Cornell AMniversity Library Honmneqie Snstiiution of Washrinatin| DZ I occassion tector nw. fiz 1357 evision of the Amphibia and Pisces of t REVISION OF THE AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA By E. C. CASE, Junior Professor of Historical Geology and Paleontology, University of Michigan WITH A Description of Permian Insects by E. H. Sellards AND A Discussion of the Fossil Fishes by Louis Hussakof WASHINGTON, D. C. PUBLISHED BY THE CARNEGIE INSTITUTION OF WASHINGTON I9II E Gl A2zodst4O ; CARNEGIE INSTITUTION OF WASHINGTON PUBLICATION No. 146 Cooles of this Beok were first issued D:; 20 1911 4 PRESS OF J. B. LIPPINCOTT COMPNAY PHILADELPHIA PREFACE. This volume forms the third of the series dealing with the vertebrates of the Permian or Permo-Carboniferous of North America. The author hopes that the publication of these volumes has, in a large degree, cleared up the synonymy and corrected the unavoidable errors of the earlier writers and has laid a more secure foundation for the study of the primitive life of the time. The object of the publication has not only been to describe the morphology of the forms, but to prepare a basis for the study of their evolu- tion and distribution, which will contribute to an understanding of the physi- cal conditions and paleogeography of the closing portion of the Paleozoic. The work will be continued on these lines. © It is necessary, and most pleasant, to repeat my thanks to the Carnegie - Institution of Washington for the aid which has made the preparation of these volumes possible; to the authorities of the American Museum of Nat- ural History in New York, and to those of other institutions in this country and Europe who have most generously placed material at my disposal. My thanks are especially due to Doctors Williston, Matthews, Broom, * and Broili for valuable advice and criticism; to Dr. Louis Hussakof, whose contribution on the Fossil Fishes is an independent piece of work of the greatest value; to Dr. E. H. Sellards, who has described two new fossil cockroaches. Finally, I desire to thank Messrs. Christman and Thompson, of the Amer- ican Museum, for the skill and care with which they have prepared many of the drawings and photographs in this and the preceding monographs. E. C. Case. NovEMBER 30, I910.44 CONTENTS. PAGE HistoricaL REVIEW.............-- Pee VES es Hee Eos abe ie Ra ae. a CLASSIFICATION ..... hs Medea Rape u ates a uaa eae MisteeMiaa a aun eos . 14 SysTEMATIC REVISION OF THE AMPHIBIA ...........00cccceeeeeeeeeeeaes 15 COMPARATIVE: TABLES «.s ciris aie tine @ yahew eee eee Rae Me 79 MorpuotocicaL REVISION OF THE AMPHIBIA ..........0 00 c cece nee e eee 85 Two New INsEcTs FROM THE PERMIAN OF TEXAS ............0-0- 2000 eee 149 Tue Permian Fisues or Norro AMERICA....... stadt ee ay tree ar ester aon 153 BIBLIOGRAPHY: .i¢43es Varese de See Aw eR ee Se PO eee eS ... 176 REVISION OF THE AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA HISTORICAL REVIEW. The first mention of Permian vertebrates in North America occurs in a description by Cope (20) of a small collection of fossils made by Dr. J. C. Winslow, in the vicinity of Danville, Illinois. Cope identified four forms, a Pelycosaur Clepsydrops colleti, an amphibian Cricotus heteroclitus (regarded by him at the time as a rhyncocephalian reptile related to Clepsy- drops), and two fishes, a dipnoan Ceratodus vinslovii, and a shark Diplodus sp. ‘The beds from which these fossils were obtained were regarded as belonging to the Triassic or Permian age, ‘“‘since on the one hand Reptilia have not been found in the coal measures, nor on the other hand has the genus Diplodus been found above the Carboniferous series of rocks.” A second lot of fossils sent to Cope by Dr. Winslow and a lot obtained by Mr. William Gurley permitted him to extend his observations and descrip- tions (21). In this paper Cope mentioned or described as new: Strigilina lingueformis gen. et sp. nov. Petalodontidarum. Selachi: Diplodus (?) compressus Newberry. Dipnoi: Ceratodus vinslovii. Ceratodus paucicristatus. Ctenodus fossatus. Ctenodus gurleyanus. Crossopterygia: Peplorhina arctata. Amphibia: Cricotus heteroclitus. A renewed consideration of the fauna confirmed Cope in his previous idea as to the age of the beds: “The present fauna must then be placed above the Coal Measures, and the horizon will correspond more nearly with the Per- mian than with any other embraced in the system.” The position is reported on the authority of Dr. Winslow to be near the top of the Coal Measures and to be marked No. 15 in Prof. F. H. Bradley’s section of the “Coal Measures of Vermilion County, Illinois” (Geol. Survey, Illinois, vol. 1v, p. 245). Later in the same year Cope (22) added to the list of animals from the Permian of Illinois: Amphibia: Fishes: Cricotus gibsont. Strigilina gurleiana. Cricotus discophorus. Ctenodus pusillus. Lysorophus tricarinatus. Orthacanthus quadrisertatus. Diplocaulus salamandroides. Eryops megacephalus. 2 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA It is suggested here that Orthacanthus and Diplodus may be synonymous. The two species Ceratodus gurleianus and C. paucicristatus are referred to a new genus, Ptyanodus. In this same paper Cope remarks that he is informed that Professor Bradley’s layer No. 15 occupies a higher position than was assigned to it and that it lies unconformably above the Merom sandstone, which lies above the Coal Measures and is unconformable with them. This confirmed Cope in his reference of the bone-bearing beds, his Clepsydrops shales, to the Permian. As will be shown below, the position of these beds is still very much in doubt. In 1878, in his first contribution to the history of Permian fauna of Texas (23), Cope reported the following new amphibians: Epicordylus erythroliticus. Zatrachys serratus. Eryops megacephalus. Trimerorhachis insignis. Parioxys ferricolus. Rachitomus valens. Epicordylus, which was founded on the caudal vertebrz of Eryops, as later recognized by Cope, was here regarded as a reptile. Parioxys was placed in the suborder Labyrinthodontia, and Trimerorhachis and Rachitomus in the Ganocephala. Rachitomus was founded on vertebrz of Eryops. ‘Two humeri, without entepicondylar foramina, Nos. 5 and 6, are referred to the Pelycosauria; these evidently belong to the genus Eryops. Three new dipnoans are named in the same paper, Ctenodus periprion, C. porrectus, and C. dialophus. Cope here correlates his Clepsydrops shales of Illinois with the Texas beds and reasserts the reference of both to the Permian. ‘The evidence now adduced is sufficient to assign the formation, as represented in Illinois and Texas, to the Permian. Besides the saurian genera above mentioned, the existence of the icthyic genera Janassa, Ctenodus, and Diplodus, in both local- ities, renders this necessary.” In 1878, Marsh (60) described in the “ American Journal of Science” some fossils from New Mexico, naming as new Ophiacodon mirus and O. grandis from very fragmentary remains. They were regarded as reptiles, but are clearly amphibians of uncertain relationships. In 1880, in the “American Naturalist” (24), Cope referred Eryops, Rhachitomus, Trimerorhachis, and probably Actinodon of Gaudry, to the Ganocephala, because they possessed distinct intercentra and centra, the Labyrinthodontia having the vertebra solid. In a more extended paper before the American Philosophical Society, in the same year (26), Cope reviewed Owen’s suborder Ganocephala, and after concluding that the definition was inadequate he offered a new definition of the group, as follows: ““Vertebre consisting of centra and intercentra, the former not extend- ing to the base of the vertebra, the latter not rising to the neural canal. The centrum consisting of two parts distinct from the superior neural arch; viz, a lateral piece (pleurocentrum), on each side. Atlas consisting of separate seg- HISTORICAL REVIEW , 3 ments, the superior of which are not united above the neural canal, and the inferior (intercentrum), divided on the middle line into two segments. “Genera: A, Basioccipital bone without condyles: Trimerorhachis Cope; Archegosaurusv. Meyer. 4.4, Basioccipital condyles two: Actinodon Gaudry; Rhachitomus Cope; Eryops Cope. | “All the above genera have well-developed neural spines except Trime- rorhachis.” In the same paper was described as new, Ectosteorhachis nitidus. This was classified as “Tribe Crossopterygia; family Rhombodipteride Traquair; subfamily Saurodipterini Huxley.” In the “American Naturalist” for 1880 (27), in a comment on Fritsch’s “Fauna der Gaskohle und der Kalksteine der Performation Béehms,”’ Cope suggests the formation of a new suborder to contain the genus Cricotus, which he calls Embolomera and defines as follows: “Centra and intercentra subequally developed as vertebral bodies, a single neural arch supported by one of each, forming a double body. Chevron bones supported only by inter- centra. Basioccipital vertebral articulation cup-like, connected with the first vertebra by an undivided discoid intercentrum. “Thus the peculiarity of the vertebral column in general is carried into the cephalic articulation, and we have, instead of the complex articulation of the Ganocephala, a single body connecting the occipital condyle and the first vertebra. This body represents, in all probability, the single occipital condyle of the Reptilian skull. This part, as is well known, remains cartilag- inous in the lizard long after the basioccipital is ossified, and is a distinct element. The structure of Cricotus shows that it is a connate intercentrum. We have now removed the last difficulty in the way of the proposition that the Reptilia are derivatives of the Batrachia, viz, the difference in the cranio- vertebral articulation. But the former have not been derived from the Labyrinthodontia as has been suggested, nor from the Ganocephala, but from the Embolomera, as I shall call the new order, or suborder. The order of Reptilia which stands next to it is, of course, the Theromorpha, which presents so many Batrachian characters, including intercentra, as I have for the first time pointed out in the paper above quoted. Besides Cricotus, Fritsch describes a genus from Bohemia under the name D1plovertebron, which I sus- pect to belong to the Embolomera.” In 1881, in “Bulletin of the U. S. Geological and Geographical Survey of the Territories” (27), Cope described Pantylus cordatus as an amphibian; this he corrected later (30). In February of 1881 Cope published his first catalogue of the vertebrata of the Permian formation of the United States (28), including: Pisces: Crossopterygia: Ectosteorhachts nitidus. Dipnot: Ctenodus fossatus, C. purleianus, G. a C. porrectus, C. dialo- phus, C. pusillus, Ptyanodus vinslovii, P. pauctcrtstatus. 4 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA PiscEs—continued. Selachi: Janassa gurleiana, J. strigilina, J. ordiana. Diplodus (?) compressus, D. sp. Orthacanthus gracilis, O. quadriseriatus. BatTRACHIA: Stegocephali: Ganocephala: Eryops megacephalus, Trimerorhachis insignis, Zatrachys serratus, Parioxys ferricolus, Pantylus cordatus. _ EMBOLOMERA: Cricotus heteroclitus, C. gibsont. Lysorophus tricarinatus was listed in the family Clepsydropida, and Dip- locaulus in a new family Diplocaulide, both under the Pelycosauria. In the “‘ American Naturalist” for December of 1881 (29), Cope described from the Permian deposits of New Mexico Eryops reticulatus and Zatrachys apicalis. In the “American Naturalist,” 1882, page 335 (30), Cope corrects the previous reference of Eryops, Trimerorhachis, and Rhachitomus to the Gano- cephala. ‘They were placed in that order because Cope believed Archegosaurus to have rhachitomus vertebre, but as it was shown by Fritsch that Archego- saurus has discoidal vertebrz, the old group must be abandoned and a new substituted. He proposed a new suborder, Rhachitomi, which he divided into two families: Occipital condyle concave, undivided............ceeceeeeeeeeees Trimerorhachide Occipital condyle divided into two lateral condyles............ SlaGnelanaious Eryopide The first family included Trimerorhachis only, the second, ? Parioxys, Eryops, Actinodon, Zatrachys, ? Pantylus. In a more extended article in the “‘ Proceedings of the American Philo- sophical Society,” a little later in the same year (31), he described as new Acheloma cumminsi and Anisodexis imbricarius, which he placed in the order Rhachitomi: family Eryopide. He listed as members of this family: Anisodexis imbricarius. Eryops megacephalus. Acheloma cumminsi. Actinodon frossardt. Eryops reticulatus. Zatrachys serratus. Eryops ferricolus (Parioxys olim). Zatrachys apicalis. The occipital condyles of Acheloma and Zatrachys were unknown to him and so the genera were included provisionally. In a note to this paper it is stated that Peplorhina arctata is not a fish, but a Theromorph Saurian (Pely- cosaur). See a later note by Case (11). The genus Diplocaulus was recognized as an amphibian and placed in the suborder Microsauria. In 1883, in the fourth contribution to the history of the Permian forma- tion of Texas (32), Cope described Trimerorhachis bilobatus and the fishes Ectosteorhachtis ciceronius and Gnathorhiza serrata. HISTORICAL REVIEW 5 In the “Proceedings of the Philadelphia Academy of Natural Science” (33), Cope substituted the name Didymodus for Diplodus, as the latter name was preoccupied, and named several new fishes: Thoracodus emydinus, Ctenodus heterolophus, and Ctenodus vabasensis. Following this paper came one in the “ Proceedings of the American Phi- losophical Society” (34), in which Cope described and figured the skull of the genus. This paper was preceded by two brief notes in the “American Naturalist” giving preliminary accounts of the skull (35, 36). The use of the name Didymodus by Cope provoked a discussion with Dr. Gill in the columns of “Science” (vol. 111, pp. 275, 429, 645), but Cope did not alter the name. In the first of these papers Cope proposed a new order of the Elasmo- branchit to contain Didymodus, which he called Icthyotomi and defined as follows: “A basioccipital bone and condyle. Occipital, (?) pterotic, and frontal bones distinct. Supraorbital (or nasal) bones present.” The remaining members of the Elasmobranchii were distinguished as a separate group by the want of these characters and called by the old name Selachit. Garman engaged in a discussion with Cope and published several short papers in “Science” during 1884 and 1885, protesting against Cope’s propo- sition that Didymodus was identical with or closely related to the Chlamy- doselachi. The most important and culminating paper was printed in the “Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology” in 1885 (53). In this he insisted that the two forms are not related and proposed a new name Diacranodus for the Permian shark. He defines his genus as “‘ distinguished by the attachment of the pterygoquadrate to the postorbital process of the cranium, and by the teeth; cusps two, diverging, subconical, slender, and separated by a median rudimentary denticle or button on the base; bases extending backward, thinner and rounded posteriorly.” Cope replied to this in the ‘American Naturalist,” criticizing Garman and retaining the name Didymodus (40). In the “American Naturalist,’ Jan. 1884, Cope published a semi-popular account of “The Batrachia of the Permian Period of North America” (37); in this he gave a genealogical table of the class Batrachia and an analysis of the characters of the Permian forms as follows: “1, Supraoccipital, intercalary (tabulare) and supratemporal (squamosal) bones present. Propodial bones distinct. Vertebral centra, including the atlas, segmented, one set of segments together supporting one arch.......... 0. cece cece cece eee eens Rhachitomi Vertebrz segmented, the superior and inferior segments each complete, forming two centra to each arch......... 0. cece cece cence een ees Embolomeri Vertebral centra, including atlas, not segmented; one to each arch... .Stegocephali “As regards the extinct orders, the primitive type is evidently the Rha- chitomi whose vertebral column displays an arrest of characters which are transitional in the higher Vertebrata. From this group the orders Embo- 6 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA lomeri and Stegocephalt have evidently been derived. We may: ‘then present the following genealogical table of the class Batrachia: “put “ Anura Gymnophiona Ya Urodela _ ‘Trachystomata ~~ ? fr \ Embolomeri ‘, Rhachitomi ? Cope placed in the Rhachitomi, the genera Trimerorhachis, Eryops, Ache- loma, Anisodexis, and Zatrachys. In the Embolomeri he put the single genus Cricotus. In the latter part of 1884 appeared the “ Fifth Contribution to the iol: edge of the Fauna of the Permian Formation of Texas and the Indian Terri- tory” (38). In this paper Cope named a new species of Dipnoan, Ceratodus favosus, and two species of the genera Cricotus, C. crassidiscus and C. hypan- tricus. With the former he identifies the specimens of C. heteroclitus, named and described in 1880 (25) and 1884 (37). In the first paper figures a and b of plate 11, and in the second paper figures a, b, c, and d of plate 5, are regarded as representing the species crassidiscus and figures f and g of the same plate, in the second paper, the species heteroclitus. In 1885 came Cope’s discussion “On the Evolution of the Vertebrata, Progressive and Retrogressive” (39); in this he repeated the analytical key of the Permian amphibians, but slightly changed his ideas of the phylogenetic relations, as is shown in the following diagram: Anura Urodela Trachystomata Proteida Stege Embolomeri Rhachitomi Ganocephala HISTORICAL REVIEW 7 The Rhachitomi are held to contain the Eryopide, and the Ganocephala the Trimerorhachide and Archegosauride. In May of 1886, Cope read before the American Philosophical Society a catalogue of the Permian Vertebrates of North America (41). This was published as a separate in the same year, but the volume of the Transactions of the Society in which it appeared was not completed until 1888. In this paper he gives the following list and arrangement of the fishes and amphibians: Pisces. SELACHII. Thoracodus emydinus. Janassa. J. strigilina., J. gurleiana. J. ordiana. Orthacanthus. O. gracilis. O. quadriseriatus. Didymodus. D. texensis. D. platypternus. DIPNOI. Ctenodus. C. fossatus. C. gurleianus. C. periprion. C. porrectus. C. vabasensts. C. dialophus. C. pusillus. Ptyanodus. P. vinslovit. P. paucicristatus. Gnathorhiza serrata. Ceratodus favosus. TELEOSTOMI. Ectosteorhachis. E. nitidus. E. cicerontus. BATRACHIA. GANOCEPHALA. Trimerorhachts. T. insignis. T. bilobatus. RHACHITOMI. Zatrachys. Z. serratus. Z. apicalts. Eryops. E.. megacephalus. E. erythroliticus. E. ferricolus. E. reticulatus. Acheloma cummtinsi. Ansiodexis imbricartus. STEGOCEPHALI. Diplocaulus. D. salamandroides. D. magnicornts. EMBOLOMERI. Cricotus. C. heteroclitus. C. gibson. C. crassidiscus. C. hypantricus. 8 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA A front foot, previously described as Icthycanthus platypus (Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., 1877, p. 54), was in this paper referred to the genus Eryops. This reference is exceedingly doubtful. In 1887 appeared that portion of Zittel’s Handbuch d. Paleontologie, dealing with the more primitive fishes. The following disposition is made for the Permian fish: Subclass Selachit. Suborder Plagiostomi. Family Xenacanthide. Genus Didymodus. Orthacanthus. Suborder Batoidet. Family Petalodontide. Genus Janassa. Thoracodus. Subclass Dipnot. Order Ctenod1pterini. Genus Ctenodus. Ptyanodus. Gnathorihiza. Strigilina. Order Sirenoidea. Genus Ceratodus. Subclass Ganoidet. Order Crossopterygide. Family Rhombodipterini. Genus Ectosteorhachis. In 1888 appeared the portion dealing with the Amphibia. Diplocaulus is placed as uncertain, in the family Microsauria of the sub- order Lepospondyli. The others are arranged as follows: Suborder Temnospondyl1. Division A. Rhachitomus vertebre. Genus Trimerorhachis. Eryops (Rhachitomus). Epicordylus (Partoxys). Zatrachys. Acheloma. Anisodexis. Division B. Embolomerous vertebre. Genus Cricotus. In 1889 Cope published a synopsis of the families of the vertebrates (42). In this he divides the Elasmobranchii into two orders, which he defines as follows: “A basioccipital and exoccipital elements; actinotrichia; baseosts and axonosts continuous with neural spines; paired fins with a single basal axonost, and numerous others in line with it; claspers simple....... Icthyotomi No basi- or exoccipital; median baseosts and axonosts continuous with vertebral spines; several axonosts to paired fins, and numerous base- osts; claspers complex; actinotr.chia..............ccceeeceeecers Selachii”’ HISTORICAL REVIEW 9 In the first order was placed the Xenacanthide, including the Permian Diacranodus and the Cladodontide. In the second order were placed all the other families of the sharks. The Stegocephali was divided into the orders Ganocephali, with the families Trimerorhachide and Archegosaurida, the former without and the latter with neural spines on the vertebrae; the Rhachitomi with a single family, the Eryopide, in which is included the Labyrinthodontia; the Embolomert, with the single family Cricotidg; and the Microsauria with the families Branchio- sauride, Hylonomide, Molgophide, Phlegethontiide. His synopsis of characters is as follows: “Subclass Stegocephali. Basioccipital, supraoccipital, intercalare, and supra- temporal bones present; propodial bones distinct. a. One occipital articulation. Vertebral bodies represented by basal and lateral elements (inter- Centha and: Centra) vow cowie S ae ee eaee ee vem eens eae aia eta Ganocephali aa, Two lateral occipital condyles. Vertebra represented by distinct and incomplete intercentra and centra (pleurocentra); atlas segmented. ...............0.-eeeeee Rhachitomi Centra and intercentra complete, making two vertebral bodies to each Hetiral arch 2... cece cece yas ehipowe eas ek cyaeenea ee eee ee Embolomeri No centra; intercentra each supporting a neural arch............ Microsauri” Smith-Woodward in the “Catalogue of Fossil Fishes in the British Museum” (74) substituted Pleuracanthus for Cope’s Didymodus. He gives: Subclass Elasmobranchit. Order Selachii. Family Genus Pleuracanthus. Family Petalodontide. Genus Janassa. Genus Thoracodus. Subclass Dipnoz. Order Sirenoide. Family Lepidosirenide. Genus Ceratodus. Family Ctenodontide. Genus Sagenodus (Ptyanodus). Subclass Teleostomt. Order Crossopterygia. Family Osteolepide. Genus Megalicthys (Ectosteorhachis). In the “Catalogue of the Fossil Reptilia and Amphibia of the British Museum (N. H.), 1890,” Lydekker (59) gives the following classification of the Permian Amphibia from North America: 10 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA Order Labyrinthodontia. Suborder Labyrinthodontia vera. Family Diplospondylide. Genus Cricotus. Family Archegosauride. Genus Trimerorhachis. Family uncertain. Eryops (Rhachitomus, Epicordylus, Parioxys). In 1890 Lydekker (58) described a lower jaw and an intercentrum from the Karroo system of South Africa, which he referred provisionally to Eryops. There is no doubt that these specimens belong to a totally different genus from Eryops; the only resemblance between the two consists in characters common to all the primitive Temnospondyli. The specimens were referred to as £. oweni in the “Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society,” but later, in the “‘Catalogue of the Fossil Reptiles and Amphibians of the British Museum,” the species is called E. africanus. Gadow in 1896 (51) proposed that the genera Eryops and Cricotus be placed among the Reptilia, and, later, in 1901, in “The Cambridge Natural History” (52), he formed the subclass Proreptilia to receive them. This prop- osition was based on the conclusion that the vertebrz of these forms are gastrocentrous in origin, an idea which has not been generally accepted. In 1895 Cope described a new amphibian with a distinct carapace of transverse plates as Dissorhophus multicinctus (43). He later spoke of this form as a new genus of Ganocephalous Stegocephali (47). In 1896 Cope published in the “Proceedings of the American Philo- sophical Society” the first of two papers on the “Paleozoic Reptilian order Cotylosauria” (45); this was preceded by an abstract published in the “American Naturalist” (44). In these papers there were described as new: Zatrachys micropthalmus, Z. conchigerus, Trimerorhachis mesops, Diplocaulus limbatus. In the “American Naturalist” of the same year (46) he described a new family Otocelide with two genera Otocelus and Conodectes, which he referred to the Reptilia. As shown in the body of this paper the first genus is an amphibian and the name is synonymous with Dissorhophus; the second is probably identical with Seymouria, a Cotylosaur. ‘This paper and a second in the November “Naturalist” (47) were in part a preliminary of his “Second Contribution to the History of the Cotylosauria” (48). In the Second Contribution he named one new species of Trimerorhachis, T. conangulus. In 1897 Williston reported the occurrence of Permian vertebrates from Cowley County, Kansas (67, 68). In the second edition of his lectures on the Vertebrates, published in 1898, after his death (49), Cope adopted the new order of Elasmobranchs proposed by Smith-Woodward, so his divisions are Acanthoditi, Icthyotomi, and Selachit. The classification of the Pisces and Amphibia is otherwise unchanged. ' HISTORICAL REVIEW ‘ II .In.1899 appeared a description of the genus Dimetrodon by Baur and Case; in this the genus Ophiacodon, considered by Marsh as.a reptile, was referred to the Amphibia (1). In 1900 Case undertook a redescription of the vertebrates from Illinois (11) and the bones from this locality were figured in his paper for the first time. by Cope, was re-established. No new forms were described, but the genus Peplorhina, abandoned Two years later (12) the same author described more fully the vertebrz of Lysorophus tricarinatus; they were still regarded as reptilian. In 1902, Hay’s “‘ Catalogue of the Fossil Vertebrates of North America” appeared as Bulletin 179 of the U. S. Geological Survey (54). His classifica- tion of the fish and Amphibia is as follows: Class Elasmobranchii. Subclass Plagiostomata. Superorder Icthyotomi. Family Pleuracanthide. Genus Diacranodus (Diplodus). Pleuracanthus. Orthacanthus. Superorder Fuselachit. Family Petalodontide. Genus Janassa. Thoracodus. Icthyodorulites, Ctenacanthus. Class Pisces. Subclass Azygostet. Superorder Dipnot. Order Sirenodei. Family Ctenodontida. Genus Sagenodus (Cteno- dus, Ptyanodus). Gnathorhiza. Family Ceratodontide. Genus Ceratodus. Class Pisces—continued. Subclass Telzostomi. Superorder Rhipidistia. Family Osteolepide. Genus Parabatrachus (Ectosteorhachis). Superorder Actinoptert. Order Chondrostei. Family Platysomide. Genus Platysomus. Class Batrachia. Suborder Microsauria. Family Diplocaulide. Genus Diplocaulus. Suborder Apecospondyli. Family Archegosaurida. Genus Trimerorhachis. Dissorophus. Family Cricotide. Genus Cricotus. Family Eryopide. Genus Eryops (Parioxys, Rhachitomus, Epi- cordylus). Anisodexis. Acheloma. In 1902 (4) Broili published a preliminary account of the skull of Diplo- caulus, i in which he proposes to renew the family Diplocaulide and place it in the Amphibia where it belongs, considering that Cope had not made the correction. He proposes as a classification: Lepospondylt. Family Microsauride Dawson. Aistopodide Miall. Diplocaulide nom. nov. In 1903 Case described a new species of Eryops, E. latus, anda species of Zatrachys, Z. crucifer (14). 12 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA The same year he described a collection of fossils found in northern Okla- homa (15). There were reported from this locality: PIscEs. Elasmobranchii. Diacranodus (Pleuracanthus) compressus Cope. Dipnoi. Sagenodus (?) sp. Diplocaulus magnicornis, D. limbatus, D. salamandroides. Trimerorhachis leptorhynchus sp. nov. Cricotus sp. Cricotillus brachydens gen. et sp. nov. Eryops megacephalus. Crossotelos annulatus gen. et sp. nov. In 1904 Broili published his paper on Permian reptiles and Amphibians of Texas in the “Paleontographica” (5). Several new forms were described as listed below: Order Stegocephalt. Suborder Lepospondyl1. Family Diplocaulide. Genus Diplocaulus. D. copei nov. D. pusillus nov. Suborder Temnospondyli. Genus Cricotus. Trimerorhachis. Eryops. Zatrachys. Acheloma. Anitsodexis. Dissorophus. Aspidosaurus nov. A. chiton nov. Cardiocephalus nov. C. sternbergi nov. Lysorophus and Otocelus are regarded as reptiles. The first is placed ina new family Paterosauride and regarded provisionally as Rhyncocephalian. Later in the same year (6) a second paper by Broili elaborated the idea of the fundamental position of Lysorophus and suggested that there must be a diphyletic origin of the Reptilia, one branch passing back through the Cotylo- sauria to the Stegocephalia and another through the Paterosauride to the fish. Another paper (7) describes the skull of the Permian shark, to which Broili gives Garman’s name Diacranodus. The species platypternus is regarded as a synonym of D. texensts. In 1907 Case described as Zatrachys apicalis a fossil from Texas (16). And the next year he gave an account of the skull of Lysorophus, referring the genus to the Amphibia (17). This paper was answered by Broili (8) who reasserted the reptilian character of Lysorophus, but he now regarded it HISTORICAL REVIEW 13 as a Lacertilian, instead of a Rhyncocephalian, and closely related in habits to the Amphisbenians. . In October of 1908, before the appearance of Broili’s paper just cited, Williston (69) described the skull of Lysorophus and objected strongly to Broili’s reference of the genus to the Rhyncocephalia and considers it as an amphibian. This conclusion was reached independently of Case. Williston proposes the family name Lysorophide to replace the Paterosaurida, as the last is not according to the rules of nomenclature. He says: “My con- viction is that the Lysorophide should be included in the Icthyoidea.” Moody, in a paper read before the Kansas Academy of Science and pub- lished in the “Geological Magazine” in 1909 (61), proposed the following arrangement of the Amphibia: Class AMPHIBIA. Subclass I. Euamphibia. Subclass II. Holospondyli. Order 1. Branchiosauria. Order 1. Microsauria. Order 2. Apoda. Order 2. Aistopoda. Order 3. Caudata. Order 3. Diplocaulia. Suborder 1. Proteida. Subclass III. Stegocephala. Suborder 2. Meantes. Order 1. Temnospondyl1. Suborder 3. Mutabilia. Order 2. Stereospondyli. Order 4. Salientia. Suborder 1. Aglossa. Suborder 2. Linguata. Suborder 3. Costata. It is regarded as doubtful whether the proposed order Diplocaulia should be placed in the second or the third subclass. In 1910 Broom (1), in the ‘‘ Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History,”’ called attention to resemblances between the South African and North American Reptilia and Amphibia. In the same year Case (19) published in the same journal an account of several new Amphibia and Reptilia from Texas. The new forms of Amphibia were: Order Temnospondyl1. Family Aspidosauridé nov. A. glascocki g. et sp. nov. Family Trimerorachide. Tersomius texensis g. et sp. nov. Trimerorhachts allent sp. nov. Anew suborder with a single known family and species was referred to the Reptilia, but in this paper it is referred with query to the Amphibia. Suborder Gymnarthria nov. Family Gymnarthride fam. nov. G. willoughbyi g. et sp. nov. A study of Broili’s type material, after this paper was written, revealed the fact that the specimen was very closely related to his Cardiocephalus, and the two are here united in one family. CLASSIFICATION. Order STEGOCEPHALIA. Suborder Microsauria. Family Diplocaulide. Diplocaulus. Suborder Temnospondyl1. Rhachitomus division. Family Eryopida. ~ Eryops. Parioxys. Anisodexis (?). Acheloma. Family Trimerorhachide. Trimerorhachis. Tersomius. Zatrachys. Family Dissorhophide. Dissorhophus. Cacops. Alegeinosaurus. Family Aspidosauride. Aspidosaurus. Family Trematosauride. Trematosaurus. Embolomerus division. Family Cricotide. Cricotus. Cricotillus. Incerte sedis. Family Crossotelide. Crossotelos. Family Gymnarthride. Cardiocephalus. Gymnarthrus. Family Pleuristion. Order URopELa. Family Lysorophide. Lysorophus. 14 SYSTEMATIC REVISION OF THE AMPHIBIA. AMPHIBIA. Order STEGOCEPHALIA. Suborder MICROSAURIA (?). Family DIPLOCAULID& Cope. Cope, Am. Nat., vol. xv, 1881, p. 164; Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xx, 1882, p. 452. Broili, Centrlb. f. Min. Geol. u. Pal., 1902, s. 536; Paleontographica, Bd. 11, 1904, s. 26. Original description: Cope, in his first paper, regarded the Diplocaulide as belonging in the reptilian group Pelycosauria, but in the second paper he corrected this and gave the following definition: “* * * the vertebral centra are not segmented, nor are the inter- centra present in any form. Under this definition it must be referred to the suborder which includes Oestocephalus, Ceraterpeton, etc., for which I have adopted Dawson’s name Microsauria. The division includes genera with simple amphiccelous vertebral centra, and teeth without inflection of the dentine.” Broili’s description is, translated: ‘Body long, serpentiform. Centra cylindrical, amphiccelous, zygosphene and zygantrum present. Ribs hollow, two-headed. ‘Teeth conical, smooth, and hollow. Vitrodentin and enamel united and a large pulp cavity present.” Revised description: Skull enlarged, triangular; prosquamosal, quadrato- jugal, parietal, supraoccipital, and tabulare taking part in the formation of a large horn. Facial region very abbreviate, not over one-fifth the length of the skull. Vertebree complete, amphiccelous; intercentra absent; diapo- physis and parapophysis separate, attached to middle of vertebra. Zygo- sphene and zygantrum present. Ribs two-headed; attached intravertebrally. Teeth conical, without inflected dentine, large pulp cavity present. Clavicle and interclavicle present, large, sculptured on outer surface. Coracoid small, scapula unknown. Limbs present, short and weak. Humerus with entepicondylar foramen. Genus DIPLOCAULUS Cope. Cope, Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xvi, 1877, p. 187; also Pal. Bull. No. 26, pub- lished Nov. 20, 1877; Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xx, 1882, p. 453; also Pal. Bull. No. 35. Broili, Cua. f. Min. Geol. u. Pal., 1902, s. 536; Paleontographica, Bd. 11, 1904, s. 7. Williston, Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci., 1909, p. 122. Type: Several vertebre, Nos. 6513, 6514, 6515, 6516 University of Chicago. From Vermilion County, Illinois, near Danville. Original description: In the first paper cited Cope’s description is as follows: “Vertebral centra elongate, contracted medially, and perforated by the foramen chordz dorsalis; coossified with the neural arch, and supporting trans- verse processes. Two rib articulations one below the other, generally both at the extremities of the processes, but the inferior sometimes sessile. No neural spines nor diapophysis; the zygapophyses normal and well developed.” 15 16 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA In the second paper he adds the following characters: ““Vertebre with a more or less perfect zygosphen articulation; centra shorter in the anterior than in the median part of the column; axis and atlas solidly united by a long zygosphen, which is not roofed over by the zygantrum. Neural arch continued as a short tube into the foramen mag- num. Atlas unsegmented, and, like the axis, without free hypapophysis. ce vertebre not distinguished from dorsals, and with two-headed ribs. “Orbit separated from the maxillary bone by the union of the lachrymal and malar. Either the malar, or more probably the quadratojugal, extends much posterior to the quadrate bone. It is bounded above by the squamo- sal, which extends anteriorly to the distinct post-frontal, thus covering over the temporal fossa. Posteriorly it extends into a long, free process, like the operculum of Polyodon ossified. This horn does not appear to consist of the epiotic, as appears to be the case in Ceraterpeton. ‘The quadrate bone is extended very obliquely forwards and its extremity is divided into an hour- glass-shaped condyle. In other words the condyle consists of two cones with apices continuous. The internal cone is the smaller, and its base is overlapped from before by a flat bone, probably the pterygoid. The cotyli of the mandible correspond. Mandible without angle; symphysis short. “The teeth are of about equal size, and are rather slender and with con- ical apex. Their surface is not inflected at any point. The superior series is double, forming two lines between which the mandibular teeth close. This superior series stands near the external edge of the vomer, palatine, and pterygoid bones successively. I have not been able to find any larger teeth in the jaws of this genus. Some fragments, mingled with those here described, display such teeth, but I think they pertain to a species of another genus. I know nothing of the limbs of this genus.” : Revised description: This is contained in the revised description of the amily. Diplocaulus salamandroides Cope. Cope, Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xvi, 1877, p. 451. Case, Journ. Geol., vol. vim, 1900, p. 710. Type: The same as the genus. Original description: “The surface of the centrum is smooth and is with- out grooves. The diapophyses and parapophyses are rather elongate, and are closely approximated one above the other. The superior process issues from the centrum opposite the superior margin of the articular faces. They stand equidistant from the extremities of the centrum, and are directed obliquely backwards. The anterior zygapophyses occupy the same level. The neural spine is a compressed longitudinal ridge; it divides behind, leav- ing a notch between the posterior zygapophyses. “ Measurements. “Diameter of the centrum: M Longitudinal). issscjia00 te uate ncteeg cana Meese eo eal nee ee .0060 Vertical: satis cir eon eeu pak caus amare ee wees .0025 WPPANS VERGE. gx ceca Secs earn Emam ay Re REM Ats elas ous daw secede: .0025 Depth of centrum and neural arch............... intar Seieurees .0060 Width of transverse processes... ........ cece cece eee eeeaceee .0070 Expanse of posterior zygapophyses..............0.eeecececees -0050” SYSTEMATIC REVISION 17 Revised description: Skull unknown except for a fragment of a lower jaw. Vertebre small, resembling those of larger forms, but the lower face of the centrum round from side to side instead of flat. The species is not clearly distinguished from limbatus or magnicornis, and can not be until the skull is known. The appearance of small vertebrae of uniform size in Texas, Oklahoma, and Illinois, without intermediate sizes connecting them with the larger vertebre, warrants holding this species as separate, provisionally. Fic. 1.—Diplocaulus limbatus. A. Lower view showing the maxillary and palatine teeth. No 4542 Am. Mus. x % B. Upper view of skull. No. 4470 Am. Mus. Reduced. n, nasal; f, frontal; pif, post-frontal; 7, jugal; sg, squa- es mosal; 9, parietal; ps5, prosquamosal; so, supraoccipital plate; ¢, tabulare; J, lachrymal. Diplocaulus limbatus Cope. Cope, Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xxx, 1896, p. 456. Type: An imperfect skull. No. 4471 Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. Cope Coll. From Texas. Original description: “The character of the species is seen in the horns. These are much less produced relatively to other regions than in the D. magnicornis, and the postquadrate (quadratojugal) element is more distinct and terminates in a separate apex below the principal horn. This tract, which is fused with the principal bone in the D. magnicornis, is separated from it by a groove in the D. limbatus, and the large fossa which it incloses with the inferior side of the principal horn looks inward at an angle of 45°, while it looks downward in the D. magnicornis. ‘The terminal angle of the post-quadrate (quadratojugal) body forms a prominent compressed offset, rather than a free apex. In one specimen of large size it is inferolateral; in type, entirely inferior. The principal horn is shorter and narrower than in the D. magnicornts, and less divaricate. ‘“‘As the mandibular rami are in place and their extremities are entire, the length of the muzzle can be inferred. It is relatively longer and less broadly rounded than in the D. magnicornis. ‘The surfaces of the skull are sculptured in a honeycomb pattern, as in the type species. “ Measurements. aus “Length of the skull on median line ......... 00... cece cece eee 92 Length of the skull to extremity of horn........... 0. ceeeeeeeees 220 Width of skull at posterior border......... 0.0.0. c eee e eee 160 Width of base of horn... cece 51 Length from angle of mandible to end of horn................4.. 115 Length from angle of mandible to postquadrate process........... 65 Length of mandibular ramus.......... 00. c eee cece eee eee eens 82 - Interorbital width (approximate).............. 0. eee e cece neces 20 18 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA Revised description: 1. Horns terminating in a point and curved inward at end. The posterior edge of skull more sharply concave. Anterior edge of frontal bone but little anterior to orbits. Vomerine teeth arranged in a segment of a broad curve. Anterior end of skull a segment of a broad curve. Sculpture of facial region distinctly radial from a point be- tween orbits and nares. Orbits larger. ho aE} Fic. 2.—Diplocaulus magnicornis. Upper view of skull. After Williston. No. 652 Univ. of Chicago. Reduced. pmx, premaxillary; n, nasal; mx, premaxillary; pf, prefrontal; fr, frontal; péf, postfrontal; 7, jugal;.sg, squamosal; Pp, parietal; so, supraoccipital plate; psg, prosquamosal; 2, tabulare; cl, clavicle; Jc, interclavicle- ¢, coracoid; 4, humerus. Diplocaulus magnicornis Cope. Cope, Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xx, 1882, p. 453. Also Pal. Bull. 35; Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xxxrv, 1896, p. 455. Broili, Paleontographica, Bd. 11, 1904, s. 8. Type: A skull and vertebre. No. 4472 Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. Cope Coll. From Texas. ; Original description, from the first paper by Cope: “The skull is very peculiar in the great extent of the parts posterior to the orbits as compared with the portion anterior to them. The posterior border not being complete, the proportions can not be exactly given, but the part anterior to the orbits is two-thirds the length of the part extending from their posterior border to near the base of the lateral horn, and one- fifth the distance from the orbit to the extremity of the horn. The part of the border of the orbit preserved indicates that the latter is of fair size. It is separated from the maxillary border by at least its own diameter. The external nares are peculiarly situated. They are nearer the orbit than the end of the muzzle, and are close to the maxillary border, being separated from the mouth by a narrow strip of bone only. They are round, open nearly laterally, and are removed from the edge of the orbits by the diameter of the latter. SYSTEMATIC REVISION 19 “The malar or quadratojugal bone is protuberant at the canthus oris and projects laterally beyond the mandible at its posterior part. It also pro- jects beyond the extremity of the quadrate bone. This border is continued as that of the external base of the horn, but the portion which belongs to this element is soon distinguished from the superior element (squamosal) which composes the horn, by a groove. This groove is decurved and bounds the apex of the element, which is a decurved, low tuberosity. The horn is produced backwards in a horizontal plane, forming a long, flat triangle which contracts gradually with straight sides. The apex is narrowed, obtuse, and a little incurved. Near and at the extremity the horn is flat above and convex below. “The mandibular quadrate cotylus consists of two fossz, which together form an approximate figure 0, of which the internal fossa is the smaller, and opens internally. The external one is nearly transverse. The superior border of the ramus posteriorly is straight. The greater part of the superior aspect is occupied by a huge fossa which opens upwards. “Tt is uncertain whether the horns meet at an entering angle on the middle line posteriorly or not, but the width of the base of the horn indi- cates that such is the case. The extremity of the muzzle is depressed and is broadly rounded. “The external surface of the skull is sculptured in the form of fossz so distributed that the narrow ridges separating them do not form straight lines, except in a few places on the superior face of the horn. This sculpture is strongly impressed and is of medium coarseness. It extends on the inferior face of the quadratojugal (?) posterior to the quadrate, and on the infe- rior side of the horn at the edges. It is most extended below from the interior edge, and for the terminal inch of the horn is as well marked as on the supe- rior face. Elsewhere the sculpture of the inferior side passes into puncte before disappearing. A groove marks the superior boundary of the maxillary bone, which divides when it reaches the superior surface. One branch descends behind the nostril, the other passes transversely across the lach- rymal bone and shallows out before reaching the middle line of the muzzle. The mandible is even rougher than the superior surfaces, and has a longi- tudinal groove below the dental line to near the symphysis, where it runs out on the alveolar edge. The internal and external sides of the mandible posteriorly are smooth. On the malar and other facial bones there are four fosse in 9 or IO mm. “The atlas is peculiarly flattened above, the neural arch being a tube, without neural spine. Its anterior tubular prolongation is not long and is deeply notched below. The condyloid fossz are widely spread transversely and nearly flat, except that their surface is carried forwards on the neural tube. They are well separated below. There is a strong hypapophysial keel, which diminishes and runs out anteriorly. There are prezygapophysial facets, but the postzygapophyses exist. Their superior edge is, however, carried posteriorly to form the sides of the huge embracing zygantrum. These side processes, which I will call zygantropophyses, extend as far pos- teriorly as above the posterior end of the centrum of the axis, embracing almost the whole of the neural arch. There is another short median supe- rior process, which notches the extremity of the zygosphen. The side of the atlas between the postzygapophysis and the condyloid facet is wrinkled, and the inferior face finely punctate. 20 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA “In the axis, the hypophysis is a large ridge with a horizontal truncate edge. ‘The costal heads of the diapophysis are not split to the base of the latter and the superior is the more robust (extremities broken off). Centrum concave posteriorly, and on each side of hypopophysis with reticulate sur- face. A short zygantropophysis; zygantrum not large. Exposed summit of zygosphen (nearly equal neural arch) without neural spine. In both the axis and other cervical vertebra, the superior diapophysis is connected with the zygapophyses fore and aft, in accord with the shortness of the centra. In the more posterior vertebre they become separated on account of the increasing length of the centrum. “The third vertebra is like the axis, except in having a keel-shaped neural spine, and a short obtuse zygosphen continued from its base anteri- orly. With increasing length of centrum the diapophysis becomes longer, the hypophysial ridge becomes wider, and coextensive with the inferior face of the centrum. It is separated by an angle from the sides in the longer verte- bre; in those of intermediate length the inferior face is convex. All of them retain the delicate lines and puncte of the inferior surface. The neural spine on the more elongate vertebre is a rather elevated keel with horizontal superior edge. Its posterior extremity forms a wedge-like zygosphen. The zygantrum is a deep V-shaped cavity, opening posteriorly and not roofed over at any point, unless for a small part of its fundus. The zygapophyses are well spread and have horizontal faces. Each of the columns of the dia- pophysis sends a ridge forwards, which inclose a groove between them. “Measurements of vertebra. M M “Length of atlas below........... 0.015 Length of centrum of another (No. Length of atlas at zygantropophyses .029 LV) See ciceaneee@ared cee ee .022 Expanse of atlas at condyloid facets .034 Expanse of postzygapophyses of do. .o018 Expanse of centrum atlas behind... .0145 Length of centrum of No.V....... .022 Depth of atlas at middle.......... .019 Diameters centrum V anteriorly: Length of axis below.............. O15 Vertical icne ine Sar uote a pegged 013 Length of axis at zygantropophyses .o16 Transverse... ise seeen en oedaeee .O12 Width of zygosphen above........ .O11 Expanse prezygapophyses......... .O21 Expanse of postzygapophyses...... .024 Elevation of neural spine from Width of centrum posteriorly...... .O12 CENTRUM § fdnsigeaiicciw dacs hase .OIl Depth of centrum posteriorly...... Diameters centrum No. VI: Length of centrum of another (No. Anteroposterior.............0.5 .023 WL) Os ancceciamecetlacaet Seeks .018 Verticals ccuhle scan ve veararrarotes .O1L "TTANSVeTSO is hd bho daa actos .013 “The vertebre of this species are very much larger than those of the D. salamandroides, and the diapophyses do not originate so low down on the centrum. Otherwise they are much alike. The cranium of the Illinois species is yet undetermined.” Cope adds, in his second paper cited: “In the typical specimen the posterior border of the skull was not preserved. The present specimen shows that it was continuous from the extremity of one horn to that of the other, and regularly concave without angles, and that it overhangs the occipital condyles a little. The posterior parts of the horns consist of the tabular bones, and the anterior portion con- sists of the supratemporals. The inferior part of the base of the horn externally consists of the element which articulates with the quadrate, or quadratojugal. It is distinguished from the supratemporal by a horizontal SYSTEMATIC REVISION 21 suture. A considerable part of its surface presents inferiorly. The supra- mastoid lies between the supratemporal and the post frontoorbital. “The supraoccipital extends well forward on the superior face of the cranium, the median suture equaling the length of the parietal bone. They have an extraordinary transverse extent. The median suture of the parie- tals is rather longer, and it is separated by the small parietal foramen at a point one-third its length from the frontal suture. The posterior width of the frontal is equal to three-fifths its length, and is a little greater than the interorbital width. It extends as far anterior as posterior to the orbits. The posterior suture is trilobate. The postfrontals are suboval with the long diameter at 45° to the median line, and the anterointernal border excavated by the orbit. They do not advance on the internal border of the latter, resembling the prefrontals in this respect. The supramastoids are necessarily well produced forwards to meet the short postfrontals, advanc- ing far anterior to the posterior border of the jugals. “The premaxillaries are short and wide, and are widely truncate by the frontal posteriorly. The prefrontals do not extend posteriorly to the inner border of the orbit, but they join the jugal by a considerable suture. The nasals occupy their usual position and are rather small; one of them is fused with the premaxillary in the specimen. The maxillaries are small, especially in the facial part, which does not reach the orbit. The jugal is a relatively large bone and has an irregular posterior outline, where it joins the quadratojugal and the supratemporal. “The great expansion of the roof bones posterior to the quadrate is asso- ciated with a considerable expansion of the pterygoids in the same region. The palatopterygoid arch has the relations prevalent in the Stegocephalia, but (what is novel so far), its anterior and chiefly palatine portion carries a single series of teeth on the external and anterior border, which is con- centric with the premaxillo-maxillary series, as in Cryptobranchus. Poste- rior to this is a pair of straight series of teeth, probably on the vomers, which form an anteriorly directed right angle at the middle line. They do not extend so far posteriorly as do the maxillary teeth, and the latter do not extend so far posteriorly as the pterygopalatines which terminate at a straight line drawn through the posterior borders of the orbits. ‘The pos- terior nostrils are situated between the two series of palatal teeth. The external nostrils open forwards and outwards. Maxillary and premaxillary teeth twenty-three on each side. Palatines, twenty-four; vomerines, ten. “The composition of the huge horns is thus the result of the fusion of the three posterolateral roof elements into one, thus obliterating the notch which separates the tabular from the quadratojugal bones in most other Stego- cephalia.” Revised description: 1. Horns terminating more bluntly or with spatulate ends. Not curved in at ends. The posterior edge of the skull with a wide concavity. 2. Anterior edge of frontal nearly midway between orbits and nares. 3. Vomerine teeth arranged as a wide V with the apex forward. 4. Anterior edge of skull sharper. s. Sculpture of facial region not distinctly radial. 6. Orbits smaller. 22 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA Diplocaulus copei Broili. Broili, Paleontographica, vol. L1, 1904, p. 21. Type: This species was founded on a series of imperfect specimens, of which there are three (Nos. 44, 45, and 47, xv, 1901), with vertebre attached, on a single plate. They are all from Texas, north of Seymour, in Wilbarger County, and are preserved in the Museum of the Alte Akademie, Munich. Original description (abstracted from Broili): The skulls have all suffered from pressure, so that it is impossible to give a complete description of any one; the account furnished by Broili is taken from all. The outline of the skull is crescentic and the posterior prolongations are turned somewhat towards each other, so that the posterior line of the skull is sharply concave. The position of the orbits and nares and the character of the sculpture are as in D. magnicornis. The sutures do not show even in a specimen which has lost the rough outer layer of the bone. The under surface of the skull can not be described in detail, because it is obscured by the pressure to which the specimens have been subjected, but it is, in all essentials, like that of D. mag- nicornis. Only the slightly concave occipitalia lateralia, the posterior ends of the pterygoids, and the parasphenoid can be made out, and these are as in D. magnicornis. ‘The lower jaw reaches a length equal to one-third of that of the skull. Measurements of four skulls are given as follows in centimeters: I. II. Il. IV. Total length from tip of horn to middle of premaxillary region..... 19.5 18.8 16.2 10.1 Length of skull in middle line... 0... 2... cece eee eee e eee 9.8 9.6 9.3 6.6 Space between tips of horns........... 0. cece ceececeeeeeeeeeee 20.4 18.4 15.5 ways Distance from tip of a horn to middle of supraoccipital region.....| 12.2 12.1 9.0 5.1 Distance of orbits from posterior border of skull................. islets 6.9 6.5 3.6 Interorbital’ spaces. centimeters in length. 2. Skull elongate, flat; orbits small, in anterior half of skull; with- out elevated rims; no interorbital depression. Nares not terminal. No preorbital depressions. Sculpture finely reticulate; edges of skull smooth. Tabulare not prolonged into points. Posterior edge of skull not deeply concave. Occipital condyle not divided. A double row of teeth on maxillary. Teeth not enlarged, except on anterior end of mandible, and palatine tusks (?). Intercentra thin, not constricting the notochord. ee) eee ‘o Trimerorhachis insignis Cope. Cope, Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xvi1, 1878, p. 524; Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xrx, 1880, p. 54; Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xx, 1883, p. 630. Broili, Paleontographica, Bd. 11, 1904, p. 39. Type and paratype: The same as the genus. Original description: “There are two large tusks at the anterior extremity of the inner superior row of teeth, and two similar ones on the plate-like element above described (see description of the genus). The inferior border of the mandible rises gradually posteriorly to below the posterior border of the glenoid cavity, behind which it is a short vertical and compressed angu- lar process, which is rounded in profile. There is a patch of small teeth inside of the posterior extremity of the mandibular series. The mandible closes inside of the posterior part of the quadratojugal arch. There is a groove near the inferior margin of the inferior face of the mandible; external to this the surface is marked with elongate, shallow pits. The sculpture of the external side of the ramus is less pronounced, and the pits are smallest near the angle. The pits of the top of the cranium are coarse and well defined. The fragment of maxillary bone is broken off four teeth behind the tusks, and the neural opening has contracted but little at that point. The sculpture of the anterior portion of the maxillary is coarsely reticulate. “The diapophyses of the centrum are oblique rhomboids in form, the anterior upper side receiving the neural arch. The external surface is con- cave and smooth. The median element, which I call the intercentrum, is a 42 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA crescent with subacute horns, which terminate below the anterior part of the posterior zygapophyses. The inferior surface is slightly angulate, with two low, latero-inferior ridges, and sometimes a low median one. The sur- face between them is delicately reticulately sculptured. The neural arch is oblique and highest behind. The combined neurapophyses rise rather abruptly behind the anterior zygapophyses with an obtuse and convex margin. ‘They then descend in an arc to the extremities of the posterior zygapophyses, diverging downwards and separated by an open groove, which was doubtless the basis of attachment of the cartilage which repre- sented the neural spine. External surface of the neurapophyses smooth. The zygapophyses have little lateral expansion, but are well defined and prominent antero-posteriorly. The processes which I have alluded to above as diapophyses may not be such, as they are simply transverse expansions of the anterior portion of the neurapophyses, whose posterior border articu- lates with the lateral diapophyses of the centrum. “The basioccipital condyloid fossa is transversely hexagonal in outline, the superior border being deeply notched by the superior portion of the josse chorde dorsalis. ‘The articular surface itself is funnel-shaped. ‘The parasphenoid bone advances far posteriorly under the basioccipital. It expands into an acute angle on each side below the prootic, and then con- tracts, so that its sphenoid region is narrower than its occipital extremity. Its surface is slightly concave. “ Measurements. M M “Depth of the maxillary bone at the Six posterior mandibular teeth in. .o11 middle of the nares........... 0.021 Transverse extent of glenoid cavity .0o12 Width of the palatal surface at Transverse diameter of condyloid middle of the nares........... .O14 fossa of occiput.............. .O19 Six maxillary teeth at middle of Vertical diameter of do........... .013 NAPES: oni es Aner eat .o14 Greatest width of parasphenoid.... .034 Diameters of an anterior maxillary Thickness of do. at sphenoid portion .0035 tOOth o.tee se reen eae daa dieses .002 Three vertebree (measured below)in. .042 Diameters of an anterior tusk of Chord of intercentrum............ .o18 the inner row................ .004 Length of intercentrum below..... .O10 Length of ramus mandibuli to an- Thickness of intercentrum below... .002 terior border of interna ptery- Total length of neural arch........ .O17 goid fossa........ 0c. . ee ee eee .058 Elevation of do. above posterior Depth of do. at do............... .023 zygapophyses................ .008 Length of ramus mandibuli to pos- Expanse of anterior zygapophyses. .007 terior border of internal ptery- Long diameter of lateral diapophysis .012 goid fossa .... 2.2... eee eee .015 Short diameter of lateral diapophy- Depth of ramus mandibuli at do.. .016 SIS 3 atarsiaie seme eRe aimee .005 Depth of ramus mandibuli 0.110 Length of rib...............000 ee .O21 from angle................4. .016 Width of head of do.......... 2... .008” In the second paper Cope adds the description of the head: ‘‘The skull is flat and rather wide, the length exceeding a little the transverse posterior diameter. The posterior borders of the orbits mark a point half-way between the extremity of the muzzle and the posterior supraoccipital border. The orbits themselves are of medium size and are separated by a space about equal to their transverse diameter. Their form is a wide oval, with the long axis obliquely anteroposterior. The diameter of the external nostril is nearly half of that of the orbit, and the form is similar to that of the latter. The interorbital and ethmoidal regions are concave; the prefrontal SYSTEMATIC REVISION 43 regions are convex. The supraoccipital border is strongly concave; and the notch separating the epiotic angle from the quadrate angle is as deep as the supraoccipital. The surface of the cranium is thrown into wrinkles with no regular pattern and which inosculate to a moderate extent, most so on the preorbital region. The anterior parts of the maxillary and mandibular bones are marked with small, pit-like impressions. “ Measurements. o “Total length to quadrate angles measured on the median line... 0.170 Length to supraoccipital bordéfin..5 ius csiwese vane nswak nanan y 138 Total width posteriorly sau cciwyc0i05-4 hee iF ee exo ueease dense -155 Walley Ae BED itee ago cacascatd wh suede usy ese ep wea aie .095 Width Beween, GrUitia.anrkagesuraavasen desk veaendauner ened o21 WV IGCH Ok DATOS iw aek ws eae eel eee akan! 062 Width between nares.......... 0c cece cece e ete eteeeeees 030 Long diameter Of Orbits .. Reatoranon of ekull, A. After Williston. Upper view of skull, showing su- A, Left; B, Posterior surface; C, Superior sur- tures. Lettering as usual. . face; D, Inferior surface. Lettering as B. Same. Lower view of skull, showing branchial bones. usual. 0, otic opening; oc, occipital condyle; pa, neural arches of first vertebra. C. Same. X §. After Broili. Lateral view of a mid- dorsal vertebra. D. Same. Neural spine from above, showing perma- nent separation of the two halves. without sculpture or rugosities. The various investigators of Lysorophus seem to be in complete accord as to the position and shape of the bones of the skull, but differ materially in their interpretation. The upper surface is composed largely of three pairs of bones, the nasals, frontals, and parietals. : 5 The nasals are large, paired elements extending to the anterior end of the skull; the premaxillaries have not been made out, and were evidently very small. The nares lie outside of the nasals and are terminal. The frontals are nearly rectangular and extend back as far as the ante- rior edge of the orbit. 142 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA On either side of the skull, parallel to the frontals and nasals, are ele- ments running from the anterior edge of the orbit to the posterior edge of the nasals; a descending process, near the anterior end, forms the pos- terior edge of the nares and joins the maxillary below. These bones form the side of the facial region and have been called lachrymals (Case) and prefrontals (Williston). The maxillaries are short and very slender. They form the lower border of the nares and send a long splint back to a point below the middle of the orbit. The parietals are large plates forming the whole interorbital surface of the skull, and are strongly convex from side to side. There is no trace of a parietal foramen. The supraoccipital is a single median plate which extends downward on the posterior surface to form the upper edge of the foramen magnum. On either side of the supraoccipital plate are large elements forming. the posterior angles of the skull; these were called sguamosals by Case and eptotics by Williston. Their homology seems uncertain. From the lower side of these elements, a projection forward carries on its lower end the articulation for the lower jaw; it is certain that the lower end represents the guadrate. The upper portion may or may not be distinct; a partial suture was noted by both Williston and Case. The upper part, called by Williston the squamosal, corresponds almost exactly to the part called tympanic (Hoffmann) or paraquadrate (Gaup). The lower, quadrate end of this composite bone becomes very slender and rod-like. The lower surface: A large flat bone forms the posterior surface of the basicranium; this is considered to be a basisphenoid; anteriorly it is joined by an equally broad element which terminates in a point anteriorly, the parasphenoid. Anterior to the parasphenoid the separate elements can not be made out. The teeth extend in an unbroken curve around the anterior edge of the skull, and a second line of palatine (?) teeth within this follows nearly the same curve. There is a great median, palatine vacuity. Broili reported the occurrence of gular plates lying between the lower jaws, but Williston has given reasons for believing that these are the dis- placed elements of a proatlas. Posterior surface: This is completely closed. ‘There are distinct, exoccip- ital condyles (Williston and Case); Broili believes that there is a single tripartite condyle, the lower portion formed by the basioccipital bone. This he reports on the evidence of several specimens; Williston and Case, working independently, with separate series of skulls, are of the opinion that the condyles are paired and formed by the exoccipitals. Broili’s criticism of Case’s drawings showing the condyles does not take into account that the condyles slant inward and upward; the greatest distance between the con- dyles shown in the posterior view of the skull is greater than that between the portions of the condyles shown in the lower view, but it is the upper ends of the condyles which show in the lower view, and the two drawings coincide exactly. The lower jaw is about two-thirds the length of the skull and is very wide in the articular region. The angle projects considerably beyond the quadrate. The dentary carries small conical teeth similar to those of the maxillary. MORPHOLOGICAL REVISION 143 There are four pairs of branchial bones in one specimen described by Williston (69). “The outer pair, lying close to the inner margin of the man- dibles, have the posterior end thickened and recurved, hook-like, to abut against or approach the hind side of the quadrate. I would take them to be ceratobranchials, save for the fact that a pair of nearly square bones very clearly articulate with the anterior ends, which must be ceratobranchials. To the inner side and progressively more posterior, lying symmetrically, are three pairs of epibranchials, the inner and hindmost represented in the specimen only by their anterior ends, the posterior portion being broken off with the atlas. The two outer pairs, at least, are thickened and truncate at each end, and are partly hollowed or cancellated, like all other bones of the skeleton. The first of these pairs also seems to have a thickened and recurved posterior extremity.” The vertebral column: Just over the occipital condyle are two small plates, which probably represent a proatlas. ‘There is no distinct atlas or axis, and the vertebre of the column are all similar. The centrum is per- forate, and the cavity is widely open, so that the notochord was very little constricted. The sides are marked by deep pits, which divide the lower surface of the centrum into three ridges, hence the name of the species. The neural arch is free from the centrum and the two halves are separate. The zygapophyses are nearly horizontal. There is no trace of intercentra. The ribs are single-headed, rather long, and proportionately stout. They are frequently broken at the proximal end and present the appear- ance of having been anchylosed to the centrum and broken off. Williston reported finding small limb bones among the specimens of Lysorophus, but it is very uncertain whether these belong to Lysorophus; at least four genera have been found in the same beds, Guvmnarthrus, Cardio- cephalus, young Diplocaulus, Lysorophus. ‘Thousands of series of Lysorophus vertebre have been found with very perfectly preserved ribs and centra, but without any trace of limbs associated. It seems, with all of the suggestions of a snake-like body, that it is less likely that these limb bones belonged with Lysorophus than with some of the other forms. The position of Lysorophus is not certain. That it is an amphibian seems well established. Broili’s interpretation of the condyle as single is certainly not borne out by numerous other specimens. The same may be said for the basicranial region; it is certain that the broad flat plate can not be reckoned as a basioccipital element; parts taken for this in several specimens have proven to be fragments of the proatlas or first vertebra. In addition, Williston cites the tricarinate vertebre, the sutural division of the neural arch, and the neuro-central attachment of the ribs as distinctly amphibian. It is not so apparent that the Lysorophus was a-Urodele of the group Ichthyoidea, as declared by Williston. The apparently limbless condition and the probable position of the eyes far forward in the orbital spaces suggest some affinity with the limbless amphibians. The singular fact that the specimens are always found in a more or less tightly rolled up condition, led the late Dr. Baur to suggest that these were embryonic forms, but the enormous numbers and well-ossified condition negative the idea, It is more probable that they were, as Williston suggests, naked-skinned, mud-burrowing creatures, that met their death by suffocation in large, shallow pools, which were in process of gradual desiccation. This would 144 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA account for the accumulation of large numbers of animals in small areas, and it would also account for the attitude in which they are found. Measurements. MM Length of a skull on median line............. 0. cece eee eens 20.8 Length of a second skull, same.... 0.0.0.0... ccc cece cee eens 19.5 An average vertebra Height from bottom of centrum to top of neural arch............ 7 Greatest length of centrum............ 0. cece cece eee eee teens 5 Greatest length of neural arch.......... 0. cece eee eee eee 7 Genus GYMNARTHRUS Case (p. 69). Gymnarthrus willoughbyi Case (p. 69). Characteristic specimens: The type and paratype Nos. 4892 and 4763 Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. The type skull is small, total length slightly over 16 mm., but, as the premaxillaries are imperfect, it is impossible to give the exact length. At first sight the skull resembles closely those described by Cope as Pariotichus and Lysorophus, but it is radically different in the postorbital region. The postorbital portion of the roof of the skull has been cut away from the lower edge in the manner of some turtles, until the quadratojugal is gone, the prosquamosal doubtfully present, and the quadrate fully exposed and perhaps movable. The posterior portion of the skull is roofed over and there is no suggestion of temporal openings. ‘The quadrate is elongate and of peculiar shape (see fig. 49); it articulates with the squamosal above and seemingly with the occipital (supraoccipital + paroccipital + exoccipital) plate behind. The posterior surface is somewhat injured and it is impossible Fic. 49. A. G. willoughbyt. <4. No. 4763 Am. Mus. Lateral view of skull. B. Lower view of skull. Same specimen. C. G. willoughbyi. Lateral view of skull. No. 4892 Am. Mus, X 3. to make out the form and relations of the various bones. The relations of the bones of the upper surface are shown in fig. 16. The premaxillaries were apparently large and sent back a process between the nares to meet the nasals. The anterior nares were of good size and terminal in position. The maxillary carries nine teeth; the posterior is small, the penultimate the largest; from this point they diminish regularly toward the anterior end. There are no tusks or enlarged teeth on the premaxillaries, the incisor teeth sharing in the regular diminution in size toward the anterior end of the skull. The three posterior teeth are the largest and have a greater anteroposterior diameter than transverse. There is no cutting edge on the anteroposterior faces. On the lower surface the basioccipital occupies a small space at the rear; the basisphenoid is a large flat plate and unites directly with a strong parasphenoid process. At the anterior end the parasphenoid meets two diverging plates, which are apparently the palatines, but in large part they are covered by the lower jaws. The lower edge of the pterygoids can be MORPHOLOGICAL REVISION 145 made out as a thin line in the matrix, which fills the back part of the skull; its relations to the basisphenoid and quadrate are normal. The lower jaws lie in position between the upper jaws and the teeth can not be seen. ‘The articular region is low, and just anterior to this the upper edge rises in a prominent coronoid process. The different bones of the jaws can not be made out, but it is apparent that the dentary takes part in the symphysis. The paratype confirms the points made out in the type. It shows the pterygoids as broad plates, approaching each other in the middle line. If there were any teeth on the pterygoids, they are too small to be seen in the present condition of the specimens. Certain small openings, anterior to the orbit in the type specimen, were considered as antorbital openings, but, as these do not appear in the more perfect paratype, they are probably accidental breaks. The type specimens of Cardiocephalus are not well preserved and it was impossible to recognize the relationship of this genus to Gymnarthrus from the description, but a direct comparison makes it very apparent. Cardiocephalus has, in both specimens, grooves lying on the inner side of the orbits, which seem to be natural and not the result of pressure; also, the pineal foramen is extremely small or absent; because of these struc- tures, which are absent in Gymnarthrus, the latter is retained in a separate genus, although it is recognized that when more than the skull is known the two may have to be united. Gymnarthrus was originally regarded as a reptile, but it may almost as readily be placed among the Amphibia; because of its resemblance to Cardiocephalus it is here placed provisionally in the latter class. Fic. 50. A. C. heteroclitus. No. 45504 Am. Mus. X #4. Upper view of skull showing sutures. B. Same. Lateral view of skull shown in A. Lettering of both figures as usual. C. Cricotus sp. No. 4551 Am. Mus. Much reduced. Lower view of skull, showing elon- gate Meckelian opening. Genus CRICOTUS Cope (p. 72). (Plates 24, 25.) Characteristic specimens: Nos. 4550, 45502, 4551, and 4552 Am. Mus. Nat. Hist. Cope Coll. The best specimens of this genus preserved are Nos. 4550 and 4550a, the type of C. crassidiscus. A large skull, No. 4551, shows little more than the general form; the sculpture and sutures can not be made out. 10 146 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA Figure 50, A and B, gives a restoration of a small skull No. 4550a, with such sutures as are certain. The whole skull is slender and elongate, with small, subequal, conical teeth showing along the edge of the maxillaries. The extremity of the snout is broken away just posterior to the nostrils, but the larger skull shows that the nostrils were nearly terminal. The orbits and nares looked largely upward. The sculpture, so far as can be seen, consists of small pits and rugosities. The supraoccipital plates are small and short, as are the tabulare. There are no prominent posterior angles on the tabulare. It is not possible to detect a-suture between the postorbital and postfrontal, and the ends of these bones extend nearly to the anterior edge of the orbit. The lower jaw is very deep posterior to the middle; the angle does not project beyond the quadrate region. On the inner side - there is a narrow, elongate opening into the Meckelian cavity. Fic. 51. . C. hypantricus. No. 4552 Am. Mus. X 2. Anterior view of a dorsal vertebra. Same. Lateral view of a dorsal intercentrum and pleurocentrum with neural arch detached. Same. A caudal intercentrum with attached chevron. . Same. Anterior view of a dorsal pleurocentrum, showing hypantropophyses on sides of neural canal. Same. Sacral pleurocentrum and intercentrum, showing facets for rib head. C. heteroclitus. No. 4550a Am. Mus. X 2. Neural arches and transverse processes of three dorsal vertebrz with rib heads. . Same. Several caudal vertebre showing elongate neural spines, and relation of neural arches and chevrons to pleurocentra and intercentra. QO mh YOB> The vertebral column of the most complete specimen shows thirty- seven presacral vertebre, but this is not the complete number, as there are at least two missing from the anterior end. Even the most anterior vertebre are embolomerous. The presacrals are all of similar form; the intercentra and centra are as described by Cope (see the original description). ‘The neural arches are free from the centra; the spines are low, with considerable fore-and-aft extent; the zygapophyses are horizontal; there are well-devel- oped transverse processes, to which are attached fairly long, slightly curved, MORPHOLOGICAL REVISION 147 single-headed ribs. The number of caudals is uncertain, but the tail was certainly very long, longer than the presacral portion of the body. As mounted in the American Museum, one specimen, No. 4550, has the tail sufficiently long to include forty-five or more complete vertebrz; this is perhaps too long. The pieces of the tail preserved do not fit and are arranged according to size. ‘The neural arches of the caudal vertebre are free and rest almost equally on centra and intercentra. The arches are elongated; the spines rise from far back and are very long. One nearly perfect spine reaches back over the second succeeding vertebra, measuring 65 mm. The chevrons are fused to the intercentra, the ends are broken so that the com- plete length can not be given; one nearly complete chevron, from a point near the end of series, measured 33.5 mm. Free ribs occur on the anterior caudals. The interclavicle is rhomboid, with a sharp point to the rear; the clavicles are represented by the anterior ends only; these overlap the inter- clavicle below; neither the clavicles nor the interclavicle show a determinable sculpture. There is a slender cleithrum with pointed anterior and clavate posterior ends. The scapula can not be made out. The abdominal armature of scales (plate 25) underlies the clavicular arch, covering the posterior end of the clavicle and interclavicle. This is composed of rhomboidal scales overlapping from before backward, and arranged in parallel series on each side. There are six to eight scales in each lateral series. The rows of the two sides are inclined forward and inward over the greater portion of the abdomen and form a chevron pattern with the apex forward; but just posterior to the pectoral arch the pattern is reversed, and the chevrons anterior to this point to the rear. ‘There is not a single V-shaped scale in the middle, but the scales of opposite sides overlap alternately. The pelvis is represented by the ilium and a fragment of the ischium. The ilium is much more reptilian in appearance than in most of the amphi- bia; the crest has a considerable posterior prolongation to the rear; the lower end is wide, showing the presence of a broad ischium and pubis. A femur attached to specimen No. 4550 is quite similar to that of Eryops in general form, but lacks the prominent, thin keel on the anterior face. Measurements. Specimen No. 4550a, as mounted: MM From tip of nose to end of sacrals ........... cece cee eeeeeee 820 From sacrals to tip of tail........ cece eee eee ees 720 Length of skull from anterior end of nose to middle of back of Leth eat Pack ec tae tle ate a handset ie alee pea nes ee 150 Back edge of skull to front of orbit..............00--20005- 73. Interorbital widthis:sacocaveris ececenaie eee hawea ees 21 Back edge of skull to anterior edge of parietal foramen...... 22 Specimen No. 4550, as mounted: From anterior end of clavicle to tip of tail..............566- 1048.5 Length of ventral armor. . 1.0.0... 0 cece eee ener e eens 675 Length of a femur..... 0... ccc cee ence nnn eee 70.5 A large skull No. 4551: Length from tip of nose to middle of posterior edge......... 238 Middle of posterior edge to anterior edge of orbit............ 81 Interorbital width............ 2. cece cee eee cnet ee eeee 34 Posterior edge to anterior edge of parietal foramen........... - «38 148 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA The foregoing description, with the original description quoted, gives about all we know of this creature. It is certain that it was an aquatic form with a very slender body, short legs, and a powerful tail. It was probably the most active of the amphibia of its time, rivaling in its speed and aggres- siveness the contemporary Reptilia. Its form and general adaptations sug- gest that it occupied a position in the animal world similar to that of the more slender and active Crocodilia to-day. Moody has recently (62) noted the occurrence of an embolomerous form in the Mazon Creek deposits. He regards it as related to Cricotus and belonging in the family Cricotide. ‘“‘It differs from Cricotus, however, in the form of the centrum, and the relatively greater length of the com- ponent elements. The notochordal canal is widely open.” TWO NEW INSECTS FROM THE PERMIAN OF TEXAS By E. H. SELLARDS Professor of Geology, University of Florida TWO NEW INSECTS FROM THE PERMIAN OF TEXAS. The specimens submitted to me by Professor Case consist of two detached front wings of cockroaches; two species being represented by the two specimens. The insects are preserved in a thin stratum of impure limestone. This limestone, according to Professor Case, lies directly upon a blue-clay stratum in which is found conifers and some fresh-water forms, probably Estheria. The two specimens derive an added interest from the fact that they are the first insects obtained from the Texas Permian. The character of the limestone in which they are preserved is not unlike that from which insects have been obtained in the Kansas Permian,* and it may be confidently expected that additional material will ultimately be obtained from the Texas deposits. The genus Eioblattina to which the two species are provisionally referred is common both to the Upper Coal Mea- sures and to the Permian. The two species are new. A B Meee Doe ee iete ss Fic. 52.—Wings of fossil cockroaches. A. Etoblattina texana sp. nov. B. Etoblattina permiana Sellards. A specimen from the Per- mian of Kansas, inserted for comparison. C. Etoblattina (?) robusta sp. nov. The line beneath each wing indicates three-fourths the breadth of wing measured across anal area. Etoblattina texana sp. nov. (Text fig. 52a.) Small cockroaches. Tegmina slender, almost three times as long as broad. Subcostal area short. Radial area strongly developed, its branches occupying a part of the apex of the wing. The radius divides first near the termination of the basal fifth of the wing. The upper branch gives off * Sellards: Amer. Journ. Sci., vol. xvi, pp. 323-324, 1903; vol. xxt1, pp. 249-258, 1906; vol. xx11I, pp. 345- 355, 1907; vol. XXVII, pp. 151-173, 1909. 151 152 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA three or four veins; the lower branch is again divided before reaching the middle of the wing, each division being subdivided. Media divides opposite the termination of the anal area, each division giving off. one or two simple branches. The cubitus is short and gives off three inferior branches, the second of which is forked. The anal area is of medium extent. Length of tegmina, partly estimated, 19 mm.; width 7 mm. ‘Type in the American Museum of Natural History. This species resembles in a general way E. permiana Sellards from the Permian of Kansas, an illustration of which is inserted for convenience of comparison (fig. 52 B). The radius of E. texana, however, divides much earlier and occupies a much larger area of the wing than does that of £. permiana. The cubitus of E. texana, on the other hand, is shorter and more lax than that of E. permiana. Etoblattina (?) robustasp. nov. (Text fig. 52 c.) Large cockroaches. Tegmina broad in proportion to length. Sub- costal area indistinctly preserved in the type specimen, but apparently broad. Radial area probably reaching to the tip of the wing. Media several times forked, its branches filling the inner part of the apex. Cubitus nearly straight and supplied with about six simple inferior branches. Anal area relatively long, traversed by eight or nine simple veins, the first four of which occupy more than half of the area. The imperfect preservation of the subcostal and radial areas renders the generic determination doubtful. Length of tegmina partly estimated, 30 mm.; width, 14 mm. ‘Type speci- men in the American Museum of Natural History. THE PERMIAN FISHES OF NORTH AMERICA By LOUIS HUSSAKOF Associate Curator of Fishes, American Museum Natural History THE PERMIAN FISHES OF NORTH AMERICA. INTRODUCTION. The fishes of the Permian of North America were described by Cope in a series of papers published between 1875 and 1894. In a list of the verte- brata, which he compiled in 1890, 21 species of fishes are enumerated; to these he subsequently added an additional one, making a total of 22 species, representing 10 genera. They are divided among the major groups as follows: Genera. | Species. Selachii............ 4 8 Dipneusti.......... 4 II Teleostomi......... 2 3 10 22 From the data presented in the following pages it will be seen that several of Cope’s species are not tenable. Some of his Permian material was too fragmentary for accurate diagnosis, and would better have been left unnamed. But, as was his custom, he gave names to most of this material in order to afford a handle by which to refer to it in discussions of the fauna. Moreover, Cope did not allow sufficient latitude to individual variation within the species, even slight differences being often regarded by him as specific. Hence it is not surprising that his list of species should have to undergo considerable change. A restudy of his types preserved in the American Museum of Natura History, of the material in the Gurley Col- lection at the University of Chicago, and also the study of some new material, result in the addition of four genera to Cope’s list; but the num- ber of species, on account of additions and subtractions, remains unchanged. These genera and species are divided among the various groups of fishes as follows: Genera. | Species. Selachii............ 2 3 Ichthyotomi........ 2 4 Ichthyodorulites.... 2 2 Dipneusti.......... 3 7 Crossopterygii...... I 2 Actinopterygii...... 4 4 14 22 155 SYSTEMATIC REVISION OF SPECIES. SELACHII. Genus JANASSA Munster. Beitr. Petrefakt., 1832, p. 67. Revised description of genus: 1. Depressed, ray-like sharks belonging to the extinct family Petalodontide. 2. Teeth in each jaw arranged in a pavement composed of several rows; those in median row the largest, and those in the lateral rows gradually diminishing in size. 3. Each tooth a flattened plate reflexed at both ends so as to appear fshaped in lateral view; the proximal reflexed part the root. Middle portion of tooth traversed on inner surface by a series of fine ridges. Carboniferous and Permian Periods. Represented in the Permian of America by two species, Janassa strigilina and J. gurleyana. Janassa strigilina (Cope). (Plate 26, figs. 1-15.) 1878. Strigilina lingueformis Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., XvII, p. 52. 1881. Janassa strigilina (Cope), Amer. Nat., p. 163. 1887. Janassa strigilina (Cope), Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., xvi, p. 285. 1889. Janassa strigilina (Cope), Woodward, Cat. Fos. Fishes, 1, p. 38. 1900. Janassa strigilina (Cope), Case, Journ. Geol., vit1, p. 699, pl. 1, figs. Ia—1¢. Type: A tooth, probably belonging to a median series. Gurley Col- lection, No. 6500 University of Chicago. Vermilion County, Illinois. Original description of species: ‘The plicate surface terminates behind in a median angle, at the base of the root. There are eight plicz which all cross the plane, excepting the sixth, which is interrupted in the middle by the strong angulation of the seventh, which touches the fifth. The lateral extremities of the right are in contact with the base of the recurved cutting portion. The latter is convex transversely, leaving a smooth surface between it and the eighth plica. The smooth side of the tooth is shining, and there is a shallow fold, which passes around its side and crosses just at the base of the recurved cutting lamina. “ Measurements. M “Total length of the plane......... 0.0... ccc eee cence cree eecs 0.008 Width at base of the cutting lamina.............ccccesceeeee .006 Width at the base of the root.......... ccc cece cece ee eeees 004. Thickness of plane portion... .........cceecceccceccccceeeces .0o15” Janassa gurleyana (Cope). (Plate 26, figs, 2-25.) 1878. Strigilina gurletana (Cope), Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., xvil, p. 191. 1881. Janassa gurleiana (Cope), Amer. Nat., xv, p. 163. 1889. Janassa gurleiana (Cope), Woodward, Cat. Fos. Fishes, 1, p. 39. 1900. Janassa gurleyana (Cope), Case, Journ. Geol., vim, p. 700, pl. 1, figs. 2a—2¢. Type: A small tooth lacking the root. Gurley Collection, No. 6501 University of Chicago. Vermilion County, Illinois. 156 THE PERMIAN FISHES OF NORTH AMERICA 157 This species is perhaps identical with Janassa strigilina, but based on a lateral tooth, whereas the former is based on a median one. In the absence of evidence on this point, however, it is best to retain the name strigilina, at least provisionally. Original description: “The tooth is quite small, its length only equaling the width of the known tooth of S. [Janassa] lingueformis. It is also nar- rower in proportion to the length. The root and the cutting edge are turned in opposite directions, as in the other species. The principal difference between the two is seen in the character of the transverse ridges or crests of the oral face. There are two crests less, or five, with a delicate basal fold, making six, while, counting the fold, there are eight in S. [Janassa] lingueformis. The anterior ridge is transverse; the others slightly convex backwards, and all are equidistant and uninterrupted, which is not the case in the older species. They are also of different form, being distinct ridges with anterior and posterior faces similar. In S. [Janassa] lingueformts the anterior face only is vertical, the posterior descending very gradually, the whole forming a series of steps. “Length of ridged face, 0.0060 m.; width anteriorly, 0.0035 m.; width posteriorly, 0.0020 m.” Janassa ordiana Cope (Am. Nat., xv, 1881, p. 163, and Trans. Am. Philos. Soc., xvi, 1888, p. 285) was mentioned by name only but never described. Its inclusion in the list was probably due to an oversight on Cope’s part, and it should be dropped. Thoracodus emydinus Cope (Proc. Academy Nat. Sci., Phila., 1883, p. 108) is, as suggested by A. S. Woodward (Catalogue Fossil Fishes British Mus., 1, p. 39), an incomplete Janassa tooth; but it is too imperfectly defined to stand as a valid species. (?) Genus HYBODUS Agassiz. There are in the American Museum collections a number of fragments of a spine (No. 7263), too imperfect for description, which indicate, appar- ently, a species of Hybodus (plate 30, figs. 5, 5a). The fragments represent a large spine ornamented with smooth, coarse ridges closely apposed to one another and with a single series of small denticles running down the middle of the posterior face. Anterior margin of “cut water” without an enlarged rib. ICHTHYOTOMI. Genus PLEURACANTHUS Agassiz. Poiss. Fos., 111, 1837, p. 66. The type genus of the Ichthyotomi—a group of extinct, primitive sharks ranging from the Upper Devonian to the Triassic, and reaching its maximum evolution in the Carboniferous. Revised description of genus: ; : Skeleton cartilaginous, with minute prismatic calcifications. Notochord persistent. Neural and hemal arches present. Paired fins of the archipterygial type with segmented lateral branches. Dorsal fin without spine, low, extending from a little back of the occiput to origin of caudal. mw BYP e 158 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA 6. Caudal fin diphycercal. 7. Two anal fins. 8. A large denticulated spine attached to occipital region of cranium. g. Teeth with two divergent cusps springing from a broad, flat base, and with one or more small median denticles. Pleuracanthus quadriseriatus (Cope). (Plate 26, figs. 3-35.) 1877. Orthacanthus quadriseriatus Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., p. 192. 1889. Pleuracanthus quadriseriatus (Cope), Woodward, Cat. Fos. Fishes, 1, p. 9. 1900. Pleuracanthus (Orthacanthus) quadriseriatus Cope, Case, Journ. Geol., vit, p- 700, pl. 1, figs. 3a-3. 1902. Pie gaene quadriseriatus (Cope), Hay, Bull. U. S. Geol. Surv., No. 179, p. 264. Type: Small fragment of a head spine, 7 mm. long, from near the distal end of the spine. No. 6502 Gurley Collection, University of Chicago; Vermilion County, Illinois (plate 26, figs. 3-30). Referred specimen: A small fragment of a head-spine associated with the type specimen (plate 26, fig. 3’). The fragment upon which this species is based is from the distal portion of a spine—the part which shows less of the peculiarities of the spine than any other, since it is generally smoother and rounder than the proximal portion. But since the species has been described, the name must be retained, provisionally at least. Cope’s diagnosis of it is as follows: Original description: “The spine is wider than deep, and the series of denticles are widely separated. ‘The surface between them is gently convex and smooth. The anterior face is strongly convex, and presents at each side two shallow furrows. The external groove is divided by a series of thin longitudinal denticles which are smaller than those of the principal row and which are sometimes confluent at the base. The principal denticles are closely placed, stout, acute, and recurved. “Transverse diameter of shaft 0.0035 m.; anteroposterior diameter 0.0025 m.; the portion of the shaft preserved is straight.” Pleuracanthus gracilis (Newberry). (Plate 26, figs. 4-45.) 1875. Orthacanthus gracilis Newberry, Paleont. Ohio, 11, p. 56, pl. Lx, fig. 7. 1881. Orthacanthus gracilis Newb., Cope, Am. Nat., xv, p. 163. 1889. Orthacanthus gracilis Newb., A. S. Woodward, Cat. Fos. Fishes, 1, p. 9. 1900. Pleuracanthus (Orthacanthus) gracilis Newb., Case, Journ. Geol., vit1, p. 701, pl. 1, fig. 4. This species is represented by a number of fragments of head-spines preserved in the University of Chicago collection (No. 6503), from the Red Beds in Vermilion County, Illinois. They may be distinguished at a glance from the preceding species by their circular cross-section and larger, more widely-spaced denticles. In the proximal portion of the spine the denticles of the two rows are placed opposite one another, while in the more distal portion they alternate, though not regularly. Newberry’s definition of the species applies word for word to the fragments in hand and may here be appended: Original description: “Spine small and straight, about three inches long, very slender and acute; section circular at base, posterior face and sides flattened above; the angle inclosed by them set with acute, recurved, com- THE PERMIAN FISHES OF NORTH AMERICA 159 pressed denticles throughout the upper two-thirds of the entire length; surface smooth or very finely striated longitudinally.” Genus DIACRANODUS Garman. (Plates 28, 29, and part of 30.) Bull. Mus. Compar. Zool., x11, 1885, p. 30. The genus Diacranodus is at present known from crania and teeth only; it is therefore impossible to compare it in all details of its anatomy with Pleuracanthus. ‘The crania of the two, however, seem to be sufficiently different to justify their separation generically. The characters of the cranium of Diacranodus are well brought out in the figures in plates 28 and 29, which are based on the types and one of the referred specimens of the type species, D. texensis. A restoration is also given, plate 29, figures 1, Ia. Revised description of genus (based on skull): 1. Cranium fiddle-shaped; more shark-like than ray-like, as shown by the smallish rostral fontanelle. . 2. Nasal capsules, auditory capsules, and postorbital processes well | developed. 3. A pair of elongated bars (trabecule?), on the under side, in the median axis of the cranium, inclosing between them a small fossa (pituitary ?). 4. Foramen magnum, on the under side of cranium, in the basi- sphenoid region. 5. Posterior face of cranium cup-shaped (for the articulation of the spine?). 6. Teeth as in Pleuracanthus. Diacranodus texensis (Cope). (Plates 28, 29, and 30, figs. 9-90.) 1883. Didymodus (?) compressus (Newb.) Cope, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., p. 108. 1884. Didymodus compressus (Newb.), Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., xx1, p. 585, 1 pl. 1884. Didymodus compressus (Newb.), Cope, Amer. Nat., xviii, pp. 413 and 818, pl. xxiii, 1885. Pleuracanthus compressus (Newb.), Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., xx1, p. 406. 1885. Diacranodus compressus (Newb.), Garman, Bull. Mus. Compar. Zool., x11, p. 30. 1890. Didymodus texensis Cope, Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., N. s., XVI, p. 285. 1900. Pleuracanthus compressus (Newb.), Case, Journ. Geol., vit, p. 701. Cotypes: 1. A complete, badly crushed cranium, figured by Cope in ventral view (erroneously interpreted as dorsal), 1884, Joc. cit., plate, fig. 1. No. 7928 Am. Mus. 2. The anterior portion of a cranium, figured by Cope, loc. cit., plate, fig.4. This memoir, pl. 28, figs.1,1a. No.7929 Am. Mus. 3. The posterior half of a cranium, figured by Cope, /oc. cit., plate, figs. 2, 3 (ventral view, erroneously labeled as dorsal). This memorr, pl. 28, figs. 2, 2a. No. 7930 Am. Mus. 4. The facial portion of a cranium, showing upper and lower jaws from right side, and the hyomandibular, naturally articulated. Also two isolated teeth which probably do not belong with this head. Cope, Joc. cit., plate, figs. 5 and 6. This memoir, pl. 29, fig. 2. No. 7117 Am. Mus. All from the Red Beds, Northwest Texas. 160 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA Referred material: Numerous well-preserved teeth; fragments of spines; several crania; the five teeth figured by Case, Joc. cit., No. 6504 University of Chicago. Original description: “Skull with massive walls. Form elongate, depressed, the orbit not extending behind the anterior third of the length. Basicranial and basifacial axes in one line, flattened, the supraorbital border flat, concave on the edge; postorbital processes obtuse, the temporal ridges commencing with thin posterior border, which they excavate. The ridges then turn, extend parallel posteriorly, terminating in the horn-like processes already described, with a slight divergence. The apices mark the posterior third of the length of the skull. The occipital condyle is wider than deep, and its superior border retreats forwards so as to cause its cup to look upwards. The exoccipital diameter at the foramen magnum is less than that of the basicranial axis, the osseous element of which, probably sphenoid, is recurved on the sides to their middle. The sides of the latter expand a little to meet their lateral ale. Immediately above their contact is situ- ated the supposed condyle for the hyomandibular element. The basicranial axis is convex opposite the postorbital processes, from the bases of which a concavity separates it. It has a slight median groove at this point. It is much narrower than the interorbital width above. A short distance in front of the postorbital processes it begins to contract, and gradually reaches an acuminate apex. Superior to this apex, commencing posterior to it, the space between it and the supraorbital or nasal elements is occupied by a massive element (? ethmoid) which forms the floor of the nasal median fontanelle. “The surfaces are smooth, but readily weather so as to be granular. The granules are subround, with flattened surface. “ Measurements of skull. M “Total length of skull to end of frontal bone (No. 1).............. 0.180 Total length of muzzle to orbit; axial... 1.2... . cc eee ee ee ee eee 024 Total length of skull to postorbital process...............00 cece 058 Total length of skull to apices of frontal cartilage................ 117 Total length of skull to (?) pterotic apex (axial).............000- 155 Width of skull at prefrontals... 0.0.0.0... cece cece cece cece eens 045 Width of skull at supraorbital borders. ............ 0. ccc cece eee 055 Width of skull at (?) pterotic apices. ..... 0... cece cece .088 Width of occipital condyle............ cece cece eee c eee eeeeees 034 Depth of occipital condyle............ ccc cece cece eect ee eeee .025 “ Measurements of jaws. M “Length of mandibular ramus from cotylus, inclusive............. 0.145 Depth of mandibular ramus at cotylus............ lie eee danoeaeawia 028 Depth of mandibular ramus at middle....................00000 .035 Length of palatopterygoid bone from cotylus, inclusive........... 145 Depth of palatopterygoid bone at postorbital articulation......... O71 Depth of palatopterygoid bone at orbit................ cece euee 035 Length of palatopterygoid bone posterior to orbit................ 070” Diacranodus platypternus (Cope). (Plate 30, fig. 8.) 1884. Didymodus platypternus Cope, Amer. Nat., xvi, p. 818, pl. xxiii, figs. 8, 9. 1884. series platypternus Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., xx1, p. 587, plate, gs. 8, 9. 1885. Diacranodus platypternus (Cope), Garman, Bull. Mus. Compar. Zool., p. 30. 1890. Didymodus platypternus Cope, ‘Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., N. s., XVI, p. 285. Type: Numerous fragments of a pair of large jaws and two imperfect teeth. No. 7243 Am. Mus. Texas. THE PERMIAN FISHES OF NORTH AMERICA 161 This species is not well differentiated from the preceding, owing to the paucity of material. No sufficient reason for separating it can be found in the peculiarities said by Cope to be present in the teeth—as has already been pointed out by Broili (7). The material available indicates a form of larger size than Diacranodus texensis. Its distinctive characters as given by Cope are the following: Original description: “The lower jaw is distinguished from that of the D. compressus by its small transverse as compared with its other diameters. The ramus is quite compressed, and is not thicker at the inferior edge than the superior, and is slightly concave on the inner side. Its external face is nearly vertical. The angle is rounded forwards, and there is no angle behind the cotylus, which is raised above the superior line of the ramus. The cotylus is rather large, and has a shallow anterior superior, and a pos- terior subposterior facet. There is no indication of a coronoid process. The inferior edge of the ramus is swollen on the outer side, below the anterior border of the condyle, so as to mark with the thickened posterior edge of the ramus a fossa in the position of the masseteric.” ICHTHYODORULITES. Genus CTENACANTHUS Agassiz. Poiss. Fos., 111, 1837, p. 10. A provisional genus of sharks, to which are referred numerous paleo- zoic dorsal fin-spines, known to have had (at least in certain species referred to the genus) cladodont dentition and primitive fin-fold paired fins. Revised description of genus: 1. Dorsal spines straight or gently arcuate, and more or less later- ally compressed. 2. Lateral faces longitudinally ridged, the ridges smooth or orna- mented with various types of denticulations or beading. 3. Posterior face flat or concave, usually with a series of small denticles along each margin. Ctenacanthus amblyxiphias Cope. (Plate 30, figs. 6-62.) 1891. Ctenacanthus amblyxiphias Cope, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., x1v, p. 449, pl. xxviii, fig. 3. 1902. Ctenacanthus amblyxiphias Cope, Hay, Bull. U. S. Geol. Surv., No. 179, p. 327. Type: An imperfect spine. When complete about 25 or 30 cm. No. 7283 Am. Mus. ‘Texas. Referred specimen: No. 7282 (plate 30, fig. 6). Original description: “Spine elongate, but little curved, moderately compressed; the posterior face with a flat median plane bounded by a shallow groove on each side. The ridges are wider than their interspaces, and they gradually become smaller posteriorly, so as to be half the diameter of the anterior ribs. The anterior border consists of a single rib of twice the diam- eter of the largest lateral ribs. Its front surface is smooth; the sides are marked with shallow grooves directed downward, and the border is serrate with subacute tubercles, which point backward. The tubercles of the ribs are closely placed and vary from round to transverse in shape, and have a finely grooved surface. The line of the posterior hooks is flush with the sides of the spine. They are small, decurved, and subacute.’’ ir 162 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA Genus ANODONTACANTHUS J. W. Davis. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., xxxvu1, 1881, p. 427. A genus of ichthyodorulites represented in the Coal Measures of England and in the Permian of Bohemia and Texas. It may be defined as follows: Revised description of genus: 1. Spines straight, or very gently arched, as viewed from the side. 2. No denticles along posterior margin. 3. Lateral faces ornamented either with incised lines which are discrete for some distance and then anastomose or end abruptly; or with lines and pittings arranged so as to give a reticulated appearance. 4. Pulp-cavity circular in cross-section, completely inclosed, large (occupying about one-third the width of the cross-section in the proximal part of the spine) and gradually diminishing in diame'er distalward. In 1881, J. W. Davis described (50 a) three species of Carboniferous fish- spines, two from Yorkshire and one from near Edinburgh, for which he proposed the generic name Anodontacanthus. They differed from all other ichthyodorulites in the absence of denticles along the posterior margin; but in several respects they were suggestive of the head-spines of Pleura- canthus, enough so, in fact, to raise the question whether Anodontacanthus might not really be identical with this genus. _ In 1888, Traquair showed that one of these three species—the one from Scotland, Anodontacanthus fastigiatus—was a weathered Pleuracanth spine. In a large series of these spines he found that some “‘are smooth and without denticles, others show, in all stages of apparent wearing away, undoubted stumps of denticles, whereby the species fastigiatus falls into Pleuracanthus” (66a). The removal of one of the three species of Anodonta- canthus to Pleuracanthus did not, of course, invalidate Anodontacanthus, which should still be retained as a provisional genus. In 1889, Fritsch in his “Fauna der Gaskohle,” page 113, plate 86, fig. 5, described and figured a similar spine from the Permian of Bohemia, to which he gave the name Platyacanthus ventricosus. This spine falls within the definition of Anodontacanthus and hence Platyacanthus must be regarded as a synonym. The genus is represented in the Permian of Texas by a distinct species which is described below. Anodontacanthus americanus n. sp. (Plate 26, figs. 5-54.) Type: A spine lacking both distal and proximal extremities. Length of preserved portion, 59 mm. Diameter at widest part, 10mm. No. 7934 Amer. Mus. Red Beds, Texas. This species is distinguishable from the Bohemian one, 4. ventricosus (Fritsch), by its smaller size, the shape of its cross-section and the absence of pittings in the striations. The American form is stouter and not such an elongated ellipse in cross-section (the character which had apparently sug- gested the generic name Platyacanthus to Fritsch). From the two Carbonif- erous species it is distinguished by its cross-section and by the details of ornamentation. THE PERMIAN FISHES OF NORTH AMERICA 163 DIPNEUSTI. Genus SAGENODUS Owen. Trans. Odontol. Soc., v, 1867, p. 365. Description of genus: 1. Body-form resembling that of the living Neoceratodus. 2. Head covered with numerous plates, of which one is a large median occipital; a smaller median plate in front of it. Scales large, thin, irregularly ovate, or polygonal with rounded angles. Scales and external bones without a layer of ganoine. Dental plates, triangular, irregularly ovate, with few radiating ridges, which may be smooth, or more or less crenulated or denticulated. Caudal, continuous with dorsal and anal fins. oS ES Sagenodus dialophus (Cope). (Plate 26, figs. 6, 7.) 1878. Ctenodus dialophus Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., xvii, p. 528. 1881. Ctenodus dialophus Cope, Amer. Nat., xv, p. 162. 1888. Ctenodus dialophus Cope, Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., xvi, p. 285. 1891. Sagenodus dialophus (Cope), Woodward, Cat. Fos. Fishes, Brit. Mus., 11, p. 261. 1899. Sagenodus dialophus (Cope), Williston, Kans. Univ. Quart., Ser. A. vim, p. 176. Type: Left lower dental plate lacking portions of first two ridges. No. 7234 Am. Mus. Cope Collection. Texas. Referred specimen: An imperfect dental plate; Texas. No.7470Am. Mus. Original description: Dental plate ‘‘of narrow form, and has more num- erous crests than any other known American species. They number ten, and there are two or three other rudimental ones at the posterior extremity. They are all more transverse than usual, five being directed forwards and five slightly backwards. The crests are acute, but the grooves and emargina- tions are not very deep. The crests are entire, except at the obliquely truncate distal extremities, where there are from two to four dentations. The shining layer does not extend within these. The inner border of the tooth is vertical, excepting posteriorly, where the inner border of the crest-bearing portion turns outwards, leaving a narrow ledge of the palatal face. The latter is concave in cross-section. “ Measurements. M “Length (0.004 at one end inferential)..........-.--0-eeeeeeeeees 0.033 Width at fifth crest. cc tco sae aes ven wiet gee ce eee ee haleaa wary O10 Depth opposite fifth crest......... 00. cece cece cece ee eee ee eeees 004 Sagenodus fossatus (Cope). (Plate 26, figs. 8-11.) 1877. Ctenodus fossatus Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., xvit, p. 53. 1877. Ctenodus gurleyanus Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., Xv1I, p. 54. 1878. Ctenodus porrectus Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., xvl, p. 527. 1883. Ctenodus vabasensis Cope, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., p. 110. Type: An imperfect, immature, left mandibular plate. No. 6506 Uni- versity of Chicago Gurley Collection. Vermilion County, Illinois. Referred specimens: 1. The type of Ctenodus gurleyanus Cope—an upper dental plate. Vermilion County, Illinois. No. 6509 University of Chicago. 2. Type of Ctenodus porrectus Cope—a lower(?) dental plate. Vermilion County, Illinois. No. 7235 American Museum. 3. Type of Ctenodus vabasensis Cope—one dental plate. Vermilion County, Illinois. No. 6510 University of Chicago. 164 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA This species was founded on an immature, imperfect dental plate. Subsequently well-preserved, mature plates were obtained by Cope from the same locality and described as distinct species under the names given in the synonymy above. It appears very plainly, however, after a com- parison of ten dental plates in the American Museum and in the University of Chicago collections, representing these forms, that they are only varia- tions of one species. For this the name Sagenodus fossatus should be used because of priority. Revised description: Dental plate with six or seven ridges radiating from an inner smooth area; these ridges separated from one another by very deep grooves. Each ridge with several (three to six) coarse denticulations in its distal half, but mreeiial half sharp and even, gradually descending towards the inner smooth area. Sagenodus (Ctenodus) heterolophus Cope (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 1883, p. 109) was founded on “a single broken tooth” which was de- scribed but not figured. The description is quite inadequate, leaving open the question whether the specimen was not an imperfect S. fossatus. The whereabouts of the type are unknown. A specimen in the American Mus- eum, No. 7473 (plate 27, fig. 6), is perhaps this type, as it answers in a mea- sure to the dimensions given by Cope; but of this there is no certainty. It presents the three anterior ridges of a lower dental plate, of which the most anterior ridge is higher than the succeeding ones. On the whole, S. hetero- lophus can not be regarded as a valid species since it was not sufficiently described. Sagenodus paucicristatus (Cope). (Plate 27, figs. 4, 4a.) 1877. Ceratodus paucicristatus Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., xvtt, p. 53. 1877. Ptyonodus paucicristatus Cope, [bid., p. 192. 1891. Sagenodus paucicristatus Cope, Woodward, Cat. Fos. Fishes, Brit. Mus., 1, p. 261. 1899. Sagenodus paucicristatus Cope, Williston, Kans. Univ. Quart., Ser. A, vii, p. 175. 1900. Sagenodus paucicristatus Cope, Case, Journ. Geol., v111, p. 707. Type: An imperfect dental plate. No. 6505 University of Chicago Gurley Collection. Vermilion County, Illinois. Original description: “The single tooth representing this species is narrow in the transverse direction, but stout in vertical diameter. But four ridges are present, all of which have a single direction, but the shorter ones are the less oblique to the long axis of the tooth. They all extend into the inner border, but become low as they approach it. Distally they are quite prominent, but do not project very far beyond the emarginate border between them. The inner border is plane and vertical, and without ledge; the inferior surface is concave in the transverse direction. The surface of the tooth is minutely and elegantly corrugated. “Measurements. Mt “Length from base to second rib............... cee eeeeeeceeeees 0.0170 Depth at base of second rib....... 0... ccc cece eee eters 0045” I may add that while only four ridges are preserved in the type, a com- parison with other species indicates that at least two more must have been present. The ridges are sharp and devoid of the denticulations so con- spicuous in some other species, ¢.g., Sagenodus fossatus; the second ridge, however, shows at its distal end two faint elongated crenulations. THE PERMIAN FISHES OF NORTH AMERICA 165 Sagenodus periprion (Cope). (Plate 27, figs. 5-s5a.) 1878. Ctenodus periprion Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., xvul, p. 527. 1881. Ctenodus periprion Cope, Amer. Naturalist, xv, p. 162. 1888. Crenodus periprion Cope, Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., xv1, p. 285. 1891. se erie periprion (Cope), Woodward, Cat. Fos. Fishes, Brit. Mus., 1, p. 261, 1899. pe periprion (Cope), Williston, Kans. Univer. Quart., Ser. A, vim, p. 176. Type: A left palatal plate, defective at anterior and posterior extremi- ties. No. 7474 Am. Mus. Cope Collection. Texas. Original description: ‘This large species is indicated by a fine palatal tooth of the left side. Its outline approaches that of a right-angled triangle, but the hypothenuse is deeply incised by the interradial notches. The plate is rather thin, and is moderately concave on the inferior face. The ridges number seven, all of which are directed outwards and forwards. They are separated by strong grooves, have a perfectly smooth and uniform crest, and become more elevated at the distal extremities. The latter are steeply decurved and serrate, both faces being invested with a polished enamel-like layer. This substance is only visible in an edge view, and covers one-half the depth of the margin, being excavated by the extremities of the radiating grooves. The superior face is flat. “The absence of serration from the radiating ridges of this species is a striking feature, allying it to the genus Ptyonodus, where the teeth are wanting. ** Measurements. M “Length of dental plate... 0... 0. ccc eee ee eee eee 0.037 Width of dental plate... 2... cece cece eneee .018 Thickness at inner border.............. cece eee eee e eee e ee eees 005 Thickness at external border of penultimate crest................ .007” Sagenodus vinslovi (Cope). (Plate 27, figs. 7-8.) 1875. Ceratodus vinslovi Cope, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., p. 410. 1877. Ceratodus vinslovt Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., xvi. 1877. Ptyonodus vinslovi (Cope), [bid., p. 192. 1891. Sagenodus vinslowi (Cope), Woodward, Cat. Fos. Fishes, Brit. Mus., 11, p. 262. . 1899. Sagenodus vinslovi (Cope), Williston, Kans. Univer. Quart., Ser. A, vim, . 176. 1900. Seon vinslovi (Cope), Case, Journ. Geol., vir, p. 703, pl. 1, figs. 6a-6b. Type: A left palatal plate defective at anterior extremity. No. 6507 University of Chicago Gurley Collection. Vermilion County, Illinois. Referred specimen: A left palatal from Texas, also defective anteriorly. No. 7233 Am. Mus. Cope Collection. Revised description: Dental plate relatively thin; coronal face traversed by six ridges radiating from an inner smooth area, which occupies one-third to one-half the width of the entire element; ridges smooth, without serrations, rising gradually towards their distal extremities, which are cusp-like. De- pressions between ridges wide and shallow. 166 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA Genus CERATODUS Agassiz. Poiss. Fos., 11, 1838, p. 129. Revised description of genus: 1. Body-form similar to that of the living Neoceratodus. 2. Head with relatively few, thin bones; two (“‘ethmoid” and “‘occip- ital’’) in the median line, one behind the other; three pairs of lateral plates symmetrically disposed on either side of these. 3. Scales large and thin. 4. Paired fins, archipterygia with biserial radials, and covered with scales. 5. Dental elements irregularly triangular, with ridges developed into stout cusps, without lateral denticles. Ceratodus favosus Cope. (Plate 27, figs. 11, 114.) 1884. Ceratodus favosus Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., xx11, p. 28. 1888. Ceratodus favosus Cope, Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., xvi, p. 286. 1891. Ceratodus favosus Cope, Woodward, Cat. Fos. Fishes, Brit. Mus., 1, p. 274. 1908. Ceratodus favosus Cope, Hussakof, Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., xxv, p. 51. Type: A fragment of a splenial with portion of a dental element show- ing two cusps. No. 7230 Am. Mus. Cope Collection. Texas. In the writer’s opinion the type of this species was too fragmentary for specific description. Its distinctive characters are given by Cope as follows: Original description: “The species may be distinguished from those | described by Agassiz, and from the existing species, by the great depth of the two emarginations of the external side. ‘These enter the crown so deeply as to reduce its width to dimensions no greater than those of each of the processes of the crown. The internal face is strongly convex, and one extremity is more strongly recurved than the other.” The first of these two supposedly distinctive characters applies equally well to some dental elements of Neoceratodus forsteri. In fact I have a dentition of this species before me in which the emarginations are certainly as deep as in the type of C. favosus. And as to the second character, namely, that ‘“‘the internal face is strongly convex, and one extremity is more strongly recurved than the other”—that I believe will apply equally well to many other ceratodont dental plates. The convexity of the internal face in these dental elements is quite variable. All that should have been concluded from the specimen was the presence of Ceratodus in the Permian of America; but no new species should have been founded upon it. How- ever, since the species has been established, we have no alternative but to retain it until better material comes to light and proves it either valid or merely a synonym. Genus GNATHORHIZA Cope. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., xx, 1883, p. 629. The genus Gnathorhiza was founded by Cope on small dental elements which he thought “very doubtfully * * * may belong to the Petalo- dont family.” Since the date of his description, however, several similar elements have been discovered, and from these it is quite certain that they represent the dental system of a dipnoan and not of a shark. This dipnoan, as far as one may infer from the dental plates alone, differed strongly from all others and should stand as generically distinct. THE PERMIAN FISHES OF NORTH AMERICA 167 Cope’s description of Gnathorhiza was given in a single paragraph, which was unaccompanied by figures, and otherwise left doubts open concerning the diagnostic characters of this form; for one reason, because of his com- parison of these dental elements with sharks’ teeth. It would have been diffi- cult to recognize his genus again merely by his description had it not been for the preservation of his type specimen in the American Museum of Natural History. Before any figures of it were published, however, Dr. Eastman described two similar dental elements under the name Sagenodus pertenuts (50 b). He recognized the anomalous character of this dipnoan, and gave an accurate description of its dental elements accompanied by excellent figures. His view of the peculiarities of this type of dipnoan dentition is given in these words: [This fish] ‘‘occupies a unique position amongst fossil dipnoans in having a dentition adapted for cutting instead of crushing, thus paralleling the con- ditions found in certain Paleozoic sharks and in recent Gymnodonts. This divergence is the more striking in view of the singularly uniform type of dental system pervading lung-fishes throughout their entire geological history.” In 1908 the writer figured the type specimen of Gnathorhiza for the first time and called attention to its identity with the form described as Sagenodus pertenuis by Eastman (55 a). Of the dental elements referable to Gnathorhiza, three distinct species have been made: 1. Ctenodus pusillus Cope, 1877, based on a very small dental plate from Illinois. 2. Gnathorhiza serrata Cope, 1883, based on a small dental plate from Texas. 3. Sagenodus pertenuis Eastman, 1903, based on two small dental plates from Illinois (?). A study of the types of these species, however, shows that they are all of the same genus (Gnathorhiza), and probably of one species. For this species the name pusilla should be retained because of priority. A differ- ence is observable between the pusilla and the serrata forms—the former having two and the latter but one transverse coronal ridges. This, however, is not sufficient reason for separating them specifically, since variations in the number of ridges in dipnoan dental elements is quite common. Furthermore, as remarked by Dr. Eastman, it is probable that the superior dental plate of this form had one ridge more than the lower. ‘The generic characters of Gnathorhiza are comprised in the description of G. pusilla, the only known species, below: Gnathorhiza pusilla (Cope). (Plate 27, figs 9-10.) 1877. Ctenodus pusillus Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., xvi, p. 191. 1883. Gnathorhiza serrata Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., xx, p. 629. 1888. Gnathorhiza serrata Cope, Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., xvi, p. 286. 1891. Sagenodus pusillus (Cope), Woodward, Cat. Fos. Fishes, Brit. Mus., 1, p. 261, 1899. Sagenodus pusillus (Cope), Williston, Kans. Univer. Quart., Ser. A, vu, p. 176. 1900. Sagenodus pusillus (Cope), Case, Journ. Geol., virt, p. 705, pl. 1, figs. 94, gb. 1903. Sagenodus pertenuis Eastman, Amer. Nat., xxXxvil, p. 493, figs. 1-2. 1908. Gnathorhiza serrata Cope, Hussakof, Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., xxv, p. 53, fig. 25. Type: A small right palatal plate. No. 6508 University of Chicago Gurley Collection. Vermilion County, Illinois. 168 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA Referred specimens: 1. A right mandibular element, the type of Gnathorhiza serrata. No. 7258 Am. Mus. Cope Collection. Texas. 2. A left mandibular collected by Case in Texas, larger and better preserved than either of the preceding. No. 7935 Am. Mus. Description of species: Dental plates relatively small, with oral face adapted for cutting or chopping rather than grinding. Inner oral margin compressed into a sharp edge angulated near its middle and with one or two sharp ridges radiating from the angulation; anterior moiety of coronal ridge with two or three broad denticulations; posterior moiety, as well as radiating ridges, finely serrated. CROSSOPTERYGII. Genus MEGALICHTHYS Agassiz, Poiss. Fos., 11, pt. 11, 1844, pp. 89, 154. A Crossopterygian genus belonging to the family Osteolepide. Revised description of genus: 1. Cranial bones arranged as in typical Osteolepida, with paired frontals and parietals. 2. Throat region protected by a pair of large gular plates, an anterior median gular plate, and a series of small lateral plates. 3. Teeth conical, those in front part of jaw much larger than the others. 4. Vertebre ossified in the form of rings, with well-developed neural and hemal arches. 5. Paired fins covered with scales except in their distal portions. 6. Dorsal fins two in number: the first opposed to the ventrals; the second a short distance in advance of the anal. 7. Caudal fin, heterocercal. 8. Scales thick, covered with ganoine and finely punctate. Carboniferous and Permian. The Permian species of Megalichthys were originally described by Cope as a new genus, Ectosteorhachis. The distinction between this genus and Megalichthys, according to him, consists in differences in the form of the vertebral centra. “Both Agassiz and Huxley describe those of Megalichihys as completely ossified and as biconcave. In Ectosteorhachis they are repre- sented by annular ossifications resembling somewhat those of the stegoceph- alous genus Cricotus, but with a larger foramen Chorde dorsalis’? (25, p. 56). Regarding this distinction it may be said that the vertebre of Cope’s Ectosteorhachis do not differ markedly from those of Megalichthys as figured, for instance, by Wellburn.* In both they are narrow rings, but those in Cope’s specimen (see plate 30, figs. 1, 2) are not well enough preserved to make it absolutely certain that they were complete, and not open, above. In all other respects, so far as the state of preservation of Cope’s speci- men allows of comparison, Ectosteorhachis and Megalichthys are the same. Hence the latter name should be employed for Ectosteorhachts.f * Proc. Yorkshire Geol. and Polytechnic Soc., 1900, pl. xix, fig. F. + Dr. O. P. Hay has pointed out (54, p. 362) that the name Megalichthys was first applied to the fishes generally known as Rhizodus. And hence Rhizodus should, properly, be called Megalichthys, Because of priority; and the genus generally called Megalichthys should have its name changed to Parabatrachus Owen, which is an available synonym. But in view of the confusion which would result in thus reversing a usage which has been in vogue for eight decades and has become thoroughly established in the science, the writer deems it best to retain the name Megalichthys in its present general usage. THE PERMIAN FISHES OF NORTH AMERICA 169 Megalichthys nitidus (Cope). (Plate 30, figs. 1-4; plate 31, figs. 3-35.) 1880. Ectosteorhachis nitidus Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., xrx, p. 56. 1888. Ectosteorhachis nitidus Cope, Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., xv1, p. 286. 1891. Megalichthys nitidus (Cope), Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., xrv, p. 457, pl. xxxii, figs. 8, 9. 1891. Megalichthys nitidus (Cope), Woodward, Cat. Fos. Fishes, Brit. Mus., 11, p. 388. 1899. Parabairachus nitidus (Cope), Hay, Amer. Nat., xxx11, p. 788. Type: Head and trunk, including ventral fins, of a large fish. No. 7239 Am. Mus. Texas. Referred specimen: Cranium and some vertebre. No. 7936 Am. Mus. Archer County, Texas. The principal points in the specific diagnosis may be condensed from Cope’s original description as follows: Original description: “‘ Pectoral fins originate further behind the head than is usual. The ventrals are well posterior and close together. * * * The orbits are in’front of a transverse line divid- ing the skull equally. The muzzle is broadly rounded, and is covered with rounded plates of ganoine. Several of these have median per- forations. * * * The top of the head behind the muzzle is entirely without ganoine layer in two specimens; its surface is smooth, or weakly finely ridged. On the other hand the premax- illary, maxillary, mandibular, and gular bones are invested with perfectly smooth ganoine. “The pectoral fins are quite wide, and their rays diverge exclusively from the inner border, and are very fine. The ne eae is thick and acuminate, and has no fulcra on : the external edge, but is covered with quad- ee a ‘apd: Noun rate and rhomboidal scales, of very much smaller size than those of the body. The axial portion of the ventral fins is not quite so large as that of the pectoral. “The scales of the body are quite large and overlap each other by both the free edges. Though their form is rhombic, the apex is rounded. The surface is ganoid, and entirely smooth. There are five rows between the internal bases of the ventral fins, and twelve between the external bases of the pectorals.” Megalichthys ciceronius (Cope). 1883. Ectosteorhachis ciceronius Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., xx, p. 628. 1888. Ectosteorhachis ciceronius Cope, Trans. Amer. Philos. Soc., XVI, p. 286. 1891. Megalichthys ciceronius (Cope), Woodward, Cat. Fos. Fishes, Brit. Mus., 11, p.388. 1891. Megalichthys ciceronius (Cope), Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., xiv, p. 457. 1899. Parabatrachus ciceronius (Cope), Hay Amer. Nat., xxxi1I, p. 788. 1900. Megalichthys ciceronius (Cope), Wellburn, Proc. Yorkshire Geol. and Poly- technic Soc., p. 60. This species was founded on two imperfect crania, which have thus far not been identified among the material in the Cope collection in the American Museum; nor have they been found in any other collection. Cope’s diagnosis of the species was as follows: a Original description: “The E. ciceronius differs from the E. nitidus in having a narrower interorbital region, and in the possession of small 170 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA tubercles of ganoine on the posterior parts of the superior surface of the skull. These are seen on the sides of the surface, and are quite small, not numerous, and of various sizes and shapes. They resemble shining seeds. In E. nitidus these points are wanting, but there are rugosities on the post- frontal and pterotic regions of a radiating character, not found in £. cicer- OniUus. “Measurements. M “No. 1. Length of skull to occiput above (muzzle worn).......... 0.069 Interorbital width............ 0.0. e ee eee eee eee eeee O14 No. 2. Length of osseous base of cranium (parachordal)......... 039 Length of open median groove...........-.0seeeeeeeees 022 Width of base at parachordals.............ceeeeeeeeeee .036 Width of groove at apices of parachordals.............-. OI Width of foramen notochord@............ cece cece noes 0095” ACTINOPTERI. Genus SPHASROLEPIS Fritsch. Sitzungsb. k. bohm. Gesell. Wiss., 1877, p. 46. In 1877 (22) Cope described a small dentigerous plate which he con- sidered, with evident doubt, ‘“‘a pharyngeal, pterygoid, palatine or half of the vomerine element” of a Crossopterygian, and referred it to his genus Peplorhina as a new species, P. arctata. In 1882 (31) he abandoned this interpretation and declared the element to belong to a theromorphous Saurian. In 1900 (11) Case examined this element and wrote concerning it that while it ‘‘certainly has much the appearance of the small teeth which occur in the roof of the mouth in certain of the Cotylosauria and may very possibly belong there”’—still a second specimen of this dentigerous plate (University of Chicago, 6512) which was quite perfect, and with which the first entirely agreed, was of undoubted Crossopterygian origin and hence Cope’s original interpretation was correct and his name Peplorhina arctata should be retained. , A third dentigerous element of the same kind was obtained by Prof. Case on a recent collecting trip to Texas. This element (fig. 54 a) is a frag- ment of a larger plate which was covered with denticles quite like those of Cope’s type specimen; and it apparently represents the same genus. Prof. Case also collected a small fragment with conical teeth (fig. 54 B), of either the mandible or the maxillary, which probably also belongs to the same form. In regard to their relationship: it seems to the writer that these ele- ments agree quite well with the type of teeth figured by Professor Fritsch in his genus Trissolepis (Fauna der Gaskohle, 111, pl. 109, fig. 1; pl. 110, figs. 1 and 2)—a form he had previously named Spherolepis and which name should be retained, because of priority. In view of this identification of the elements from the Permian of Texas with Spherolepis of the Permian of Bohemia, the names Spherolepis Fritsch and Peplorhina Cope become synonymous; Peplorhina has priority, but for the following reasons it should not be retained, being an insufficiently defined genus. Peplorhina was established by Cope in 1873 on fragmentary material from the Coal Measures of Ohio with P. anthracina as the type species.* * Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila., 1873, p. 343. THE PERMIAN FISHES OF NORTH AMERICA 171 It was at once pointed out by Newberry that the material representing this genus was “too imperfect for satisfactory study” and that it represented an amphibian and not a fish.* In 1875 Cope emended his description, published a figure of the type, and gave his grounds for regarding the species as fish and not amphibian. Fic. 54.—Spherolepis arctata (Cope). X 2. A. Fragment of a palatal (?) plate, bearin denticles. No. 7932 Am. Mus. ; B. Fragment of mandible or maxilla, bearing relatively large conical, partly striated teeth. C. Specimen shown in A, in side view. But it is evident, on even little study, that neither his figure nor his diag- nosis offers any distinctive characters by which one could recognize this genus in a lot of material. Some of the characters he enumerated were undoubtedly derived from a specimen of Celacanthus which, as appears from his figures, had become mixed up with his type specimen.t For these reasons Peplorhina is to be looked upon as an insufficiently defined genus, and Spherolepis Fritsch should be substituted. Spherolepis arctata (Cope). (Plate 31, figs. 1-22, text fig. 54.) 1877. Peplorhina arctata Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., p. 54. 1882. Theromorphus saurian Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., p. 461, footnote. 1891. Peplorhina arctata Cope, Woodward, Cat. Fos. Fishes, 1, p. 408. 1900. Peplorhina arctata Cope, Case, Journ. Geol., vit, p. 707. Type: A fragmentary dentigerous plate. No. 6511 University of Chi- cago. Vermilion County, Illinois. Referred specimens: 1. A small symmetrical element bearing similar teeth and from the same locality as the type. No. 6512 University of Chicago. 2. A fragment of a larger palatal (?) plate than either of the two preceding specimens, bearing similar teeth. Texas. Collected by Dr. E. C. Case. No. 7932 American Museum. 3. A small fragment of a mandible or maxilla bearing relatively large conical teeth, which are striated in their lower half. Original description of species: “The bone is plate-like and diamond- shaped, with the longer angles both recurved. ‘The convex surface is thickly studded with teeth which are not in contact with each other. Their size increases from one side of the bone to the other, and still more, from one extremity to the other. The crowns are swollen at the nearly sessile base, and contract rapidly to a conical and unsymmetrical apex. Those of the smaller teeth are more conical, those of the larger more bulbiform. One side of the latter is slightly concave below the apex. The surface is shiny and distinctly grooved. Fractured crowns do not display any central cavity. There are sixty-five teeth on the plate. * Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila., 1873, p. 426. t Geol. Sur. of Ohio, 11, pt. ii, Palzont., p. 409. } Ibid., pl. xlii, fig. 4. 172 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA “Measurements. ‘ M Lenpth Of plate .ciade wunia saw aia tralis: caves nesareverais wieladevelinarecereraip ste wrsiere x 0.013 Width on short border............. 20.0 ee eee SHRED ee ane eG a 007 DP PANSVETSE WIGED, 5. issere: olen. sis Udo siain-ag ore eae ee caGinn's ¥eeledyre'es LOOT Depthis.s cic scnwnraw. gaicinn. iepuraeae deed willerne adein ce ynweisiane. poertieaie .002”” Genus SPERMATODUS Cope. Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 2d ser., rx, 1894, p- 438. An imperfectly known genus founded on half of a much-crushed skull. It was regarded by Cope as a Crossopterygian and the type specimen was thought to resemble closely the skull of Polypterus. To the writer, oe the resemblance to Polypterus is not so apparent; and it is even doubtful whether it is a Crossopterygian. Provisionally the genus may be placed in the Actinopteri. Its peculiarities—as far as they may be inferred from only a very poorly preserved half of a skull—are given below: Revised description of genus: 1. Basioccipital of skull with a cotyloid cavity for the first vertebra and situated in front of the foramen magnum. 2. Parasphenoid covered from its posterior third to near the ante- rior extremity with small, delicate teeth. 3. Surface of skull ornamented with minute tubercles of enamel. Additional characters are given under the specific description below. Spermatodus pustulosus Cope. (Plate 32.) 1894. Spermatodus pustulosus Cope, Journ. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phila., 2d ser., 1x, p. 438, text fig. 4. . 3 Type: Left half of a badly crushed skull. No. 7245 American Museum. exas. Original description: ‘The general shape of the head is broad and flat. The occipital cotylus is circular in outline. The parasphenoid tooth-patch has an elliptic posterior outline, and the teeth are crowded, and measure from 0.4 to 0.3 millimeter in diameter. The parasphenoid is 5.5 times as long as wide at the middle. There are two rows of palatine teeth, but whether they are on different bones or on a single crushed bone is not easy to determine. They are displayed on the superior surface of the specimen by the crushing of the parts. The teeth are rapiform, with acuminate apex and striate enamel. They generally stand four in a space of five mil- limeters, with short interspaces. ‘The largest are a millimeter in diameter. In the longest row, probably imperfect, there are eight teeth. The cranial sculpture is probably considerably worn off by-exposure. It remains on parts of the frontal and maxillary bones. It resembles greatly a collection of minute pustules. The bony tissue is elevated into small tubercles, which . are capped with enamel, which is abruptly distinguished from the osteine. When the enamel is lost there remains a pit in the tubercle. The tubercles are oval on the frontal, and oat-shaped at one point on the maxillary. “The basihyal is turned with the anterior face posteriorly. This face is not divided into two for the hypohyals as in Polypterus bichir. It is a transverse oval with one long side flat, and the other concave. The cerato- hyal is flat, and becomes quite thin posteriorly. Its anterior extremity is excavated into an oval cup. The supposed mandible is flat, and in a hori- zontal plane, but is more robust than the ceratohyal. If there were any orbital bones they have left no traces. Pa THE PERMIAN FISHES OF NORTH AMERICA 173 “ Measurements. MM “Transverse diameter skull near posterior end of maxillary......... 200 Length of parasphengided sia cc. estore sd seas sev Cowanstuetenas 86 Width of parasphenoid at occipital cotylus..............000 00008 25 Width of parasphenoid at middle... ...........c ccc eee cece eeeee 16 Diameters of anterior face of basihyal: VGIiiGalensis ddcewews ria os Pads euke esse eee teeenaa eee ee eed II "TP VANSVOLSE 5. e: dave gcsalanes 0lbtk Bala aA ore a Bes ual ine Gran a Gane oer eh 27 Width of basibranchial..3.sc:eveurerd ciwcedsw sewers wuewas arn Length of (?) ceratohyal......... ccc cece cece cece eee eee eeeees 80” (?) Genus PYRITOCEPHALUS Fritsch. Among the specimens collected by Professor Case in Texas there is a small dermal bone (No. 7934 Am. Mus.) ornamented similarly to the cranial bones of Pyritocephalus Fritsch as described and figured by that author in his “Fauna der Gaskohle,” vol. 111, p. 86, pl. 115. It is shown, natural size, in fig. 55. The ornamentation consists of heavy raised lines more or less concentric in arrangement. The single plate is, of course, too fragmentary for specific description; but it is interesting as evidence of the presence in the Texas Permian of another of the forms occurring in the Permian of Bohemia. Professor Fritsch regards Pyritocephalus Fis-|55.—Dermal bone of 7 . - Pyritocephalus (?), No. as a typical member of the family Palgoniscide. 7934 Am. Mus. Texas. Genus PLATYSOMUS Agassiz. Poiss. Fos., 11, Pt. 1, 1835, pp. 6, 161. Revised description of genus: 1. Trunk much deepened. 2. Marginal teeth, small, styliform. 3. Dorsal and anal fins much elongated, the anal somewhat shorter than the dorsal but terminating posteriorly opposite the end of the dorsal; caudal heterocercal with the lower rays elon- gated so as to make the tail appear equilobate; ventrals small and nearer to anal than to pectorals. 4. Fin-rays articulated, distally subdivided. 5. Fulcra small, usually on all fins. 6. Flank-scales much deepened; ornamented with very fine paral- lel lines; articulating by peg-and-socket joints; scales gradu- ally decreasing in depth dorsalward, ventralward, and towards the caudal. Ridge-scales present along dorsal and ventral margins; those in front of dorsal and anal smallish, those in front of upper lobe of caudal large. Platysomus palmaris Cope. (Text fig. 56 and plate 30, fig. 7.) 1891. Platysomus palmaris, Cope, Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., x1v, p. 460, pl. xzxiii, fig. 10. Type: Numerous fragments, bearing scales, and portions of the pectoral girdle. No. 7281 Am. Mus. Red Beds, Indian Territory. - Referred specimen: An elongated nodule 3 by 9.5 cm., containing a defective fish which exhibits flank scales, caudal fin, and portions of the dorsal and anal. No. 7935 Am. Mus. Texas. (Fig. 56 a.) 174 AMPHIBIA AND PISCES OF THE PERMIAN OF NORTH AMERICA This species is inadequately known, having been described from exceed- ingly fragmentary material. The scales agree most nearly, in size and orna- mentation, with those of Platysomus and the species may provisionally be left in that genus. In Benedenius the scales are not nearly so deep. In the few scales in which the external ornamented layer is preserved, it is seen that the ornament agrees well with that of Platysomus, consisting of very fine, parallel, slightly undulating lines, crossing the scale at a slight angle to its vertical axis (plate 30, fig. 7). The flank scales have a depth of about three times their width. Cope’s original description may here be quoted. Original description of species: “The scale-series tend slightly backward from the vertical below, without distinct curvature. ‘The scales on the sides in front are about five times as deep as long, and they graduate in size Fic. 56.—Platysomus palmaris Cope. A. Imperfect fish in a nodule, natural size. No. 7935 Am. Mus. Texas. B. Scales, natural size. One of the fragments representing the type specimen. No. 7281 Am. Mus. Texas. ; to the lowest undivided row, where they are about twice as deep as long. The small scales of the inferior row are twice as deep as long, and their depth is about half that of the scales of the next series above them. The sculpture of the scales consists of narrow vertical ridges, which are curved slightly backwards below. About ten may be counted, crossing a trans- verse bone on each scale. Each of the narrow scales of the inferior row possesses a median angular keel which extends from the anterior edge downwards and backwards, but which does not reach the posterior edge of the scale. The external face of the clavicle is vertically striate like the scales, and horizontally striate on the recurved portion. The interclavicle has more distinct longitudinal ridges, and one ridge on each side of the low median keel is broken up into enamel tubercles. “The body is acute below. This is always the case, whether the frag- ments are compressed or not. “ Measurements. “Diameters of anterior median scale: MM ANLtErOpOStenor suc seers dle eee eee 2 Verticalss coiscu ve swede ese wed Mean wee ee ae sieinces 10 Diameters of lowest normal scale: Anteroposterior sco ja: dig cna oa Sg aa Sear ee aaa ote aes 3 Vertical occ cwtieerie dined ea heeee er woken ee wk eee aes 4 Depth of scale of inferior border (specimen No. 2)............. ta 2.5 Length of interclavicle (specimen No. 3)...........cceeeeeeeeeee 10 Width of interclavicle in front (No. 3)........ 0.0000 cceeecceeees 8 Diameter of interclavicular tube, transverse (No. 3).......0--005 ot THE PERMIAN FISHES OF NORTH AMERICA 175 COMPARISON OF THE PERMIAN FISH-FAUNA OF AMERICA AND BOHEMIA. In the accompanying table the Permian fishes of Illinois, Texas, and Bohemia are brought together for comparison. It is seen that of the two American localities the Texan is the richer in genera—12 as against 6 for Illinois. The Illinois fauna is entirely represented in Texas with the excep- tion of one group—the Petalodontide, a family of sharks represented in Illinois by the genus Janassa; but as this genus is known only from small teeth, which may easily be overlooked in collecting, it is probable that it may yet be discovered in the Texan formations. However this may be, there is a remarkable agreement between the two faunas considering the dis- tance by which they are separated. Table showing Genera of Fishes in the Permian of Illinois, Texas, and Bohemia. America. America. Bohemia! Bohemia! Texas. | Illinois. Texas. | Illinois. AcaNnTHODII: Dipnevustt: Traquairia....... x Sagenodus....... x x. x Protacanthodes .. x Ceratodus....... x Bae Acanthodes...... x Gnathorhiza..... x x IcHTHYOTOMI: CrossoPpTERYGII: Pleuracanthus.. .. x siete x Megalichthys.... x x (Orthacanthus, AcTINOPTERI: Xenacanthus) Spherolepis...... x x x Diacranodus..... awe x aie Acentrophorus. .. x seed ies SELACHII: Spermatodus..... oat x . Hybodus...... x x a3 Pyritocephalus. . . x ? Janassa....... ite eee x Sceletophorus.... x sexs IcuTHyopoRuLiTEs: Phanerosteon... . x 3 Ctenacanthus. . ene x as Amblypterus..... x : Tubulacanthus... 4 gic ae Acrolepis........ x Brachiacanthus .. x oe ase Progyrolepis..... x ee an Anodontacanthus x x ne Platysomus...... ‘ese x x 18 11 (12?) 6 1 Based on the list given by Fritsch in Sitzungsb. d. k. bohm, Gesell. Wiss., 1895, pp. 12 et seq. A comparison of the Permian faunas of Texas and Bohemia brings out several interesting points. While the groups represented in the two are, with the exception of the 4canthodit, the same, there is a marked difference in the genera respectively represented, proving the long segregation of the two stocks from which the Permian faunas of the two localities are descended. The most remarkable difference between the faunas is the presence of Acanthodii (three genera) in Bohemia and their absence in Texas. The Acanthodii occur in Bohemia at the same level as Pleuracanthus, a horizon which may be correlated approximately with the Texas and Illinois horizons. BIBLIOGRAPHY. The following list contains only those papers referred to in the text or published since the appearance of Hay’s “Catalogue of the Fossil Verte- brates of North America.” 2. rd 10. > OTN ES eS Baur, G., and E. C. Cas. The history of the Pelycosauria with a description of the genus Dimetrodon Cope. Trans. Am. Phil. Soc., nN. s., vol. xx, 1899, pp. I-58. Branson, E. B. Structure and relationships of American Labyrinthodontide. Journ. Geol., vol. x111, No. 7, Oct.-Nov. 1905, pp. 568-610. . Broru, Ferp. v. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntniss von Eryops megacephalus (Cope). Paleon- tographica, Bd. xtv1, 1899, s. 61-84. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntniss von Diplocaulus Cope. Centralblt. f. Min. Geol. u. Pal., 1902, No. 17, pp. §36-541. Permische Stegocephalen und Reptilien aus Texas. Paleontographica, Bd. 11, 1904, pp. 1-120. : Stammreptilien. Anat. Anzeig., Bd. xxv, No. 23, 1904, pp. 577-587. Ueber Diacranodus texensis Cope (=Didymodus? compressus Cope). Neues Jhrbk. f. Min. Geol. u. Pal., Beilage Bd. xrx, 1904, s. 467-484. Systematische u. biologische Bemerkungen zu der Permischen Gattung Lysor- ophus. Anat. Anzeig., Bd. xxx1m, No. 11-12, 1908, pp. 290-298. Ueber die rhachitomen Wirbel der Stegocephalen. Zeitsch. d. deutsch. geolog. Gesell., Bd. 60, 1908, pp. 235-240. Broom, R. A comparison of the Permian reptiles of North America with those of South Africa. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., vol. xxvii, Art. xx, 1910, pp. 197-234. toa. Boutencer, G. A. A contribution to the history of the Carboniferous Ganoid, II. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. Benedenius deneensis Traquair, with notes on two newly-discovered specimens. Annals Mag. Nat. Hist., Ser. 7, rv, 1899, pp. 445-451, pls. rx, x. . Case, E.C. The vertebrates from the Permian bone-bed of Vermilion County, Illinois. Journ. Geol., vol. viz, 1900, pp. 698-729. Paleontological notes. Journ. Geol., vol. x, No. 3, Apr-May 1902, pp. 256-261. On some vertebrate fossils from the Permian beds of Oklahoma. Second Ann. Rpt. Dept. Geol. and Nat. Hist. Terr. Oklahoma. 1902-3, pp. 62-68. New or little known vertebrates from Texas. Journ. Geol., vol. x1, No. 4, 1903, PP. 394-403. The Osteology of Embolophorous dollovianus Cope, with an attempted resto- ration. Journ. Geol., vol. x1. No. 1, Jan.-Feb. 1903, pp. 1-28. Additional description of the genus Zatrachys. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., vol. XXIII, art. XXIX, 1907, pp. 665-668. Notes on the skull of Lysorophus tricarinatus. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., vol. xx1v, Art. xxvi, 1908, pp. 531-533. Description of vertebrate fossils from the vicinity of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Annals Carnegie Museum, vol. 1v, Nos. 3 and 4, 1908, pp. 234-241. New or little known reptiles and amphibians from the Permian (?) of Texas. Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., vol. xxvii, Art. xvi, 1910, pp. 163-18F. Corr, E. D. On the fossil remains of Reptilia and fishes from Illinois. Proc. Phil. Acad. Nat. Sci., 1875, pp. 404-411. On the Vertebrata of the Bone-bed in eastern Illinois. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xvi1, 1877, pp. 53-64. Descriptions of extinct Vertebrata from the Permian and Triassic formations of the United States. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xvi1, 1877, pp. 182-193. Descriptions of extinct Batrachia and Reptilia from the Permian formations of Texas. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xv, 1878, pp. 505-530. The structure of the Permian Ganocephala. Am. Nat., vol. x1v, 1880, pp. 383-384. 176 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 42: 33- 34. 35- 36. 37- 38. 39: 40. 4l. 42. 43. 44. 45- 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. BIBLIOGRAPHY, 177 Corr, E.D. Second contribution to the history of the Vertebrata of the Permian formation of Texas. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xrx, 1880, pp. 38-58. Extinct batrachia. Am. Nat., vol. x1v, 1880, pp. 609-610. Art. II. On some new Batrachia and Reptilia from the Permian beds of Texas. Bull. U. S. Geol. Surv. of the Terrs., vol. v1, 1881, pp. 79-82. Catalogue of the vertebrata of the Permian formation of the United States. Am. Nat., vol. xv, 1881, pp. 162-164. ‘The Permian formation of New Mexico. Am. Nat., vol. xv, 1881, pp. 1020-1021. The Rhachitomous Stegocephali. Am. Nat., vol. xv1, 1882, p. 335. —Third contribution to the history of the Vertebrata of the Permian formation of Texas. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol: xx, 1882, pp. 447-474. Fourth contribution to the history of the Vertebrata of the Permian formation of Texas. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xx, 1883, pp. 627-636. On some Vertebrata from the Permian of Illinois. Proc. Acad. of Nat. Sci., 1883, pp. 108-110. On the structure of the skull in the Elasmobranch genus Didymodus. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xx1, 1884, pp. 503-507. The skull of a still living shark of the Coal Measures. Am. Nat., vol. xvi, 1884, pp. 412-413. The genus Pleuracanthus. Am. Nat., vol. xvi, 1884, p. 818. ‘The Batrachia of the Permian period of North America. Am. Nat., vol. xvi, 1884, pp. 26-39. ——— Fifth contribution to the knowledge of the fauna of the Permian formation of Texas and the Indian Territory. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xxm, 1884, pp. 28-47. On the evolution of the Vertebrata, progressive and retrogressive. Am. Nat., vol. x1x, 1885, pp. 140-148; 234-247; 341-353. Garman on Didymodus. Am. Nat., vol. xrx, 1885, pp. 870-879. Systematic catalogue of the species of Vertebrata found in the beds of the Per- mian epoch in North America, with notes and descriptions. Am. Phil. Soc. Trans., vol. xvi, 1886 (1888), pp. 285-297. Synopsis of the families of the Vertebrata. Am. Nat., vol. xxi, 1889, pp. 849-877. : ——A Batrachian Armadillo. Am. Nat., vol. xxrx, 1895, p. 998. The Paleozoic Reptilian order Cotylosauria. Am. Nat., vol. xxx, 1896, pp. OI-304. the Reptilian order Cotylosauria. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. xxxrv, 1896, Pp. 436-456. : The ancestry of the Testudinata. Am. Nat., vol. xxx, 1896, pp. 398-400. Permian land Vertebrata with carapaces. Am. Nat., vol. xxx, 1896, pp. 936-937. Second contribution to the history of Cotylosauria. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc., vol. Xxxv, 1896, pp. 122-139. Syllabus of lectures on the Vertebrata. Philadelphia, 8vo, 1898, pp. 1-135. Cummins, W. F. The localities and horizons of Permian vertebrate fossils in Texas. Journ. Geol., vol. xv1, 1908, pp. 737-745. 50a. Davis, James W. On Anodontacanthus, a new genus of fossil fishes from the Coal Measures; with descriptions of three new species. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., XXXVII, 1881, p. 427, pl. 22, figs. 10-12. 50b. Eastman, C.R. A peculiar modification among dipnoan dental plates. Am. Nat., XXXVII, 1903, p. 493, figs. I-2. 50c. Frirscu, A. Fauna der Gaskohle in Bohmen, 11. Prague, 1889. 51. 52. 53- 54- 55+ Gapvow, Hans. On the evolution of the vertebral column of Amphibia and Amniota. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc., 1896, (B), cLxxxvil, pp. I-57. —Reptilia and Amphibia. Vol. vim, Cambridge Natural History Series, 1go1, Pp. 300-310. : a ; Garman, SaMuEL. Chlamydoselachus anguineus Garman. A living species of clado- dont shark. Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., vol. x11, 1885. pp. 1-35. Hay, O. P. Bibliography and catalogue of the fossil vertebrates of North America. Bull. U.S. Geol. Surv., No. 179, 1902, Washington. Hueune, Ferp. v.. Neubeschriebung des Permischen Stegocephalen, Dasyceps buck- landi (Lloyd) aus Kenilworth. Geolog. u. Paleontolog., AbhdIng., N. F., Bd. vi, Heft 6, 1910, pp. 325-338. 12 178 BIBLIOGRAPHY. ssa. Hussaxor, L. Catalogue of types and figured specimens of fossil vertebrates in the American Museum of Natural History. Part I.—Fishes. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist., xxv, 1908, pp. 1-103, pls. i—vi. 56. JAEKEL, O. Ueber Ceraterpeton, Diceratosaurus u. Diplocaulus. Neues Jhrb. f. Min. Geol. u. Pal., Heft 1, 1903, s. 109-134. 57. LypExer, Ricup. Indian Pretertiary Vertebrata. Paleontolog. Indica, Series 4, vol. I, 1865-1885, pts. 3) 4, 5- 58. On two new species of Labyrinthodonts. Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. 46, 1890, pp. 289-294. 59. Catalogue of the Fossil Reptilia and Amphibia in the British Museum (Nat. Hist.). Pt. 4, London, 1890. 60. Marsu, O. C. Notice of new fossil reptiles. Am. Journ. Sci., vol. cxv, 1878, pp. 409-411. 61. Mooniz, Roy L. The Microsauria as ancestors of the Reptilia. Geol. Mag., vol. vz (sth series), 1909, pp. 216-220. 62. ‘The Amphibia of the Mazon Creek shales. Science, Nn. s., vol. xxx. I9I0, pp. 233-234. 63. Neumayer, L. Die Koprolithen des Perms von Texas. Paleontographica, Bd. 11, s. 121-128, 64. STERNBERG, Cuas. The Permian life of Texas. Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci., vol. xviut, 1904, pp. 94-98. : 65. StickieR, L. Ueber den microscopischen Bau der Faltenzahne von Eryops megaceph- alus Cope. Paleontographica, Bd. xiv1, 1899, s. 85-94. 66. THevintn, ArmMaNpD. Les plus anciens quadrupedes de France. Annales de Paléon- tologie, T. V., fasc. 1, I910, pp. I-63. 66a. Traquair, R. H. Further notes on Carboniferous Selachii. Geol. Mag., Dec., iii, v, 1888, pp. IOI-104. 66d. On the structure and affinities of the genus Platysomus, Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh, xxrx, 1879, pp. 343-391, pls. iii—vi. 67. Wittiston, 8. W. Vertebrates from the Kansas Permian. Science, n. s., vol. v, 1897, P- 395- 68. Notice of some vertebrate remains from the Kansas Permian. Kansas Univ. Quarterly, Ser. A., vol. 6, 1897. pp. 53-56. 69. Lysorophus, a Permian Urodele. Biol. Bull., vol. xv, No. 5, 1908, pp. 229-240. 70. ———The skull and extremities of Diplocaulus. Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci. +» 1909, pp. 123-131. 71. New or little known Permian vertebrates. ‘Trematops, new genus. Journ. Geol., vol. xvu, 1909, pp. 636-658. 72. Cacops, Desmospondylus; new genera of Permian vertebrates. Bull. Geol. Soc. Am., vol. 21, 1910, pp. 249-283. : 73. Dissorophus Cope. Journ. Geol., vol. xvi11, 1910, pp. 525-536. 74. Woopwarp, A. SmitH. Catalogue of the fossil fishes in the British Museum (Nat. Hist.). Pt. 1, 1889. 75. ZITTEL, Karu v. Handbuch der Paleontologie. 1, Abth., Paleozoologie, Bd. m1, 1887- 1890. Acheloma, 34, 104 A. cumminsi, 35, 104 Actinopteri, 170 Alegeinosaurus, 60 A. aphthitos, 60 Anisodexis, 33 A. imbricarius, 33, 104 Anodontacanthus, 162 A. americanus, 162 Aspidosauride, 63 Aspidosaurus, 63 A. chiton, 63 A. glascocki, 64 A. apicalis, 65 A. crucifer, 65 Cacops, 62, 119 C. aspidephorus, 62, 119 Cardiocephalus, 70 C. sternbergi, 70 Ceratodus, 166 C. favosus, 166 Cricotidz, 72 Cricotus, 72, 145 C. hypantricus, 74 C. gibsonii, 75 C, heteroclitus, 75 C. crassidiscus, 76 Cricotillus, 78 C. brachydens, 78 Crossotelos, 70 C. annulatus, 70 Crossopterygii, 168 Ctenacanthus, 161 C. amblyxiphias, 161 Diacranodus, 159 D. texensis, 159 D. platypternus, 160 . Diplocaulide, 15, 85 Diplocaulus, 15, 85 D. salamandroides, 16 D. limbatus, 17, 91 INDEX. D. magnicornis, 18, 91 D. copei, 22 D (?). pusillus, 22 Diplovertebron, 79 D. punctatum, 79 Dipneusti, 163 Dissorhophide, 51 Dissorhophus, 52, 115 D. multicinctus, 54, 115 Embolomerus division, 72 Epicordylus, 27 Eryopide, 23 Eryops, 24, 91 E. megacephalus, 29 E. reticulatus, 30 E (?). platypus, 30 E. latus, 31 Etoblattina, 151 E. texana, 151 E (?). robusta, 152 Gnathorhiza, 166 G. pusilla, 167 Gymnarthria, 69 Gymanarthride, 69 Gymnarthrus, 69, 144 G. willoughbyi, 69, 144 Hybodus, 157 Ichthyotomi, 157 Ichthyodorulites, 161 Janassa, 156 J. strigilina, 156 J. gurleyana, 156 Lysorophide, 66, 141 Lysorophus, 68, 141 L. tricarinatus, 60 Megalichthys, 168 M. nitidus, 169 M. ciceronius, 169 Microsauria, 15, 85 Otoccelidz, 57 Otoccelus, 58 O. mimeticus, 59 O. testudineus, 59 Parioxys, 31 P. ferricolus, 32, 104 Platysomus, 173 P. palmaris, 173 Pleuracanthus, 157 P. quadriseriatus, 158 P. gracilis, 158 Pyritocephalus, 173 Rhachitomus division, 23 Rhachitomus, 27 Sagenodus, 163 S. dialophus, 163 S. fossatus, 163 S. paucicristatus, 164 S. periprion, 165 S. vinslovi, 165 Selachii, 156 Spermatodus, 172 S. pustulosus, 172 Spherolepis, 170 S. arctata, I71 Stegocephalia, 15 Temnospondyli, 23 Tersomius, 51 T. texensis, 51 Trematopsidz, 66, 130 Trematops, 67, 130 T. milleri, 67, 130 Trimerorhachida, 38 Trimerorhachis, 39, 106 . insignis, 41, 112 . bilobatus, 43 . conangulus, 44, 112 . leptorhynchus, 45 . mesops, 46, 112 . alleni, 47 Urodela, 68 Zatrachys, 47, 113 Z. serratus, 48 Z..conchigerus, 50 Addds4 179 CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE Diplocaulus timbatus. No. 4470 Am.Mus. X %. 1. The Skull. 2, 3, 4. Dorsal vertebrae. 2, from side; 3, from above; 4, from below. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 2 Diplocaulus magnicornis. No. 4472 Am.Mus. xX 4. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 3 Diplocaulus magnicornis. No. 4514 Am. Mus. X 1. 1, anterior view of skull; 2, lower surface. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 4 1. Diplocaulus magnicornis. No. 4467 Am. Mus. X %. Lower surface of skull showing teeth. 2. Eryops megacephalus. No. 4186 Am. Mus. X %. Upper surface of a particularly broad skull. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 5 Ou: RTA oy ee ye 25 ary Ve, ¢ 2398, 4 . land 2. Skulls of Diplocaulus copei. Reduced about half. co, occipital condyle. . Cross-section of a tooth of Aryops. Enlarged. . Dorsal vertebrae of Aryops. X 1. . Skull of Aspidosaurus chiton. X 1. . Skull of 7rimerorhachis conangulus. X 1. Nn kw CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 6 Eryops megacephalus. No. 4188 Am. Mus. X 3g. Lower surface of a skull. PLATE 7 CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES Eryops megacephalus. No. 4673 Am. Mus. X 4. Palatal surface of a skull, showing the sutures. . Eryops megacephalus. No. 4180 Am. Mus. X 4%. Lateral view of a well preserved skull. . Eryops megacephalus. No.4313 Am. Mus. X g. Outer surface of right lower jaw. WDNR CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 8 1. Eryops megacephalus. No, 4673 Am. Mus. X #4. Anterior portion of nose, showing sculpture. . Lryops (2). No. 4310 Am. Mus. X 2g. Upper surface of skull of a young individual. . Eryops megacephalus. No.4183 Am. Mus. 2g. Anterior view of pelvis. . Ervops megacephalus. No.4582 Am. Mus. X }%. Lateral view of pelvis. wh CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 10 E. megacephalus. Sketch model restoration showing author’s idea of general form of Aryops. 1, side view; 2, upper view. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 11 Acheloma cumminsi. No. 4205 Am. Mus. X 3% circa. PLATE 12 CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES Anterior end of skull from above. x %. 1. Trimerorhachis mesops. x Clavicles and interclavicle in position. 2. Interclavicle of 7rimerorhachis (2). %. x %. 3. Diplocaulus magnicornis. X Trimerorhachis insignis. 4. Outer surface of right half of lower jaw. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 13 Dissorophus multicinctus. No. 648 Univ. of Chicago. 1-5, X 45; 6, X 45. . Right scapula-corocoid with cleithrum, from outer side. sg//, supraglenoid foramen; g//, glenoid foramen; ig//, infraglenoid foramen. . Clavicles and interclavicle from below. Right femur, from below. Left humerus, posterior view. . Left humerus, inner side. . Skull. All figures after Williston. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 14 Trematops miller1. No. 640 Univ. of Chicago. X lg. All figures after Williston. 1, lower surface of skull; 2, lateral view of skull; 3, upper surface of skull. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 15 Trematops milleri. No. 640 Uniy. of Chicago. X 4%. All figures after Williston. Right scapula-corocoid, outer surface. 6. Left ulna, inner surface. dl. 2. The same, inner surface. 7. The same, outer surface. 3. The same, posterior edge. 8. Left humerus, anterior view. 4. Interclavicle and right clavicle from 9. The same, posterior view. above. 10. Right humerus of £7-yops, inserted for 5. Right clavicle, from behind. comparison. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PEATE, 16 OONND UNF WHH f= oO Trematops millert. No. 640 Univ. of Chicago. > 45. All figures after Williston. 11. Ninth vertebra, from the side, nearly natural size. lla. The same, on same scale as the other Left hind leg, lower surface. Left tibia, outer surface. The same, upper articular surface. . Second rib, from the right side. . Seventh rib, right side. . Eighth rib, right side. . Seventeenth rib, right side. . Nineteenth rib, right side. . Twenty-third rib, right side. . Twelfth and thirteenth hypocentra, from below. figures. 12. Left sacral rib, from above. 13. Left half of the pelvis, outer surface. 14. A chevron bone, posterior surface. 15. The same, from the side. The last two figures nearly natural size. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 17 Cacops aspidephorus. No. 647 Univ. of Chicago. X 4. All figures after Williston. 1. Upper view of skull. 2. Lower view of skull. 3. Lateral view of skull. 4. Upper surface of lower jaw. PLATE 18 CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES “WOISHIIM Jaye soinsy [Tv ‘eeIQO]IOA Tepneo puelesiog “hx OSBOIYD JO AIT) LQ ON ‘susoygapidsn sfom) jesoes | CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 19 1. Cacops aspidephorus. No. 647 Univ. of Chicago. X 2%. Scapula with attached cleithrum and clavicle; a, inner surface; 6, outer surface. 2. Aspidosaurus. X %. Spines of dorsal vertebrae; a, from the left side; 6, from in front. 3. Desmospondylus anomalus. % ¥3. Posterior dorsal vertebrae; a, from the left side; 6, intercentrum from below. All figures after Williston. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 20 Cacops aspidephorus. No. 647 Univ. of Chicago. X 24. 1. Pectoral girdle, upper surface. 4. The same, anterior view. 2. Left humerus, inner side. 5. The same, posterior view. 3. The same, outer side. All figures after Williston. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 21 Cacops aspidephorus. No. 647 Univ. of Chicago. 24. 1. Various toe bones from the left hind foot. 2. Tarsals of the same foot. 3. Carpals and phalanges of the left hind foot. 4. Lower surface of the pelvis. 5. The twelfth vertebra, anterior view, the left pleurocentrum omitted. 6. The dorsal shield of the same vertebra; a, from above, 6, from below. 7. Intercentrum. 8. Ribs, as numbered; three and five from the left side, the others from the right. All figures after Williston. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 22 Cacops aspidephorus. No. 647 Univ. of Chicago. X 2%. 1. Outer surface of the pelvis, from the 3. The same, posterior view. right side. 4. The same, inner surface. 2. Left femur, anterior view. 5. The same, outer surface. All figures after Williston. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES 1-10, Ankone ' i \ Cacops aspidephorus. No. 647 Univ. of Chicago. & 24. 11,12, Dissorophus multicinctus. . Left tibia, anterior view. . The same, posterior view. The same, inner surface. . The same, outer surface. . Left fibula, posterior view. The same, anterior view, a, upper extremity. 7. Left radius, posterior view. 8. The same, anterior view. 9. The same, inner surface. 10. Left ulna, anterior view. 11. Atlas; a, from behind; 6, from in front; c, from the side; @, from below. 12. The same, anterior intercentrum. X 4%. All fivures after Williston. PLATE 23 PLATE 24 CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES ‘OzIs [eInjeu &% ynoqy ‘OINSBSUL J[QVIOPISUOD UI palojsayy ‘UOJS[OYS poyunow wv jo ydeisojoyg ‘OBBOIYD JO “AIUQ /p9 ‘ON ‘Sxsoygapidsv sfo2v7 ‘¢ “SOW “WY VOSSp PU OSSp “SON °S7J1].9019]9Y SNJOIIAD JO SUOJSTOYS OMT, *Z PU T PLATE 25 CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES ‘i +8. A No. 4 50a. 0. 45 N Skull of Cricotus heteroclitus. . Abdominal armor of Cricotus het. y Lis 2 xX %. 550a Am. Mus. roclitus. ey 3 Ya: tus. xX ICO of the abdominal armor of C A fragment S 3 eee Se Mus. No. 4551 Am. tcolus heteroclitus. kull of C7 4, CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 26 9 8 5 10a a, 16. Janassa strigilina, front, posterior, and side views. Type. X 3. No. 6500 Univ. of Chicago. a, 2b. Janassa gurleyana, front, posterior, and side views. Type. X3. No. 6501 Univ. of Chicago. ’, 3a, 36, Fragmentary head spines of Pleuracanthus quadriseriatus, ventral view; X 3. 3a, 30, sections taken at levels indicated in figs. 3,3’. No. 6502 Univ. of Chicago. 4, 4’, 4a, 4b, Fragmentary head spines of Pleuracanthus gracilis Newb., ventral view. X 3. 4a, 46, sections taken at levels indicated in figs. 4,4’. No. 6503 Univ. of Chicago. 5, Sa, 56. Anodontacanthus americanus n. sp. X 2. Type. No. 7934Am. Mus. Texas. 5a, 56, sections 1, 1 2,2 339 taken at levels indicated in fig. 5. 6. Sagenodus dialophus. Left lower dental plate. Type. xX 1% No. 7234 Am. Mus. 7. Sagenodus dialophus. Dental plate, X 14g. No. 7470 Am. Mus. 8-11. Sagenodus fossatus. X 1%. 8, Immature left mandibular plate. Type. No. 6506 Univ. of Chicago. 9, Incomplete upper dental plate. Type of Clenodus gurleyanus Cope. No. 6509 Univ. of Chicago. 10, 10a, Lower dental plate. Type of Ctenodus porrectus Cope. No. 7235 Am. Mus. 11, Lower dental plate. Type of Clenodus vabasensts Cope. No. 6510 Univ. of Chicago. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 27 1-3. Sagenodus fossatus, dental plates, X 14g. Am. Mus.: original of figs. 1, la, No. 7475; originals of 2 and 3, No. 7260. 4, 4a. Sagenodus paucicristatus. Dental plate, X 14% Type. No. 6505 Univ. of Chicago. 5, Sa. Sagenodus periprion. Left palatal plate, X 14g. Type. No. 7474 Am. Mus. 6. Sagenodus heterolophus?. Incomplete dental plate, xX 13g. No. 7473 Am. Mus. 7, 7a, 8. Sagenodus vinslovi. Left palatal plates, X 1¥g. Type. 7, 7a. No. 6507 Univ. of Chicago. 8. A specimen from Texas; No. 7233 Am. Mus. 9, 9a. Side and top views of the type of Grathorhiza serrata, No. 7258 Am. Mus. X 3. 10. Top view of Guathorhiza pusilla. Type. No. 6508 Univ. of Chicago. X 3. 11, lla. Ceratodus favosus. Imperfect dental plate attached to a fragment of the splenial, X 1%. Type. 11, seen from above; lla, viewed from side. No. 7230 Am. Mus. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 28 26 Cle. Diacranodus texensis (Cope). X %. Texas. 1. Anterior portion of a cranium, viewed from above. Cotype. No. 7929 Am. Mus. la. The same viewed from below. 2. Posterior half of a cranium, viewed from above. Cotype. No. 7930 Am. Mus. 2a. The same seen from below. 26. The same in posterior view. 3. Tooth, probably of this species. 4. Nearly complete cranium seen from above. No. 7931 Am. Mus. 4a. The same seen from below. au, auditory capsule; C.c., cotyloid cavity for articulation of occipital spine; e.c., ethmoid canal; #, /1, fontanelles; /. mag., foramen magnum; o. /, opthalmic foramen; /%. 0.f., postorbital process; p./os. ?, pituitary fossa ?; s.f., supraorbital foramen; ¢r., trabecula; v.a., vestibular aqueduct. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 29 Diacranodus texensis (Cope). X %. Texas. 1, la. Restoration of the cranium, viewed from above and below. 2. Specimen exhibiting the jaws in natural articulation. Cotype. No. 7117 Am. Mus. au, auditory capsule; C.c., cotyloid cavity for articulation of cranial spine; é.c., ethmoid canal; /,/1, fontanelles; /’, f/’’, foramina; /. mag., foramen magnum; H.//., hyomandibular; A/ck., meckelian cartilage; /V., nasal capsule; o.f., opthalmic foramen; P. Q., palatoquadrate; /p. fos?, pituitary fossa?; Pt.o.p., postorbital process; 2., rostrum; s./., supraorbital foramen; tr., trabecula; v.a., vestibular aqueduct. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 30 tiiias, -t <0 ‘ Uddddadddad J erteerths bre ddd rit iii iddattttet b Gaa* 6a 1-4. Megalichthys nitidus (Cope); natural size. . Scale of Platysomus palmaris (Cope), of about 1. Vertebrae with neural spines. three times the natural size. 2. Incomplete vertebral rings. 8. Diacranodus platyplternus (Cope). Posterior portion of right meckelian cartilage, in outer view. X 24. Cotype. Texas. No. 7243 Am. Mus. . Diacranodus texensis (Cope). Texas. 7 . Flank scales of type specimen. No. 7239 Am. Mus. 4. Pectoral fin of type specimen. No. 7239 Am. Mus. 5, 5a. Fragment of a spine belonging to (?) Hybodus. 9 Left meckelian x 14%. Texas. No. 7263 Am. Mus. cartilage slightly defective at posterior extrem- 6, 6a. Ctenacanthus amblyxiphias (Cope). X 1%. No ity; inouterview. 2s. Texas. Am. Mus. 7282 Am. Mus. 9b. Articulating surface of the meckelian cartilage seen from above. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 31 1-2a, Spherolepis arctata (Cope). 1, la, 1b. Complete dentigerous plate, in upper, under, and side views, natural size. Vermilion Co., Ill. No. 6512 Univ. of Chicago, 2, 2a. Fragmentary dentigerous plate, inupperand side views. X 2. Type. Vermilion Co., Ill. No. 6511 Univ. of Chicago. 3-36. Megalichthys nitidus (Cope). %%. Head of type specimen viewed from in front (fig. 3a), from below (fig. 3) and from the right side (fig. 36). Texas. No. 7239 Am. Mus. CASE—AMPHIBIA AND PISCES PLATE 32 Spermatodus pustulosus. Type. X 2%. No. 7245 Am. Mus. 1. Crushed skull; from above. 2. The same from below. Hay i, Ay ft 4 y yy Z if aif ae } ee \ ‘ SS be gf