by von 
Dechen in his German edition of De la Beche’s ‘ Handbook.’ 

There is more doubt whether the fossil described by Phillips under the name of 
Macrocheilus harpula (Sow.) belongs to the present species. In general appearance 
and markings it closely resembles it, but Phillips’s description presents some diver- 
gences ; ¢.g. according to it, the spire is more elongate, the base of the columella is 
more thickened, and there is a plain longitudinal band running along the centre 


1 1841, Phillips, ‘ Pal. Foss.,’ p. 105. 


~ <a 


NATICOPSIS—NATICA. 191 


of the back and separating the two groups of striz. As, however, I have been 
unable to discover Phillips’s original specimen, it is impossible to say how far these 
points may not be due to accident, through the imperfection of the specimen or 
inaccuracy of drawing, and upon the whole his figure is so similar to Mr. Vicary’s 
largest specimen (which seems more elongate than the others) that in all 
probability they are identical. 

Sowerby’s' original figure and description are very imperfect, and certainly do 
not at first sight at all convey the impression of the present species. It is, 
however, to be observed that his specimen, though called Carboniferous, comes 
from ‘‘ Bradley,” 7%.e. it was a Devonian, and probably a Wolborough fossil, 
and, moreover, he mentions the splitting of the longitudinal ridges upon the 
lower part of the shell. I believe, therefore, that he intended to represent the 
present species. ‘The fossil which he identifies as its young form in the ‘ Geol. 
Trans.,’* although, as Phillips points out, not very like his earlier figure, evidently 
belongs to the shell now under consideration. 

Goldfuss and d’Archiac and de Verneuil give views of its aperture, which 
is not well shown in any English specimen I have seen. The former author 
most accurately represents it. 

Bronn® and Giebel* appear to have confounded it with Buccinites swbcostatus, 
Schlotheim ;° but it is totally different from that shell, and there is no reason to 
suppose that Goldfuss regarded it as the same, while d’Archiac and de Verneuil 
certainly did not do so. 

In the British Museum are two fine specimens from Paffrath, both showing 
the aperture; and they prove, in the opinion of Mr. Etheridge and myself, that 
it belongs to the genus Naticopsis. They also preserve the colour-markings— 
three rows of large black spots or splashes, each at the rate of nine or ten to a 
whorl. 


2. Genus. —Natica, Lamarck. 


No reason appears at present for separating the Devonian species described 
below from this well-known and widely spread recent genus, but as the aperture is 
unknown they cannot be allocated to it with any degree of certainty. 


1 1827, Sowerby, ‘ Min. Conch.,’ vol. vi, p. 152, pl. dlxxviii, fig. 5. 

2 1840, Sowerby, ‘ Geol. Trans.,’ ser. 2, vol. v, pt. 3, pl. lvii, fig. 21. 
3 1848, Bronn, ‘ Handbook,’ p. 788. 

* 1866, Giebel, ‘ Repertorium,’ p. 108. 

5 1820, Schlotheim, ‘ Petrefact.,’ p. 180, pl. xii, fig. 3. 


192 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


1. Natica? nextcosta, Phillips. Pl. XIX, fig. 1. 


1841. Narica nexicosta, Phillips. Pal. Foss., p. 95, pl. xxxvi, figs. 174 a, 0. 
1845. Lirrorina Bisertatis, de Verneuil. In Murch., Vern. and Keys., Russia, 
vol. ii, p. 340, pl. xxiii, fig. 13. 
P 1853. — LIRATA, Sandberger. Verst. Rhein. Nassau, p. 220, pl. xxv, 
figs. 15, 15 a, 158. 
1854. Natroa nexicosta, Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 263. 
1857. Lirortna eronosa, Hichwald. Bull. Soc. Nat. Moscow, p. 162. 
1860. Narica exososa, Hichwald. Letheza Ross., p. 1123, pl. xlii, fig. 20. 


1870. —  wexicosta, Tietze. Dev. Schicht. Ebersdorf, p. 40, pl. ii, fig. 25. 
1888. — _ Etheridge. Foss. Brit., vol. i, Pal., p. 164. 
Not 1843. —_ — FA. Romer. Harz., p. 27, pl. vii, figs. 5 a, b. 


Description.—Shell small, subglobular, pointed, of about three rapidly 
increasing whorls. Spire short, broadly conical, about one-third the height of 
the shell. Suture well defined, obtuse. Upper whorls roundly step-like, much 
enveloped, their width about equal to their height above the suture. Body-whorl 
very large and capacious, starting obliquely from the suture, rather flatter on the 
back, and rounding in to form the base of the shell. Ornament consisting of 
very strong, elevated, steep, subacute, longitudinal ridges, separated by similar 
furrows, about thirty on the body-whorl, sloping obliquely backwards from the 
suture, becoming more perpendicular in the back, and again tending rather 
backwards near the base of the shell, often divaricating close to the upper suture. 
Base and mouth hidden in the described specimen. 

Size.—Height 12 mm., width 11 mm. 

Locality.—There is a small specimen from Lummaton in the Woodwardian 
Museum, and a larger specimen in the Battersby Collection of the Torquay 
Museum, apparently from the same place. I have also seen a specimen in the 
Champernowne Collection, which I believe to belong to the same species. 

Remarks.—The above description is taken from the shell in the Battersby 
Collection. It is to be noticed that all the ribs do not start from the suture, but 
that some either rise or divaricate almost immediately below it. It is almost exactly 
similar to the South Petherwyn shell to which Phillips gave the name Natica 
nexicosta, Phillips ; the only difference being that there are no signs of any of the 
ribs divaricating upwards as his figure indicates, but some of them are shorter, as 
he mentions, or at least divaricate downwards close to the suture. I do not think 
that these points are likely to indicate any specific difference, and have no 
hesitation in placing our shells under Phillips’s species; they are alike in shape, 
and the number and style of the ribs exactly correspond. 

There is much more doubt whether Littorina lirata, Sandberger, is the same 


'NATICA. 193 


shell. Its shape is slightly more elongate, and the ribs are not quite so prominent, 
and show little signs of uniting at the suture; but these points do not seem of 
specific value, and there seems every reason for regarding it as asynonym. ‘The 
mouth is shown in Sandberger’s figure, and he regards his shell as belonging to the 
genus Littorina. In the Battersby specimen and in Phillips’s figure it is not seen. 

The small Woodwardian specimen is rather more elongate than the Torquay 
example, and in it the ribs are strongest in the upper part of the shell, but this 
seems due to the accidents of fossilization. 

Intorina globosa, Hichwald, seems exactly similar; the only apparent dif- 
ference being that in the Russian shell the ribs are wider, instead of being 
narrower, than the intervals. Its aperture is not figured or described. 

Affinities.— Naticopsis harpula, Sowerby, sp., differs from this species in being 
more angulated in contour, and in having subsidiary ribs starting one-third the 
way down from the suture, where the other ribs also much diminish in size. 

In Natica lirata, Phillips,’ the shell is very much wider, and the longitudinal 
ribs few and very much more distant. 

N. newicosta, F. A. Romer,’ almost certainly belongs to a different species, as in 
it the ribs appear to be much more numerous, and the spire is much lower. In 
fact, N. ewcentrica, F. A. Romer,’ would more nearly approach it if it were not dis- 
tinguished by much more slanting ribs. Clarke* states that some at least of the 
original specimens of Natica newxicosta, F. A. Romer, are nothing but young forms 
of N. inflata, F. A. Romer. 

Holopea tumidula, Hhlert,’ appears to have very much finer striations. 


2. Natica antigua, Goldfuss. Pl. XIX, figs. 2, 2 a. 


21843. Narrca nexicosta, F. A. Romer (not Phillips). Verst. Harz., p. 27, pl. vii, 


fig. 5. 
1844. — antigua, Goldfuss. Petref. Germ., vol. i, p. 116, pl. excix, 
figs. 2a, b. 
? 1844. —  eFossa, Goldfuss. Ibid., vol. iii, p. 117, pl. excix, figs. 3a, b. 
? 1850. —  INTERSTRIALIS, F. A. Romer. Beitr., pt. 1, p. 34, pl. v, figs. 11a, b. 
1853. —  priieERA, Sandberger. Verst. Rhein. Nassau, p. 235, pl. xxvi, 
figs. 6, 6a—e. 
1882. ~- — Holzapfel. Paleontographica, vol. xxviii, p. 250. 
1889. — — Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


1 1836, Phillips, ‘Geol. Yorks.,’ vol. 11, p. 224, pl. xiv, fig. 22. 

2 1843, F. A. Romer, ‘ Harz.,’ p. 27, pl. vii, figs. 5 a, 6. 

3 Ibid., p. 27, pl. vii, figs. 7 a, 6. 

4 1884, Clarke, ‘Neues Jahrb. f. Min.,’ Beil.-Band iii, p. 353. 

5 1887, Ehlert, ‘ Bull. Soc. d’Etudes Sci. d’Angers,’ p. 5, pl. vi, figs. 7, 7a. 


194 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


Description.—Shell very small, subglobose, turbiniform, pointed, of about four 
very rapidly increasing whorls. Spire broadly conical. Suture well defined, 
rectangular. Upper whorls small, low, rounded, step-shaped, the width from the 
suture being rather less than the height of the exposed part. Body-whorl very 
capacious and oblique ; in section spreading out at first perpendicularly from the 
suture, and soon rounding with an almost semicircular curvature over the back to 
the oblique base of the whorl. Ornament consisting of very fine and numerous 
close, rounded, regular, microscopical, longitudinal threads, crossing the whorl 
obliquely backwards from the suture. Mouth defective, but probably very large 
and spreading. 

Size.-—Height about 7 mm., width 8 mm. 

Locality.—There is a small specimen in the Torquay Museum, which seems to 
have come from Lummaton. 

Remarks.—The small specimen described above undoubtedly belongs to Natica 
piligera, Sandberger, with which it agrees accurately as far as the English speci- 
men will admit comparison. The drawing given of it (Pl. XIX, fig. 2) does 
not perhaps present a sufficient obliquity of the lower slope of the whorls, so that 
it is really rather wider and more oblique than there indicated. It will be seen 
by Sandberger’s figures that the shell varies considerably in shape. In the 
Torquay specimen there is a decided umbilicus, but in Sandberger’s figures it is 
represented as closed by the callosity of the inner lip. This is probably due to 
the fact that the body-whorl is really broken away in the Torquay fossil, so that 
the true aperture is not seen. 

Natica antiqua,' Goldfuss, appears to be so similar that I think it must be 
regarded as the same species, and if so this name has the priority. His figure 
gives the impression of being less oblique and having a longer spire than Sand- 
berger’s shell, but as the shells are figured in different aspects, and as the two 
figures given by Sandberger vary much in obliquity, it is not easy to draw any 
specific distinction between them. 

Natica efossa, another fossil described by Goldfuss,? seems to have rather 
coarser and more irregular striz, and to be a little more oblique, but these 
differences are so slight that I am disposed to regard it as the same shell. 

Again, in Natica interstrialis, F. A. Rémer,* the striz seem more irregular and 
unequal, but it is similar in shape and may be identical, especially as Romer 
mentions that he has only observed the inequality of striation upon the penultimate 
whorl of his figured example. 

Under the name of Natica newicosta, F. A. Romer figures a shell which differs 


1 1844, Goldfuss, ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 117, pl. excix, figs. 2 a, 8, 
2 Ibid., p. 117, pl. excix, figs. 3a, 0. 
3 1850, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 1, p. 34, pl. v, figs. lla, 0. 


NATICA. 195 


widely from Phillips’s type. It has much finer and more numerous striz, and is 
more depressed, and so is very similar to the present shell. Though the striz 
are visible on Romer’s small figure, and are therefore represented as decidedly 
coarser than in ours, Mr. Roberts agree with me in thinking that this may be due 
to the necessities of the drawing, and therefore that it may perhaps be intended 
for the present species. Romer, however, mentions shorter swellings between the 
main ribs, and, if they exist, it is unlikely to be a synonym of this shell. 

In my Collection is a fragment from Lummaton which consists of a single 
defective whorl marked in a similar manner. It more probably, however, be- 
longs to a Holopella, or even to a Goniatite, than to a Natica. 

Affinities—This species differs from Natica nexicosta, Phillips, in having much 
finer, closer, and more regular ribs, which never show any tendency to divaricate, 
and in being less elongate. 

Natica striolata, F. A. Rémer,' and N. spirata, F. A. Romer,’ are more ovate 
and elongate forms. 

Naticopsis elegantula, Ghlert and Davoust,’ is almost exactly similar in shape 
and longitudinal striation, but differs in being covered with microscopic spiral 
lines. 

Natica inflata, F. A. Rémer* and Tietze,’ which is similarly striated, is a less 
oblique shell, and has a higher spire. 

Natica modesta, ‘“‘ Barrande MS8.,” as given by Maurer,° approximates it in 
shape, but is described as smooth. 

Natica Adorfensis, Holzapfel,’ appears to be distinguished by possessing coarser 
strive. 

Ampullaria Ponti, Goldfuss,’ is another shell which nearly corresponds, but is 
differentiated by having its striz less oblique, and by possessing a few coarse 
folds immediately below the suture-line. 


1 1850, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 1, p. 38, pl. v, figs. 7a, 5. 

2 Tbid., p. 34, pl. v, fig. 10. 

3 1880, @hlert and Davoust, ‘Bull. Soc. Géol. Fr.,’ ser. 3, vol. vii, p. 712, pl. xv, figs. 3, 8 a—e. 
4 1843, F. A. Romer, ‘ Harz.,’ p. 27, pl. vii, fig. 8. 

5 1872, Tietze, ‘Dev. Schicht. Ebersdorf,’ p. 40, pl. i, fig. 26. 

6 1880, Maurer, ‘ Neues Jahrb. f. Min.,’ Beil.-Band i, p. 32, pl. ii, fig. 13. 

7 1882, Holzapfel, ‘ Paleeontographica,’ vol. xxviii, p. 250. 

8 1844, Goldf., ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 114, pl. exeviil, figs. 17 a, 0. 


196 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


3. Navica MERIDIONALIS, Phillips 2? Pl. XVII, figs. 15, 15a, 155d. 


21841. Narica MEertDIoNALIS, Phillips. Pal. Foss., p. 94, pl. xxxvi, fig. 173. 
? 1854. —- —- Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 263. 
P 1888. — = Etheridge. Foss. Brit., vol. i, Pal., p. 164. 


Description.—Shell small, ovoid, turbiniform. Spire low, convex, of about 
four whorls. Suture deep. Whorls narrow, convex, less than half exposed, very 
rapidly increasing. Body-whorl about two-thirds the height of shell, voluminous, 
evenly convex, and turning in to form an obliquely rounded base. Surface 
almost smooth, marked by a few indistinct ridges or growth-lines, starting 
perpendicularly from the upper suture, and vanishing as they slope backwards on 
the middle of the whorl. Mouth large, wide; apical portion obtuse; lower 
extremity evenly rounded. Inner lip apparently straight. Signs of a small 
umbilicus. Shell-structure rather thick. 

Size —Height 9 mm., width 6 mm. 

Locality.—W olborough. A single specimen is in Mr. Vicary’s Collection. 

Remarks.—This is a pretty little species, but the only example I know is too 
defective to enable me to determine its position positively. It is a very small 
shell, but a line along the centre of its largest whorl seems to indicate that the 
true body-whorl is absent. Nevertheless its form is certainly peculiar. The 


spire is low and convex in outline, owing to the proportionately increasing 
rapidity of diminution. More than half the whorls are covered by those succeeding, 
and where exposed at the base of the specimen they appear to be of a similar 
convexity all through. The rounding-in of the shell below seems to indicate the 
existence of an umbilicus, but as that part is choked with matrix, this cannot 
be certainly asserted. The ornament is very faint, but the surface appears 
somewhat worn. 

I am in great doubt as to whether this is the shell represented by Phillips 
as N. meridionalis. His description is very slight, and his figure very sketchy. 
When examined under a lens the latter appears to be similar in shape to our 
shell, but the striz certainly show no signs of turning backward as they vanish. 
It is, however, possible that this might have been unnoticed by Phillips; and, 
as I have been unable to meet with his type specimen, I think it best for the 
present to include the Wolborough fossil under his name. 


STROPHOSTYLUS. 197 


IV. Family.—Ve.otinipn, Gray, 1840. 
1. Genus.—Srropuostyivs, Hall, 1879. 


This genus or sub-genus is separated from Platyostoma by having a twisted 
columella and by not being umbilicated. It belongs to the Upper Silurian and the 
Devonian formations. 

The shell described below is referred to it with much hesitation, because it 
seems, as far as can be judged from the defective state of the specimens, to 
resemble the shells placed under this genus by Hall and by Chlert. 


OTROPHOSTYLUS, sp. Pl. XIX, figs. 11, 11 a. 


21870. Narica, sp., Tietze. Dev. Schicht. Ebersdorf, p. 41, pl. ii, figs. 27, 27 a. 


Description.—Shell rather large, spiral, of few volutions, subglobose. Spire 
small, low, flattened above. Suture small and deep. Whorls less than half 
exposed, very convex on the shoulder, less convex on the back. Surface smooth. 
Body-whorl large and voluminous. Shell-structure thick. 

Size.—Height 15 mm., width 24 mm., but the measured specimen is probably 
crushed and distorted. 

Locality—There are two specimens in the Lee Collection in the British 
Museum, labelled ‘* Lummaton,” but their mineral character is so different from 
the generality of Lummaton fossils that I have little doubt that there is some 
error, and that they came from another locality, possibly from Chircombe Bridge. 
Though I have introduced them here, they must certainly be excluded from the 
Lummaton list. 

Remarks.—This species seems most probably to belong to the genus Stropho- 
stylus; but, the aperture of both specimens being obliterated and the shape 
contorted, it is almost impossible to make any positive generic identification. 

Affinities.—It appears to be a more definitely coiled shell than Strophostylus 
Cheloti, Ghlert.' 

It is very similar to Platyostoma Ciiebeli, Kayser,’ but its spire is higher and 
is more distinctly coiled. 


1 1887, Ehlert, ‘ Bull. Soc. d’Etud. Sci. d’Angers,’ p. 6, pl. vi, figs. 8—8 d. 
? 1878, Kayser, ‘ Abhandl. Geol. Specialk. Preuss.,’ Band ij, pt. 4, p. 99, pl. xvi, figs. 1—3. 


198 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


2. Genus.—P.atyostoma, Conrad, 1842. 


These shells are low, subglobose, and umbilicated. The spire is of few whorls, 
and increases rapidly and somewhat asymmetrically. The mouth is more or less 
pentangular in shape. The genus occurs in the Silurian, Devonian, and Carboni- 
ferous formations. 

Some of the species described below show considerable likeness to the 
Ianthinide in the shape of the mouth, but, on the other hand, they appear in 
some other respects to be related to the Capulide; and, after a comparison 
with several foreign species of Platyostoma, it has seemed best to group them 
under that genus, and to follow Zittel in ranking them among the Velutinide. 


1, PLATYosToMA SIGMOIDALE, Phillips sp.? Pl. XIX, figs. 9, 10, 10a. 


21840. Acrocurta staemorpaLis, Phillips. Pal. Foss., p. 94, pl. xxxvi, fig. 170. 

1854. Caputus stemorpatis, Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 239. 

1858. — NATICOIDES, Giebel (not F. A. Romer), Sil. Faun. Unterharz., 

p- 26, pl. ii, fig. 7. 
Natica GREGARIA, Barrande, MS. 

1878. PiaryostoMa Naticoipes, Kayser. Abhandl. Geol. Specialk. Preuss., 
Band ii, pt. 4, p. 100, pl. xvi, 
figs. 4, 4a. 

1888. AcrocuLta stamorDaLis, Etheridge. Foss. Brit., vol. i, Pal., p. 163. 


Description.—Shell small, spiral, very oblique, and flattish. Spire depressed 
and very obtuse, formed of about three flat and very rapidly increasing whorls. 
Suture well defined, obtuse. Whorls rising convexly from the suture, and then 
spreading out with a gradually increasing curvature till they turn with a slhght 
blunt angle to the lower parts of the shell, along which a slight shallow, indistinet 
groove or depression is developed near the mouth. Surface ornamented by very 
numerous, regularly undulating, longitudinal, microscopic, sharpish lines, sepa- 
rated by shallow furrows, which are visible also on the mould, and are arranged in 
groups of two or three, occasionally divaricating, and sometimes crossed and 
partially reticulated by still finer spiral striz. Mouth very large, oblique, with 
wavy lips. Shell-structure very thin. Colour black. 

Size.—Height 8 mm., width 15 mm. 

Locality.—Lummaton. There is a specimen in the Torquay Museum upon a 
slab with Terebratula juvenis, as well as a second specimen in the same Museum, 
and a third in my Collection. 


PLATYOSTOMA. 199 


Remarks.—The above description is taken from the first of these shells, which 
I at first thought to be distinct from the other two. Afterwards, upon re- 
examining them in company with Mr. Thomas Roberts, F.G.S., we came to the 
conclusion that they were all of one species, and that they belonged to Acroculia 
sigmoidalis, Phillips, the type specimen of which is in the Museum of Practical 
Geology, and is a small and much-crushed shell from Hope’s Nose. In this shell 
the “ much-bent striz, reticulated on the outer part of the whorl,” described by 
Phillips, are decidedly coarser than they are in our own examples. 

These Lummaton fossils very closely approach the group of Capulide, with 
well-developed spires, oblique mouths, and a single spiral furrow running up a 
short distance from the front of the outer lip. The grouping of the ornament into 
sets is peculiar, and is more easily observed on the mould than on the exterior of 
the shell itself. It is either formed by the threads being occasionally a little 
stronger, or by slight undulations in the growth of the shell itself. 

Our species seems identical with the shells referred by Giebel' and Kayser’ 
to Acroculia naticoides, F. A. Romer.’ The undulating longitudinal striation is 
the same in each; and the chief difference between them, as far as I can see, is 
that the English form is a little less oblique. This might easily, however, be 
accounted for by supposing a little contortion to have occurred in the course of 
fossilization. I cannot, however, think that the two later authors are correct in 
identifying their fossil with Romer’s species. That shell seems totally different in 
shape, being much more globular with a much higher body-whorl ; and its striz 
form a single slightly arched curve instead of being regularly undulating, as in 
their German and our English shell. Kayser refers it to the genus Platyostoma, 
Hall, and states that Natica gregaria, Barrande, MS., is probably the same 
species. No signs of the reticulation which is observable upon Phillips’s type 
specimen appear to be visible on any of the German shells. 

Affinities.—In Pileopsis lineata, Goldfuss,* the spire 1s much larger, and the 
longitudinal lines much less undulating. 


1 1858, Giebel, ‘Sil. Fauna Unterharz.,’ p. 26, pl. i, fig. 7. 

* 1878, Kayser, ‘ Abhand]. Geol. Specialk. Preuss.,’ Band 11, pt. 4. p. 100, pl. xvi, figs. 4, 4a. 
3 1852, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 2, p. 101, pl. xv, fig. 16. 

4 1844, Goldfuss, ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 9, pl. clxviii, fig. 2. 


200 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


2. PLarrostomMa ? DEFORME, Sowerby sp. Pl. XXIII, figs. 1—5. 


1840. Nenrira peFormis, Sowerby. Geol. Trans., ser. 2, vol. v, pt. 3, pl. lvii, fig. 14. 


1845. — sprrata, Sowerby. Ency. Metrop., p. 578. 
1854. —  oeEFormMIs, Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 264. 
1889. — — Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


Description.—Shell rather small, subglobose, spirally conical, of two or three 
volutions. Spire, small, very rapidly increasing, excentric, irregularly coiled. 
Suture deep, acute. Whorls irregularly convex, more or less elevated above the 
lower suture; flattened on the basal side, but becoming gradually rounder as 
they advance from the apex. Body-whorl transversely flattened at first, gradually 
expanding, so as to become very large and capacious near the mouth; sometimes 
spirally compressed along its centre, so as almost to form a blunt angle or 
undeveloped keel. Mouth very large, subcircular, entire. Lips discontinuous. 
Inner lip replaced for one-third part by the parietal wall. Peristome sharp, 
bevelled all round. Columella very long, shghtly arching and slightly twisted. 
Umbilicus small and very deep. Shell-structure apparently rather thin. Surface 
ornamented by very fine, regular, and numerous strizw, arching convexly very 
rapidly backwards from the suture, but becoming concave and perpendicular upon 
the centre of the whorl and towards the base of the shell. 

Size. 


A middle-sized specimen measures 14 mm. in height by 13 mm. in 
width. <A large specimen is 22 mm. wide. 

Localities —From Wolborough there are five specimens in Mr. Vicary’s 
Collection; nine, or perhaps ten, in the Godwin-Austen Collection in the Museum 
of Practical Geology; two in the British Museum; and seven'in the Torquay 
Museum. From Lummaton there is a small specimen in the Woodwardian 
Museum. 

Remarks.— This species appears to be decidedly common at Wolborough. As 
far as the state of the specimens will allow a judgment to be formed, it appears 
to be a distinctly variable shell, especially in the height and shape of its spire. 
In the young shell this seems to be almost flat, and scarcely indented by the 
suture-lines, while in the more aged specimens it becomes elevated and sub- 
turrited. 

The shape of the base of the shell also seems to change with its growth, that 
of the upper whorls appearing to be flat, while that of the body-whorl gradually 
becomes convex and produced in front. 


' Only three of these seven specimens are certainly from Wolborough ; the others may be from 
Lummaton. 


PLATYOSTOMA. 201 


Hence the aspect of the shell varies much with its age, or with the point of view 
from which it is observed. Sometimes it appears almost lenticular, and at others 
subglobose. Nevertheless it may be regarded as a very well-defined species, for it 
has clear distinctive features in spite of this tendency to individual variation. Thus 
the spire has a peculiar and characteristic style of coiling; the body-whorl has 
one or two spiral flattenings, which break the uniform convexity of its section ; the 
rapid increase and change of shape of the tube gives a characteristic spiral slope 
to the base ; the aperture has an incurved inner lip, and a break between the 
upper terminations of the two lips; and the style of ornamentation is altogether 
very unusual and distinctive. This ornament consists of thin, parallel, micro- 
scopic striz, arching backward from the suture until they become almost 
transverse, and then changing their curvature, and becoming almost longitudinal 
upon the lower part of the whorl. These lines appear to be structural rather 
than mere surface-markings, but, as the shells are generally decayed, they can 
only occasionally be seen. 

I am strongly of opinion that this species is the shell referred to by 
Sowerby in the ‘ Encyclopzedia Metropolitana’ as N. spirata, and described in the 
‘Geological Transactions’ as N. deformis. His description is very slight, and his 
figure is so poor that neither Mr. Roberts nor myself could feel any certainty 
about the correctness of its identification with the present shells, some of which 
have been so labelled in the Godwin-Austen Collection. They certainly can only 
belong to Sowerby’s species if his figures in the ‘ Geological Transactions’ are 
inaccurate. The back view might agree with them if a little tilted up, but the 
front view appears to depict a nonumbilicated shell with continuous lips. Hence 
they ought to represent a shell even of a different genus from the present; but, 
nevertheless, after a careful comparison of his figures and description with some 
of the Godwin-Austen specimens I feel very much under the impression that the 
appearances in his figure are only due to shading, and that the type specimen 
from Plymouth will be found to belong to the same species as these Wolborough 
shells. 

It is to be noticed that Sowerby described it as finely striated, though the strive 
figured are much coarser than those in ours. While, however, several such 
differences could be pointed out, there is in it such a look of specific resemblance 
to our fossils that I think they must really be due only to the roughness of 
Sowerby’s drawing. 

Afjinities.—Nerita spirata, Sowerby,’ from the Mountain Limestone, is very 
similar, but its ornamentation has a different contour, the shape of its aperture 
is different, and it has a spiral concavity encircling the whorls just below the 
suture, of which there is no trace in any of our specimens. 


' 1824, Sowerby, ‘ Min. Conch.,’ vol. v, p. 93, pl. cece)xui, figs. 1, 2. 


202 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


Some, though not all, of the figures given by Hall’ of Platyostoma lineatwm, 
Conrad,” bear considerable resemblance to the present species. There is the same 
variability of shape, but it appears to be upon the whole a flatter form, with 
generally a less elevated spire, and the character of its ornament is totally 
different. 


3. Puatyostoma speciosum, Sowerby, sp. Pl. XXIII, figs. 6, 6 a. 


1840. NeErrra speciosa, Sowerby. Geol. Trans., ser. 2, vol. v, pt. 3, pl. lvu, 
fig. 15. 
1854. — — Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 264. 


Description.—Shell small, lenticular, dilate, of rather few whorls. Spire very 
broadly conical, almost flat externally, but somewhat elevated in the centre. 
Apex apparently sharp. Suture small but deep. Body-whorl spreading out 
horizontally from the suture to the shoulder, where, after shghtly sinking, it turns 
through a sharpish angle, and proceeds obliquely inwards to form the base. 
Umbilicus closed. Mouth large, trapezoidal, somewhat produced below. Lips 
meeting in front at an obtuse angle. Inner lip much arched. 

Size.—Height 6 mm., width 12 mm. 

Locality.—A specimen in the Torquay Museum probably comes from Lumma- 
ton or Barton. A specimen from Wolborough in the Museum of Practical 
Geology belongs either to this species or to Hwomphalus circularis. 

Remarks.—Nerita speciosa is described by Sowerby as being a species which 
occurs of all sizes up to several inches in the Plymouth Limestone. Its height is 
equal to its breadth. The upper whorls are convex, but the body-whorl is marked 
by a shallow concentric depression between the suture and the shoulder. It will 
be seen that the small specimen described above does not quite fulfil all these 
conditions, but is still so similar that it may in all likelihood be regarded as a young 
specimen of it, in which the concentric depression has not yet developed, or the 
mouth so much increased in size as to render the height equal to the breadth. 
Both our specimen and Sowerby’s figure are so defective that the full characters 
of the species cannot be made out. 

Affinities. —This shell differs from Huomphalus circularis, Phillips,’ by its acute- 
angled whorls and its closed umbilicus. 

Euomphalus Gualtieriatus, Schlot.,* almost exactly corresponds upon the upper 

1 1879, Hall, ‘ Pal. N. Y.,’ vol. v, pt. 2, p. 21, pl. x, figs. 1—23, 25, 26. 

2 1842, Conrad, ‘Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil.,’ vol. viii, p. 276, pl. xvii, fig. 7. 
3 1841, Phillips, ‘ Pal. Foss.,’ p. 94, pl. xxxvi, fig. 171. 

4 1844, Goldfuss, ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 81, pl. clxxxix, figs. 3 a, b. 


PLATYOSTOMA—CAPULUS. 203 


side, differing perhaps in the spire forming a slightly convex cone, and in the 
mouth being smaller ; it 1s, however, at once distinguished by having (as described 
by Goldfuss) a wide subangulated umbilicus. 

Platyostoma turbinatum, Hall,’ approaches the present form so nearly as to 
suggest that it very probably belongs to the same genus. The American species 
is a decidedly more elongated form, with much fewer and more quickly increasing 
whorls, and curved growth-lines of which we can trace no sign in our English 
specimens. 


V. Family.—Carutipa, Cuvier. 
1. Genus.—Carutus, Montfort, 1810. 


The paleeozoic forms of this group were placed by Conrad under the genus 
Platyceras in 1840, and by Phillips under the genus Acroculia in 1841; and these 
names, as well as some others, have been largely used for them by various authors. 
There is a vast amount of individual as well as of specific variation in the palzozoic 
forms of these shells, and it appears to me that they include the recent species of 
Capulus within their limits, although on the other hand they contain many shapes 
that would not otherwise be included in it. Thus, for instance, the spire is often 
very asymmetrical and the surface tuberculated or strongly plaited. However, 
these forms are so closely connected among themselves that it seems impossible to 
draw any generic distinction between them, and therefore there seems no reason 
for separating them from the recent genus, which contains only about ten living 
species—a very small number compared with those of the Silurian and Devonian 
formations, which are to be counted by hundreds. We therefore can only regard 
the recent shells as the worn-out representatives of a large and flourishing 
ancient type. 

At the same time, the horseshoe-shaped muscular impression which is so pro- 
minent in the modern species is not generally noticeable in the Devonshire fossils 
when they occur as casts ; and, if the shape of this proves to be different, it may be 
needful to retain the name Platyceras as a sub-genus of Capulus, or as a distinct 
genus. At present, however, there seems no reason for doing this, and the best 
course is to follow Tawney, Kayser, and others, in referring these ancient shells to 
the genus Capulus itself. 

It has proved very difficult to decide the specific limits of such shells of this 
genus as are described below. Hardly two specimens are exactly alike, and the 


1 1879, Hall,‘ Pal. N. Y.,’ vol. v, pt. 2, p. 27, pl. ix, figs. 12—24. 
27 


204 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


material at hand is often quite insufficient to show how far their variation is only 
accidental or of permanent value. On the other hand, as fresh specimens are 
examined, the existence of real lines of demarcation becomes increasingly evident. 
Hence, while it is possible that some of the species now given may have here- 
after to be re-united, it seems probable that the number of species will be 
ultimately found to exceed that which is here recorded. 


1. CaPuLus? Invictus, n. sp. Pl. XIX, figs. 12—14. 


Description.—Shell rather small, depressed, lenticular, regularly coiled. Spire 
small, contiguous, almost flat but tending upwards, nearly level with the highest 
plane of the shell, rapidly and regularly increasing, consisting of one or two 
volutions. Apex minute, recurved, pointed. Body-whorl wider than high; in 
section suboval or subtriangular, gently rising from the inner or sutural side, 
spreading out for a great width above, where it is slightly convex and on the 
whole oblique, rounding so very rapidly as to be almost subangular on the narrow 
back, and then proceeding inwards in an oblique direction to the lowest part of 
the shell, where it curves upwards to form apparently an incipient umbilicus; 
longitudinally, regularly arched, almost keeled on the back, and bearing a more or 
less defined, broad, shallow groove, midway between the convex back and base of 
the shell. Mouth oblique, the lower part being less advanced than the upper. 
Peristome in part wavy or coarsely undulated. Surface ornamented with 
numerous, superficial, unequal, angulated, broad, flat spiral bands, separated by 
shallow grooves. Colour black, with broad white spiral bands, following the 
course of the grooves. 

Size.-—Height 12 mm., width 21 mm. 

Localities. 
and from Barton and Lummaton two in the Lee Collection in the British 
Museum, one in the Woodwardian Museum, two in the Bristol Museum, and two 


From Wolborough there is a specimen in Mr. Vicary’s Collection ; 


in my Collection. 

Remarls.—Whether this species is to be regarded as belonging to Capulus, or 
to Platyostoma, I am not sure. It appears at all events to be on the border-line 
of the former genus, its regular symmetrical shape closely connecting it with 
ordinary spiral forms. 

Mr. Vicary’s specimen is the only one in which the ornamentation or the 
colour-bands are visible, but in it the portions of the bands not worn away are 
beautifully displayed. The other specimens seem smooth ; but, as their surface is 
not well preserved, there is no reason to doubt that they belong to the same 


CAPULUS. 205 


species, the only difference in them being that the basal depression is rather less 
marked than in Mr. Vicary’s fossil. 

Pileopsis lineata, Goldfuss,' seems to have a larger spire and a more obliquely 
shaped mouth, and has no spiral groovings ; but for Mr. Vicary’s specimen, how- 
ever, which shows the different style of ornament, I should have regarded it as 
belonging to this shell. 

Capulus Kahlebergensis, Beushausen,’ is very similar in shape, but the longi- 
tudinal striz, or growth-lines, have a totally different curvature. 

Capulus crassus, Trenkner,’ is, as shown by Beushausen,* a more globular form, 
with an asymmetrical spire and convex base. 

Capulus immersus, Barrande, as given by Maurer,’ has a smooth surface 
marked only by fine undulating growth-lines, and does not appear keeled on the 
back. Maurer notices its black colour. 

Pileopsis neritoides, Phillips,® is a very similar shell, but has a much more 
rounded base, and strong, irregular, longitudinal strie. That species, as given by 
Barrois’ from the Asturias, is very much flatter than Phillips’s type, but Dr. 
Barrois thinks that this flatness may probably have been caused by pressure in 
the course of fossilization. 


2. CAPULUS PERICOMPSUS, n. sp. Pl. XX, figs. 1—5. 


1880. Capruius rostRatus, “ Barrande?’? Maurer, Neues Jahrb. f. Min., Beil.- 
Band i, p. 33, pl. u, fig. 16 (not 
Trenkn., Palaon. Novitat., pt. 1, 
p- 12, pl. i, fig. 32). 
1887. Puraryceras, sp., Tschernyschew. Mém. Com. Géol. Russ., vol. i, No. 3, 
p- 39, pl. vi, figs. 6 a—e. 


Description.~—Shell small, depressed, very narrow, and elongate. Spire very 
small, less than a volution, free except at the apex, very distant from the plane 
of the mouth, much overhanging the inner margin of the mouth, and much 


1 1844, Goldf., ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 9, pl. elxviil, figs. 2a, b. 

2 1884, Beushausen, ‘ Abhandl. Geol. Specialk. Preuss.,’ Band vi, pt. 1, p. 53, pl. i, figs. 14a, 6. 

3 1867, Trenkner, ‘ Paliont. Novit.,’ ii, p. 6, pl. v, fig. 1. 

4 1884, Beushausen, ‘ Abhandl. Geol. Specialk. Preuss.,’ Band vi, pt. 1, p. 52, pl. i, figs. 18 a, 8. 

5 1880, Maurer, ‘ Neues Jabrb. f. Min.,’ Beil.-Band i, p. 33, pl. 11, fig. 15. 

6 1836, Phillips, ‘ Geol. Yorks.,’ pt. 2, p. 224, pl. xiv, figs. 16—18. 

7 1882, Barrois, ‘Mém. Soc. Géol. Nord,’ vol. ii, No. 2, pl. xiii, figs. 11 a—e. 

8 In describing these shells I have treated them, for the sake of uniformity, as ordinary Gasteropods, 
regarding the mouth as perpendicular, and the spire as approximately horizontal. 


206 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


sunk below the highest plane of the shell. Apex minute, incurved, and direct, 
facing neither upwards nor downwards. Body-whorl very elongate, perpendi- 
cularly compressed, and very slowly increasing; in section, broadly oval, most 
convex round the back which sometimes is almost bluntly angular, less convex 
above and below; longitudinally convex along the back with a decreasing 
curvature towards the mouth, definitely concave along the inner side, sometimes 
showing indistinct longitudinal grooves. Mouth small. Peristome slightly 
sinuous, not expanded. Surface ornamented with irregular undulating growth- 
lines and numerous microscopical striz, crossed sometimes, especially in the lower 
parts, by occasional fine ridges, in which case the strie become deeply sinuous 
between them. 

Size.—A specimen in Mr. Vicary’s Collection measures—width 16 mm., depth 
18 mm., height 12 mm. A specimen in the Woodwardian Museum measures 
—width 15 mm., depth 12 mm., height 9 mm. 

Localities—From Lummaton there are eight specimens in my Collection and 
four in the Woodwardian Museum. From Barton there are three specimens in 
the British Museum, two of which have the lower lip more than usually expanded. 
From Wolborough there is a specimen in Mr. Vicary’s Collection. 

Remarks.—This little species seems very well defined, and very different from 
any of the accompanying forms. It is notable for the very slow rate of increase 
of its whorl, by the great distance of its apex from the plane of the mouth, and 
for its great horizontal symmetry. If it be stood on its mouth the perpendicular 
from the apex falls some distance outside the centre of the inner margin of the 
aperture. 

The shell described by Maurer appears identical with the English form, as far 
as can be judged from the defective cast which he figures. This shell he submitted 
to Barrande, who described it as ‘‘rapproché de Capulus rostratus, Barr., e’—f?.” 

There is the usual amount of variability between individual specimens of this 
species of Capulus, both in the length and curvature of the shell and in other 
points, but at the same time there is a general similarity which marks them as all 
belonging to the same species. Perhaps the most aberrant specimen is one in my 
Collection which is very long and flat and almost rhomboidal in section, being 
flattened on the back, lateral, and inner sides, and angulated at the corners. 

Affinities.—Orthonychia subrectum, Hall,’ is shghter and. less recurved. 

Platyceras Thetis, Hall,’ has a longer, freer, and more recurved apex. 

One of Kayser’s® figures of Capulus Zinckenii, F. A. Rémer,* sp., is something 


1 1859, Hall, ‘ Twelfth Rep. N. Y. State Cab. Nat. Hist.,’ p. 18. 

2 1879, Hall, ‘ Pal. N. Y.,’ p. 8, pl. iii, figs. 11—16. 

° 1878, Kayser, ‘ Abhandl. Geol. Specialk. Preuss.,’ Band ii, pt. 4, p. 39, pl. xv, figs. 5—7. 
* 1843, F. A. Romer, ‘ Harz.,’ p. 27, pl. vii, figs. 4a—e. 


CAPULUS. 207 


like Mr. Vicary’s specimen, but that species is distinctly different, being more 
deeply furrowed, twisted, and with a much less recurved umbo. Barrois’! figure 
of the same species also closely resembles it, but may be distinguished by the 
same particulars ; and on the whole I think that, though closely allied, the English 
and German species are not identical. 


3. CaPuLus rostratus, Trenkner? Pl. XX, figs. 6—8. 


1852. PILEOPSIS COMPRESSA, Quenstedt (not Goldf.). Handb. Petref., p. 440, 
pl. xxxv, fig. 11. 
?1853. CapuLtus @raciiis, Sandberger. Verst. Rhein. Nassau, p. 236, pl. xxvi, 
figs. 17,17 a: 


? 1867, ~- Rostratus, Zrenkner. Palaiont. Novitat., pt. 1, p. 12, pl. i, 
fig. 22. 
P1884. — — Clarke. Neues Jahrb. f. Min., Beil.-Band iii, p. 362, 


pi ve figs; LO; 


Description.—Shell rather large, very much depressed, lenticular, very short, 
trigonal. Spire usually much recurved, and consisting of more than a 
volution, rather depressed below the highest plane of the shell, slightly tending 
upwards, involute. Apex minute, rather distant from the plane of the mouth. 
Body-whorl short, rapidly and regularly increasing; very much flattened, being 
gently convex above, deeply convex on the narrow back, and concave below; 
horizontally convex along the back, concave on the inner side and nearly straight 
below. Mouth not expanded, not sinuous except perhaps at the back. Surface 
marked with numerous, irregular, flattish, arched growth-lines, tending upwards 
near the back, and crossed by crowded, indistinct and discontinuous, microscopic, 
spiral striee. 

Size.—Width 34 mm., depth 24 mm., height about 10 mm. 

Locality.—A fine and large specimen from Wolborough is in Mr. Vicary’s 
Collection. There are four smaller specimens from Lummaton in my Collection, 
and one probably from the same locality in the Torquay Museum. 

Remarks.—I should at once have placed these shells with the following 
Species, were it not for their greater flatness, for the greater curvature of 
the back, and for the pronounced spiral concavity of the under side. This last 
character can only be seen in the two small specimens in my Collection, as Mr. 
Vicary’s large specimen is embedded in the matrix at that part. In that specimen, 
moreover, the spire is much more recurved, owing probably to its being a much 
older shell. The above-mentioned features seem to point to the probability of 


1889, Barrois, ‘ Faun. Cale. d’Ebray,’ p. 197, pl. xiii, figs. 6 a—e. 


208 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


the present shell proving to be specifically distinct. It appears to be the best 
course to place it, for the present, under the heading C. rostratus, Trenkner, leaving 
it to be decided whether it should be differently treated when more and better 
specimens are found. 

Capulus rostratus, Trenkn.,’ as described by him and as given by Clarke,’ is a 
smaller form with a less distant and recurved apex and no distinct signs of any 
basal concavity, but it comes so close that there is a probability that the same 
species may be intended by the very rough figure of the earlier author. 

The next is the only accompanying species to which it could be united, 
as its great flatness and other characters widely separate it from all the other 
shapes which occur in the present localities. 

Affinities.—Pileopsis compressa, Goldfuss,* is exceedingly like the exposed side 
of Mr. Vicary’s large specimen, but as described by him and F. A. Romer * it 
appears to want the deep basal concavity seen in the other specimens of the 
English shell. As given by Barrois,’ also, it is very like Mr. Vicary’s specimen. 
No basal concavity is, however, noticed by him, the spire is smaller, and there is 
no notice of any spiral markings. Hence, though coming so close, I do not feel 
justified in regarding it as identical. 

Capulus gracilis, Sandberger, seems to come very near it, though the view 
given by Sandberger does not render a comparison with our shells very easy, 
and his description does not help much. It differs somewhat in the elliptic curve 
of its spire, which is much greater, and there is no sign of the depression on the 
lower side. 


4, CaPuLus compressvs, Goldfuss, sp. Pl. XX, figs. 9—11. 


1832. Pitxopsis compressa, Goldfuss. In De la Beche’s Handbook (German 
edition), p. 531. 
21841. Acrocunia verusta, Phillips (pars). Pal. Foss., pl. xxxvi, fig. 169 ¢ 
(only). 
1843. — compressa, F. A. Rimer. Harz., p. 26, pl. xii, fig. 34. 
1844, Priropsts compressa, Goldf. Petref., vol. iii, p. 9, pl. elxvii, figs. 18 a—e. 
1846. AcrocuLia pROmVA, Eichwald. Geogn. Russ., p. 384. 
1855. Caputus compressvs, de Verneuil. Bull. Soc. Géol. Fr., vol. xii, p. 1001, 
pl xxix, fig. le 


1 1867, Trenkner, ‘ Palaont. Novit.,’ pt. 1, p. 12, pl. i, fig. 22. 
1884, Clarke, ‘ Neues Jahrb. f. Min.,’ Beil.-Band iii, p. 362, pl. v, figs. 10, 11. 
* 1844, Goldfuss, ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 10, pl. elxvii, figs. 18 a—e. 
4 1843, F. A. Romer, ‘ Harz.,’ p. 26, pl. xii, fig. 34. 
®* 1882, Barrois, ‘Mém. Soc. Géol. Nord,’ pl. ii, No. 1, p. 281; pl. xiti, figs. 2 a, 6. 


rw 


CAPULUS. 209 


1860. CapuLus Prozvus, Hichwald. Lethexa Rossica, p. 1102, pl. xli, figs. 14a, b. 
1885. — CoMPRESSUS, Clarke. Neues Jahrb. fiir Min., Beil.- Band iii, p. 361. 
1889. AcrocuLia PROmVA, Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


Description.—Shell rather small, very much depressed, lenticular, short, 
trigonal. Spire little developed, recurved, much less than a volution, much 
depressed below the highest plane of the shell, but tending slightly upwards, 
involute. Apex very minute, indistinct, rounded, considerably distant from the 
plane of the mouth. Body-whorl rather short, rapidly and regularly increasing, 
very much flattened, showing a very long oval in section ; gently convex above and 
below, slightly flattened on the narrow back; horizontally having a nearly circular 
curvature on the back, deeply concave on the inner side and slightly concave 
below. Mouth not expanded, hardly if at all sinuous. Surface marked with 
irregular growth-lines or fine striz, which occasionally undulate, and which turn 
rearwards as they cross the back. Colour pale, marked with a few narrow spiral 
black streaks. 

Size.—A specimen measures 16 mm. in width, 16 mm. in depth, and 13 mm. 
in height. 

Locality—Lummaton. There are five specimens in my Collection, two in 
the Woodwardian Museum, and one in the Battersby Collection of the Torquay 
Museum. 

Remarks.—This species is characterised by its great flatness perpendicularly, 
by its short, subtriangular, and rapidly increasing whorl; by the total absence of 
longitudinal furrows, and, where seen, by the remarkable spiral colour-bands. 
This is, in fact, almost the only Devonshire species in which I have observed the 
remains of colour pattern, and even in this it is only observable in two specimens, 
the others being either a blackish or pale grey monochrome. It is to be observed 
that one of the figures (fig. 169c) given by Phillips in his ‘ Paleeozoic Fossils ’ 
evidently shows traces of a similar colouring. It represents a considerably 
larger and higher shell than any of our specimens, but in other respects it 
corresponds with them, except that its back is more evenly rounded and broader, 
and possibly it may simply be an old and lofty example of the present species. 
I am, however, more inclined to regard it as a variety of Capulus tylotus, and to 
think that it represents the same species, and perhaps even the same shell, as that 
given by Phillips in his fig. 169 a. I have been unable to find the originals of 
these two figures. 

This species differs from C. pericompsus by its shorter and less tubular form, 
and the absence of spiral furrows; and from C. rostratus, Trenkner, by the much 
smaller concavity in the lower contour of the shell. 

It should be observed that the small specimen given as Pl. XX, fig. 9, is a 
fragment of the apex, and not a perfect infant shell. 


210 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


Goldfuss’s fig. of Pileopsis compressa seems to me to represent either this or 
the preceding species. I have united with it the fossils now under consideration 
because there is no sign or mention of a basal groove, but it is questionable 
whether its spire is too much recurved to agree with either of them. 

Capulus rostratus, Trenkner,’ is distinguished, by its describer, from Goldfuss’s 
species by the sharpness of its back. 


5. CAPULUS PUELLARIS, n. sp. Pl. XX, figs. 12 ?, 12 a?, 13—15. 


? AcROCULIA TRIGONA, Ff. A. Rimer (not Phill.). Harz., p. 26, pl. xii, figs. 33 a, b. 
Pp — Clarke. Neues Jahrb. f. Min., Beil.-Band iii, p. 360. 


Description.—Shell large, depressed, trigonal, more or less wide. Spire free, 
recurved, very small, more or less than a volution, depressed below the hori- 
zontal plane through the top of the shell. Apex apparently much incurved, 
minute and facing hardly if at all upwards, overhanging and generally very 
distant from the plane of the mouth. Body-whorl more or less subcircular in 
section, generally most convex at the back, of variable width, but generally 
broader than high ; horizontally arched, regularly increasing, and occasionally with 
short grooves or swellings close to the mouth, not expanded below. Mouth of 
moderate size, nearly perpendicular to the spire. Peristome more or less sinuous. 
Surface with irregular undulating growth-lines. 

Size.—Width 45 mm., depth 20 mm., height 27 mm. 

Localities —From Wolborough there are two specimens in the Museum of | 
Practical Geology ; and from Lummaton there are four specimens in my 
Collection, two in the Woodwardian, and three in the Torquay Museum, which 
last seem to belong to the same species, and to come from the same locality. 
There are four in the British Museum labelled ‘‘ Barton.” 

Remarks.—The present form seems distinguished by its minute recurved apex, 
by its undeveloped, free, hardly elevated spire, by the distance of the apex from 
the plane of the mouth owing to the great length of the mner side of the body- 
whorl, and by its trigonal regularly increasing shape. Some of the specimens 
show signs of indistinct longitudinal folds close to the mouth, and in two of them 
these folds appear to be numerous, more definite, and more extensive. The 
surface presents considerable inequalities or irregularities, but for the most part 
the outer shell is lost, so that its ornamentation cannot be defined. 

From the state of the material at my command it is impossible to speak very 

1 1867, Trenkn., ‘ Palaont. Novit.,’ pt. 1, p. 12, pl. i, fig. 22. 


CAPULUS. 211 


positively of the definiteness or limits of the species, but it appears to represent 
one if not two forms distinct from those that accompany it. The large specimen, 
Pl. XX, fig. 12, for instance, has a much more elongated spire, and I am in some 
doubt whether it might be a variety of Capulus contortus, F. A. Romer ?, as it has 
some indistinct longitudinal markings, and its spire tends upwards; but it is 
crushed and a cast, and on the whole it seems better to leave it with the present 
species. 

Affinities—Acroculia trigona, F. A. Rémer,' seems to resemble it in some 
respects, and may possibly belong to the same species, though it has a larger and 
contiguous spire; but this species differs from Pileopsis trigona, Goldfuss,” which 
is a highly conical shell, with hardly any signs of a spire. 

Capulus conspicuus, Hichwald,’ appears to be distinguished by having a less 
elongate and recurved beak, and by the total absence of spiral undulations. 


6. CAPULUS TERMINALIS, n. sp. Pl. XX, figs. 16, 16 a. 


Description.—Shell rather large, depressed, transversely conical. Spire very 
small, elongate, much recurved, free (?), tending upwards, considerably distant from 
the oral plane. Body-whorl subcircular or oval in section, flat on the inner side, 
horizontally very convex with decreasing curvature. Mouth large, hardly if at all 
sinuous. Surface unknown. 

Size—Width 18 mm., breadth 28 mm., height 27 mm. 

Locality.—Lummaton. ‘Two specimens in my Collection. 

Remarks.—lIt is rather doubtful whether this shell may not be only a variety of 
Capulus columbinus, but it seems at present needful to separate it from it on 
account of its long and free spire standing at a greater distance from its mouth, 
as well as the more tubular shape of its spire. In both cases the apex is rather 
imperfect, but in this it was evidently much more elongated than in the other 
species. The species appears to come midway between Capulus puellaris and 
Capulus columbinus. 

1 1843, F. A. Romer, ‘ Harz.,’ p. 26, pl. xii, figs. 33 a, b. 


2 1844, Goldfuss, ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 9, pl. clxvii, figs. 17 a—e. 
3 1857, Hichwald, ‘Bull. Soc. Nat. Moscov.,’ p. 157; and 1860, Eichwald, ‘ Lethza Rossica,’ 


p. 1108, pl. 1, figs. 12 a, b. 


28 


212 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


7. CapuLus corpatus, Whidborne, sp. Pl. XXI, figs. 1, 1 a. 
1889. Meroproma corpata, Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


Description.—Shell rather small, depressed, transversely conical. Spire very 
small, free, consisting of about one-half of a volution, moderately convex exter- 
nally, very concave within. Apex minute, sharp, recurved, below the median line 
of the shell, and tending slightly downwards. Whorls increasing with extreme 
rapidity ; in section, flatly and obliquely convex above, rapidly rounding so as to 
be almost keeled on the median line, and then turning in with a slightly concave 
curve on the lower part; imner side very concave. Mouth very large, obliquely 
heart-shaped or subtriangular. Peristome undulating, flatly expanded nearly all 
round. Perpendicular from apex falling near, but well within, the inner margin 
of the mouth. 

Size.—Height 14 mm., width 19 mm., distance of the apex from the plane of 
the mouth 5 mm. 

Locality.—There is a single specimen from Wolborough in the Museum of 
Practical Geology. 

Remarks.—This shell seems distinguished by its very large expanded mouth, 
by its free, acute, and slightly recurved apex, by its almost keeled back, and espe- 
cially by the extension of the inner side of the mouth beyond the perpendicular 
let fall upon it from the apex. It is unfortunate that it is represented by only a 
single specimen, as it becomes very difficult to decide how far the peculiarities in 
its shape may be due to the accident of the individual, but these are so numerous 
and so marked that it seems impossible to unite it with any of the accompanying 
species. I was at first inclined to place it with the shell next to be described, but 
the shape and freedom and position of its apex seem to prove that it cannot 
belong to that species. 

Affinities.—In Metoptoma pileus, Phillips,’ from the Carboniferous Limestone, 
the apex is more elevated, and the proximal corners of the mouth more angulated. 

Pileopsis cassideus, d’Arch. and de Vern.,” has a sharp median keel, a rather 
greater spire, and a smaller mouth. 


1 1836, ‘ Geol. York.,’ vol. ii, p. 224, pl. xiv, fig. 7. 
2 1842, d’Arch. and de Vern., ‘ Geol. Trans.,’ ser. 2, vol. vi, pt. 2, p. 366, pl. xxxiv, fig. 10. 


CAPULUS. 213 


8. Caputus UssHeri, sp.n. Pl. XXI, figs. 2, 2a, 20. 
21840. PinEopsis verusta, Sow. Geol. Trans., ser. 2, vol. v, pt. 3, pl. lvii, fig. 15. 


Description.—Shell of moderate size, depressed, trigonal. Spire very rapidly 
increasing, very small, consisting of less than a volution. Apex small, much 
recurved. Body-whorl in section narrow and flat above, curving suddenly to the 
back which is broad and gently convex, and rounding in more rapidly below. 
Horizontal curvature of the body-whorl small, about one-fifth of a circle. Surface 
slightly uneven, covered with close, irregular, slightly smuous growth-lines, which 
are crossed by multitudinous, microscopical, spiral striz. Mouth very large and 
wide; peristome apparently slightly sinuous. 

Size.— Width 27 mm., depth about 13 mm., height 22 mm. 

Locality.—W olborough. A single specimen in Mr. Vicary’s Collection. 

Remarks.—This specimen was labelled by Salter “ Acroculia not vetusta,’ 
it certainly does not belong to Sowerby’s original species,’ though it may be the 
same as the shell afterwards figured by lim in the ‘Geol. Trans.’ Its mouth and 
spire are unfortunately much obscured by the matrix, so that the above description 


’ 


and 


is in some degree tentative, and it is very difficult to make out its true form or 
relationship. It appears, however, to be so different from any of the other speci- 
mens which I have examined, that I am obliged, at least for the present, to regard 
it as distinct. As the base-line cannot be made out, it is impossible to decide its 
lateral elevation, and therefore the position of the apex with regard to the mouth. 
It may perhaps be best compared with the specimen of Capulus cordatus in the 
Museum of Practical Geology, from which, however, it differs in so many points 
that I do not think it could under any circumstances be regarded as identical. It 
differs from Capulus columbinus in being less globose, and in having a more 
tapering, elevated, and apparently free apex ; and from C. puellaris in being flatter, 
wider, and much more rapidly tapering. 


9. CapuLus uncinatus, F. A. Romer? Pl. XXI, figs. 3, 3 a. 


? 1852. Caputus uncinatus, F. A. Romer. Beitr., pt. 2, p. 101, pl. xv, fig. 15. 


1858. — = Giebel. Sil. Faun. Unterharz., p. 20, pl. 1, figs. 16 ?, 
19, 20. 
1878. — — Kayser. Abhandl. Geol. Specialk. Preuss., Band ii, 


pt. 4, p. 92, pl. xv, figs. 1—3, 4?, 5. 


Description.—Shell rather small, depressed, transversely conical. Apex minute, 
much recurved, contiguous, situated nearly in the median line of the shell, and 
1 1829, Sowerby, ‘ Min. Conch.,’ vol. vi. p. 2238, pl. devii, figs. 1—3. 


214 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


extending beyond the inner margin of the mouth. Spire increasing with extreme 
rapidity, consisting of less than a volution, not very convex, and spreading out 
rapidly to the mouth on every side. Spiral contour of the back only slightly convex. 
Mouth broadly heart-shaped. Surface indistinct. 

Size.—Height 17 mm., width 19 mm., distance of apex from plane of mouth 
5 mm. 

Locality.—There is a specimen, probably from Lummaton, in the Torquay 
Museum, and another from the same locality in my Collection. 

Remarks.—The materials for identifying this species are exceedingly scanty, 
and it is therefore very difficult to speak with any certainty about it. All that 
can be said is that it seems so unlike any of the accompanying forms that it must 
be regarded as most probably distinct. The distinguishing points seem to be its 
large ovate mouth, its small, advanced, and horizontally straight umbo, and its 
low flattened contour. Capulus cordatus differs in having a free and less curved 
and more central apex; and C. squamosus, Trenkner?, in having its apex 
more advanced and decidedly curved upwards, and in being horizontally more 
elongated. 

As far as can be judged from our imperfect specimen, it seems to agree with 
the O. uncinatus of F. A. Romer,’ at least as interpreted by Giebel,” and Kayser,® 
except in having no spiral folds upon the body-whorl. 


10. Caputus cotumBinus, Whidborne sp. Pl. XXI, figs. 4, 4a, 40, 5, 5a. 


1889. AcRocULIA COLUMBINA, Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dee. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


Description.—Shell rather large, depressed, globose. Spire very small, 
rapidly increasing, closely recurved. Apex minute, facing upwards. Body- 
whorl subcircular in section, more convex above, probably flat on the inner side, 
rather produced below; horizontally very convex, with decreasing curvature. 
Mouth large. Peristome occasionally sinuous. Surface covered with very nume- 
rous, fine, distinct, undulating growth-lines, crossed by very indistinct micro- 
scopical ridges, and sometimes with strong spiral grooves, at which the growth- 
lines become strongly flounced. 

Size—Width 32 mm., breadth 19 mm., height 29 mm. 

Localities.—From Wolborough there is a specimen in Mr. Vicary’s Collection ; 
and from Lummaton there are two specimens in my Collection. 

' 1852, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 2, p. 101, pl. xv, fig. 15. 

* 1858, Giebel, ‘Sil. Faun. Unterharz.,’ p. 20, pl. iii, figs. (16), 19, 20. 

* 1878, Kayser, ‘Abhand]l. Geol. Specialk. Preuss.,’ Band ii, pt. 4, p. 92, pl. xv, figs. 1—3, 4?, 5. 


CAPULUS. 215 


Remarks.—There is considerable variation in the three specimens placed under 
this heading, but on the whole they present such a general similarity as to lead to 
the conclusion that they belong to the same form; and they appear to be widely 
different from any of the accompanying fossils. Thus my smaller specimen is a 
narrower shell with a more tapering apex, and with the growth-lines strongly 
flounced all over by spiral constrictions. In Mr. Vicary’s specimen (Pl. XXI, 
fig. 4) these marks are only seen near the base of the whorl, while in the 
other specimen, which in every other respect agrees with that last named, there 
are hardly any indications of them at all. In every case the true shape of the 
beak is obscured by the partial absence of the outer shell. 

On the whole, the species may be defined by its subglobose form, its great 
height, and its minute recurved apex. 

Affimities.—Of the adjacent species, it appears to approach most nearly to 
Capulus Ussheri, n. sp., and Capulus terminalis, n. sp. 


11. Capuus squamosus, Trenkner? Pl. XXI, figs. 6, 6a, 6b. 


21867. CapuLus squamosvus, Zrenkner. Paliont. Novit., pt. 1, p. 18, pl. i, fig. 5. 
P1884. - — Clarke. Neues Jahrb. f. Min., Beil.-Band iii, p. 362, 
pl. v, fig. 13. 


Description.—Shell large, depressed, obliquely conical. Spire apparently unde- 
veloped. Apex turned upward, much overhanging the inner margin of the mouth. 
Body-whorl almost circular in section except on the inner side; gently convex in 
horizontal contour, regularly and rather slowly increasing. Mouth apparently 
very large and oblique, with a thickened fold upon its upper edge. Surface of 
the under shell showing indistinct growth-lines, and very fine, sharp, transverse 
markings, five or six times as numerous as the growth-lines, which meet and sepa- 
rate, so as to form a compressed network. Surface of the upper shell showing 
similar markings, but somewhat coarser. 

Size.—Width about 40 mm., depth about 27 mm., height 20 mm. 

Locality. —From Lummaton there is one specimen in my Collection, and from 
Wolborough one specimen in the Museum of Practical Geology. 

Remarks.—The specimen figured on Pl. XXI, fig. 6, is unfortunately very 
defective. The lower part of the shell is gone, so that the line of the mouth, and 
therefore the elevation of the apex above the mouth, cannot be made out. It was 
therefore impossible to decide the true position in which the figure should be 
drawn, and possibly it is represented as more upright than it ought to be. The 
other specimen differs considerably in shape, being flatter and more circular. 


216 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


Taking the figured specimen as the type, the shell is to be defined by its 
regular and slowly increasing form, its slight, horizontal curvature, and its small 
rounded apex facing upwards. Of the accompanying species it perhaps most 
closely resembles C. Ussheri, but it differs from it by its more elongate form, its 
more rounded and blunter and more oblique apex, and in its surface-markings. 

Capulus squamosus, Trenkner, as given both by himself and by Clarke, seems 
so close to this form that they should probably be united under one species. 


12, Caputus TtyLotus, n. sp. Pl. XXI, figs. 9,9 a, 10, 10a; Pl. XXII, figs: 1) ae 
Ps PAID PO 


21841. AcrocuLta vetusta, Phillips (pars). Pal. Foss., p. 93, pl. xxxvi, fig. 169 a 
(and ¢) only. 
21854. Capunus verustus, Morris (pars). Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 239. 


Description—Shell rather large, depressed, narrow, elongate, loosely coiled. 
Spire large, recurved, consisting of more than a volution, much sunk below the 
highest plane through the shell, very slightly if at all tending upwards. Apex 
much recurved, nearly or quite direct. Body-whorl rather short, increasing in a 
rapidly advancing ratio, much produced below near the mouth so as to form a 
more or less definite concave ** wing,” subcircular in section, being almost evenly 
convex except on the inner side, which is flattened: back convex in horizontal 
section, with a decreasing curvature, so as to become nearly straight close to the 
aperture; inner side coneave. Mouth not very large, expanding especially on the 
inner side and below. Peristome slightly sinuous. Surface marked with irregular, 
sinuous, transverse growth-lines, and fine, crowded, microscopical striz, crossed 
by numerous indistinct furrows or folds; and bearing occasional small low 


tubercles. 
Size. .. depth 18 mm., height 24 mm. 
Localities —From Wolborough there are two specimens in Mr. Vicary’s Collec- 


tion; and from Lummaton there are seven specimens in my Collection, three in the 
Woodwardian Museum, two in the British Museum, and one in the Torquay 
Museum. 

Remarks.—This species is Cistinguished by its comparatively well-developed 
and large spire, its generally almost horizontal symmetry, the considerable dis- 
tance of its apex from the plane through the mouth, the elegant curves formed by 
the changes in the spiral curvature of its walls except on the back, the expan 
mouth, and especially by the tubercles of its surface. 


CAPULUS. 217 


It does not exactly agree with any of the figures of Acroculia vetusta in 
Phillips’s ‘ Pal. Foss.,’ but it presents most likeness to the indistinct fragment 
given in his fig. 169 a, which may perhaps belong to it ; and of this, his fig. 169 ¢ 
may perhaps be another view. It appears a sufficiently well-defined form, although 
there is considerable variation in the growth of the different specimens. It differs 
from all the accompanying species by the possession of tubercles, which seem 
always present, though they vary in number and distinctness. 

Affinities —It most nearly approaches Capulus galeritus, n. sp., which, however, 
is more depressed and narrower, and has a larger and more regular spiral, and 
also shows no tuberculation. 

In the tuberculated variety of Pileopsis prisca, Goldf.,' the tuberculation is, as 
shown by numerous examples from the Hifel,’ of a larger and more pronounced 
character, and the shell is more definitely coiled. From the smoother variety, 
which is described by Kayser,’ it is more difficult to separate it, although the 
latter seems more flat and generally more definitely coiled, and its mouth is 
more oblique. The general appearance, however, of our specimens leads me to 
think that it must be distinct, and certaimly none are in the slightest degree 
similar to typical Hifelian examples of that species. 


13. CaPULUS GALERITUS, n. sp. Pl. XXII, figs. 3, 3a, 4. 


1834. BrELLEROPHON, sp., Steininger. Mém. Soc. Géol. Fr., vol. i, pt. 2, p. 368, 
pl. xxu, figs. 8, 3a, 3d. 


Description.—Shell rather large, depressed, rather narrow, elongate, loosely 
and elliptically coiled. Spire free, large, much recurved, consisting of more than a 
volution, sunk beneath the highest plane through the shell, but facing upwards. 
Apex very minute, apparently nearly approximate to the plane of the mouth. 
Body-whorl regularly increasing, subcircular or slightly oval in section, being 
most convex on the back, and somewhat flattened and produced below near the 
mouth ; back very convex in the horizontal direction, but becoming less so near 
the mouth. Mouth not large, apparently oblique. Peristome sinuous. 

Size.—Width 30 mm., depth 18 mm., height 17 mm. 

Localities.—There is a specimen in the Museum of Practical Geology, and 
another in the British Museum from Wolborough; another in the Battersby 


1 1844, Goldfuss, ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 9, pl. exlviii, figs. 1 —d. 

* Ibid., pl. clxviii, fig. La. 

3 1878, Kayser, ‘ Abhandl. Geol. Specialk. Preuss.,’ Band ii, pt. 4, p. 94, pl. xvi, fig. 5, and pl. xx, 
figs. 11, 14, 15. 


218 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


Collection of the Torquay Museum probably from Wolborough; and two less 
perfect examples in my Collection, another small doubtful specimen in the Wood- 
wardian Museum, and another in the British Museum, from Lummaton. 

Remarks.—This species seems to stand about midway between C. tylotus, 
n. sp. and C. invictus, n. sp. From the former it is distinguished by its more 
regular spiral shape, less expanded mouth, and the absence of tubercles ; and from 
the latter by its sunk and less perfect spire, and the absence of a defined spiral 
sulcus on the lower part of the whorl. 

Affinities—Capulus substriatus, Minster,’ seems to approach this form. It 
appears to have a more perfect spire, to be more circular in section, and to be 
ornamented with spiral striz, thus forming in some points a passage between the 
present species, O. invictus, n. sp. and C. compressus, Goldf. 

Capulus neritoides, de Koninck,’ from the Carboniferous, seems to have a small, 
but more developed spire than any of these species. It consists of more than two 
volutions. 

Naticopsis obliqua, Trenkner,’ as given by Clarke,* is a higher shell with a mouth 
more pronounced and angulated above, and a not-sinuous, round, thickened inner 
lip. It is, however, generally similar, and indicates that the present species is 
closely allied. In Trenkner’s own figure the spire is larger, and there are 
regular distant longitudinal ridges. It is evidently not accurately drawn, but it 
shows, I think, that it clearly is a different species. 


14. Caputus contortus, I. A. Rémer, sp.? Pl. XXII, figs. 5—9. 


1834, BELLEROPHON ? sp., Steininger. Mém. Soc. Géol. Fr., vol. i, pt. 2, p. 368, 
pl. xxiii, figs. 4, 4a. 
1841. Acrocuria verusta, Phillips (pars). Pal. Foss., p. 93, pl. xxxvi, fig. 169 } 
(only). 
1844. Prreopsis Prisca, Goldf. (pars). Petref. Germ., vol. iii, p. 9, pl. elxviii, 
figs. 1 6 and ¢ (only). 
21843. AcrocuLia contorta, F. A. Rimer. Hayrz., p. 26, pl. vii, figs. 1 a,b, 2a, 6. 
1854. CapuLus vetustus, Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 239. 


? 1867. —  DEFLExUS, Trenkner. Paliont. Novit., p. 13, pl. i, fig. 24. 
? 1884. _— vetustus, Clarke. Neues Jahrb. f. Min., Beil.-Band iii, p. 362, 
pl. v, figs. 8, 9. 


! 1840, Munster, pt. 3, p. 82, pl. xiv, fig. 29. 

* 1842-4, de Koninck, ‘ Dise. An. Fossil.,’ p. 834, pl. xxiii bis, figs. la—ce. 

* 1867, Trenkner, ‘ Paliont. Nov.,’ pt. 1, p. 12, pl. i, fig. 28. 

* 1884, Clarke, ‘Neues Jahrb. f. Min.,’ Beil.-Band iii, p. 356, pl. v, figs. 6, 7. 


CAPULUS. 219 


Description.—Shell large, depressed, wide. Spire free (?), much incurved, 
tending slightly upwards, consisting of rather more than a volution. Apex 
unseen, but not far from the inner side of mouth. Body-whorl more or less 
subcircular in section, being flattened or slightly concave above, convex on the 
back, and more or less produced below, sometimes so as to form a concave wing ; 
horizontally much arched, and divided by five or six indistinct and irregular 
spiral ridges and furrows, which give it a slightly angulated appearance. Mouth 
very large. Peristome deeply sinuous or undulating. Surface covered with fine, 
sharp, irregularly undulating striz, crossed by occasional spiral inequalities. 

Size —Width about 45 mm., depth about 27 mm., height about 33 mm. 

Localities.—From Wolborough there are two specimens in the Museum of 
Practical Geology, and three in Mr. Vicary’s Collection. From Lummaton there 
are four specimens in my Collection, one in the Woodwardian Museum, and one 
in the Lee Collection in the British Museum. 

Remarks.—Though as usual in this genus almost every specimen of the 
present species has a slightly different shape, there is a general resemblance 
in them which affords reason for grouping them together, and for distinguishing 
them from the adjoming species. Their most striking features are the indistinct 
horizontal furrows and ridges which are seen in very few of the other forms, 
while in the present species these are much less definite than in C. multiplicatus, 
Giebel. Other distinguishing points are the incurved and apparently free 
spire, slightly curving upward, but not distant from the plane of the mouth, 
and partly overhanging its inner margin; the boldly undulating peristome, and 
especially the expansion of the lower part of the body-whorl near the mouth, 
which thereby sometimes forms an area which is called by Phillips ‘a wing.” 

One of the specimens in the Museum of Practical Geology is the original of 
one of Phillips’s figures of Acroculia vetusta, ‘ Pal. Foss.,’ pl. xxxvi, fig. 169 6. As 
will be seen by the figure which I have given of it, Philhps’s drawing does not 
quite represent its true shape. It is a somewhat flatter shell than our other 
specimens, and the *‘ wing” is more extended; but it is quite possible from its 
appearance that it has been subjected to pressure, and to this cause the existence 
of the so-called ‘‘ wing”’ may be partially due. 

A comparison with Sowerby’s original figure and with Carboniferous specimens 
of Pileopsis vetusta, Sow., in the Museum of Practical Geology, leads to the 
conclusion that our Devonshire fossil cannot belong to that species, which is a 
more limpet-shaped form with less arching whorls and smaller and less recurved 
spire. The two other figures given by Phillips in the ‘ Pal. Foss.’ do not appear 
to belong to either of these species, but I have been unable to find the original 
specimen or specimens from which they were taken, and therefore it is difficult 
to feel certain on the point. 

99 


~e 


220 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


The figure of the furrowed variety of Pileopsis prisca, Goldf., is very similar, 
and perhaps represents the same species, though its furrows seem closer and 
more numerous. His name, however, cannot be retained for the present species, 
as it should be restricted to his tuberculated variety, which is quite distinct from 
the present form. 

It is very similar to Acroculia contorta as described by F. A. Romer, which 
bears somewhat similar spiral ridges, and may perhaps be a small variety of the 
same species. Romer’s figures are, however, not sufficiently distinct to enable 
us to be very certain about the identification. 

Clarke states that Trenkner’s Capulus deflewus is certainly the same as 
A. vetusta, Phil. (not Sow.), and from his mention of spiral furrows it would seem to 
belong to the part of his so-called species placed under the present head. Clarke’s 
own figure, as well as Trenkner’s, however, does not show any spiral grooves, and 
for that reason I was at first more inclined to place it with OC. tylotus, n. sp., but 
the shape of the mouth accurately agrees with Phillips’s type, Pl. XXII, fig. 6, 
of Capulus contortus, F. A. Romer (?), with which it is most likely identical. 

Affinities. —Capulus disjunctus, Giebel,' is a closely allied species having similar 
spiral marks, but it is distinguished by its much longer and more definitely coiled 
spire, and its decidedly flatter shape. 

Pileopsis sinuosa, F. A. Romer,” has a much smaller and less recurved spire, 
and is more flatly conical in shape. 

Platyceras priscum, var. undulatwm, Barrois,® has a straighter and longer body- 
whorl, and the spiral marks are gentle undulations rather than sharpish ridges. 


15. CapuLus MuLtipLicatus, Giebel. Pl. XXII, figs. 10, 10 a, 11, lla. 


1855. Acrocuria HALiotis, F. A. Romer. Beitr., pt. 3, p. 118, pl. xvi, fig. 8. 
1858. Caputus HaLiotis, Giebel Sil. Faun. Unterharz., p. 22, pl. iii, fig. 5. 


1858. — MULTIPLICATUS, Giebel. Ibid., p. 23, pl. iii, fig. 6. 

1878. — — Kayser. Abhandl. Geol. Specialk. Preuss., 
Band ii, pt. 4, p. 97, pl. xvi, figs. 
7—9. 


1889. AcrocuLra MuULTIPLIcATA, Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


Description.—Shell large, depressed, wide, angulated. Spire very small, 
recurved, tending slightly upwards, much depressed below the highest plane of 


1 1858, Giebel, ‘Sil. Faun. Unterharz.,’ p. 25, pl. iii, fig. 4; and 1878, Kayser, ‘Abhandl. Geol. 
Specialk. Preuss.,’ Band ii, pt. 4, p. 95, pl. xvi, figs. 6, 6 a. 

* 1850, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 1, p. 33, pl. v, fig. 6. 

8 1882, Barrois, ‘Mém. Soc. Géol. Nord.,’ vol. ii, No. 1, p. 281, pl. xii, figs. 3 a, b. 


CAPULUS. 221 


the shell, consisting of less than a volution, probably free. Apex minute, very 
distant from the plane of the mouth. Body-whorl large, regularly increasing ; in 
section subcircular, but much complicated by nine or ten large, deep, subangular, 
irregular, spiral grooves and ridges, which vanish only on the upper part of the 
spire ; in longitudinal direction hardly curved, and regularly increasing, but slightly 
more expanded at the mouth. 

Size.—Width 35 mm., depth 30 mm., height about 32 mm. 

Localities—There is a very fine example in Mr. Vicary’s Collection and a very 
poor one in the Museum of Practical Geology from Wolborough ; as well as 
another imperfect specimen in my Collection from Lummaton. 

Remarks.—The deep angulated furrows, the long straight body-whorl, and the 
minute apex immediately distinguish this species. In Mr. Vicary’s specimen upon 
the inner or sutural side there first comes a fold following the line from the apex to 
the mouth ; this is followed by a wide deep groove, then on the shoulder come two 
high subangular folds separated by an equally narrow furrow, and followed by two 
wide deep furrows, separated by a small low fold; next on the back come two high 
flattened folds separated by a small furrow; then a very broad low fold bounded 
on each side by a rather deep narrow furrow, and then on the lower part of the 
whorl two high narrow folds separated by a rather small furrow: the rest of the 
surface is hidden by the matrix. It is exactly like a specimen of Capulus multi- 
plicatus, Giebel,' as figured by Kayser,’ and with this the English fossils must 
clearly be identified. 

Affinities—Under the name of Capulus canalifer, Minster’ describes a very 
large species with very similar markings. This appears to differ from ours in size 
and in having a much less quickly tapering and straighter tube, so that the mouth 
is smaller and much more distant from the apex. The spiral grooves also seem 
much deeper and much shorter. In spite, therefore, of the great variability in 
species of this genus, I do not think that these two forms could with any degree 
of probability be referred to the same species. 

Capulus haliotis, Sowerby,’ of the Wenlock Limestone, with which F. A. Romer 
identified it, has a very much larger and more spiral apex. 

Capulus conicus, Trenkner,’ is a more conical shell, and the apex is not at all 
recurved. 

1 1858, Giebel, ‘ Sil. Foss. Unterharz.,’ p. 22, pl. ili, fig. 6. 


) 


2 1878, Kayser, ‘ Abhandl. Geol. Specialk. Preuss.,’ Band ii, pt. 4, p. 97, pl. xvi, fig. 7. 
3 1840, Minster, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 3, p. 82, pl. xiv, fig. 27. 

4 1839, Sow. in ‘ Murch. Sil. Syst.,’ p. 625, pl. xii, fig. 16. 

> 1868, Trenkner, ‘ Paliont. Novit.,’ pt. 2, p. 21, pl. vii, fig. 14. 


222 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


2. Sub-genus.—Orruonycnta, Hall, 1843. 


This is a sub-genus of Capulus, which is to be distinguished by its rounded 
mouth, the entire absence of a spire, and the straight or only very slightly 
recurved apex, the perpendicular from which falls within the circle of the mouth. 

It is rare in Devonshire, and I am only acquainted with three specimens 
representing two species, but on the Continent and in America it seems to be 
sufficiently abundant. It occurs in the Devonian and Carboniferous formations. 


1. OrtHonycuta costata, Barrois. Pl. XXI, figs. 7, 7 a, 7 b. 


1889. Puatyceras costatuM, Barrois. Faun. Cale. d’Ebray, p. 196, pl. xii, 
figs. 5, 5a—e. 


Description.—Shell rather small, depressed, transversely conical or campanulate, 
without a spire. Apex gone, but apical region horizontally compressed, slightly 
bent upwards, situated slightly above the median horizontal line. Perpendicular 
from apex falling well within the margin of the mouth. Sides of the shell 
spreading out from near the apex to the mouth with a slightly convex curve, the 
ereatest convexity being along the back or outer side. Mouth large, flat, broadly 
oval. Surface covered by irregular, microscopic, undulating growth-strize and 
indistinct radiating lines, and also on the greater part of the marginal third of 
the shell by a few strong, distant, sharpish, radiating ridges, visible to the 
naked eye. 

Size-—Width 21 mm., breadth from apex to mouth 15 mm., height 18 mm. 

Locality.—There is a single specimen from Lummaton in Mr. Champernowne’s 
Collection. 

Remarks.—This species is distinguished by its simple cup-shaped form, by its 
radiating ridges, which seem to vanish in the peristome, and by the absence of any 
spire. The only other fossil at all like it from the localities now under review is 
Orthonychia quadrangularis, but that shell is sufficiently distinguished by its less 
elevated form and its almost flat surface. 

Barrois’s figured specimen has rather more numerous cost than the English 
specimen, and its apex is slightly more distant from the mouth, and more central 
in respect to it, but on the whole there can be, I think, no doubt that it is 


identical. 


ORTHONYCHIA. 223 


2. ORTHONYCHIA QUADRANGULARIS, n. sp. Pl. XXI, figs. 8, 8 a, 8 b. 


21878. Capunus? sp., Kayser. Abbandl. Geol. Specialk. Preuss., Band ii, pt. 4, 
p- 98, pl. xvii, figs. 1, la. 


Description —Shell large, rather elevated, conical or campanulate, without 
volutions. Apical extremity horizontally compressed, erect or very slightly recurved, 
gently bent upwards, not spiral. Apex itself accidentally removed in type 
specimen. Perpendicular from apex falling within the aperture, but very near 
its front. Mouth very large, oval or oblong, considerably wider than long. 
Margins sinuous, consisting of eight or nine double undulations, which are 
strongest at the front or outer part of the peristome. Shape of shell rather 
elongate at apex, then very rapidly expanding for about a third of its height, and 
there turning through a blunt elbow and proceeding in a slightly expanding cone 
to the aperture, gradually developing the undulations seen at the mouth. Surface 
covered with low, subsinuous, irregular growth-ridges, which are seen under a 
lens to be composed of very fine, discontinuous, fimbriated lines. Shell-structure 
extremely thin, almost papyraceous. Mould (?) marked on the back by numerous 
straight, definite, longitudinal ridges, and a few concentric bulges, corresponding 
with the chief growth-lines of the shell. 

Size.—Height from apex 21 (probably 22) mm., length of mouth 28 mm., 
width of mouth 38 mm. 

There is a fine specimen in the Torquay Museum, which may have 


Localities. 
come from Wolborough; and a smaller specimen in my Collection, which came 
from Lummaton. 

Remarks.—This fine shell seems to be distinguished by its untwisted elevated 
apex, gently undulating surface, and peculiar bell-shaped form. 

Affinities. —This species comes very near to Platyceras (Orthonychia) conicum, 
Hall! That shell seems to be extremely variable, but differences may be observed 
in the greater flatness and convexity, and in the more lateral position of the apex 
of the English form. 

It comes very near to Orthonychia costata, Barrois, with which at first I 
‘regarded it as identical, but the presence on the latter of a number of sharp, 
radiating ridges seems to indicate that they are specifically distinct. 

In Capulus hercynicus, Kayser,’ the perpendicular from the apex to the plane of 
the mouth is very much longer, and, except in the varieties where it is longest, 


1 1879, Hall, ‘Pal. N. Y.,’ vol. v, pt. 2, p. 3, pl. 1, figs. 18—23. 
2 1878, Kayser, ‘ Abbandl. Geol. Specialk. Preuss.,’ Band ii, pt. 4, p. 89, pl. xiv, figs. 1—14. 


224 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


falls in the centre of the aperture. Kayser unites with his shell several species 
of F. A. Romer and Giebel, all differing from the present shell in this particular. 


VI. Family.—Soatanipa, Chenu. 
1. Genus.—Hotoprtia, M‘Coy, 1852. 


The shells of this genus are very elevated, with very numerous narrow whorls, 
and with very fine longitudinal and also sometimes spiral striz. The surface has 
often a polished or glossy appearance. It extends from the Silurian to the Trias. 


1. HOLOPELLA TENUIRETICULATA, n. sp. Pl. XVIII, figs. 9, 9 a, 9 b. 


Description.—Shell of moderate size, very elongate, spiral, tapering regularly, 
many-whorled. Sutural angle varying. Suture small, shallow, rather wide. 
Whorls increasing regularly, short, bemg about half their diameter in height, 
slightly convex, sloping flatly from the upper suture, and becoming suddenly 
more convex at their posterior end so as to slightly overhang the lower suture ; 
ornamented by multitudinous, fine, sharp, rather irregular striz, sloping straightly 
and obliquely backwards from the upper suture over the greatest part of the 
whorl, but curving rather more forwards in its lower region, and imbricated by 
equally numerous, rounded, spiral threads, so as to form a very fine lozenge- 
shaped reticulation. Body-whorl small, curving suddenly in its lower part, and 
continued flatly and obliquely inwards to form the base, which is marked only 
by spiral threads, as the perpendicular lines have in that part almost entirely 
disappeared. Mouth ovate. Columella straight. Shell-structure thin. 

Size.—Height (of three and a half whorls) 30 mm., width 12 mm. 

Locality.—W olborough. A single example is in Mr. Vicary’s Collection. 

Remarks.—This shell appears to be distinguished by the exceeding fineness of 
its ornamentation, by its very elongate form, and by its narrow whorls. The 
sharp perpendicular lines are broken into a series of frills by the imbrication of 
the spiral threads. The spire appears to taper regularly as far as is shown by 
the portion remaining in Mr. Vicary’s specimen, and if this were continued 
throughout it would indicate a shell between 70 and 80 mm. high, but most 
probably the rate of tapering increased apically, so that the shell would be 
somewhat shorter. ‘The sutural angle is very variable, so that the lines of the 


HOLOPELLA. 225 


sutures appear when viewed on one side almost horizontal, and when viewed in 
the opposite direction exceedingly oblique. The shape of the aperture cannot be 
properly made out as its lower part is broken away, but there are signs of a strong 
columella or rounded inner lip. 

Affinities —In Holopella Hennahiana, Sowerby, the whorls are more convex, 
the transverse striz coarser, the sutures larger, and there are no spiral threads. 


2. HoLopenta tenuisutcata, Sandberger. Pl. XVII, figs. 20, 20 a; and Pl. XVIII, 
figs, 10> 10a, i: 


18538. Hotoperna Trenutsutcata, Sandberger. Verst. Rhein. Nassau, p. 229, 


pl. xxvi, fig. 6. 
1860. — ELoNGATA, Hichwald. Lethea Rossica, p. 1123, pl. xliui, fig. 9. 
1889. — TENUISULCATA, Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


Description.—Shell of moderate size, elongate, spiral, of many whorls. Sutural 
angle large, probably variable. Suture rather deep. Whorls broad, about two- 
thirds their diameter in height, numerous, probably eight or nine, moderately 
convex, becoming suddenly steeper at the lower end, so as slightly to overhang 
the suture. Ornament consisting of very numerous, fine, transverse, very 
irregular, subacute strie, which sometimes appear and vanish indiscriminately, 
and are very unequal in size, and which are reticulated or crenulated by very 
indistinct and still closer spiral lines, so as to give them the appearance of frills. 
Base of shell rounding gently in, nearly smooth. Aperture small, broadly ovate, 
pointed above, rounded below. Columella short, arched, involute at the extremity. 
Outer lip sharp, moderately convex, slightly expanded along its edge. Shell- 
structure thin. 

Size—A specimen consisting of the five lower whorls is 84 mm. high and 14 
mm. in diameter. 

Locality —From Wolborough there are two good specimens and a poor cast in 
Mr. Vicary’s Collection ; another, which is very poor, but appears to belong to the 
same species, in the Museum of Practical Geology, and a cast which is scarcely 
identifiable, but which is similar in shape, in the Torquay Museum. From 
Lummaton there is a specimen in the Woodwardian Museum. 

Remarks.—Upon the penultimate whorl of the Woodwardian specimen is a 
broad band formed by two parallel brown-stained lines. This mark seems rather 
perplexing, for although it is in a natural position upon the whorl it is hard to say 


226 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


what it indicates, and there is no sign of a similar mark on any of the other 
whorls. It is possible that it may be the remains of a colour-band. 

The present species seems to be distinguished by its slender shape and the 
great breadth of its whorls. 

Hf, elongata, Eichwald, corresponds exactly in shape, and is in all probability 
the same species, though its ornament seems to have been rather more indistinct. 

Affinities.—It approaches most nearly to H. tenuireticulata, fig. 9, from which 
it 1s distinguished by its much less elongate form, by the direction of the strie, 
and by the much greater coarseness of its ornamentation. In spite of these 
differences it bears so great a general likeness to that shell that I am in 
considerable doubt whether to regard it as a distinct species or only as a variety 
of it. It is clearly distinguished from H. duplisuleata by its less conical form, 
and by the different character of its ornamentation; and from 4H. costata, 
Sandberger, by its broader whorls and less conical form. 

Mr. Vicary’s specimen was labelled by Salter ‘‘ Lovonema Hennahiana,” 
Sow. sp., but Sowerby’s figure of his Terebra Hennahiana' shows that his shell is 
distinguished by having narrower whorls, and coarser, more direct, and straight 
striz, as seen in our figure, Pl. XVIII, fig. 16, of that shell. 

Turritella tenuicarinata, Minster,’ differs in having a slight keel immediately 
below the suture, and in being otherwise smooth. 

Melania absoluta, Goldfuss,’ has decidedly higher whorls and more direct strie. 

Lovonema leve, F. A. Romer,‘ is very similar, but its spire is longer and its 
surface is smooth. Clarke,> moreover, states that it has varices. 

Holopella elegans, Kichwald,°is almost identical in shape, but it is distinguished 
by possessing fine spiral, and no longitudinal lineations. 


1 1840, Sow., ‘Geol Trans.,’ ser. 2, vol. v, pt. 3, pl. lvii, fig. 22. 

2 1840, Minster, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 3, p. 89, pl. xv, figs. 20 a, b. 

3 1844, Goldfuss, ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 110, pl. exevii, fig. 18. 

4 1850, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 1, p. 35, pl. v, fig. 11. 

5 1883, Clarke, ‘ Neues Jahrb. f. Min.,’ Beil.-Band iii, p. 365, pl. v, fig. 21. 
6 1860, Eichwald, ‘ Lethwa Rossica,’ p. 1634, pl. xliv, fig. 25. 


HOLOPELLA. 227 


3. Hotopeiia puptisuLoata, Whidborne. Pl. XVIII, figs. 12—14. 
1889. Ho1LopeLia DuPLIsuLcata, Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


Description.—Shell small, elongate, spiral, of many volutions. Sutural angle 
small. Suture rather deep. Whorls narrow, convex. Surface ornamented by 
fine, rounded threads, just visible to the naked eye, crossing the whorl in a rather 
oblique direction, rather concave to the aperture, between each of which upon the 
lower whorls are several still finer microscopic striz. | Body-whorl small, 
sloping gently in to the base of the shell. Aperture ovate, poimted above, regu- 
larly rounded below. Outer lip arched, apparently somewhat excavate. Shell- 
structure thin. 

Size—About 26 mm. in height, 15 mm. in diameter. 

Locality.—There is a beautiful specimen in Mr. Champernowne’s Collection 
from Wolborough ; two fragmentary specimens in my Collection from Lummaton ; 
and another specimen, with obliterated surface, in Mr. Vicary’s Collection from 
Chudleigh. 

Remarks.—This species is distinguished chiefly by the possession of a series of 
fine minor striz in addition to the major. In general shape it approaches very 
close to Holopella costata, Goldf. sp.,' from which it chiefly differs in the possession 
of these minor markings and in its ornamentation being decidedly finer than that 
of the German shell, though not than that of its English variety. That species, 
however, is identified by Sandberger with Terebra Hennahiana, Sow.,’ which is 
widely separated from the present form by the broadness of its whorls, and the 
coarseness and directness of its strive. 

Affinities.—Our shell differs from all the others that accompany it except 
H. costata by its shorter shape and narrower whorls. It is also distinguished 
from LH. tenwireticulata and H. tenuisulcata by the comparative coarseness of its 
strie. 

As given by their describer, H. tenwicostata, Sandberger,’ and H. tenuisulcata, 
Sandberger,* differ from it in having broader whorls and finer striz, and 
H. piligera, Sandberger,’ differs in being of a more slender shape, and in having 
more indistinct markings. Lovonema linctum, Ph.,° is quite a different-shaped shell, 
being very much shorter, and its ornamentation is more regular. 

1 1853, Sandberger, ‘ Verst. Rhein. Nassau,’ p. 230, pl. xxvi, figs. 11, 11a. 

* 1840, J. Sowerby, ‘ Geol. Trans.,’ ser. 2, vol. v, pt. 3, pl. lvii, fig. 22; and 1841, Phillips, ‘ Pal. 
Foss.,’ p. 99, pl. xxxviii, fig. 184. 

3 1853, Sandberger, ‘ Verst. Rhein. Nassau,’ p. 227, pl. xxvi, figs. 7, 7 a. 

* Tbid., p. 228, pl. xxvi, figs. 8, 8 a. 

> Ibid., p. 228, pl. xxvi, figs. 9, 9a—e. 

6 1841, Phillips, ‘ Pal. Foss.,’ p. 109, pl. xxxviii, figs. 185 a, 0d. 

39 


228 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


Turritella Koninckiana, Goldfuss,' comes very close to it, but differs in being 
decidedly more elongate, and in having flatter, shorter, and more numerous 
whorls, and a more uniform striation. It is from the Carboniferous beds of 
Ratingen. 

Semenow and Moller’ figure as Turritella spiculum, Hichwald,* a minute species 
which agrees with the present form in general shape, but it is quite impossible to 
judge from their drawing whether its ornamentation is the same or not. Hichwald’s 


own description, however, shows that it possessed spiral, instead of transverse, 
striz. 


4+, Honoperta Hennantana, Sowerby, sp. Pl. XVIII, figs. 16, 16a. 


1840. TrreBra Hennanrana, Sowerby. Geol. Trans., ser. 2, vol. v, pt. 3, pl. lvii, 
figs. 22, 22 a. 
1841. Loxonema Hennaniana, Phillips. Pal. Foss., p. 99, pl. xxxviii, fig. 184. 
1844. Mernanta antigua, Goldfuss. Petref. Germ., vol. ii, p. 110, pl. exevii, 
fig. 14. ' 
1845. Trrepra Hennautt, Sow. Encyclop. Metrop. (fide Sowerby, Geol. Trans.).* 
21853. HotopeLta TenvicostaTa, Sandberger. Verst. Rhein. Nassau, p. 228, 
pl. xxvi, figs. 7, 7 a. 
1854. Loxonema Hennaurana, Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 255. 
P1882. Hotopetna reNuIcostata, Holzapfel. Paleontogr., vol. xxvii, p. 249. 
1888. Loxonema Hennauiana, Etheridge. Foss. Brit., vol. i, Pal., p. 163. 
1889. HoLopetta renvuicostata, Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


Description.—Shell small, elongate, spiral, conical, acuminate, of many whorls. 
Sutural angle slightly varying. Suture small, shallow. Whorls six or seven, 
narrow, moderately convex, the convexity seeming to be rather less in the middle 
of the whorl. Ornament consisting of numerous fine, distant, regular, nearly 
straight, sharp lines, barely visible to the naked eye, and set perpendicularly to the 
suture. Columella arched (?). Inner lip diffuse, callous. 

Size.-—Height 24 mm., width 15 mm. 

Locality. —Lummaton. There are two specimens in the Battersby Collection 
in the Torquay Museum. Sowerby records it from Plymouth. 

Remarks.—I have not met with Sowerby’s type of this species; but, as far as 


1 1844, Goldf., ‘Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 104, pl. exevi, figs. 5 a—e. 

2 1863, Semenow and Moller, ‘ Ober-Dev. Schicht. des Mittl. Russ.,’ p. 674, pl. iv, fig. 10. 

% 1860, Eichwald, ‘ Lethza Rossica,’ p. 1120, pl. xlii, fig. 5. 

* This article appears to have been written by Sowerby before that in the ‘ Geol. Trans.,’ 
although not published till 1845. 


HOLOPELLA. 229 


can be judged from its figure, it appears to be specifically identical with our 
Lummaton fossils. Phillips’s figure conveys rather a different impression, but it 
is only a copy of Sowerby’s. There seems no reason for supposing that Holopella 
tenuicostata, Sandberger, is distinct, although it certainly differs in possessing a 
few distant spiral threads. In general shape, and in the breadth of its whorls, it 
corresponds. Goldfuss’s Melania antiqua also exactly corresponds with our figure. 

H. Hennahiana is distinguished from the other species which accompany it in 
Devonshire by the directness of its longitudinal striz. 

Affinities.—Turritella lineata, Mimster,’ is separated by the possession of 
broader whorls, a deeper suture, and somewhat coarser strie. 

Lovonema multiplicatum,’ F. A. Romer, is very similar, but more subulate, 
with broader whorls and only about thirty striz (Romer says sixteen, but figures 
more) to a whorl. 

Lowvonema ranelleforme, F. A. Romer,’ appears only to differ in the possession 
of varices. 

Loxonema subtilistriatum, Hhlert,* is a much more elongate form with narrower 
whorls, but the shell figured under this name by Barrois’ more nearly approaches 
ours, and I should be inclined to class it with it, rather than with (Hhlert’s shell, 
were it not for its greater number of whorls (ten). 


5. Honopetta costata, Sandberger. Pl. XVIII, figs. 15, 15 a. 


Metanta costata, Goldfuss, MS. 
1858. Loxonrema costatum, Sandberger. Verst. Rhein. Nassau, p. 230, pl. xxvi, 
figs. 11, lla. 


Description.—Shell small, somewhat elongate, conical, of many whorls. Sutural 
angle small, constant. Suture moderately deep and wide. Whorls five or six, 
narrow, about half their diameter in height, evenly convex. Ornamentation con- 
sisting of very numerous, fine, close, straight, regular, subacute, transverse strie, 
sloping obliquely backwards over the whorl from the upper suture, barely visible 
to the naked eye, and becoming very irregular upon the body-whorl. Body-whorl 
rounding-in suddenly below to form a comparatively flat base. 

Size.—Height 18 mm., width 9 mm. 

1 1840, Minster, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 3, p. 89, pl. xv, figs. 21a, 6. 

2 1850, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 1, p. 16, pl. iii, figs. 16 a, d. 

3 1850, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 1, p. 35, pl. v, fig. 14. 

+ 1887, (Ehlert, ‘ Bull. Soc. d’Htud. Sci. d’Angers,’ p. 12, pl. vu, figs. 1, 1 a. 
5 1889, Barrois, ‘ Faun. Cale. d’Ebray,’ p. 222, pl. xv, fig. 18. 


230 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


Locality.—Wolborough. There is a finely preserved specimen in the Museum 
of Practical Geology, in which, however, the aperture is hidden ; and a poor speci- 
men in Mr. Vicary’s Collection. 

Remarks.—This shell comes very close to Sandberger’s figure of his species 
Hi. tenuisuleata, Sandberger. It differs, however, from that, and from the English 
shell with which I identify that German species, in being a much more conical 
shell, and in having much narrower whorls and coarser ornamentation. Though I 
was at first inclined to identify it with that shell, it appears to me that the 
differences are so strongly marked that it must certainly be kept distinct. 

It appears, however, to correspond with another species figured by Sandberger, 
viz. Lovonema costatum, Goldfuss, MS., except that the lneations are consider- 
ably finer than those in one of his figures. He, however, describes that as a 
coarsely ribbed variety, and his other figure shows the lineations to be almost as 
fine as those of ours. Hence it may be regarded as the same species. He, how- 
ever, identifies it with H. Hennahiana, Sow., from which it is quite distinct, and 
also with Melania Kaupii, Goldfuss,’ which appears to be a totally different form 
with strong direct ribs and transverse striz. 

Affinities.—This species is very much the shape of H. duplisulcata, but differs, 
as shown above, in the character of its ornamentation. 


2. Genus.—Scotiostoma, Braun, 1838. 


The shells of this genus are more or less spirally conical, and consist of a 
nearly circular tube loosely coiled upon itself for the greater part of its length. 
Their distinctive feature is the sudden deflexion of the body-whorl, which, leaving 
the regular coiling, is twisted back asymmetrically, so that the mouth sometimes 
appears midway up the spire, or even above the apex. The peristome is nearly 
circular, complete, and sometimes thickened. The shell is reticulate and slightly 
umbilicated. The genus appears to be confined to the Devonian beds. 

The genus Strophostoma, Deshayes, which is referred to the fresh-water family 
Cyclostomide, bears very great resemblance to it, especially in the asymmetrical 


deflexion of the aperture. This genus existed from the Chalk to the Miocene 
epoch. 


1 1844, Goldfuss, ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 110, pl. exevii, figs. 15 a, b. 


SCOLIOSTOMA. 231 


1. Sconostoma texatom, Minster sp. Pl. XXIII, figs. 7—9. 


1840. Turzo Texatus, Minster. Beitr., pt. 8, p. 89, pl. xv, fig. 22. 
1841. — — Phillips. Pal. Foss., p. 95, pl. xxxvii, fig. 175. 
? 1850. —  cyYcLostomorpDEs, F. A. Rimer. Beitr., pt. 1, p. 36, pl. v, figs. 23 a, b. 


1853. ScoLrosroma MrGaLostoma, Sandberger. Verst. Rhein. Nassau, p. 224, 
pl. xxvi, figs. 2, 2 a, 26. 
1853. = CRASSILABRUM, Sandberger. Ibid., p. 228, pl. xxvi, figs. 1, 
1 a—e. 
1854. VermeErus Texatus, Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 285. 
21884. Turbo cyctostomorpeEs, Clarke. Neues Jahrb. f. Min., Beil.-Band_ iii, 


p- ddl. 
1888. ScoLiostoma TExatTuUM, Etheridge. Yoss. Brit., vol. i, Pal., p. 165. 
1889. — ~~ Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


Description—Shell small, irregularly spiral, acuminate, of five or six 
volutions, having the body-whorl deflected and bent back upon itself, so that 
the mouth is irregularly placed. Spire conical, rather elongate, with broad, 
slowly increasing whorls. Suture small but definite, and rather deep. 
Whorls moderately convex. Body-whorl beginning as regularly as the other 
whorls, but twisting suddenly back and over, so that the mouth occupies a 
simistral position about halfway up the spire. Ornamentation reticulate, con- 
sisting of a series of rather distant, sharp, narrow, spiral ridges (seven or eight on 
the penultimate whorl), crossed by similar and similarly distant, nearly straight 
and rather oblique longitudinal ridges, so as to form hollow tessere with knotted 
corners. Mouth regularly oval, with entire margins, which are thickened so as 
to be patulous externally. Umbilicus small, deep. Base of whorls rounded. 

Size.—Height 17 mm., width 12 mm. 

Localities.—From Wolborough there are four specimens in the Godwin- Austen 
Collection in the Museum of Practical Geology, some of which admirably preserve 
the markings ; one fragmentary example in Mr. Vicary’s Collection ; one specimen 
which shows its peculiar form, but is destitute of markings, in the Battersby Collec- 
tion in the Torquay Museum, and two minute specimens in the same museum 
about 3 mm. long. From Lummaton (?) there is one very poor specimen in the 
Bristol Museum. 

Remarks.—This is an exceedingly well-marked species, though possibly some- 
what variable in the elevation of the spire and the convexity of the whorls, as is 
seen by a careful comparison of the above specimens. It is to be noted that one 
of the specimens in the Museum of Practical Geology is on the same slab with a 
small Pleurotomaria, which must not be confused with the present shell. One of 


232 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


the specimens in the Torquay Museum is interesting, as, though only 3 mm. high, 
it contains parts of the nucleus and four whorls. It seems decidedly a narrower 
and more elevated shell than any of the other specimens,—so much so, indeed, 
that [am in doubt whether it will prove to belong to this species; but, as the 
ornament is exactly the same, and the specimen is not sufficiently perfect for us to 
be certain of its true shape, it seems better to leave it for the present under this 
heading. With some of the other specimens it shows that the shell was acuminate 
at least in the young stage. 

Phillips refers this species to the genus Turbo. But, though he does not 
mention the remarkable retroflexion of the body-whorl, he shows it clearly in his 
figure, which thus proves that it cannot be a ‘‘ Turbo.” His type specimen has not 
yet been recognised. 

Miinster’s own figure represents a small shell with markings similar to those of 
our specimens, but it does not show the peculiar twist of the body-whorl, and 
ends just like an ordinary Gasteropod. This might very well be accounted for by 
supposing the specimen to be imperfect, or to have been too young to have deve- 
loped the peculiar mouth; so that there is no reason for questioning the correct- 
ness of Phillips’s identification in this case. 

It also appears from Sandberger’s description and figure to be the same shell 
as his Scoliostoma megastoma, the only difference being (if we understand his fig. 2 } 
aright) that the concentric ridges are only visible on the back of the body-whorl, 
and not on its upper and lower sides. Of this, however, he says nothing in the 
letterpress, and it is so shght a distinction that, even if it is not a mere slip of the 
draughtsman, it is altogether too small a thing to be counted more than an 
accidental individuality. He also speaks of a slight carina close to the suture, 
but I can see no trace of it either in the English specimens or in his own figures 

Neither can I see any distinction of specific value between it and Se. crassi- 
labrum. If the distinction be that Sc. crassilabrum, Sandberger, has wider 
furrows than Sc. megastoma, then the former comes nearer the English form in 
that respect than the latter. If it be, on the other hand, in the greater convexity 
of its whorls, it is, | think, clear from the English specimens that this character 
varies considerably ; and, indeed, the spire is of such an elementary nature that 
considerable variation in it might be expected. I have therefore added this name 
also to the list of synonyms. 

Sandberger separates the Turbo tevatus, Phil., from that of Minster, and refers 
it to the genus Scoliostoma, but he did not recognise it from its drawing as the 
shell he was describing. We have already seen that the difference in Miinster’s 
shell is probably only due to its immature condition. 

Turbo cyclostomoides, F. A. Rémer, seems identical, except that it wants the 
twisted lower whorl. Rémer describes the aperture as “angulated circular,” 


SCOLIOSTOMA. 233 


and it appears to me that this is the shape it would assume if the true mouth were 
absent. 


2. Sconrosroma GRAcILE, Sandberger (?). Pl. XXII, figs. 10, 10a. 


? 1853. Scontostroma @RactLe, Sandberger. Verst. Rhein. Nassau, p. 225, pl. xxvi, 
figs. 5, 5a. 


1889. = = Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


Description.—Shell small, very elongate, turriculated, many-whorled. Spire 
of more than ten whorls, conical below, but becoming almost cylindrical towards 
the apex. Suture apparently rather deep. Whorls narrow, about half their 
diameter in height, but increasing in height with their proximity to the apex; 
moderately convex, the convexity slightly increasing in the lower part of the 
whorl; slightly angulated along the median line. Ornamentation mammillar, 
consisting apparently of small rounded tubercles arranged in six spiral rows, the 
first of which is immediately below the suture, and seems more continuous than 
the rest. Body-whorl uniform with the whorls above, and turning in suddenly to 
form an almost flat base. Umbilicus minute and deep. Columella or inner lip 
rounded, thickened, and expanded. 

Size.—Height of a specimen retaining the ten lower whorls 19 mm., width 
7 mm. 

Locality.—Wolborough. A single example is in the Battersby Collection in 
the Torquay Museum. 

Remarks.—The specimen from which the above description is taken has its 
surface very much worn and blurred, after the characteristic manner of so many 
of the Wolborough shells, so that it is impossible to decipher the ornamentation 
with any degree of certainty. Its mouth, also, is a good deal imjured and 
obscured by the matrix, but it would seem to have been of a more or less rounded 
and expanded form, with a thickened peristome. The top of the spire is so nearly 
cylindrical as probably to indicate that several upper whorls are absent, but it 
becomes more conical downwards, and in consequence of this the comparative 
narrowness of the whorls increases with their distance from the apex. 

A comparison of this specimen with the figure of Scoliostoma gracile, Sand- 
berger, leads me to the conclusion, in which Mr. Roberts supports me, that, as 
far as the present evidence goes, they are probably to be referred to the same species. 
There are certainly some differences between them, especially in the greater 
narrowness of the whorls of the German shell and in its more conical form, but 


234 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


as it has the same tendency to the upward elongation of the spire, and is a larger 
specimen, it seems most probable that these differences are to be explained by age. 
The ornamentation in the English shell is too obscure to be compared with that 
of the German shell with certainty, but it seems to be much in the same nature, 
except that the latter shows no signs of median angulation. 

Affinities. —Turritella cancellata, Goldfuss,’ has similar, but twice as fine, orna- 
mentation. It seems very nearly to correspond in general shape, but Goldfuss’s 
figure gives no points for generic comparison. 

Achrisina multicristata, Ghlert,’ differs in having narrower whorls, and in 
being only ornamented with definite, and probably more numerous, spiral lines, 
whereas there is little doubt that the English shell was more or less tuberculous. 
Though the base of the French shell is gone, it is sufficiently like the English 
shell in general form to show that it very probably may belong to the same 
genus. 


3. Genus.— ANTITROCHUS, gen. nov. 


Shell spiral, turbiniform, sinistral, of few loosely coiled and almost wholly 
exposed, convex whorls. Sutures large, wide, and deep. Mouth subcireular or 
subquadrate. Peristome continuous. Umbilicus minute. Ornamentation con- 
sisting of both spiral and longitudinal threads. 

In this genus I would place the shell described below, and also Scalaria 
antiqua, Minster. I have been unable to find any known genus to which these 
shells might be satisfactorily referred, nor have several paleontologists whom I 
have consulted on the question been able to recognise their generic position. 
They appear to bear so strong a general likeness to many of the Scalaride that I 
have no hesitation in referring them to that family; but to the genus Scalaria 
they clearly, in the opinion of Mr. Etheridge, F.R.S., and others, do not belong. 
They approach the genus Scoliostoma, but from that they are separated by the 
absence of any irregularity in the body-whorl, and other points. 

In both the above-named species the shells are sinistral, but it may be unsafe to 
regard this as a generic quality until a larger number of species are known, as 
others may be found which agree in every other quality, but have dextral shells. 


1 1844, Goldfuss, ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 103, pl. exevi, figs. 10a, 0. 
2 1887, Ghlert, ‘ Bull. Soc. d’Etud. Sci. d’Angers,’ p. 10, pl. viii, figs. 4, 4a. 


ANTITROCHUS. 235 


1. ANTITROCHUS ARIETINUS, n. sp. Pl. XXIII, figs. 11—18. 


1841. PLevRoTomarta antITORQUATA, Phillips (pars). Pal. Foss., p. 96. 

1854, VERMETUS ANTITORQUATUS, Morris (pars). Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 285. 

1889. Scabarta antigua, Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dee. 3, vol. vi, p. 30 (not 
Minster). 


Description.—Shell spiral, moderate in size, sinistral, pyramidical, turbiniform. 
Spire containing about four regularly and rapidly increasing whorls. Suture 
very deep, narrow, and horizontal. Sutural angle varying, so that on one side the 
whorls are horizontal, and on the other very oblique. Whorls very convex, being 
circular or short-elliptic in section. Ornament reticulate, consisting of about 
eighteen or twenty rounded, distant, rather unequal, and occasionally slightly 
undulating spiral lines on the body-whorl] (including the base), of which more 
than half are visible on the upper whorls; crossed by finer, straight, longitudinal 
lines, sloping obliquely backwards from the suture. Umbilicus apparently minute, 
and twisted. Mouth rounded or subquadrate, slightly angulated below. Inner lip 
thickened, elevated, recurved on itself. 

Size.-—Height 18 mm., width 16 mm. 

Localities.—There are four specimens in the Godwin-Austen Collection in the 
Museum of Practical Geology from Wolborough; and another specimen in the 
Battersby Collection in the Torquay Museum, which appears to have come from 
Lummaton or Barton. 

Remarks.—These shells at first sight appear to agree with Plewrotomaria 
antitorquata, Phillips,’ but they differ in the important particular of the total 
absence of a sinus-band or any deflexion of the longitudinal striz. Those points 
are very clearly denoted in the enlarged figure which Phillips gives of bis shell, as 
well as in a specimen in the Godwin-Austen Collection, which may have been his 
type; and therefore we are forced to believe that the present fossils belong not 
only to a different species, but also to a different genus. Again, in Schizostoma 
antitorquatum, Minster,’ with which Phillips identifies his shell as well as in the 
kindred Schizostoma contrarium, Minster,’ the presence of a sinus-band situated on 
the lower part of the whorl is clearly seen; and therefore it cannot be united to 
either of these species. At the same time Phillips, while figuring under the name 
of Pl. antitorquata a shell from South Petherwyn, refers to some specimens, 
belonging to Mr. Godwin-Austen, from Newton. As the present are the only 

1 1841, Phillips, ‘ Pal. Foss.,’ p. 96, pl. xxxvii, figs. 176 d, e. 
2 1840, Minster, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 3, p. 87, pl. xv, fig. 12. 
3 Tbid:, p. 87, pl. xv, fig. 13. 


236 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


specimens which are at all similar to them in the Godwin-Austen Collection, it 
seems most probable that they must be those referred to ; and, therefore, it appears 
that Phillips must have overlooked their difference from his South Petherwyn type. 

All the above-mentioned five specimens are sinistral, and evidently belong to 
one species, but at the same time they show slight variations in the coarseness of 
the ornament. The longitudinal lines are sometimes much closer than the spiral, 
and sometimes equally distant. The spiral lines also seem to vary in number, 
though apparently they are usually much fewer than those in Pl. antitorquata, 
Philips. The intersections of the lines form nodes, so that the structure of the 
shell is moniliferous. One of the Godwin-Austen specimens shows a curious 
irregularity of growth; the shell has apparently been fractured and mended 
while alive, and hence a second set of spiral lines arise near the mouth at an acute 
angle to the original ridges. 

Affinities —This species so nearly approaches Scalaria antiqua, Mimster* 
(referred by d’Orbigny to Turbo’), as evidently to belong to the same genus, but 
differs from it in being a much wider shell with a less compressed body-whorl and 
aperture, in having its longitudinal lines oblique instead of perpendicular to the 
spiral markings, and in its ornamentation being much coarser. Thus, if Minster’s 
figure is accurate, it cannot be regarded as the same species. 

It differs from Scoliostema texatum, Phillips sp., in having no twisting of the 
mouth, in being a much wider shell, and in having its ornamentation coarser and 
reticulate instead of cancellate or decussate. 


VII. Family.—Sotaripa, Chenu. 
1. Genus.—Puitoxenn, Kayser, 1889. 


Shell spiral, discoid, or conical, of rather numerous volutions, rather loosely 
coiled, so that the whorls hardly do more than touch at the suture. Suture 
deep and wide. Umbilicus large, deep, and wide, perforating the spire almost to 
the apex. Surface chiefly ornamented by growth-lines, but frequently bearing 
rows of scars from the agglutination of shell-fragments or foreign bodies. Shell- 
structure somewhat massive. 

This genus was established by Professor Kayser in consequence of his having 
discovered marks of agglutinated shells upon some examples of Huomphalus levis, 
d’Arch. and de Vern. He defines it as wanting the conical shape, sharp rim, and 
concave base of Xenophora, Fischer von Waldheim, 1807 (= Phorus, Montfort, 

1 1839, Minster, ‘ Beitr.,’ pt. 1, p. 61, pl. xiii, fig. 1. 
* 1849, d’Orbigny, ‘ Prodrome,’ p. 66. 


PHILOXENE. 237 


1810 and Onustus, Humphrey, 1797), and as having the wide umbilicus, flattened 
shape, and smooth whorls of the Huomphali, and especially of the sub-genus 
Straparollus, but bearing agglutinated bodies. This latter feature I have observed 
in no less than three British species, although only slightly and occasionally in two 
of them. As amatter of fact the external surface of these shells is often so injured 
that shght agglutinations might easily be obscured; but it seems certain that in 
some instances there were agglutinations, and in other instances none. As, there- 
fore, there appears to be no other character by which the shells bearing adherences 
can be distinguished from the rest, we must conclude that (as is also the case in 
German specimens) it is a habit only exercised by some individuals of the species 
—perhaps only in cases where broken shells were handy to them. 

In the third species, on the other hand, the habit is constant, and the scars are 
often so great as to affect the cast of the shell, and to show that the attached 
fragments were sometimes very large. This species, which I had the pleasure of 
showing Dr. Kayser in 1888 before the publication of his genus, is much larger 
and more conical than Philovene levis, and has a much smaller, though still large, 
umbilicus. Hence it seems to necessitate some modification in the limits of the 
genus, and we have therefore given its characters above. 

Kayser left X. Bouchardu, Desl., the first described Devonian ‘ carrier”’ shell, 
in the genus Xenophora; but it will be seen that one of the English species, 
Ph. philosophus, comes so close to it that it can be distinguished only with some 
difficulty. This shell, however, seems clearly to belong to Philowene and not to 
Xenophora, and therefore it seems probable that X. Bouchardii ought also to be 
classed with Philowene. 

The object of the agglutinations is supposed to have been for concealment ; 
other possible causes might be for mere ornament, or to save the body of the 
animal from jar. It is interesting to observe that these ancient ‘ carriers” had 
massive shells, whereas the Eocene and recent Xenophoridx have frequently very 
thin or almost papyraceous tests. Hence it would appear that the agglutinations 
in the latter case were probably for a different object—that of strengthening and 
guarding the shell; and it seems probable that the two groups had really no 
connection with each other. Had they been lineally related, we should have 
expected to find the thin shells among the ancient and the thick among the 
modern forms, for the strain of carrying large masses of shell or stone ought 
certainly to have tended to an ultimate thickening of the shell. That they are 
unconnected is rendered all the more probable from the absence in the Devonian 
shells of the fine characteristic ornament of many of the Phoride, but never- 
theless the general shape of the shells is so similar as to show that the family 
of the Xenophoride and the genus Huomphalus should probably be placed very 


near together. 


238 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


1. Partoxene pHrtosopaus, Whidborne sp. Pl. XXIII, figs. 14—17. 
1889. PHorvus pHitosorHus, Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


Description.—Shell large, subangular, forming a low spiral of few and rapidly 
increasing whorls. Suture angular, wide, and deep. Whorls very convex, 
starting horizontally from the suture, then turning through a blunt elbow, and 
running for about the same distance obliquely towards the widest part of the 
whorl, where they turn with a circular curvature to the front of the shell, when 
the curvature becomes less, but increases again as it traverses the inner side of 
the whorl, which forms the umbilicus. Mouth entire, of moderate size, trans- 
versely oval and dilate. Umbilicus extremely large and deep. Surface marked 
with indistinct and irregular, coarse, undulating plaits or growth-lines, and 
bearing on the lower or widest part frequent irregular hollows, which occasionally 
preserve fragments of univalves or other shells adhering, or show their casts. 
Shell-structure very thick. 

Size.-—Height 38 mm., breadth 52 mm., width 40 mm. A second specimen 
measures respectively 22, 38, and 34 mm. 

Localities —Chudleigh, Lummaton, Wolborough. There are six specimens 
of this remarkable shell in Mr. Vicary’s Collection from Chudleigh, one of which 
is very large, but none are in a very good state of preservation. In the same 
collection are two or three indistinct specimens from Wolborough. There are 
seven poor and small specimens in the Torquay Museum, two of which came from 
Wolborough, and possibly the other five from Lummaton. There is one small 
specimen from Wolborough in the Museum of Practical Geology. In my own 
collection is another specimen from Lummaton. 

Remarks.—It is interesting to find shells with this peculiar habit in so old a 
formation as the Devonian, but the specimens in Mr. Vicary’s Collection leave no 
doubt about the fact. Although much injured by the effects of fossilization his 
largest specimen in particular shows several fragments of agglutinated shells, as 
well as the impression of several whorls of a small univalve, which is almost 
sufficiently distinct to be specifically determined. The specimen in my collection 
was found and given to me by my friend Professor Hughes during a recent visit 
with me to Lummaton. Being small and indistinct, we did not recognise it at the 
time; but, on examining it afterwards, I found that the dents, which we at first 
supposed to be accidental, were really the remains of the agglutinations charac- 
teristic of the genus. It is to be observed that these adherences are primarily 
along the line of the extreme convexity of the whorls, and therefore are, in the 


PHILOXENE. 239 


upper whorls, merged in their lower sutures. It is probable that this position 
was that which most required guarding or obscuring in shells of such a 
shape. The shell-structure is, however, so massive in this species (unlike that 
of Xenophora agglutinans, Lamarck, of the Hocene, and recent forms) that the 
foreign material could hardly have been attached for the purpose of strengthening 
the shell itself, though it may have been of use in preserving the animal 
from jars. 

Affinities. —The first described Devonian agglutinating shell, Phorus Bouchardii, 
H. Deslongchamps,' from the Boulonnais, is very similar to the English species, 
but not, I think, identical. Its size is much less than our larger specimens. 
It is less massive, the suture is much less deep, so that it is much more trochi- 
form in shape, and it bears a low spiral ridge or flattened band midway 
down the whorl, which, however, is not the widest part, as it would have 
been in the English species if it had existed there. ‘Thus it differs specifically 
from our form, but is generically very similar, the chief distinctions in that 
point of view being its more trochiform shape and smaller umbilicus. Whether 
these distinctions are sufficient may be questioned. If they are, it brings Kayser’s 
genus Philowene much nearer to Xenophora. 

Onustus (Pseudophorus) antiquus, Meek, from the Devonian of America, does 


not carry adherent particles upon its shell. 


2. PHILOXENE La&vis, d’Archiac and de Vernewl. Pl. XXIII, figs. 18, 18a, 19. 


1842. Evompuatus tavis, d’ Arch. and de Vern. Geol. Trans., ser. 2, vol. vi, 
pt. 23, p.. 3638,. pl. xc, 


figs. 8, 8a, 
1842. — PLANORBIS, d’ Arch. and de Vern. Ibid., p. 368, pl. xxxui, 
figs. 7, 7 a. 
1842-4. — — de Koninck. Desc. Anim. Foss., p. 484, pl. xxv, 
figs. 7a, b. 
1843. _ oMALocEPHALUS, d’Omal. Précis Elém. Géol., p. 517. 
1844. — PLANORBIS, Goldfuss. Petref. Germ., vol. 111, p. 82, pl. clxxxix, 
fig. 8. 

1848. — —_ Bronn. Index Paleontologicus, p. 481. 

1853. — Lavis, Sandberger. Verst. Rhein. Nassau, p. 213, pl. xxv, 
figs. 6, 6a, 6b (not fig. 7). 

1882. -— = Holzapfel. Paleontographica, vol. xxvii, p. 251. 

1884. — PLANORBIS, Olarke. Neues Jahrb. f. Min., Beil.-Band iu, 
p. 359. 


1 1862, E. Deslongchamps, ‘ Bull. Soc. Lin. Norm.,’ vol. vi, p. 151, pl. viii, figs. 1—4, 


240 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


21887. Evompuatovs, cf. PLANORBIS, Tschernyschew. Mém. Com. Géol. Russ., 
vol. ii, No. 3, p. 171, pl. vi, figs. 5 a—e. 


1888. = PLANORBIS, Etheridge. Foss. Brit., vol. i, Pal., p. 163. 

1889. — — Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 

1889, PHtLoxENEe Lavis, Kayser. Zeitschr. Deutsch. Geol. Gesell., p. 292, pl. xii, 
figs. 5, 5 a—e. 


Description.—Shell rather large, discoidal, flat, of four or five whorls. Spire 
flat, the upper surface of the central whorls lying in one plane, but that of the 
outer whorls tending more or less to become conical. Suture deep, vertical. 
Whorls slowly increasing ; in section nearly circular, rising from the suture, 
slightly elevated or subangulated at the shoulder so as to form a clear though 
indefinite elbow; marked by fine, irregular, indistinct growth-lines. Shell- 
structure rather thin, thickened at the shoulder. Umbilicus very large. 

Size.—Height 6 mm., width 20 mm. 

Localities.—From Wolborough there are two specimens in the Godwin-Austen 
Collection in the Museum of Practical Geology, one in Mr Vicary’s Collection, 
and one in the Torquay Museum. From Lummaton there is a specimen in my 
Collection, and two others in the Torquay Museum are probably from the same place. 

Remarks.—In 1842 d’Archiac and de Verneuil described simultaneously two 
shells, Hu. levis and Hu. planorbis. The former of these exactly corresponds 
with our figured English specimen. The other differs in several slight particulars, 
but it seems to be the impression of Dr. Kayser, following Bronn, that these 
differences are not of specific value, and he unites them into one species under 
the name Ph. levis. This view a comparison of the figures of the two species 
leads me to consider perfectly correct ; the more so as we frequently find a con- 
siderable amount of individual variation in other kindred species. 

There seems little reason for giving preference to either name. Its describers 
place Hu. levis before Hu. planorbis. The former they identify in their “ Tabular 
List,” though not in their description, with Hu. levis, Goldfuss, a catalogue name 
for a shell which Goldfuss afterwards figured as Hw. serpens, Phillips, with which 
it agrees. Bronn doubtfully unites them under the name Hu. planorbis. Other 
authors have used the two names nearly equally. On the whole it seems best to 
follow its describers in giving priority to Hu. levis. 

Dr. Kayser formed his new genus for the reception of this shell because he 
had observed that one or two German examples of it retained agglutinated 
fragments of foreign shells. The same feature is occasionally to be observed, 
though to a much slighter degree, in the English shells, and forms an additional 
reason for concluding not only the generic but specific identity. 

The shell described by de Koninck under the name of Hu. planorbis from the 
Carboniferous of Belgium differs so slightly that we may regard it as identical. 


PHILOXENE. 241 


Affinities —From Hu. circularis and Hu. Hecale this species differs by the slow 
rate of increase of its whorls. 

From Hu. serpens it is distinguished by its spire being flat or slightly 
elevated instead of being sunken, and by the distinct elbow upon the upper part 
of the whorls. 

In some of the specimens the last whorl suddenly changes its horizontal 
direction so as to give the shell the form of a truncated cone. Thus it differs 
from the conical species Hu. Dionysius and Ph. philosophus not only by the slower 
rate of increase of its whorls, but by the cone of its spire being truncated. 

Huomphalus papyraceus, F. A. Romer,’ appears to have a papyraceous test 
and still more slowly increasing whorls, and to lie in one plane. 

Porcellia levigata, Léveillé,” appears very similar to the specimen figured on 
Pl. XXIII, fig. 19, but differs in the spire being almost equally concave with the 
umbilicus, and in the flat and lozenge-shaped section of the whorls—points which, 
in all probability, may be taken to be sufficient to prove that that Carboniferous 
shell is distinct. 


3. PHILOXENE SERPENS, Phillips sp. Pl. XXIV, figs. 1—5. 


1841. EvompHa us sERPENS, Phillips (pars). Pal. Foss., p. 94, pl. xxxvi, fig. 172 
(a and 6 only). 


1844. — — Goldf. Petref. Germ., vol. iii, p. 88, pl. exci, 
figs. 8 a, 6 (Carboniferous). 

1850. a PLANORBIS, F'..A. Rimer. Beitr., pt. 1, p. 37, pl. v, figs. 24a, b. 

1854. — SERPENS, Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 248. 

1860. — oRBIS, Hichwald. Lethea Rossica, p. 1155, pl. xlii, figs. 8 a, b. 

1861. — CLYMENOIDES, Hall. Desc. N. Sp. Foss., p. 26. 

1862. — — — Fifteenth Rep. N. Y. State Cab. Nat. 
Hist., pp. 54 and 166, pl. vi, figs. 1, 2. 

1876. — — —_— Pal; N:. ¥.,:vol.:v; pt. -2,, p/ 62) pl. xvi; 
fig. 15; and pl. lxx, figs. 1—5. 

1888. -— SERPENS, Eth. Foss. Brit., vol. i, Pal., p. 163. 


Description.—Shell rather small, discoid, very flat, of about five rather slowly 
increasing volutions. Spire usually elliptically coiled, flatly concave, slightly less 
so than the umbilicus. Suture deep and very well defined, facing upwards. 
Whorls almost circular in section, attached to the whorl within by a very narrow 
portion, so that the shell is hardly involute. Back slightly oblique. Surface 


1 1850, F. A. Romer, ‘ Beitr. Harz.,’ pt. 1, p. 49, pl. viii, fig. 7. 
2 1835, Léveillé, ‘Mém. Soc. Géol. Fr., vol. ii, pt. 1, p. 39, pl. ii, figs. 12, 13. 


242 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


crossed by numerous minute striz or lines of growth (which are more or less 
regular and clear, probably owing to the state of preservation of the fossils), which 
curve slightly rearwards on the lower part of the back, and then slightly forward 
again below. Shoulder (just within the suture on the inner whorls and just 
above the greatest diameter of the shell on the outer whorl) often bearing a 
line of frequent scars of attachment, which do not preserve any trace of impressed 
ornament, so that the attached bodies were possibly stones and not shells. 

Size.—Height 6 mm., width 22 mm. 

Localities —This species appears to be rather common. There are two 
specimens, one bearing scars, in Mr. Lee’s Collection in the British Museum, and 
four in the Woodwardian Museum from Lummaton. There are seven specimens 
in Mr. Vicary’s Collection and two in the Museum of Practical Geology from 
Wolborough ; and there are seven in the Torquay Museum, of which five are in 
the Battersby Collection, from these two localities. 

Remarks.—The above description is taken chiefly from a shell in the Torquay 
Museum and a shell of Mr. Vicary’s. These shells differ only in the striae of the 
latter being more regular; in both cases they are equally microscopic. They 
accurately correspond with the two best figures (a, b only) of Phillips’s 
Euomphalus serpens, and clearly belong to that species. In Mr. Vicary’s shell 
there are no signs of scars; and, indeed, only two of the Torquay specimens 
show them, the others being, however, mostly in the condition of casts. 

I have not met with Phillips’s type, but Mr. Vicary’s specimen is so exactly 
similar as to answer the same purpose. As the markings are only visible under a 
strong lens, Phillips’s description of it as smooth may be regarded as approxi- 
mately accurate. 

At page 138 of the ‘ Pal. Foss.’ he describes another shell, Hu. annulatus, 
Phil., as identical with that figured as pl. xxxvi, fig. 172 a, b, from which, how- 
ever, it distinctly differs both in the number of its whorls and the coarseness of 
its ribbing. 

In fact, under the heading of Hu. serpens and Hu. annulatus in the ‘ Pal. Foss.’ 
Phillips, as he himself seems aware, has included several separate species of shells. 
Four, if not five, very distinct forms are recognisable, viz. : 


No. 1. Figs. 172 a, b,—practically smooth, flat, horizontally symmetrical. 
No. 2. Fig. 172*,—finely ribbed, flat, of many whorls. 

No. 3. Fig. 172,f,—stronely ribbed below, few whorls, deep umbilicus. 
No. 4. Fig. 172 9,—spire flatly conical, strongly ribbed (?), of few whorls. 
No. 5. Figs. 172 c—e,—flatly conical, minute, smooth, of many whorls. 


(a) It seems best to regard No. 1 as the type of the restricted species Hu. 
serpens, Phillips, as that species agrees best with his description, and is weil 
represented by his first and most prominent figures. 


PHILOXENE. 243 


(8) No. 2 must evidently be taken as the type of Hwomphalus annulatus, 
Phillips. There can be no doubt that the specimen in the Museum of Practical 
Geology is the original of this figure, and it certainly belongs to a well-marked 
and distinct species. 

(y) No. 3 is represented by a poor and almost unrecognisable figure of the 
umbilical side. The authorities of the British Museum regard a shell in the Lee 
Collection as the original of this figure, and the accidental marks of the specimen 
make it almost certain that they are right in doing so. As the figure is so poor, 
and does not agree with Phillips’s description, it has no right to the original name 
of Hu. serpens. This shell, as will be seen below, in all probability belongs to the 
species described by me as Hu. fenestralis. 

(8) No. 4 is represented by a figure of the upper side only. Phillips regards it 
as the same as No. 3, saying on page 222, “‘ They (figs. 172, f and qg) have a different 
aspect from the rest.” It is, however, quite different from the upper surface of 
my Hu. fenestralis, and its figure does not seem to me to be likely to correspond 
with the type of fig. 172 f. I have been unable to discover the original specimen. 
It appears to me, however, to agree with Hu. Hecale, Hall, except that it shows 
signs of strong ribbing. Until either the type or more perfect specimens agreeing 
with it are found it will be difficult to differentiate it with certainty. 

(c) The last form, No. 5, is a minute, many-whorled, and more globose shell. 
It probably comes from North Devon. It differs from all except No. 4 in having a 
more conical spire, and from No. 4 in having more slowly increasing whorls, and 
probably in being smooth. It has been recognised by M‘Coy' from the Carboni- 
ferous beds, and there are specimens of it in the Bristol Museum. 

Hence for the form now under description we may retain Phillips’s name, 
especially as it appears to be the shell which subsequent authors have generally 
understood to represent his species. 

In it the spire is so depressed that it is sometimes difficult to distinguish the 
top of the shell from the bottom, but at other times the lower side of the aperture 
is slightly angulated. 

I can see no difference between Huw. orbis, Eichwald, or Hu. clymenoides, Hall, 
and the English shell, except that they are not eiliptically coiled and bear no 
attachment scars ; but these are not constant features in this species. 

Affinities. —Eu. xqualis, Sowerby,’ from the Mountain Limestone, is very 
similar, but it has more numerous and more slowly increasing whorls. 

The young of Euomphalus Goldfussi, d’Archiac and de Verneuil,* has decus- 
sating and more undulating striz. 

1 1844, M‘Coy, ‘Syn. Carb. Foss. Ireland,’ p. 37. 

2 1816, Sowerby, ‘ Min. Conch.,’ vol. ii, p. 89, pl. exl, fig. 1. 


3 1842, d’Arch. and de Vern., ‘ Geol. Trans.,’ ser. 2, vol. vi, pt. 2, p. 362, pl. xxxiv, figs. 1,1 a, 2, 2a. 


244 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


Eu. serpens,' as given by Goldfuss,’ from the Carboniferous rocks, may be the 
same species, though appearing a rather higher shell, and flatter above. 

Phanerotinus Eboracensis, Hall, is described and figured as having similar scars 
of attachment of fragments of shells, but its spire is free and slightly elevated. 

In the British Museum is a Huomphalus from the Middle Devonian of 
Teignmouth, with a smooth and sunken spire, which only differs from the present 
shell by having much more numerous, smaller, and more slowly increasing whorls. 
An apparently similar specimen is in the Torquay Museum. 


2. Genus.— Evompuaus, Sowerby, 1814. 


This large genus begins in the Cambrian or Lower Silurian, and reaches the 
Trias, even if some Cretaceous species of Solarium ought not to be included in it. 
There is a considerable amount of variability among its species, in the ornament, 
in the sectional shape of the whorls, and in the elevation of the spire. 

It appears that the name Straparollus, Montf., 1810, has the priority, but 
Sowerby’s name is so generally used that a change would be inadvisable. 

Zittel divides it into several sub-genera, placing smooth species in Straparollus, 
and striated and spirally keeled species in Huwomphalus. Some of the species—as, 
for instance, Hu. rota and Hu. radiatus—seem so like the genus Discoheliv, Dunker, 
1851, reaching from the Trias to the present time, that, as far as the shell is con- 
cerned, the only distinguishing mark appears to be the forward, instead of back- 
ward, curving of the striz on the back. 


1. Evompnatus Dionyst, de Montfort, sp. Pl. XXIII, figs. 20, 20 a. 


1810. Srraparonius Dionystt, de Montfort. Conch., vol. ii, p. 174. 
1818. Heticrres Dronysit, Schlotheim. Jahrbuch, vol. vii, p. 35. 


1820. — priscus, Schlotheim.  Petrefakten-Kunde, vol. ii, p. 60, pl. x, 
fio. 1, 
1820. — TROCHILINUS, Schlotheim. Ibid., vol. ii, p. 60, pl. x, fig. 2. 


1 1844, Goldfuss, ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 88, pl. exci, figs. 8a, d. 
2 1879, Hall, ‘ Pal. N. Y.,’ vol v, pt. 2, p. 61, pl. xvi, figs. 19—23. 


KUOMPHALUS. 245 


1820. HeticrrEes ELLIPricus, Schlotheim. Ibid., vol. ii, p. 60, pl. x, fig. 3. 
1823. Cirrus rotuNDatus, Sowerby. Min. Conch., vol. v, p. 36, pl. cccexxix, 
figs. 1, 2. 
1836. — —— Phillips. Geol. Yorks., vol. ii, p. 226; pl. xiii, 
fig. 15; and pl. xv, fig. 32. 
1840. Evompnatus HELIcTIFoRMIS, Minster. Beitr., pt. 3, p. 85, pl. xv, fig. 6. 
1842. Cirrus roTuNDatTUs, var., d’Arch. and de Vern. Geol. Trans., ser. 2, 
vol. vi, pt. 2, p. 389. 
1844, Evompnatus aneuts, M‘Coy. Syn. Carb. Foss. Ireland, p. 35, pl. 1ii, fig. 11. 
1848. SrRaPaROLLus PRiscus, d’Orbigny. Prodrome, p. 65. 
1848. — Dionysu, d’Orbigny. Ibid., p. 120. 
1853. EvompHaLUs L&VIS, var. TuRRITUS, Sandberger. Verst. Rhein. Nassau, 
p. 218, pl. xxv, figs. 7, 7 a, 7 6. 


1854. — Dionysi1, Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 247. 

1857. — vorTEX, Hichwald. Bull. Soc. Nat. Moscov., p. 166. 

1860. = — — Lethea Rossica, p. 1150, pl. xlii, figs. 
15a, 6. 

1876. — Dionysit, F. Rimer. Lethea Pal., pt. 1, pl. xlv, fig. 9. 

1878. — OPHTRENSIS, Hall and Whitfield. Rep. Geol. Fortieth 


Parallel, by C. King, pt. 2, p. 261, 
pl. iv, figs. 26, 27. 
1881. — Dionyst1, de Koninck. Ann. Musée Royal H. N. Belgique, 
vol. vi, pt. 3, p. 120, pl. xin, 
figs. 8—10; and pl. xiv, figs. 16, 18. 


Description.—Shell small, conical, depressed, of numerous slowly increasing 
whorls. Spire forming a low cone of about five volutions. Suture deep and wide. 
Whorls smooth, spreading horizontally from the suture, nearly circular in section. 
Shell-structure smooth. 

Size.—Height 10 mm., width about 15 mm. 

Locality.—Lummaton. There is a specimen in the Woodwardian Museum. 

Remarks.—Huomphalus Dionysii is a well-known and common Carboniferous 
species, which has been described by many authors from de Montfort to de Koninck, 
who has given a very long synonymy. Whether it is also to be registered in the 
Devonian list is much more open to question. Various fossils have been 
described by various paleontologists under several names from Devonian rock 
which are very similar, and which there is much reason to regard as identical, 
especially as the Carboniferous species is subject to a considerable amount of 
variation, which is sometimes such as to include the Devonian forms. 

The small shell in the Woodwardian Museum is the only evidence of its occur- 
rence in the localities now under notice, and this shell is not sufficiently perfect to 
enable us to come to a very positive decision in the matter. There are numerous 
specimens of Hu, Dionysii from Carboniferous beds in the British Museum and 
the Museum of Practical Geology, and several others are figured by de Koninck. 


246 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


Some of these have rather more sloping sides, but others, except that they are 
larger and better specimens, seem exactly like it. 

The Lummaton fossil also agrees so perfectly with the figure which Schlotheim 
gives of his Helicites priscus as evidently to be specifically identical with it. It 
does not seem clear from Schlotheim’s description whether that was a Devonian or 
a Carboniferous shell. If the latter, it is simply a synonym of Hu. Dionysi ; but 
d’Orbigny regards it as Devonian, and quotes it from Paffrath, and if that be 
the case I think we are obliged to regard the Woodwardian fossil as an example of 
Schlotheim’s, and therefore of de Montfort’s species. 

Schlotheim’s two other species are certainly Carboniferous fossils which are 
identical with Hu. Dionysit. 

Again, our English fossil appears to be so like Huomphalus heliciformis, Minster, 
that there can be little room for doubt that, although the body-whorl certainly 
seems wider, it also is the same shell. 

Hu. levis, var. turritus, Sandberger, is a little more elevated, but it clearly corre- 
sponds with it, and must be regarded as a synonym. 

Hu. vortex, Eichwald, on the other hand, has a slightly lower spire, a wider and 
deeper suture, and rather more slowly increasing whorls, which are more trans- 
versely oval in section. Thus it varies from Hu. Dionysvi in the opposite direction 
to Sandberger’s shell, but it still comes so close that I am very much inclined to 
regard it as identical. 

Cirrus rotundatus and Hu. ophirensis are quoted as Carboniferous synonyms 
upon the authority of de Koninck. 

Affinities. —The Devonian shell differs from Hu. circularis, Phillips, in having 
much more numerous and slowly increasing whorls, and generally a higher spire. 
From Hu. levis it is distinguished by its coiling being distinctly conical, and more 
definite and regular than it is in that shell. There is certainly just a possibility 
of its proving to be identical with that shell, especially as it bears upon its 
surface suspicious-looking fractures which might perhaps be supposed to indicate 
agglutinations. But even if this were so, it would of course still remain a question 
whether P/. levis, d’Arch. and de Vern., should on that account be merged into 
de Montfort’s shell. This is very unlikely, but it could only be finally solved by 


the discovery of more numerous and better English specimens, or by the examina- 
tion of a larger number of foreign examples than those to which I have myself 
had access. 


EUOMPHALUS. 247 


2. EKvompaatus Heoas, Hall. Pl. XXIV, figs. 7, 7 a, 8, 8a. 


21841. Evompnatvs serPEns, Phillips (pars). Pal. Foss., p. 94, pl. xxxvi, fig. 172 9 


(only). 
? 1843. — DEPRESSUS, Hall (not Goldfuss). Geol. N. Y., Surv. Fourth 
Geol. Dist., p. 294. 
1867. — SERPENS, Semenow and Moéller. Ober-Dev. Schicht. Mittl. 
Russlands, p. 675, pl. iv, figs. 4a, 6. 
1879. -- Hecate, Hall. Pal. N. Y., vol. v, pt. 2, p. 59, pl. xvi, 
figs. L1O—14. 
1889. — LEVIS, Whidborne. Geol. Mag., dec. 3, vol. vi, p. 30. 


Description.—Shell small, depressed, elliptically coiled, nearly discoidal, of 
three or four rapidly increasing whorls. Spire forming a very low cone. Suture 
deep and wide. Whorls transversely elliptic in section, rising gently from the 
suture and being slightly convex on the upper surface, becoming very convex 
round the back, and being decidedly convex, or possibly subangulated, below. 
Umbilicus large and deep, exposing the rounded inner sides of the whorls. 
Surface smooth, or marked with indistinct growth-lines. 

Size.—Height about 10 mm., width about 22 mm. 

Localities —In Mr. Champernowne’s Collection there is one specimen from 
Wolborough and one from Lummaton. In the Museum of Practical Geology 
there is a specimen from Wolborough. In the British Museum there is a specimen 
from Wolborough, which perhaps belongs to the same species. 

Remarks.—I formerly thought that these fossils were a variety of Hu. levis, 
d’Archiac and de Verneuil,’ as the figure of that species given by Sandberger’ 
seemed to approach them more nearly than does the original figure of the French 
authors. However, a further comparison has convinced me that that view cannot 
be sustained, as the English fossils are definitely conical, and their whorls are 
decidedly fewer and more oval in section, and increase much more rapidly. 

Moreover, Prof. Kayser has united Hu. levis with Hu. planorbis, d’ Archiac and 
de Verneuil,® while the various figures of the German shells leave little doubt that 
he is correct in doing so; the English fossils which I have above referred to that 
form are evidently distinct from those now under notice. 

On the other hand, these fossils appear almost exactly to correspond with 
Euomphalus serpens, Semenow and Moller (not Phillips), and I can find no grounds 


1 1842, d’Archiac and de Verneuil, ‘Geol. Trans.,’ ser. 2, vol. vi, pt. 2, p. 363, pl. xxxiii, 
figs. 8, 8a. 

2 1853, Sandberger, ‘ Verst. Rhein. Nassau,’ p. 213, pl. xxv, figs. 6, 6a, 66. 

3 1842, d’Archiac and de Verneuil, ‘ Geol. Trans.,’ ser. 2, vol. vi, p. 363, pl. xxxiil, figs. 7, 7 a. 


248 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


for distinguishing them from the American species described as Huomphalus 
Hecale by Hall, whose description, however, is rather vague in one or two 
particulars. 

Affinities —This shell has much the appearance of a small or young variety of 
Huomphalus circularis, Phillips, but it quite differs from it in the shape of its 
whorls, and in the almost entire absence of any depression round the suture. 

Huomphalus Dionysvi, Montfort, is distinguished by its more elevated spire, 
and its more numerous, circular, and more slowly increasing whorls. In Huom- 
phalus levis, var. turritus, Sandberger, which appears to me distinct from Hu. 
levis, and probably a variety of Hu. Dionysii, the spire is still more elevated. 

Straparollus grandis, de Koninck,' is a very much larger form, and its whorls 
are rather fewer and more horizontally flattened. 


3. EUOMPHALUS CIRCULARIS, Phillips. Pl. XXIV, figs. 9, 10. 


1840. Evompnatus crrcuLaris, Phillips. Pal. Foss., p. 94, pl. xxxvi, fig. 171. 
1854. - — Morris. Cat. Brit. Foss., p. 247. 
1888. — — Etheridge. Fossa. Brit., vol. i, Pal., p. 163. 


Description.—Shell very large, spiral, turrited, very depressed, so as to be 
almost lenticular, of three or four volutions. Spire very low, loosely and rather 
irregularly coiled. Suture shallow, obtuse. Whorls subquadrate or subcircular ; 
after rising slightly close to the suture spreading out flatly to the shoulder, where 
they turn through a blunt angle and become gently and uniformly convex on the 
back, at the bottom of which they turn through a still greater angle, which 
bounds the base. Base flat or slightly convex, sloping inwards, forming a 
narrow border round the wide, deep umbilicus, which is marked within by a 
sharp, deep, sutural, spiral trench or excavation. Mouth (or section of whorl) 
subquadrate or subcircular. Shell-structure rather thin. 

Size.—Height 30, width 52 mm. 

Localities.—From Wolborough there are three examples in Mr. Vicary’s 
Collection, three in the British Museum, and several in the Museum of Practical 
Geology. There are four specimens in the Torquay Museum, two of which seem 
to have come from Lummaton and two from Wolborough. There is a very large 
specimen from Lummaton, showing the umbilical side, in the Woodwardian 
Museum, and another in my Collection. 

Itemarks.—Phillips’s type of this species is in the Museum of Practical Geology, 
but at the time that the specimens for figuring were selected we had not recog- 


* 1881, de Koninck, ‘ Ann. Mus. Roy. H. N. Belg.,’ vol. vi, p. 126, pl. xix, figs. 10, 11. 


EUOMPHALUS. 249 


nised it, and consequently, as other specimens seemed to show the characters of 
the shell better, it has not been reproduced. This specimen is slightly smaller 
than his figure, which fairly represents it, though drawn upon the slant. 
It has a rather flattened band on the shoulder, and below this on the back are 
some indistinct and doubtful signs of spiral striw, which are much exaggerated in 
Philhps’s drawing. It appears to be very like fig. 10 of our plate, which would 
still more resemble it if its surface had not been so much worn away. 

Phillips mentions in his description “ some traces of spiral striz ;’’ these cannot 
be seen in many of the specimens, probably because they have been obliterated 
by the decortication which is characteristic of so many Wolborough fossils, and 
which has more or less affected all the examples of this shell that I have seen. 
They are, however, to be observed upon one or two of them, as upon Phillips’s 
type specimen, and on the British Museum specimen, Pl. XXIV, fig. 11. The 
specimens from Lummaton, which might have preserved the ornament, are 
unfortunately only exposed on the umbilical side, and indeed show so little 
character that it is only presumptively that they can be referred to this species. 

Some of the most distinctive features of the species are the horizontal 
flattening and falling in of the upper part of the whorls, and the low blunt angle 
of the shoulder, which seems to be caused by the thickening of the substance of 
the shell at that point. These characters are seen developed to a much greater 
extent in the Carboniferous species Hu. equalis, Sowerby, sp.,' and Hu. marginatus, 
M‘Coy.” Hu. pentangulatus, Sowerby,® another Carboniferous species, has a much 
sharper and more elevated keel upon the shoulder, and the part above it is 
inclined at a higher angle to the suture. 

As will be seen from the figures we give, this species is subject to considerable 
variation. Indeed, if we had a larger number of specimens to judge from, it is 
possible that they might prove that we have included more than one species under 
this head. Thus the shell delineated in fig. 10 gives the most usual form; that 
given in fig. 9 is a variety with the upper part of the whorl almost quite flat and 
horizontal, and with a much sharper angle at the shoulder, so that it is hardly to 
be distinguished from Hu. xqualis, Sow.; while in that given in fig. 11 the 
differences are so marked that I have separated it below as a named variety. 

Affinities.—Where, as is usually the case with the Wolborough specimens, the 
surface is much decayed, it often becomes very difficult to distinguish specimens 
of Pleurotomaria delphinuloides, Schlotheim, from this species. They appear, 
however, to be distinguished by having a higher spire, and by the whorls sloping 
downwards and not upwards from the suture to the shoulder. 


1 1816, Sowerby, ‘ Min. Conch.,’ vol. ii, p. 89, pl. ex], fig. 1. 
* 1844, M‘Coy, ‘Syn. Carb. Foss. Ireland,’ p. 36, pl. v, fig. 21. 
3 1814, Sowerby, ‘ Min. Conch.,’ vol. i, p. 97, pl. xlv, figs. 1, 2. 


250 DEVONIAN FAUNA. 


Euomphalus Dionysvi, Montfort, has a more elevated spire and less rapidly 
increasing whorls. 

In Huomphalus trigonalis, Goldfuss,' the spire is lower, and there is a more 
definite concavity on the upper part of the whorls near the suture, somewhat like 
that seen in Sowerby’s figure of his large specimen of Nerita speciosa, Sowerby.” 


4, Huompaavus crrcunaris, Phillips, var. GEMMULIFER, var. nov. Pl. XXIV, fig. 11. 


One of the specimens of Huomphalus circularis from Wolborough in the 
British Museum is, as mentioned above, so different from the rest that I have 
thought it best to distinguish it as a named variety. Possibly if further and 
better specimens are found it may prove to be a distinct species. It is elliptically 
coiled in about four volutions. Its spire, though conical, is so depressed that the 
apex is decidedly below the plane through the shoulder of the body-whorl. The 
section of the whorls is distinctly trigonal, the upper surface rising obliquely and 
flatly to the shoulder, the back being moderately convex, and the base also flatly 
oblique. Upon the shoulder is a prominent, elevated, rounded ridge or keel, 
between two narrow concavities, which is divided into beads by numerous trans- 
verse striz, visible only upon this keel. Upon the back are indications of several 
fine spiral threads, rather closely arranged. The umbilicus is very large and 
shallow. 

Affinities —Euomphalus catilliformis, de Koninck,’ is very similar to this shell, 
but in it the raised keel is situated much lower down upon the whorl and further 
from the suture than it is in the Devonian specimen. 


5, HuompuHaus annuuatus, Phillips. Pl. XXIV, figs. 6, 6 a. 


1841. EvompnHatus annutatus, Phillips. Pal. Foss., p. 138, pl. 60, fig. 172*. 


1841. — annuLosus, Phillips. Ibid., p. 231. 

1842. — ANNULATUS, @’ Arch. and de Vern. Geol. Trans., ser. 2, 
vol. vi, pt. 2, p. 363, pl. xxxiii, 
figs. 11, lla. 

1844. — — Goldf. Petref. Germ., vol. v, p. 82, pl. clxxxix, 

fig. 9. 


1 1844, Goldfuss, ‘ Petref. Germ.,’ vol. iii, p. 81, pl. elxxxix, figs. 5, 5 a. 
2 1840, Sowerby, ‘ Geol. Trans.,’ ser. 2, vol. v, pt. 3, pl. lvii, fig. 15. 
> 1881, de Konincek, ‘ Ann. Mus. Roy. H. N. Belg.,’ vol. vi, p. 146, pl. x, figs. 39—41. 


Fig. 
1. 
2. 
o. 
A. 
o. 


6. 
Us 


8, 
2: 


10. 


PAD xevar 


Macroouinina suscostata, Schlotheim, sp. (Page 159.) 


Large specimen. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 

Lower part of another large specimen, showing the callosity on the inner lip; 
2a, portion of surface, X 2°5, Lummaton. My Collection. 

Original specimen of Macrochilus arculatus, Phillips (not Schlotheim). Wol- 
borough. Museum of Practical Geology. 

A specimen transversely crushed, but drawn obliquely so as to give nearly the 
true shape of the shell. Lummaton (?). Torquay Museum. 

Another specimen, wanting the body-whorl. Barton. British Museum. 

Another specimen. Wolborough. Torquay Museum. 

Original specimen of Macrochilus elongatus, Phillips. Wolborough. Museum 
of Practical Geology. 


MacrocuiLina ARcULATA, Schlotheim, sp. (Page 162.) 
8a. Two views of an elongate specimen. Chudleigh. Vicary Collection. 
A stouter specimen; 9a, portion of surface, x 2°5. Chudleigh. Vicary 
Collection. 
Macrocuiiina tinota, Phillips, sp. (Page 163.) 


A specimen showing sculpture, x 2. Lummaton. Lee Collection. British 
Museum. 


L 


del. et ith 


Sawa 


A. 


PLATE XVII. 


MacrocHiLina Impricata, Sowerby, sp. (Page 164.) 


Fie. 
1. Large specimen, somewhat crushed. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 
2. Another crushed specimen. Wolborough. Museum of Practical Geology. 
3. Another specimen, defective in front. (The spire should be a little higher than it appears in the 
figure.) Barton? Torquay Museum. 
4, 4a. Small specimen, with rather higher spire. Chudleigh. Vicary Collection. 


Macrocuiiina suBimBricata, d’Orbigny, sp. (Page 166.) 


5, 6. Large specimens, with defective body-whorls. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 
7. Another specimen. Lummaton. My Collection. 


Macrocuitina ventricosa, Goldfuss, sp. (Page 167.) 


8. Large specimen; 8a, another view, showing mouth, but with shell partly destroyed. Wol- 
borough. Museum of Practical Geology. 
9. Another specimen, with defective body-whorl. Wolborough. . Museum of Practical Geology. 


Macrocuiina, AFF. acuta, Sowerby, sp. (Page 168.) 
10. Specimen with surface destroyed; 10a, another view, showing mouth. Wolborough. Vicary 
Collection. 


MacrocHILINA ELEVATA, n. sp.? (Page 170.) 


11, 11 a. A specimen whose shape is much obscured by matrix. Lummaton. My Collection. 
12, 12a, A much worn specimen, x 2. Wolborough. Museum of Practical Geology. 


MacrocHitina EJECTA, n. Sp. (Page 170.) 


18. Specimen showing the flatness of the whorls and the angulated form of the lower part of the 
body-whorl, x 2. Barton. British Museum. 


Turzo Prenerttu, Whidborne. (Page 274.) 


14. A worn and rather crushed specimen, xX 2. Lummaton. Torquay Museum. 


Narica MERIDIONALIS, Phillips? (Page 196.) 


15. Specimen wanting the body-whorl; 15a, another view, showing signs of another whorl, x 2; 
15 b, apical whorls, x 8. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 


SPANIONEMA SCALAROIDES, Whidborne, sp. (Page 185.) 


16. Specimen with worn surface; 16a, another view of the body-whorl. Wolborough. Torquay 
Museum. 
17. Another specimen, retaining surface. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 


Loxonema Rormenri, Kayser. (Page 172.) 


18. Specimen retaining the shell, though slightly worn, x 2; 18a, a whorl of the same shell still 
more enlarged. Wolborough. Museum of Practical Geology. 
19. Another fragmentary specimen, partly obscured by matrix, x 2. Lummaton. My Collection. 


HoLoPeLLaA TENUISULCATA, Sandberger. (Page 225.) 


20. Specimen retaining test ; 20a, portion of surface, x 5. Lummaton. Woodwardian Museum. 


—— 


A. Gawan. del. et lith Mintern Bros. imp 


—* 


are V0.8 


PLATE XVIII. 


LOXONEMA RETICULATUM, Phillips. (Page 177.) 


Fia. 
1. Large specimen with a thick shell. Wolborough. Museum of Practical Geology. 
2. Still larger specimen with a very thick shell, one of the figured specimens of L. preeteritum, Phillips. 
Chudleigh. Museum of Practical Geology. 
3, 3a. Original figured specimen of ZL. reticulatum; 36, a single whorl, x 1:5. Wolborough. 
Museum of Practical Geology. 
LoxonEMA? sp. (Page 178.) 
4. Internal mould of an imperfect specimen. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 
LOXONEMA SCALARIMFORME, Holzapfel, sp. (Page 179.) 
5, Specimen with exterior partially worn away. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 
Micneria, sp. (Page 183.) 
6. Internal mould of an imperfect specimen. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 
LoxoNEMA CONICUM, n. sp. (Page 180.) 
7. Specimen retaining test though rather worn, showing the flatness of the whorls and the slightness 
of the suture; 7 a, portion of surface, x 15. Wolborough. Torquay Museum. 
8. Internal mould of a shell probably of the same species. Wolborough. Torquay Museum. 
HOLOPELLA TENUIRETICULATA, n. sp. (Page 224.) 
9. Specimen retaining test ; 9a, another view, showing the variation in the sutural angle ; 96, portion 
of surface, x 4. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 
Houopetia TENUISULOATA, Sandberger. (Page 225.) 
10. Specimen retaining test; 10a, portion of surface, x 2. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 
11. Similar specimen wanting test, x 1. Wolborough. Museum of Practical Geology. 
HoLopeitia pupLisuLtcata, Whidborne. (Page 227.) 
12. Body-whorl of a specimen partly retaiming test; 12a, portion of surface, x 2; 12 6, portion of 
the same, X 5. Lummaton. My Collection. 
13. Another specimen, consisting of two whorls, x 2. Lummaton. My Collection. 
14. Another specimen, retaining surface, x 15; 14a, a single whorl more enlarged; 146, a small 
portion still more enlarged. Wolborough. Champernowne Collection. 
Hoxopretta costata, Sandberger, sp. (Page 229.) 
15, Specimen retaining shell, x 15; 15a, portion of surface enlarged. Wolborough. Museum of 
Practical Geology. 
Horoperta Hennantana, Sowerby, sp. (Page 228.) 
16. Specimen retaining test, x 1°5; 16a, one whorl, x 3. Lummaton(?). Torquay Museum. 
LoxonEMA PriscuM, Minster, sp. (Page 181.) 
17. Internal mould of a specimen. Wolborough. Museum of Practical Geology. 
18. Another specimen, x 1°56. Lummaton(?). Torquay Museum. 
19, 19a. Another specimen, retaining test, x 15. Lummaton. Torquay Museum. 


et jith 


1 


Ar 


A Gawamn 


PLATE XIX. 


Natica wexicosta, Phillips. (Page 192.) 


Fie. 
1. Specimen, X 2°5. Lummaton. Torquay Museum. 


Natica antigua, Goldfuss. (Page 193.) 


2. Specimen, xX 4; 2a, another view, with outline of mouth restored. Lum- 
maton (?). Torquay Museum. 


NatIcopsis HARPULA, Sowerby, sp. (Page 189.) 


3. Large but injured specimen, showing the fine ridges on the lower part of the 
whorl; 3a, another view, showing the coarse ridges on the upper part 
of the whorl. Chudleigh. Vicary Collection. 

4. Small specimen showing the bifurcation of the ridges, x 4. Chudleigh. 
Vicary Collection. 


Lirrorina pEvonica, Whidborne. (Page 186.) 


5, 5a. Two views of a large and very perfect specimen, x 2. Chudleigh. 
Vicary Collection. 


Lrrrorina Ussuirti, n. sp. (Page 188.) 


6,6a. Two views of a large specimen wanting spire. Lummaton. My 
Collection. 
7, 7a. Two views of another specimen, longitudinally distorted, x 2. Chudleigh. 
Vicary Collection. N.b.—On the Plate, 7b is a misprint for 8 b. 
8, 8a, 7b. Three views of another specimen, obliquely distorted so as to narrow 
the front part of the mouth, xX 2. Chudleigh. Vicary Collection. 


PLATYOSTOMA SIGMOIDALE, Phillips, sp.? (Page 198.) 


9. Specimen preserving surface, which is marked by undulating striw, x 2°95. 
Lummaton (?). Torquay Museum. 

10, Another specimen, wanting apex, X 2; 10a, portion of surface much more 
enlarged. Lummaton. My Collection. 


SrropHostyLus, sp. (Page 197.) 


11. A distorted specimen which wants the shell; 11a, apical view. Probably 
from Chircombe Bridge. British Museum. 


CapuLus ? INVicTUS, n. sp. (Page 204.) 


12. Lateral view of a large specimen; 12a, apical view. Barton. British 
Museum. 

13. Lateral view of another specimen, X 2; 13a, apical view. Lummaton. My 
Collection. 

14. Apical view of large specimen, partially retaining colour-bands, and showing 
its sinuous peristome and elliptic coiling; 14 a4, basal view, showing a deep 
basal furrow; 146, 14c, lateral views. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 


PLATE XIX 


120 410 1G. 145 140 


Geo West & Sone del lith et imp 


PLATH XX. 


CaPULUS PERICOMPSUS, n. sp. (Page 205.) 
Fra. 


1. Upper view of a specimen with unusually angulated whorls; 1 a, lateral view ; 
10, apical view. Lummaton. My Collection. 


2. Upper view of another specimen, X 1°5; 2a, apical view. Lummaton. My 
Collection. 


3. Apical view of another specimen; 3a, upper view. Lummaton. Wood- 
wardian Museum. 


4. Apical view of a stouter specimen; 4a, upper view. Lummaton. My 
Collection. 


5. Apical view of a stouter and slightly furrowed specimen; 5a, upper view. 
Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 


CapuLus rostratus, Trenkner ? (Page 207.) 


6. Upper view of a specimen partially retaining test X 2; 6a, apical view. 
Lummaton. My Collection. 


7. Upper view of another specimen; 7a, apical view; 7), basal view, showing 
the deep concavity of the base. Lummaton. My Collection. 


8. Upper view of a very large specimen with a close, well-developed spire; 8 a, 
dorsal view. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 


CapuLus compressus, Goldfuss, sp. (Page 208.) 
9. Upper view of the apical portion of a shell, retaining its colour-bands, X 4; 
9a, apical view. Lummaton. Woodwardian Museum. 


10. Apical view of the apical portion of another shell, retaining colour-bands, X 2; 
10a, basal view. Lummaton. My Collection. 


11. Upper view of a higher specimen, in which the apex is wanting ; 11 a, apical 
view. Lummaton. My Collection. 


CAPULUS PUELLARIS, n. sp. (Page 210.) 
12. Upper view of a large but doubtful specimen with slowly increasing whorl ; 
12a, apical view. Lummaton. My Collection. 


13. Upper view of a high but perhaps crushed specimen; 13 a, apical view. 
Wolborough. Museum of Practical Geology. 


14. Upper view of a specimen showing ribs near mouth; 14a, apical view. 
Lummaton. My Collection. 


15. Upper view of a specimen with a spiral apex and numerous ribs; 15a, apical 
view. Lummaton. My Collection. 
CAPULUS TERMINALIS, n. sp. (Page 211.) 


16. Upper view of a specimen with very elongated apex; 16a, apical view. 
Lummaton. My Collection. 


Nors.—These shells ave here treated in the same way as ordinary Gasteropods ; 
the “upper,” “lateral,” and “ apical” views respectively indicating them as seen 
from above, from the side near the mouth, and from the side near the apex. (See 
p. 205, note 8.) 


ee 


Nm a ry 


i 
it 


PLATE XX. 


Geo Weat & Sone dol lith et imp 


~ 


Fia. 


i 


10. 


PATH ext. 


CaruLus corpatus, Whidborne, sp. (Page 212.) 


Upper view of a specimen wanting shell; 1a, apical view. Wolborough. 
Museum of Practical Geology. 


Caputus UssHEri, n. sp.? (Page 213.) 


. Upper view of a specimen much obscured by matrix; 2a, lateral view. 


Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 


CapuLus unorinatus, I’. A. Romer? (Page 213.) 


. Upper view of a specimen; 3a, apical view. Lummaton. Torquay Museum. 


CapuLus coLumBinus, Whidborne, sp. (Page 214.) 


. Upper view of a specimen, very defective round mouth, and partially denuded 


of the shell; 4a apical view, showing the contorted striation on the lower 
side; 4b, portion of surface enlarged. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 


. Upper view of a longer specimen, partially denuded of the shell; 5a, apical 


view; 5b, portion of surface enlarged. Luummaton. My Collection. 


CaruLus squamosus, Zrenkner ? (Page 215.) 


. Upper view of a specimen wanting apex, and with a defective mouth, but 


showing the folding in of the upper part of the peristome; 6a, lateral 
view; 6b, portion of surface enlarged, showing in some degree the fine 
divaricating strie. Lummaton. My Collection. 


OrtHonyonta costata, Barrois. (Page 222.) 


. Upper view of a specimen wanting apex; 7a, apical view; 70, portion of 


surface near the apex enlarged. Lummaton. Champernowne Collection. 


ORTHONYCHIA QUADRANGULARIS, n. sp. (Page 223.) 


. Upper view of a specimen wanting apex; 8a, apical view; 86, portion of 


surface enlarged. Wolborough? ‘Torquay Museum. 


CaPULUS TYLOTUS, n. sp. (Page 216.) 


. Upper view of a specimen the surface of which has been injured by the 


removal of matrix, causing the appearance of a longitudinal ridge on the 
shoulder; 9a, lateral view, showing tubercles. Lummaton. My Col- 
lection. 

Lateral view of a specimen wanting the apical part; 10 a, portion of surface 
enlarged. Lummaton. My Collection. 


PLATE Xx! 


ga ; 40 


Geo Weat & Sone del lith et imp 


PLATE XXII. 


CaPULUS TYLOTUS, n. sp. (Page 216.) 


1. Upper view of a very small specimen, in which neither apex nor mouth is 


bo 


< 
— 


quite perfect, X 2; la,apical view. Lummaton. Woodwardian Museum. 
. Upper view of a specimen whose shell is much injured, and which shows little 
or no signs of tubercles; 2a, apical view; 20, portion of surface much 
enlarged. Lummaton. My Collection. 


CAPULUS GALERITUS, n. sp. (Page 217.) 


. Upper view of a specimen wanting shell; 3a, lateral view, in which the 
peristome is obscured by matrix. Wolborough. Museum of Practical 
Geology. 

. Apical view of another specimen, defective along lower side. Lummaton. 
My Collection. 


CaruLus contortus, I. A. Rémer? (Page 218.) 


. Upper view of a very large specimen in which the outer layer of shell is 
absent; 5a, lateral view; 5), portion of the surface of the thin inner layer 
of shell enlarged. Wolborough. Museum of Practical Geology. 

. Upper view of one of Phillips’s figured specimens (‘ Pal. Foss.,’ pl. xxxvi, 
fiz. 169 b); 6a, lateral view; 6b, portion of surface enlarged. Wolborough. 
Museum of Practical Geology. 

. Upper view of a specimen with stronger ridges ; 7 a, lateral view. Lummaton. 
My Collection. 

. Upper view of an aberrant specimen, showing deeply sinuous peristome and 
very irregular ridges. It comes very near Fig. 3 in general shape. 8a, 
lateral view. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 

. Upper view of a small specimen with very strong ridges, X 2; 9 a, apical view. 
Lummaton. Woodwardian Museum. 


CaPULUS MULTIPLICATUS, Giebel. (Page 220.) 


. Upper view of a large specimen; 10a, lateral view. Wolborough. Vicary 
Collection. 


11. Apical view of a smaller specimen wanting apex ; 11 a, lower view. Lummaton. 


My Collection. 


PLATE XxiI 


Geo West & Sone del. lith et imp 


PLATE XXIII. 


PLATYOSTOMA ? DEFORME, Sowerby, sp. (Page 200.) 


Fra. 


Ie 


2 
3. 


10. 


IEA 
12. 


13. 


20. 


. Small specimen showing the cast of an ag 


Specimen retaining ornament, though not shown in the figure, defective from having been embedded 
in matrix; 1a, apical view. Wolborough. Torquay Museum. 


. Small specimen. Wolborough. British Museum. 


Another specimen, with injured surface and rather worn, but evidently having its spire composed 
of much less exposed whorls. Wolborough. Museum of Practical Geology. 


. Fine specimen, almost entirely free from matrix, but with decorticated surface, partially restored 


about the spire. There is a pinching in round the middle of the whorls, which it has been 
found impossible to represent in the drawing, x 25. Wolborough. Museum of Practical 
Geology. 


. Another specimen, retaining surface, but with defective spire, x 1:5; 5, portion of surface 


enlarged. Wolborough. Museum of Practical Geology. 


PLaTYOSTOMA SPECIOSUM, Sowerby, sp. (Page 202.) 


. Small specimen retaining shell, x3; 6a, apical view. Lummaton(?). Torquay Museum. 


ScoLiostoMa TEXATUM, Minster, sp. (Page 231.) 


. Specimen showing the ornament and the aperture. Wolborough. Museum of Practical Geology. 


x 2°5. 


. Basal view of a specimen showing the twisting of the body-whorl and the ornament, though some- 


what worn, x 2°5. Wolborough. Museum of Practical Geology. 


. Specimen wanting the surface, but showing the twisting of the body-whorl. Lummaton (°?). 


Torquay Museum. 


ScontosToMA GRACILE, Sandberger (?). (Page 233.) 


Specimen with worn surface, x 2; 10a, basal view, showing its defective mouth. Wolborough. 
Torquay Museum. 


ANTITROCHUS ARIETINUS, n. sp. (Page 235.) 


Specimen showing the ornament, x 2°5. Wolborough. Museum of Practical Geology. 

Specimen showing aperture, though slightly defective, x 1:5. Wolborough. Museum of Prac- 
tical Geology. 

A wider specimen, in which the body-whorl has been broken and mended during the life of the 


animal so as to cause a deflexion in the ornament, x 2. Wolborough. Museum of Practical 
Geology. 


PHILOXENE PHILOSOPHUS, Whidborne, sp. (Page 238.) 


. Specimen showing aperture. Chudleigh. Vicary Collection. 


15a. Largest specimen known, showing the casts of agglutinated univalves and other shells. 
Chudleigh. Vicary Collection. 


Specimen showing casts of agglutinations. Chudleigh. Vicary Collection. 


lutinated Brachiopod. Lummaton. My Collection. 


o 
j=) 


PHILOXENE La&VIS, d’Archiac and de Verneuil, sp. (Page 239.) 


. Apical view of a specimen bearing small scars from agglutinations ; 18 a, side view. Wolborough. 


Museum of Practical Geology. 


9. Small specimen with almost flat spire. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 


Evompnatts Dionysit, Montfort. (Page 244.) 


Apical view of a small specimen ; 20a, side view. Lummaton. Woodwardian Museum. 


Geo West & Sone del lith el imp 


Fig. 
. Apical view of a specimen, showing numerous small scars of attachment, 


10. 


i be 


12. 


13. 


PLATE XXIV. 


PHILOXENE SERPENS, Phillips, sp. (Page 241.) 


x 2; la, side view. Lummaton (?). Torquay Museum. 


. Apical view of a specimen with worn surface, but showing signs of ornament, 


x 1:5; 2a, side view. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 


. Umbilical view of another specimen. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 
. Apical view of a specimen with rather narrower and more numerous whorls ; 


4a, side view. Lummaton. British Museum. 


. Defective specimen with very numerous apical whorls, x 4. Lummaton (?). 


Torquay Museum. 


EvompPuHaLus annuLatus, Phillips. (Page 250.) 


. Phillips’s type specimen, x 2. Wolborough. Museum of Practical Geology. 


Kvomeuatus Heoaun, Hall. (Page 247.) 


. Apical view of amuch-worn specimen ; 7 a, side view. Wolborough. Museum 


of Practical Geology. 


. Apical view of a rather crushed specimen; 8 a, side view. Wolborough. 


Champernowne Collection. 


HuomPHALus circuLARIS, Phillips. (Page 248.) 


. Apical view of a specimen with unusually angulated whorls; 94a, side view. 


Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 
Apical view of a specimen with very rounded whorls; 10a, side view, with 
aperture much broken away. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 


HvomPHatus circuLaris, Phillips, var. GEMMULIFER, noy. var. (Page 250.) 


Apical view of a specimen with a very depressed spire and a nodulated keel- 
like ridge. Wolborough. British Museum. 


HUOMPHALUS NEAPOLITANUS, n. sp. (Page 252.) 


Specimen retaining the shell only on the apical whorls; 12 a, view of the 
apical whorls much enlarged. Wolborough. Vicary Collection. 


HUOMPHALUS ARANEIFER, n. sp. (Page 253.) 


Very defective specimen, X 3. Lummaton. My Collection. 


PLATE XXIV, 


Geo West & Sone del lith etimp 


‘ 
* | 
a. 
| fi 
- | 
‘ 
* 
. : i 
Pi 
‘ P innate 
- | 
é a) . 
| . 
> = 
; i 
« 
f i 
| 
> . 
os 
3 — | 
¢ i . 
4 3 7 . 
ie ¢ * 
= 
7 
) i | 
. 
ee. bad | 
¢ 
- 
. 
, 
* | 
. 
Fe > . 
t 
‘ 
i 
’ 
aa} : | 
py! 
| ‘ 
j s 
, - - 
ion | 
i 
‘ 
‘ 
. 


PALAONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. 


INSTITUTED MDCCCXLVII. 


LONDON: 


THE SUPPLEMENT 


TO THE 


BRITISH FOSSIL CORALS OF THE TERTIARY, CRETACHOUS, 
OOLITIC, AND LIASSIC FORMATIONS. 


DIRECTIONS TO THE BINDER. 


This Supplement will be found in the Volumes of the Paleeontographical Society issued for the 
years 1865, 1866, 1867, 1868, 1869, and 1872. 


Cancel the title-pages and table of contents given in the Volumes for the years 1866, 1867, 1868, 
1869, and 1872, and substitute the accompanying title-pages and tables of contents, and place the sheets 
and plates in the order indicated below. The plates of the Tertiary Corals to follow their pages; the 
plates of the Cretaceous Corals to follow their pages; the plates of the Oolitic Corals to follow their 
pages, and the plates of the Liassic Corals to follow their pages. 


ORDER OF BINDING AND DATES OF PUBLICATION. 


PAGES PLATES TS UE eOE: PUBLISHED 
FOR YEAR 
General Title-page -- 1890 April, 1891. 
PART I, Tertiary 
Title-page, Table of Contents — 1865 December, 1866. 
Tiel —66 = : 3 
I—x £ ” 
PART II, Creraczous | 
Title-page, Table of Contents = 1890 | April, 1891. 
1—26 I—Ix 1868 Kebruary, 1869. 
27—46 X—XV 1869 January, 1870. 
PART III, Ooxirre | 
Title- page, Table of Contents | — 1890 April, 1891. 
1—24 I—VII 1872 | October, 1872. 
PART IV, Lriassic | 
Title-page, Table of Contents — 1890 | April, 1891. 
i, li, 1—43 I-XI 1866 June, i867. 
45—73 |  XII—XVI 1867 | June, 1868. 
Index to Tertiary Species 
Title-page, 3—6 — 1872 October, 1872. 
Index to Secondary Species 
Title-page, 3—12 | — 1872 October, 1872. 


A MONOGRAPH 


OF THE 


BRITISH FOSSIL CORALS. 


SECOND SERIES. 


BY 


P. MARTIN DUNCAN, M.B.Lonp., F.R.S., FGS., 


PROFESSOR OF GEOLOGY TO, AND HONORARY FELLOW OF, KING’S COLLEGE, LONDON. 


Being a Supplement to the 


© Monograph of the British Fossil Corals, by MM. Mitne-Kpowarps and Juies Hain. 


LON DON: 
PRINTED FOR THE PALHONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. 
1866—1872. 


PRINTED BY 
ADLARD AND SON, BARTHOLOMEW CLOSE. 


A MONOGRAPH 


OF THE 


BRITISH FOSSIL CORALS. 


SECOND SERIES. 


BY 


P. MARTIN DUNCAN, M.B.Lonp., F.R.S., 


FELLOW OF, AND SECRETARY TO, THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 


Being a Supplement to the 
‘ Monograph of the British Fossit Corals, by MM. Mitnu-Epwarps and Jutus Hare. 


PART II. 


Coraus From THE Wuirr CuHaLk, THE Upper Greensand, THE RED CHaLk or Hunstanton, 
THE Upper GREENSAND oF HaLpon, THE GauLt, aND THE LoweR GREENSAND. 


Pages 1—46; Plates I—XV. 


LONDON: 
PRINTED FOR THE PALHZONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. 
1869—1870, 


PRINTED BY 


ADLARD AND SON, BARTHOLOMEW CLOSE. 


CONTENTS OF SUPPLEMENT TO THE CRETACEOUS CORALS. 


. LyrRODUCTION : : 

. Corals from the White Chalk. Description of Species 

. List of New Species 

. List of Species 

. Corals from the Upper Geeneanid: Daerenon of 

. List of Species 

. Corals from the Red Chalk of Hanetantons mereanton of 

. Corals from the Upper Greensand of Haldon 

. Corals from the Gault ; Description of New, and Notes on Old Speuics 

. List of Species from tie Gault : ; 
. Corals from the Lower Greensand ; Description of New, aid Notices of Old Species 
. List of New Species A 2 

T, List of Species from the Lower Greensand 

. List of Species from the Cretaceous Formations . 


A MONOGRAPH 


OF THE 


BRITISH FOSSIL CORALS. 


SECOND SERIES. 


BY 


P. MARTIN DUNCAN, M.B.LOoND., F.R.S., F.G.S., 


PROFESSOR OF GEOLOGY TO, AND HONORARY FELLOW OF, KING’S COLLEGE, LONDON. 


Being a Supplement to the 
‘ Monograph of the British Fossil Corals, by MM. Mitne-Epwarps and Jutes Haine. 


PART III. 


Corals FROM THE Oo.itic Strata. 


Pages 1—24; Plates I—VII. 


LONDON : 
PRINTED FOR THE PALHONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. 


1872. 


PRINTED BY 
ADLARD AND SON, BARTHOLOMEW CLOSE. 


CONTENTS OF SUPPLEMENT TO THE OOLITIC CORALS. 


INTRODUCTION . : : ; 5 

List of Species already described from the Oolitic Strata 

List of New Species 

List of all the Species described : 
General Relations of the Oolitic Coral-faunas of Great Britain 
Description of New Species from the Great Oolite 


Description of New Species from the Inferior Oolite 


A MONOGRAPH 


OF THE 


BRITISH FOSSIL CORALS. 


SECOND SERIES. 


BY 


P. MARTIN DUNCAN, M.B.Lonp., F.G.S., 


SECRETARY TO THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY. 


Being a Supplement to the 
‘ Monograph of the British Fossil Corals, by MM. Mitnt-Epwarps and Jutes Haine. 


PART IV. 
CoraLs FROM THE ZONES OF AMMONITES PLANORBIS, ANGULATUS, BUCKLANDI, OBTUSUS, AND 


RARICOSTATUS OF THE LowER Lias; FROM THE ZONES OF JAMESONI AND HENLEYI OF 
THE Mippie Litas; AND FROM THE AVICULA-CONTORTA ZONE AND THE WuiTE Lias. 


Pages i, ii; 1—73. Plates I—XVII. 


LONDON: 
PRINTED FOR THE PAL XONTOGRAPHICAL SOCIETY. 


1867—1868. 


PRINTED BY 
ADLARD AND SON, BARTHOLOMEW CLOSE, 


CONTENTS OF SUPPLEMENT TO THE LIASSIC CORALS. 


PAGE 

PREFACE : ; ; : eet 

I. Introduction to ihe Study of feniaeee (ornle 1 
II. Description of the Species contained in the Zone of inioaies inners 5 


III. Description of the Species contained in the Zone of Ammonites angulatus in the Sutton 
stone, and in deposits at Brocastle, Ewenny, and Cowbridge in Glamorganshire. 


List of Species 6 
IV. Description of the Sneciegs from KS Zone ep Varro ongulatus at Manton’ near 
Gainsborough . : 35 
V. Description of the Species from fie Zone of Aimonites pula in fhe North of 
Treland : ; : . 38 
VI. Description of the Species mae Tereea ge in the ele of sive . 41 
VII. List of the Species described and noticed from the Zones of Ammonites Apps Sl 
angulatus 5 : . : . 42 
VILL. Remarks upon other Snecies from the Zone of Aninonites cana uletus . . 45 
IX. Description of the Species . 46 
X. On the Corals of the British and Bicspean Tere Tiaeeie DEposite of ie Zones oF 
Ammonites angulatus, Ammonites planorbis, and Avicula contorta : . AT 
XI. List of Species from the Continental Zone of Ammonites angulatus . 48 
XII. List of Species of Corals from the Continental and British Strata of the Zone of oe 
ites angulatus . . 49 
XIII. Description of Species from ‘the Zone of Aninbnites Buck landi (Ginter) , 5 il 
XIV. List of Species from the Zone of Ammonites Bucklandi 55 
XV. Description of the Species from the Zone of Ammonites obtusus, Son : 56 
XVI. Sections of the Beds in Gloucestershire and Warwickshire containing Corals from the 
Zone of Ammonites raricostatus, Ziet., and Description of the Species : De 
XVII. List of Species from the Zone of Ammonites raricostatus . 61 
XVIII. List of Species from the Zones of the Lower Lias above the Foue of Ammonites 
angulatus : : é Holl 
XIX. Corals of the Middle Lias fro the Ten of Amniionitee Samesont Sow. i . 62 
XX. Corals of the Middle Lias from the Zone of Ammonites Henleyi, Sow. : . 163 
XXI. Enumeration of the British Liassic Species ; : . 64 
XXII. Description and Notice of Species from the Zone of Amenities aise é . 65 
XXIII. List of Species from the Zone of Ammonites planorbis . 66 
XXIV. Notice on the indeterminable Corals of the Avicula Contorta Dans and White Lias of 
the British Isles (Rhetic of Moore) ; ; . 66 
XXYV. Note on the Age of the Sutton Stone and the Brovastle Bevene : : . 69 


INDEX OF Soneits ; , : : : F aie 


> 


CALIF ACAD OF SCIENCES LIBRARY 


I 


: 


| 
3 1853 10007 2060 


ri 
\ 
L 
: i 
*y 
‘ 
" 
t f