eS ree ee eed Ui hecte acabegtan a ¥) Horley Fata Nac tin yd neabe Nene | Ph 9h ym (head's eT Dire eH pater ny aren aT ION py btatinn tet hye eee eat Net Pani nh aan t mer veprte mists Pour pis i 4 et oa Ho Ht Then its ie 4 o Rul siiaatete sed 7 oD sare try ng Soi Breil biter eH 7 Ey + tiers H c bape eh aie ean ne f ‘ 0 Soper: Cetin nie evant aggie, tgs ool stata a rere beraar iy raetah i Fe renty nade Pant MSS er ls i a Sh pert : arnt Teeelstet mle Duy or ar Soa ett Sia erat om RUitet ater, msg! Myra o ey i wet eerie try COSaunicas Hn An telat Nera tapers ney ip Saree te ait 4 noe tat Te ae ty hat arnebehpes bea cy Pees ppcatiratat i ie Snr eens or aeeeraa: De eeptng vom oer ° oe tie Solent ait Pisin roatia td A Saris port Benen te * pert de + vey a Cornell University Library Sthaca, New Bork 7 cs —, ~University.ag.Lexas... Cornell University Libra 807.A5B67 The Permo-Carboniferous ammonoids of the Fe 807 AS BET ++ ag nt hw University of Texas Bulletin. No. 1762: November 5, 1917 THE, PERMO-CARBONIFEROUS. AMMONOIDS OF THE GLASS MOUNTAINS, WEST TEXAS; AND THEIR STRATIGRAPHICAL SIGNIFICANCE By r Emil Bése & Ag, oh [APPENDIX On Some New Ammonoids and the Succession of the Aenea neti: Bearing Horisons of the. Permo-Carboniferous i in Gentzal Texas BUREAU OF ECONOMIC. GEOLOGY AND. THOHNOLOGY DIVISION OF EConomié Giotocy J. A. Udden. Director of the. urea ane Heaai9 ‘of the eter at ‘ af Published by 4n8 University six times a ‘month and entered as second-class ‘matter. at the postoffice at AUSTIN, TEXAS ‘ Publications of the University of Texas Publications Committee: F. W. Gearr R. H. GairrirH J. M.. Bryant J. L. HENDERSON D. B.. CaSTEEL ; I.;P. HipEBRAND . FRreperio DuUNCALF | E, J. MATHEws | The University publishes bulletins six times a month, so num- bered that the first two digits of the number show the year of issue, the last two the position’ in the yearly series. ‘(For- ex- ‘ample, No. 1701 is the first bulletin of the year 1917.) These comprise the official publications of the University, publications on humanistic and scientific subjects, bulletins prepared by the Department of Extension and by the Bureau of Municipal | Research and Reference, and other bulletins of general educa- tional interest. With the exception of special numbers,: any bulletin will be sent to a citizen of Texas free on request. All communications about University publications should ‘be ‘ad- dressed to the Chairman of the Publications Committee, Uni- versity of hezae, Austin. ' B260-618-1m-7747 University of Texas Bulletin No. 1762: November 5, 1917 THE PERMO-CARBONIFEROUS AMMONOIDS OF THE GLASS MOUNTAINS, WEST TEXAS, AND THEIR STRATIGRAPHICAL SIGNIFICANCE . By Emil Bose APPENDIX On Some New Ammonoids and the Succession of the Ammonoid-Bearing Horisons cf the Permo-Carboniferous in Central Texas BUREAU OF ECONOMIC GEOLOGY AND TECHNOLOGY DIVISION OF ECONOMIC GEOLOGY J. A. Udden, Director of the Bureau and Head of the Division Published by the University six times a month and entered as second-class matter at the postoffice at AUSTIN, TEXAS LL The benefits of education and of useful knowledge, generally diffused through a community, are essential to the preservation of a free govern- ment. Sam Houston Cultivated mind is the guardian genius of democracy, - .. It is the only dictator that freemen acknowl- edge and the only security that free- men desire. - Mirabeau B. Lamar CONTENTS PUCIACG. CiaGius ce uu aie eek as a tuae pene se Ne seas cauee ee naow re box Sivabigeaphicd 6 teed iS. a het adn ah gs olan ne ieriauettene in Ata sate, en cenh ahee Meh ans Stratigraphy of the Permo- Carboniferous in the Glass Mountains, The different beds and their faunas ......0 00.0... ec cee eee . Distribution of the Ammonoids in different Formations... ... ....... Note on the Age of the Gaptank Formation, by J. W. Beede............ Correlation of the Permo-Carboniferous of the Glass Mountains with other North American Formations......... sar eapa® gel es os Correlation with European and Asiatic Beds... .. ... 0 0. ...0-.. Paleontological Part ..... dent) Cientes Uhr k deg ated suibk a hash er Prolecanitidae Hyatt ........... silat nde Me GG awe nae set Prolecanitinae Frech ......... Nicene is, that tiigeicntcne eee we Daraelites Gemm ..........-.0 2.000005. Riana bee Bena ai taal re Daraelites texanus n. sp... ....... alert wAtes tA aj , Seana Noritinae Karpinsky ........ tas duaeeee Hm, BORE Ga wiene a Uddenites nov. gen. ......... 2.2205. Penta alah ard Seal dass Beker tae Uddenites Schucherti n. sp......0 02... eee eee ee Uddenites: minor ns Spiis 254806 se eae eceeeevaseey. Hea Pas sa8 Medlicottinae Karpinsky ...... GAG. cagsaaesancetesex Loe eee ee Medlicottia Waagen ......... Sg. Jone ue pie Re teneenh Sane Medlicottia Whitneyi n. sp... ... 1... 0... eee. hig Cage. Bh ete, es Medlicottia Burekhardti n. Sp. ied SIA YES Sea ae Glyrphioceratidae Hyatt ......... see, dhe ere dar Dace hel ened ot Oe Gastrioceras Hyatt: 22 ccccc60 Gaba cede Pacee eee. Meh ee care ean Group of Gastrioceras globulosum M. a. W.. Gastrioceras modestum n, sp.......- due, Leeehed Group of Gastrioceras Zitteli Gemm..... ..:........ dy tae Gastrioceras roadense n. SP....-.- 6.0 cee cee cee tees Gastrioceras altudense n. sp..... ........... be ees Tyee BGS Gastrioceras sp. nov. indet..... Se eo Gh ale pug nan drm HE Satie Schistoceras Hyatt and J. P. Smith... Seca Seed om Schistoceras Smithi n. sp...... 6... e eee eee eee Schistoceras diversecostatum n. Sp..... 0-2-0. ee eee ee te eee Paralégocevas Ayaty 2 c2n sie ieee n Sate Sore BEGG eae Bee Paralegoceras incertum n. sp...... iit iinet aa Aad eee - BOS soles Thalassoceratidae Hyatt ......... 0.00 c cece ee tect e eee Prothalassoceras nov. geN......--.0.-- eee Naki iacaese Oe. ean ane Prothalassoceras Welleri n. sp...... as be Died Greaves ar Tropitidae Mojsisovics ...... ...---. Rago. baht duet eee Se eee ean Celtitinae Mojsisovics ....... Ades, ek a Gag, bet a aI e coke eee Paraceltites Gemm ........-. LES eRe OY ee «Ba eee Sete 88 Paraceltites multicostatus n. ies oP esate ® eterivted aaometien -daeS Paraceltites aff. elegans Girty.. : Re enteeiennets Arcestidae Mojsisovics .... ----.+- se eee: Se ee ee ee ma ie rrran ee Popanoceratinae Hyatt ........... be eth aera eek heen ok Agathicerag Gemmellaro ........ ee he tan onic ahaa ea On Seat i Agathiceras Frechi n. spi... 2-5-0 s eee eee etter ene evens Agathiceras Girtyi n. sp... ....-.. re er ee re eee eee 4 Contents Adtianites: Gemm:: 046 gala cdshe ete Ae Elie awrs Mia wae SAS 121 Adrianites marathonensis n, Sp......... 00000 e pee eee eee 123 Stacheoceras Gemmellaro ......... 00... cece cece eens 127 Stacheoceras Bowmani n. SP..... 0 oe cece eee tees 128 Stacheoceras gilliamense n. SP..........0 cece cee eee eee 131 Marathonites nov. subgen. ...... Dc ued ogee NES ae a ARES 133 Marathonites J. P, Smithi n. sp............. 0020 cee eee eee eee 135 Marathonites sulcatus n. Sp.. 1.2.2... cee ee ee tee eee 139 Marathonites vidriensis n. Sp....... 0.0 foe eee eee eee eee es 141 Marathonites Hargisi n. sp.. ......02. 0 (eee eee eee eee teeta 144 Vidrioceras nov. subgen. ....... inddhis sap aehae nied aeie eat aeanade Seen ae eaten 146 Vidrioceras: Uddent nn. 8p icone ses pee ben es a Vee Sees 149 Vidrioceras irregulare n. SP... 2... cee eee tee eee 152 Gyelolobinae: Aittell: ues dav eae sWe ee ees Se eee Sd ta nhew ae ee 155 PEVPIMITES OVS: CONE cs to ed a nalaaiy enable digas Whe miata tieaie ey 155 Perrinites vidriensig n. sp......-- 200 cece eee cee ee eee teens 161 Perrinites Ccompressus Nn. SP...... 06 cee eee te tenes 166 Waagenoceras Gemm. ...... 0... cece enter eens . 168 Waagenoceras Dieneri n. sp......-. 0. eee cee ee ee eee 171 Meekoceratidae Waagen sw. cect enn nent eens 177 ecanitinde, Hyatt. sidscus dsaweeees setae cise See cette dashes ind 177 Paralecanites Diener ...... Séce Use Paee Aaa Re eee ace eS 177 Paralecanites altudensis n. sp..... 0... - cece cee eee 178 ATION IO cacy aps a fate ht ae eich ase eect sity aoa Sousisiee aa eae tas ota balate May aera 182 Miedlicottia. 1 Si sacs a. douiee staring dat nats dates nwradcav awe Bikey eineie w) Dardbasee 184 Perrinites: ‘i, Spice casas Rhea Tem og eg pet Sew ae daha ok teak Agee awl os 187 Stacheoceras n. sp....... Mole Gree es ated ads Sea eee nee ee IE 190 No athiceras! al: SPncsia Vaal, hace goumie d wiak aa eae WA Wile au anteah hus eg aervasdos 193 Mle GIGOL a ans shh bal acess ep ovand Ste Ged eee atari ai ph anon ara toa hice’ tara 194 Medlicottia nv spe Ts a6 wagacep ats ces Ae Re igs Wa Barna BOE GRA banc 197 Pé@nrinités NSP. og sack ape nga Nea manatee wot awe ea meeaagts Vengo Se 201 GaStIORE AS AT IS aay erze sacred eer a aact ws acrenay c ahar eens Newioinse hy Seeal a tack yee 204 CONGIUSIONS sac5 aha Rank SES aah nals Ba eee kg a a Gee a eee Ela aewttn eae 206 Didex to plates qcas04 g0s0s Gosek ee adieges bobo es eine Geesesaieiws dae 216 THE PERMO-CARBONIFEROUS AMMONOIDS OF .THE GLASS MOUNTAINS, WEST TEXAS, AND THEIR STRATIGRAPHICAL SIGNIFICANCE By Emit Bose PREFACE Permo-carboniferous fossils have been first collected in the Glass Mountains, or Sierra del Vidrio, by R. T. Hill. These were described and listed by G. H. Girty* in 1908. They contained a number of For- aminifera, Bryozoa, Corals, Brachiopoda, Pelecypoda, and Gastro- poda, but no Cephalopoda. Hill did not try to subdivide the beds, but most of the fossils seem to have come from our Word formation, al- though some may have been collected in lower horizons. It is im- possible to ascertain the exact localities where those collections were made, Hill’s references being altogether indefinite. In 1904 and again in 1911, Dr. J. A. Udden made’a brief visit to Marathon, Brewster County, and collected a number of fossils in the region of Altuda Mountain, and among them several ammonoids. In 1914 he spent three months in the Glass Mountains and con- structed a series of cross sections through the Permo-Carboniferous, collecting at the same time numerous fossils, carefully noting their position and locality. In the course of this work he discovered many rich fossil localities, which later on proved to be of the greatest im- portance. In 1915, Dr. Udden asked me to make a general cross- section through the Permo-Carboniferous of the Glass Mountains, beginning at the Cretaceous where it overlies the youngest portion of the Palaeozoic, and ending in the oldest beds at the foot of the moun- tains bordering the Marathon basin. He proposed to make this section along the Gilliam Canyon, as this region seemed to offer the greatest facilities for observation, and to continue it in the same gen- eral direction south of the head of the canyon. I executed this work in part of September and October, 1915, with the assistance of Mr. W. F. Bowman, who did the necessary topo- 1Girty, Guadalupian Fauna, p. 27. G University of Texas Bulletin graphical work and helped me to collect fossils. The section was made following generally the eastern side of the Gilliam Canyon and an afiluent in its upper part, crossing the Road Canyon,’ the moun- tains south of it, the valley between these and Leonard Mountain, end- ing at the southern foot of this last-named mountain. After having finished this work I began to study Dr. Udden's collections and found that there existed strata older than those I had seen, that there existed quite a number of localities rich in ammonoids, and that the Glass Mountains probably would prove one of the richest localities of the earth, with respect to Permo-Carboniferous ceph- alopods. The first fruit of these preliminary studies was a paper on the Richt- hofenias found until that time in the Glass Mountains and in the region of the Shafter Mine (Presidio County) which was published as Bulletin of the University of Texas No. 55, 1916. As these first studies of Dr. Udden’s collection and my own clearly showed that our material for a palaeontological subdivision was still very incomplete, and that especially the lower part of the Permo- Carboniferous was not sufhciently represented, Dr. Udden kindly enabled me to make a second excursion to the Glass Mountains, this time accompanied by Mr. Charles Laurence Baker, who in the year 1915 had studied the older Palaeozoic and the Anthracolitic in the Marathon basin, and who desired to obtain some additional data and to acquaint himself with the subdivision of the Permo-Carboniferou north of the Southern Pacific Railway, and to try to correlate it with the strata south of that railroad, which he had studied the previous year. \Ve made this excursion during September and part of October of the year 1916, and studied principally the lower portion of the Permo-Carboniferous, although several localities of the \Vord forma- tion were also visited, and the upper part of the Pennsylvanian, the Gaptank formation of Udden. We also made a short excursion south of the Southern Pacific Railway in the Mt. Ord range, where I had the opportunity of seeing that the different Permo-Carboniferous divisions of the Glass Mountains continue there with slight changes in their lithological character. *On the map of Plate 1, in Univ. of Texas Bull. No, 1753, the Road Canyon is erroneously called Word Canyon, while on the geological map accompanying that paper, the right name has been used. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 7 The chief object of our excursion, to collect as many ammonoids as possible, was entirely attained; at the same time many fossils of other classes were brought together, some of them from entirely new localities. In the present paper I am able to describe’ 29 species of Permo-Carboniferous ammonoids belonging to 16 genera and sub- genera. This list will certainly be much augmented by later discov- eries, because on the whole the fossil treasures of the Glass Mountains have been barely touched, and several months of collecting would be’ necessary to obtain a reasonably complete fauna from all the different horizons. In the present publication, only the ammonoids will be described, because they enable us to subdivide the enormous mass of the Permo- Carboniferous sediments; while the other classes of fossils and es- pecially the brachiopods, pelecypods and gastropods, are generally not limited to certain horizons. To the description of the Permo-Car- boniferous forms is added that of a Schistoceras from the Pennsyl- vanian of the same region, on account of its relation to a Schistoceras found in the lowermost Permo-Carboniferous. But the cephalopod fauna of the Glass Mountains is not only in- teresting in so far as it enables us to establish local stratigraphical horizons in the West Texas Permo-Carboniferous. Its significance is much more far reaching! It enables us to correlate certain strata of Central Texas and their northern continuation and it makes it also possible to correlate our beds with European and Asiatic localities and even may allow us to determine the relative age of several dis- connected beds of Permo-Carboniferous age in different parts of the earth. The lower part of our beds contains a number of cephalopods entirely unknown until now, which apparently represent the oldest marine Permo-Carboniferous fauna described up to the present date. All this will be still more emphasized when the fossils belonging to other classes shall be described, but then it will be demonstrated also that a fauna composed of brachiopods, pelecypods, and gastro- pods may show a decidedly Pennsylvanian character and yet belong to the Permo-Carboniferous and not even to the oldest part of it; an observation which has been made by several other authors, especially Carl Diener. 8 University of Texas Bulletin Before we enter into the discussion of our problems it remains tu express my warmest thanks to Dr. J. A. Udden, Director of the Bureau of Economic Geology, for the great liberality which he showed in allowing me to make use of his important and detailed field notes, as well as of his collections; for his assistance in obtaining the nec- essary literature and his ever-ready willingness to further my studies. Neither should I forget to extend my sincerest thanks to the gentle- men who have helped me to collect the fauna here described—Mr. Charles Laurence Baker and Mr. W. F. Bowman; without whose assistance I probably would not have been able to amass the necessary material. I also wish to thank Mr. Carl Christianson at Austin for the great pains he has taken in making the photographs of the fossils which have been used for the compilation of the plates which accompany this work. All the sutures reproduced here have been photographed with the apparatus described by me about ten years ago." This apparatus can be further improved by setting it on another slide working at right angles with the one described in the article mentioned; this allows of centering the fossils with flattened sides, and of using a common Penny Picture Camera or holder. The circumstance that between two and twenty-four pictures can be made on a plate of 5 by 7 inches, results in saving plates and at the same time avoids movement of the camera during the changing of the plateholders. Austin, Texas, January, 1918. ‘KE. Bose, Ein verbesserter Apparat zur photcgraphischen Reproduktion von Ammonitensuturen und Ambulakren von Seeigeln. Centralblatt f. Min. Geol. u. Pal., 1907, p. 422. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS OF LITERATURE CITED IN THIS PAPER Abich, Djulfa—H. Abich, Geologische Forschungen in den Kaukasischen Landern. I Theil, Mine Bergkalkfauna aus der Araxesenge bei Djulfa ‘in Armenien. Wien, 1878. Boehm, Jiingeres Palaeozoicum v. Timor.—G. Boehm, Geologische Mitteil- ungen aus dem Indoaustralischen Archipel. VI b. Jiingeres Palaco- zoicum von Timor. N. Jahrb. f. Min. Beilagebd. 25, 1907. Caralp, Le Permien de ]’Ariége——J. Caralp, Le Permien de 1’Ariége, ses divers faciés, sa faune marine. Bull. Soc. géol. France, 4e sér., t. 3. Diener, Permocarb. fauna of Chitichun No, I—C, Diener, The Permocar- boniferous fauna of Chitichun No, I. Mem. Geol. Surv. India. Palae- ontologia Indica, Ser. XV Himalayan Fossils, vol. 1, part 3, Caleutta, 1897. Diener, Amm. u. Orth. i. siidtirol. Bellerophonkalk—C. Diener, Ueber ein Vorkommen von Ammoniten und Orthoceren im siidtirolischen Bellero- phonkalk. Sitz. Ber. K. Ak. d. Wiss. Wien, vol. 106, 1897. Diener, Syst. Stell. d. Amm. d. stidalp. Bellerophonkalkes—C. Diener, Ueber die systematische Stellung der Ammoniten des stdalpinen Bellerophon- kalkes. Centralbl. f. Min., 1901. Diener, Perm. foss. of the Central Himalayas.—C. Diener, Permian fossils of the Central Himalayas. Mem. Geol. Surv. India. Palaeontologia Indica; Ser. XV, part 5, Caleutta, 1903. Frech, Palaeozoische Faunen aus Asien und Nordafrika. N. Jahrb. f. Min,, 1895, II. Frech, Lethaea palaeoz. II 3—F. Roemer und Fr. Frech, Lethaea palaeo- zoica, Bd. II Lief. 3, Stuttgart, 1904. Frech, In Richthofen, China V.—Fr. Frech, Obere Neodyas, in Richt- hofen, China. Ergebnisse Eigener Reisen und darauf gegriindeter Studien, Bd. V. Berlin, 1911. Gemmellaro, Cale. ec. Fusulina—G. G. Gemmellaro, La fauna dei ealcari con Fusulina della valle del Fiume Sosio nella Provincia di Palermo. Fase. I. Palermo, 1888, App. 1888. Girty, Guadalupian fauna—G. H. Girty, The Guadalupian Fauna. U.S. Geol. Surv., Prof. Papers 58, 1908. Haack, Permfauna a. Nordmexico.—W. Haack, Ueber eine marine Perm- fauna aus Nordmexiko nebst Bemerkungen tiber Devon daselbst. Zeitschr. d. deutsch. geol. Gesellsch., Bd. 66, 1914 (1915). Haarmann, Coahuila—Erich Haarmann, Geologische Streifziige in Coa- huila. Zeitschr. d. deutsch, geol. Gesellsch., 1913, Monatsber. 10 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22, 23. 24. 25, 26. 27. 28. University of Texas Bulletin Haug, Les Amm. du Perm. et du Trias—E. Haug, Les Ammonites du Permicn et du Trias. Remarques sur leur classification. Bull. Soe. géol. France, IIe sér., t. 20, 1894. Haug, Et. s. 1. Goniatites —E. Huug. Etudes sur les Goniatites. Mém. Soe, eéol. France. Paléontogie, mém, 18, t. 7, fase. [Ve, 1898. Hyatt, Gen. of foss. Ceph—A. Hyatt, Genera of fossil cephalopoda. Proce. Boston Soe. Nat. Hist., vol. 22, 1884. Hyatt and Smith, Triass. ceph. gen. of America.—A. Hyatt and J. P. Smith, The Triassic Cephalopod Genera of America. U.S. Geol. Surv., Prof. Papers, No. 40, 1905, Karpinsky, Amm. d. Artinsk-Stufe—A. Karpinsky, Ueber die Ammoneen der Artinsk-Stufe und einige mit denselben verwandte carbonische Formen. Mém. de ]’Acad. I. Se. de St. Pétersbourg, VIle sér., t. 37 No. 2, St. Pétersbourg, 1889 (1888). Mojsisovics, Arkt, Trias-Amm.—E. v. Mojsisovies, Ueber einige arktische Trias-Ammoniten des nordlichen Sibirien. Mém. Acad. Imp. Se. St. Pétersbourg, VIle sér., t. 31, 1888. Noetling, Beitr. z. Geologie der Salt Range.—Fr. Noetling, Beitrage zur Geologie der Salt Range, insbesondere der permischen und triassischen Ablagerungen. N. Jahrb. f. Min., Beilagebd. XIV, 1901. Noetling, Medlicottia u. Episageceras—Fr. Noetling, Ueber Medlicottia Waag. und Episageceras n. g. aus den permischen und triasischen Schichten Indiens. N. Jahrb. f. Min., Beilagebd. 19, 1904. Rothpletz, Perm., Trias. und Jura auf Timor und Rotti—A. Rothpletz, Die Perm-, Trias-, und Jura-Formation auf Timor und Rotti im in- dischen Archipel. Palaeontographica Bd. 39, 1892. Smith, Carb. Amm. of America.—James Perrin Smith, The Carboniferous Ammonoids of America. Mon. U. 8. Geol. Surv. Vol. 42, 1903. Smith, Cephalopoda in Zittel-Eastman.—James Perrin Smith, Cephalopoda in Zittel-Eastman, Textbook of Paleontology, 2nd edition, vol. I, Lon- don, 1913. Smith, Middle triass. marine invert. faunas of N. A—James Perrin Smith, The Middle Triassic Marine Invertebrate Faunas of North America. U. S. Geol. Surv., Prof. Papers 83, 1914. Tchernow, L’étage d’Artinsk A. Tchernow, L’étage d’Artinsk. I, Ammo- noidés des bassins de Jaiva, de Kosva et de Tchoussovaia. Livr. 1. Bull. de la Soe. Imp. des Natur. de Moseou. Année 1906, Moscou, 1907. Tschernyschew, Oherearb. Brach, d. Ural u. d. Timan.—Th. Tschernyschew, Dic oberearbonischen Brachiopoden des Ural und des Timan. Mém. Com, géo]. Russie, t. XVI, No. 2, St. Petersburg, 1902. 29, 30. 31. 32. 33. oF. 39, 36. Permo-Carboniferous Amimonoids of the Glass Mountains 11 Tzwetaev, Ceph. d. Cale. Carb. de la Russie Céntrale-—Marie Tzwetaev, Cephalopodes de la section supérieure du Caleaire Carbonifére de la Russie Centrale. Mém. Com. géol. Russie, t. V, No. 3, St. Péters- bourg, 1888. Udden, Baker and Bése, Review of the Geology of Texas.—J. A. Udden, Ch. L. Baker, and E. Bose, Review of the Geology of Texas. Bull. Univ. of Texas, No. 44, Austin, Tex. 1916. Verneuil, Géol. de la Russie—R. J. Murchison, E. de Verneuil et A. de Keyserling, Géologie de la Russie d’Europe et des montagnes de 1’Oural. Vol. II, Paléontologie. Londres-Paris, 1845. Vogl, Palaeodyas v. Mrzla-Vodica.—Victor Vogl, Die Palaeodyas von Mrzla-Vodica in Kroatien (Karstgebiet). Jahrb. d. k. Ungar. geol. Reichsanstalt, Bd. 21, Budapest, 1913. Waagen, Productus limestone fossils—W. Waagen, Salt-Range fossils. I. Productus-Limestone fossils. 1. Pisces Cephalopoda. Mem. Geol. Surv. India. Palaeontologia Indica Ser. XIII, Caleutta, 1879. Wanner, Geol. Ergebn.—J. Wanner, Einige geologische Ergebnisse einer im Jahre 1909 ausgefiihrten Reise durch den ostlichen Teil des indo- australischen Archipels. Centralbl. f. Min., 1910. Wanner, Perm-, Trias-, und Jura-Formation d. Indo-australischen Archipels. J. Wanner, Neues tiber die Perm-, Trias-, und Jura-Formation des indo- australischen Archipels. Centralbl. f. Min., 1910. White, C. A. The Texan Permian.—The Texan Permian and its mesozoic types of fossils. Bull. U. S. Geol. Surv., No. 77, 1891 STRATIGRAPHICAL PART Stratigraphy of the Permo-Carboniferous in the Glass Mountains STRATIGRAPHICAL PART STRATIGRAPHY OF THE PERMO-CARBONIFEROUS IN THE GLASS MOUNTAINS TITE DIFFERENT BEDS AND THEIR FAUNAS One may divide all the Permo-Carboniferous of the Glass Moun- tains into four horizons. The highest part is then the Tessey forma- tion; below it follows the Gilliam formation, which overlies the Vidrio formation, below which exists some more richly fossil-bearing sedi- ments. This subdivision is mainly based on the lithological character of the beds, the Tessey formation being a rather unstratified or thick- bedded dolomite, the Gilliam a medium and thin-bedded limestone and dolomite, the Vidrio a thick-bedded gray, dolomite, the lowest forma- tion a sequence of sandstones, shales and limestones, which are quite generally fossiliferous. This portion includes a sequence of dolo- mite, shales and sandstones in its upper part, then follows a larger member of sandstone and below this a heavy mass of limestone, which overlies a considerable quantity of thinly lami- nated sandstone with beds of thick-bedded limestone. Below this series which we call the [Vord formation, there is a mass of shales alternating with rather thin or medium-bedded gray limestones and thinly bedded cherts which we call the Leonard formation. This series is underlain by a mass of rather medium to thin-bedded, whitish gray, rarely conglomeratic limestone, which we have called the Hess formation. At the bottom of this series was discovered an erosional unconformity, which although being of quite a considerable importance to the east of the Glass Mountains (near Gap Tank) be- comes more and more pronounced farther to the west, and has heen followed by Baker also south of the Southern Pacific Railway in the Mt. Ord Range. We recognized the great importance of this un- conformity and found that the greater part of the underlying formation belonged to the Pennsylvanian; these beds, mostly shales, limestones and sandstones, are called the Gaptank formation. The natural idea would have been to suppose that this unconformity 16 University of Texas Bulletin represented the upper limit of the Pennsylvanian, but Udden observed in an unnamed place which we afterwards used to call the Wolf Camp (between Gap Tank and Leonard Mountain) that there were certain strata below the unconformity, mostly shales and limestones, which contained fossils similar to those in the Word formation—as for example, Lyttonia,—and which did not seem to confirm the idea that the Gaptank formation really belonged to the Pennsylvanian. Near the Wolf Camp, Udden also found a few small cephalopods, ap- parently belonging to new species. By studying Dr. Udden’s col- lections and those that were made by Mr. Charles L. Baker, and my- self, at the same locality, and which contained several hundred am- monoids, I was able to demonstrate that the Gaptank formation really contained two different horizons, an upper one only preserved near the Wolf Camp which represents the lowermost Permo-Carboni- ferous, and which I shall call the Wolfcamp formation; and a lower one which contains a characteristic Upper Pennsylvanian fauna, for which we preserve the name Gaptank formation.* The uncon- formity thus does not constitute the boundary between the Carboni- ferous and the Permian, but belongs to the lower part of the Permian, notwithstanding that in most parts it forms the limit between the Pennsylvanian and the Permo-Carboniferous. In the eastern region the unconformity separates the Hess formation from the Gaptank formation (Gap Tank and some miles farther west) although in one place there it has eroded the upper limestones of the Gaptank forma- tion. At Wolf Camp we find the unconformity between the Hess and the Wolfcamp formation, but farther west, this latter one and even the whole Gaptank formation are entirely eroded and the uncon- *Editor’s Note: The undersigned has inadvertently in his “Notes on the Geology of the Glass Mountains,” (Univ. of Tex. Bull. No. 1753), himself taken the credit of having named the Wolfcamp formation. I wish to state here that the discovery of the Wolfcamp could hardly have been made except by a paleontologist of such accom- plishments as Dr. Bose. The classification and subdivision of the entire anthracolitic section in the Glass Mountain country was to a large extent the joint werk of the three authors of University of Texas Bulletin No. 44, It so happened that the writer of this note had done most of the field work on the Permo-Carboniferous rocxs in the Glass Mountains; Baker had no doubt the best information on the general geology of the surrounding region; while Dr. Bédse was relied upon for that critical paleontological knowledge which is decisive in all work of this kind—a circumstance particularly for- tunate for our studies in this region, J. A. UDDEN. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 17 formity brings the Hess formation in contact with the older and strongly folded member of the Pennsylvanian called the Dimple for- mation, or with somewhat younger beds, equally much-folded and be- longing to the Pennsylvanian, called Haymond formation by Baker,? or still other strata. This shows that the unconformity discovered by Udden is of great importance for the local geological history but that it does not constitute the boundary line between the Upper Pennsyl- vanian and the Permo-Carboniferous. This is not the place for the discussion of the geological and strati- graphical conditions of the Glass Mountains, which have been de- scribed by Dr. Udden in a separate publication,” but it is necessary to explain the stratigraphical local names introduced by us, so that we may be able to use them in the following text. DISTRIBUTION OF THE AMMONOIDS IN THE DIFFERENT FORMATIONS The upper formations—the Tessey, Gilliam and Vidrio dolomites— do not seem to be very fossiliferous and no cephalopods have been found in them at the places where I could study them. Our ammonoids have been found only in the lower part of our Per- mo-Carboniferous: in the Word, Leonard, Hess and Wolfcamp for- mations. The richest in genera and species are the highest and lowest of these—the Word and Wolfcamp formations; while the Leonard formation is extremely rich in specimens which belong to few genera and species. The Hess formation has given only two species up to this time; one of which is even not entirely without doubt as to its age; but the Hess formation has been less studied than any of the other divisions and there is the possibility that richer localities may yet be found. The species of our fauna are distributed in the different formations in the following manner: Wolfcamp formation: Daraelites texanus, n. sp. Uddenites Schucherti, n. g. n. sp. Uddenites minor, n. sp. Gastrioceras modestum, n. sp. Schistoceras diversecostatum, n. sp. 1C¢f. Udden, Baker and Bose, Review of the Geology of Texas, p, 46. 2University of Texas Bulletin, No. 1753. 18 University of Texas Bulletin Paralegoceras incertum, n. sp. Agathiceras Frechi, n. sp. Marathonites vidriensis, n. sp. Marathonites sulcatus, n. sp. Marathonites, J. P. Smithi, n. g. n. sp. Vidrioceras Uddeni, n. g. n. sp. Vidrioceras irregulare, n. sp. Hess formation: Prothalassoceras Welleri, n. g. n. sp. Marathonites Hargisi, n. sp. Leonard formation: Medlicottia Whitneyi, n. sp. Gastrioceras altudense, n. sp. Perrinites vidriensis, n. g. n. sp. Perrinites compressus, n. sp. Paralecanites altudensis, n. sp. Word formation: Medlicottia Burckhardti, n. sp. Gastrioceras roadense, n. sp. Gastrioceras sp. nov. indet. Paraceltites multicostatus, n. sp. Paraceltites aff. elegans Girty. Agathiceras Girtyi, n. sp. Adrianites marathonensis, n. sp. Stacheoceras Bowmani, n. sp. Stacheoceras gilliamense, n. sp. Waagenoceras Dieneri, n. sp. This list demonstrates that the formations distinguished here are real paleontological zones; not one species passes from one forma- tion to the other and there are even very few genera which occur in several of our subdivisions. Every one of our formations is characterized by the great develop- ment of some genera and this permits us to establish stratigraphical zones which may be used instead of the meaningless local geographi- cal names whenever a comparison with beds of other localities can be made. We can thus establish the following four zones: Zone of Waagenoceras=Word formation. Zone of Perrinites=Leonard formation. Zone of Prothalassoceras—Hess formation. Zone of Uddenites=Wolfcamp formation, Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 19 When we compare the fauna of each of these divisions we find that they may be united into two groups on account of the paleontological relations existing between them. One group would be formed by the Zone of Waagenoceras and that of Perrinites; while the other natural group would consist of the Zone of Prothalassoceras and that of Uddenites. The correctness of this view can be easily demonstrated for the first group. We find that in both these zones occurs the genus Medli- cottia; that both contain Gastrioceras belonging to the group Gastrio- ceras Zittel Gemm., and that the highly developed forms of the Cyclolobinae are represented by Perrinites in the lower zone and by Waagenoceras in the upper one. It is a little more difficult to show relations between the two lower divisions, on account of the scarcity of ammonoids in the zone of Prothalassoceras, but still there are some features which separate this zone from that of Perrinites, and others which connect it with the zone of Uddenites. Both the zones of Waagenoceras and Perrinites con- tain in general quite highly developed ammonoids like Perrinites, Waagenoceras, Medhcottia, Adrianites, and species belonging to the group of Gastrioceras Zitteli Gemm., while both of the two lower zones contain less highly developed forms. Instead of the higher developed Medlicottia we find in the zone of Uddenites the new genus Uddenites which is not a precursor of Medlicottia, though also a branch of Pro- norites, but which has not developed in the same degree of the first- mentioned genus. Instead of Stacheoceras with many lobes, we find Marathonites and Vidrioceras with a very small number of lobes. In the lowermost zone there occurs even the genus Schistoceras which has been known only from the Pennsylvanian. In the upper zone of the lower group we find a less developed member of the Thalasso- ceratidae, and although the higher developed forms of this genus do not occur in the zone of Waagenoceras, we shall see that in Europe and Asia these higher forms occur in beds of the same age, and as- sociated with forms that are also found in our highest zone. The two zones of the lower group are united with each other to a certain degree by the occurrence of Marathonites in both of them and they show a certain difference from the zones of the higher group in the degree of development of the ammonoids contained in them. 20 University of Texas Bulletin At the present time it is difficult to decide how near the relationship is between the zone of Uddenites and that of Prothalassoceras, because so few ammonoids have been found in the latter one. According to my provisional observation also the brachiopods and gastropods of these two zones have more affinities with the Pennsylvanian than those from the two upper zones, although in the zone of Perrinites occur some gastropods of entirely carboniferous aspect. We have to take into account also that we do not know how much material of the zone of Uddenites was removed by erosion before the zone of Prothalassoceras was deposited. Near the Wolf Camp the con- glomerate is about 45 feet thick and indicates considerable erosion; therefore quite a number of beds may be unknown to us because they have been carried away and are not preserved anywhere else in this region. Thus we arrive at the following conclusions: There is a certain affinity between the zones of Waagenoceras and of Perrinites, while the ammonoids of the two lower zones show a distinct and somewhat older character; the degree of relationship between these two latter zones cannot be exactly determined, on account of the scarcity of am- monoids in the upper one and because we do not know how much mater- ial has been destroyed during the erosional period which separates the zones from each other. We have already mentioned that the dolomites on top of the Word formation do not seem to be very fossiliferous and that an exact de- termination of their age cannot be made; the fossils only show that these beds belong still to the Permian, but it is impossible to say where the Permo-Carboniferous ends. Somewhat different are the conditions below our fossiliferous series. The shales and limestones which carry the ammonoids of the Wolf- camp formation rest on the very characteristic gray limestone which may be followed to the east as far as Gap Tank. This limestone con- tains a small fauna of brachiopods, pelecypods, gastropods, etc., of decidedly Pennsylvanian character. At Gap Tank the rocks underly- ing the afore-mentioned limestone are well developed; they consist of shales alternating with rather thick-bedded whitish-gray limestones similar to the upper one, and farther below of sandstones, limestones, shales and several conglomerates. In the continuation of this series ame 4 : Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 21 southward the shales which belong to its upper portion are very well exposed and enormously fossiliferous. They contain a characteristic Pennsylvanian fauna. Ammonoids are rare; the principal species which was found and which will be described in the palaeontological part of this work is Schistoceras J. P. Smithi n. sp., similar to Sch. Hyatti Smith. Furthermore, we collected a small globose involute ammonite which seems to belong to Stacheoceras or Marathonites, and a fragment of a large ammonoid with simple sutures which be- longs apparently to a new genus but is too incomplete for a description. Lately Dr. J. W. Beede has made a provisional study of the faunas contained in the Gaptank formation and to him I am indebted for the following review, which I reproduce verbatim: “A cursory review of the invertebrate fossils of the Gaptank forma- tion, with provisional identifications, shows an interesting succession of forms from the base upward, and shows also that the formation covers a large span of the Pennsylvanian system of rocks. From the lowest part of the formation—really series—we have such fossils as Cryptacanthia cf. compacta W. and St. J., Chonetes mesolobus N. and P., and Pugnax rockymontanus (Marcou) with fossils usually asso- ciated with this fauna; to these it is important to add others belonging to the lower and middle part of the formation, such as species of Het- erocoelia, Coelocladia, and Wewokella?; three species of Com- posita, two of which have Guadalupian affinities, Spirifer aff. musak- heylensis Dav., Uncinulus aff. Wangenhewmi Tschern., Chaenomya leavenworthana Meek, Porcellia, and others. Many additional species are common to the rocks of the Kansas section or are closely related to them. The Fusulinae of the lower part of the formation (however much of it this may include) seem to be those of the “Upper Coal Mea- sures” below the top of Stage G of the Kansas section. The basal part of the formation, however, must go as low as the vicinity of the Pawnee or Fort Scott limestone of the Kansas section as is shown by the first four species named. The upper limit of the lower part of the forma- tion, as represented by the collections, probably reaches up to or into Stage G of the Kansas section. “The upper part of the formation contains a species of Schwagerina probably identical with the Kansas species, Fusulina sp. very closely related to F. longissimoidea Beede, of the same horizon as the Schwag- ee University of Texas Bulletin erina in both states, Onuphalotrochus? sp. and a variety of Euomphalus pernodosus M. and W. “The associated fauna is such as to force the conclusion that the up- per Gaptank formation reaches as high as the base of the Lower Per- mian (Permo-Carboniferous) if it does not slightly penetrate it. The evidence of the faunas of the overlying formation is perfectly consis- tent with this conclusion. “While a large percentage of the species of fossils found in the Gap- tank formation is identical with or related to species from the Pennsy vanian of the Mississippi Valley, yet many have very close relation- ships with forms described from the Pennsylvanian and even Permo- Carboniferous of Eurasia, especially the southern part of the con- tinent. ‘ “Among the species with southern Asiatic affinities may be men- tioned Spirifer cf. musakheylensis Dav., Productus group of P. gigan- teus Waagen, Enteletes hemiplicatus Hall? aff. (Syntrialasma) hemi- plicatus of Keyserling from Lo Ping, and Productus guadalupensis comancheanus Girty, group of P. humboldti; three of those with north- ern Eurasian affinities are “Plewrotomaria” group of P. altaica de Vern., Uncinulus aff. wangenheimi Tschernyschew, and Euphemus nodocarinatus (New Harmony variety) White, with E. carbonarius Stuckenberg (Kart. Géol. Russ. 127) ; of species related to the Permo- Carboniferous of the Alps and Sicily we have Enteletes ati. waageni Gemm., Geyerella aff. Geyerellae of Schellwien from the Trogkofel- schichten. “Even from this brief review it is evident that during the Pennsyl- vanian time at least an intermittent connection was maintained be- tween the waters of this part of west Texas and the Mississippi Valley sea, as well as with the southern Eurasian region during the later Pennsylvanian. “The fauna of the formations above the Gaptank—Wolfcamp to Gil- ' liam—show little if any evidence of a connection with the Mississippi Valley region after the close of the Gaptank. While these higher for- mations contain some species common to the Mississippi Valley region or related to them, yet they may all be accounted for as survivors of the earliest migration.” Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 23 ‘With these remarks of Dr. Beede should be compared his list of fossils from the Gaptank formation published by Udden in his “Notes on the Geology of the Glass Mountains,” University of Texas Bulletin No. 1753, 1917, p. 38 et. seq. Together with the ammonoids of our zone of Uddenites, we have found some fossils of carboniferous aspect, but at the same time we found intimately associated with the cephalopod-bearing beds several Richthofenia and a little higher several Lyttonia and other brachiopods of Permo-Carboniferous character, all far below the conglomerate of the erosional unconformity at the beginning of the zone of Prothal- assoceras. It seems therefore that we are justified in considering as the upper- most Pennsylvanian the light gray limestones which follow the foot- hills from Wolf Camp to Gap Tank, and to regard our cephalopod- bearing dark shales and gray limestones as the lowest portion of the Permo-Carboniferous. For the time being, this is certainly the best solution of the problem, because it is easy to follow the upper limit of the gray masses of limestone. If later detailed studies should demon- strate that part of these limestones belongs to the Permo-Carboni- ferous this would not have great influence on the main subdivision of the beds. CORRELATION OF THE PERMO-CARBONIFEROUS OF THE GLASS MOUN- ‘TAINS WITH OTHER NORTH AMERICAN FORMATIONS The Permian of North America is still very little known. This makes correlation difficult, especially in those regions where no marine fauna has been described. Most of the fossils cited are pelecypods, which do not make it possible to distinguish well limited palaeontolog- ical zones. Nevertheless, there are some regions which permit a more exact correlation. The nearest place where a marine Permo-Carboniferous fauna has been found is the Guadalupe Mountains in Culberson County, West Texas. The detailed description of this fauna by G. H. Girty should allow an exact correlation, but unfortunately the ammonoids de- scribed are few and badly preserved. Nevertheless, the occurrence of Waagenoceras (not “Waagenoceras’ Cumminsi White) seems to 24 University of Texas Bulletin be certain and this would correlate the Delaware Mountain beds with our Word formation (zone of Waagenoceras). This is confirmed by the existence of a form described as Gastrioceras sp., which has most intimate relations with our Gastrioceras n. sp. indet. With the exception of the Gastrioceras serratum Girty, the rest of the ammo- noids have been found in higher strata; nothing similar to them seems to occur in any of our beds. The brachiopod fauna of the Word forma- tion contains a number of species also found in the Delaware Mountain beds and therewith confirms our supposition that both are contempor- aneous; but we must not forget that many of those species occur fre- quently also in our lower horizons. A further, although negative proof for our assumption is afforded by the fauna of our Leonard formation (zone of Perrinites.) None of the characteristic Perrinites seems to have been found in the Guada- lupe Mountains. The Perrinites Cumminsi White figured by Girty certainly does not belong to this genus, but in part at least to Waagen- oceras. Nor have there been found in the Guadalupe Mountains any of the very large Producti of the group of Productus sino-indicus Frech, so common in our Leonard formation. This negative proof is of course not conclusive, but tends to bear out our supposition that the Delaware Mountain beds are younger than our Leonard formation, and contemporaneous with our Word formation. Girty had already found that the fauna from the Glass Mountains collected by R. T. Hill had a great similarity with that of the Delaware Mountain beds. It has to be kept in mind that his collections may have come from dif- ferent horizons and this may at least in part account for the differences Girty found. Much more certain are the relations between our fauna and that of some localities on the western border of the great central carboniferous area, developed in Kansas, Oklahoma and Texas. Most of the Per- mian existing in this region has not yielded any ammonoids, but there are somé localities in Texas where ammonoids have been described and where these even seem to be quite plentiful. These are the Old Military Crossing of the Big Wichita in Baylor County; the falls on Salt Croton Creek, Kent County; Quanah, Hardeman County, and a place near San Angelo, Tom Green County. In the last named locality, only a Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 25 species of Medlicottia was found, which White’ identified with his Medlicottia Copei. The locality near the falls on Salt Croton Creek has furnished Perrinites Hilli Smith and a number of undescribed species of Popanoceras (probably Stacheaceras) and Medlicottia which are supposed to be identical with similar forms found at the third locality, the Military Crossing of the Big Wichita. The am- monoids discovered at this last place are: Medlicottia Copei White, Paralegoceras baylorense White sp., Stacheoceras Walcotti White sp., and Perrinites Cumminsi White sp. White recognized the fact that his ammonoids showed some very near relation to those of the Sosio beds of Sicily and of the Productus limestone of India, but notwith- standing this he expressed the somewhat surprising belief that those beds of Sicily and India might perhaps belong to the Upper Coal Measures, strata that he found below his Texan Permian. As we shall see later on, he reversed the real conditions. White did not know the works of Murchison, Verneuil and Keyserling, Karpinsky’ and Krotow, or he would have perceived that those forms which he thought to be Mesozoic types are in reality typical Permian genera and that there was no commingling of Mesozoic and Carboniferous types at all. When we study the fauna described by White we see that the most important fact is the occurrence of highly developed Cyclolobinae in the form of Perrinites, while other decidedly Permian forms are Med- licottia and that group of Stacheoceras which is represented by St. Walcotti. The occurrence of Perrinites is of special significance as it is by far the most common of all the species found at the Military Cross- ing, the same as is the case with Perrinites in our Leonard formation. Perrinites has been found also at the falls of the Salt Croton Creek, Kent County; but this species, P. Hilli Smith, is very different from P. Cumminst and exceedingly similar to P. vidriensis; so much so that for some time I doubted if it were not the same species. This resem- blance justifies us in supposing that the beds of P. Hilli and our Leon- ard formation are of the same age. The former ones belong to the middle part of the Double Mountain formation while the beds at the tWhite, The Texan Permian, p. 21. *He received this work after his paper had gone to the printer, 26 University of Texas Bulletin Military Crossing belong to the upper Wichita, or perhaps the lower Clear Fork. The fauna of the beds at the Military Crossing shows that they cannot be much different in age from the Leonard formation and may possibly be an equivalent of the lower part of the zone of Perrinites. The beds at Salt Croton Creek certainly correspond to the upper part of the Leonard formation where P. vidriensis is the most common fos- sil. The result is somewhat surprising because the thickness of the Clear Fork formation is about 1900 feet, and that of the lower half of the Double Mountain about 700 feet, while that of the Leonard forma- tion is probably not much over 700 feet. This may possibly be ex- plained by the difference of facies as there cannot be much doubt that paleontologically the beds at the Military Crossing cannot be much older that the Leonard formation, while the middle part of the Double Mountain certainly corresponds to the upper part of the Leonard formation. Both localities of Central Texas are certainly older than our Word formation and of course also older than the Delaware Moun- tain formation. These latter zones may be represented by the upper part of the Double Mountain formation. The locality at Quanah, Hardeman County, was apparently dis- covered by Ch. N. Gould. Ona recent trip to this place which I made, accompanying Dr. J. W. Beede, we collected quite a number of gen- erally badly preserved specimens of Perrinites. Some of the better preserved individuals show the details of the suture, which are quite different from those of Perrinites Hilli as well as Perrinites vidriensis, the saddles being much more slender and deeper scalloped, although the branches are in general simpler of outline. The species is more evolute than the other two mentioned, and has to be considered as new, the external form being entirely different from that of P. Cumminsi. The only other ammonoid observed by us at the same locality was a very large Gastrioceras, larger than any other one so far described, but so badly preserved that it is practically undeterminable. The lo- cality is north of the Acme Cement Mills west of Quanah, and a little south of the first wagon road running east and west. The locality near San Angelo where Medlicottia Copei? was found must be above the Albany formation which is considered as an equliva- Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 27 lent of the Wichita formation of northern central Texas. It belongs possibly to the Clear Fork division, but no details are known. Below the Clear Fork division we find in northern Texas the Wichita formation composed of red, bluish and gray-white sandstones, red con- cretionary clays, occasional blue shales and clay-ball conglomerates. Further south these beds are supposed to be represented by the blue- black and gray shales and clays and the hard compact and thick-bedded limestone of the Albany formation. This member of the Central Texas series thus would correspond to the lower part of our Leonard forma- tion, the Hess formation, the unknown strata destroyed by the Permo- carboniferous erosion, and the Wolfcamp formation. The invertebrate fauna of the lower Wichita~-Albany has never been described and the ammonoids are not known. No nearer comparisons can be made with other Permian localities of North America. In the Appalachian region the Permian consists of plant-bearing beds of lower Permian charac- ter, while in Nova Scotia this series probably corresponds to higher beds of the Permian (Saxonian and Franconian). Unfortunately, no detailed studies about the Permian in the Basin Ranges and the Rocky Mountains are available, although the Permian seems to be well re- presented there. The fossils found by Frech near Fort Douglas near the Great Salt Lake seem to represent principally an upper Permian fauna. Very little is known about the shales which represent the Per- mian in California; especially in the southern part of the Sierra Neva- da, they seem to be entirely sterile. Very little can be said about the interesting locality discovered by Haarmann’ at Las Delicias near Torreon, Coahuila, in northern Mex- ico. The small fauna which has been described by W. Haack’ belongs undoubtedly to the upper Anthracolitic and may very well represent one of our Permo-Carboniferous zones, but it is impossible to make a more exact determination of its age. Still less is known about the upper Anthracolitic existing in Chiapas, southern Mexico, Guatemala and British Honduras, although a list of the fossils from the last two countries has been made by E. Stolley and published by Carl Sapper. 1Haarmann, Coahuila. *Haack, Permfauna a. Nordmexico. 28 University of Texas Bulletin CORRELATION WITH EUROPEAN AND ASIATIC BEDS The main marine lower Permian beds of Europe, in which am- monoids have been found, are the Sosio beds of Sicily; the Trogkofel beds of the Carnian Alps, and the Karawanken; the sandstones of Mrzla-Vodica in Croatia; the beds of St. Girons in the Pyrenees; and perhaps the cherty beds of Spitzbergen and Barent Island; the Artinsk beds of eastern European Russia. Of all these the Sicilian Sosio beds are by far the richest, containing twenty genera and subgenera, with sixty-eight species of ammonoids; while the next richest fauna, that of the cephalopod-bearing strata of the Artinsk in Russia, has four- teen genera with forty-two species of ammonoids (not counting the species which have been cited but not described, or which are doubtful). It has been the opinion of most of the authors that the cephalopod- bearing Artinsk is a little older than the Sicilian Sosio beds. Karpin- sky gives a short comparison of the faunas and reaches the conclusion that the Sicilian fauna is a little younger, but that it is very similar to that of the Artinsk; that one form even is identical, while others are very nearly related. He adds that the occurrence of the complicated Arcestidae (Waagenoceras and Hyattoceras) could be explained if one supposed that such forms belong to more southern regions. It appears to me that Karpinsky has paid more attention to the sim- ilarity of the two faunas than to the discrepancies. I do not give much importance to the circumstance that the species are not identical in both faunas, because it is not to be supposed that many forms could have such an enormously wide distribution without undergoing speci- fic changes. Much more important seems to me the occurrence of the same subgenera or genera and also of groups of species wherever these have not been united into special subgenera. Karpinsky tries to demonstrate that practically the greatest part of the Artinskian fauna is autochthonic because their ancestors were living in the upper Carboniferous of Russia. This appears to be a very dangerous pro- ceeding, because if we apply this rule to American occurrences, we can easily show that those ancestors lived in America also in the Carboni- ferous. I do not believe that it is often possible to prove in what spec- ial place on the earth a certain genus originated. Our knowledge oi the distribution of ammonoids is far too limited yet, and every day Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 29 may prove our conclusions to be wrong. Whatever may seem today to be a type which was developed in a certain locality, tomorrow may prove to be much more plentiful in a far distant locality. The modern studies about the ammonites of the Mesozoic seem to demonstrate that most of the genera, subgenera and even groups of species occur all over the earth, at least during the period before the Upper Cretaceous ; that they succeed each other in one region in the same manner as in the other; and that only very few types developed locally. I do not doubt that similar conditions existed in the Permian, the first forma- tion where ammonoids begin to occur very frequently. If we compare the genera, subgenera and groups of species which occur both in the Artinsk and in the Sosio beds, we find that there is really a great similarity between the two faunas. The genera, etc., which occur in both faunas are: Parapronorites, Medlicottia, Pro- pinacoceras, Daraelites, Gastrioceras (group of G. Zitteli), A gathi- ceras, Adrianites, Popanoceras, Stacheoceras, and perhaps Thalasso- ceras, Paraceltites and Sicanites. Part of these genera are not of great importance as they occur also in younger or older formations. Med- licottia, for example, occurs certainly in different parts of the Permian; Gastrioceras, Agathiceras and Stacheoceras (in the wider sense) are even found in the Carboniferous. But Parapronorites, Propinacoceras, Daraelites, Adrianites, Popanoceras, Thalassoceras, Paraceltites, and Sicanites certainly appear to be limited to the lower part of the Per- mian, where also the typical Medlicottia and Stacheoceras seem to have attained their greatest development. The occurrence of these types in both faunas tends to prove that the difference in age must be compara- tively small, but that such a difference exists is proved by the oc- currence of genera in the Artinsk which are generally of an older type, and of others in the Sosio beds which belong to a younger type. We shall discuss these particularities here a little more fully. In the Artinsk we find Pronorites, a genus which is most frequent in the Carboniferous, and which is entirely missing in the Sosio beds. Parapronorites which is nearly related to Pronorites, but shows a higher developed suture, is very frequent in the Artinsk (nine species) while in the Sosio beds it is represented by only one species. On the other hand, Propinacoceras, which has perhaps a little more highly developed suture than Parapronorites, is represented by three species 30 University of Texas Bulletin in the Sosio beds and only by one in the Artinsk. Among the Gastrio- ceras of the Artinsk there are yet forms which are nearly related to Carboniferous forms (Gastrioceras Fedorowi, G. Nikitini) while others like G. Sucssi belong to the group of G. Zitteli. In the Sosio _beds the older forms seem to be absent and all the species described belong to the younger group of G. Zitteli. The species described by Gemmellaro as Glyphioceras have nothing to do with the Carboni- ferous Glyphioceras. Agatliceras is about equally frequent in both faunas but the genus changes very little in the different horizons from the upper Carboni- ferous to the different.stages of the Permo-Carboniferous and is there- fore of no importance at all except on account of its greater frequency in the younger formation. A higher stage is represented by Adrianites and it is quite characteristic that from the Artinsk only one species has been described (Tchernow cites a second one) while ten are known to occur in the Sosio beds. Among these are two belong- ing to the subgenus Hofimannia altogether unknown in the Artinsk. The genera Doryceras and Clinolobus seem to be limited to the Sosio beds and are not known with certainty elsewhere. Very characteristic is the distribution of the different groups and perhaps subgenera of Stacheoceras in both faunas. In the Artinsk we find not only the type with very few lobes, similar in its external ap- pearance and in its suture to those which occur in the Carboniferous and which may all be nearly related to our subgenus Marathonites; but also the type with a higher development of the suture. In the Sosio beds only these latter forms (represented by twelve species) are known to occur. Popanoceras s. s., is represented by only one species in the Artinsk, while in the Sosio beds four species occur ; Popanoceras certainly represents a higher stage of development than Stacheoceras does. Very important is the occurrence of the highly developed Cyclolo- binae (Hyattoceras and Waagenoceras) in the Sosio beds. They are nearly related to the evidently younger form of Cyclolobus. None of this kind has been described from the Artinsk. In the Sosio beds, Thalassoceras is represented by four species, while in the Artinsk only one or two occur, and the only one figured may Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 31 even belong to a less highly developed precursor of that genus. (Pro- thalassoceras.) The occurrence of Paraceltites in the Artinsk is extremely doubtful, while this genus is represented by four species in the Sosio beds. This is important in so far as the sculpture of the genus is very similar to that of the real ammonites, while the suture is somewhat archaic. The genus Daraelites was first described from the Sosio beds where it occurs in only one species, represented by numerous specimens. An- other and seemingly rather rare species has been described from the Russian Artinsk by Tchernow. The genus has apparently a wider range in age than has been thought. It occurs in our lowermost Per- mo-Carboniferous of the Glass Mountains, Texas, although in only two specimens. There it is represented by a new species which differs from those of the Artinsk and the Sosio beds by the broad first lateral lobe. Another species is known to occur in the Permo-Carboniferous of St. Girons in the Pyrenees. A very interesting feature is the occurrence of Medlicottia in both the Sosio limestone and the Artinsk sandstone. In the latter beds the genus is represented by at least one species, while the Sosio beds contain four species different from those of the Artinsk. Karpinsky had thought that M. Orbignyana was possibly identical with M. Traut- scholdi Gemm., or that this latter one only represented a variety of the Russian form; but Noetling has already indicated a number of dif- ferences in the sutural line and we may add that the form of the ex- ternal saddle and of the adventive lobe A is very different in both forms, and that also the lateral lobes have an evidently very different outline. This is especially evident when we compare Gemmellaro’s figure with that of nearly the same size of M. Orbignyana given by Karpinsky on his plate II, fig. 1, g, h and k. It seems also that the furrow on the ventral part is much wider in M. Trautscholdi than in the Russian form. Noetling has tried to determine the age of certain beds through the development of the sutural line of Medlicottia. He supposes that the geologically older species have a smaller number of auxiliary lobes and also of rudimentary lobes on the external saddle than the younger ones; that the adventive lobe A is shallower in the older species than in the younger ones, etc. But he supposed also that the cephalopod-bear- 32 University of Texas Bulletin ing sandstones of the Artinsk are younger than the Sosio beds. I have tried to show in our chapter on Medlicottia that Noetling over-esti- mates the value of certain details in the sutural line. The differences between the species of Medlicottia are in reality so small that a deter- mination of age based on the development of the sutural line is cer- tainly out of the question until we get to know more material in different horizons. Sicanites has been found in Sicily in only two species, one of which is somewhat doubtful, and the type species appears to have been found in only a very few specimens. Karpinsky even doubts that Sicanites represents a final stage of development and thinks that the specimens described as Sicanites may be nothing more than young individuals or inner whorls of Medlicottia. If Sicanites is really a genus it pro- bably occurs both in the Russian Artinsk (Medlicottia Karpinskyana Krotow) and in the Sosio beds of Sicily. This comparison of the ammonoid fauna of the Artinsk and the Sosio beds shows us quite clearly that the Artinsk contains a number of rather archaic genera unknown in the Sosio beds or represented by an occasional species. On the other hand, the Sicilian fauna contains some highly developed forms, especially those belonging to the Cyclo- lobinae (Hyattoceras, Waagenoceras) which are absolutely unknown in the Artinsk and which find their nearest relations in higher strata of the Permian. These facts can be deduced from the table B published by Karpinsky (1. c., pp. 88, 89), and they are still more evident if we add to it those species described by Tchernow and make the necessary cor- rections of generic determinations for some of the species described by Karpinsky. They can only be explained by supposing that the Artinsk and the Sosio beds represent paleontological zones of different age, and that the Artinsk is decidedly older than the Sosio beds. Karpinsky obtained quite similar results. He also believes that the Artinsk is somewhat older than the Sosio beds but he does not think that the difference is very great (Karpinsky, loc. cit., table C on page 94); and Tschernyschew even thinks the difference in age is entirely inconsiderable (Tschernyschew, Die obercarbonischen Brach. d. Ural u. d. Timan, p. 720-721). University of Texas Bulletin 33 As I have said above, Karpinsky seems to pay more attention to the similarities of the two faunas than to the discrepancies, although these latter are evidently by far greater than the similarities. It is of course extremely difficult to decide how great the difference in age is because the two faunas are found in localities separated from each other by an enormous distance; but the paleontological character of the Sosio beds makes it very probable that they correspond in age at least to the Kungur dolomites of the Ural which cover the ceph- alopod-bearing sandstones of the Artinsk. This is only a supposi- tion, because the Kungur dolomites do not contain ammonoid forms and a direct paleontological comparison is therefore impossible. It may even be that the Sosio beds are still a little younger than the Kungur dolomites but they are certainly not nearly of the same age as the Artinsk sandstone. This will appear more evident yet when we compare the faunas of the Artinsk and of the Sosio beds with those of the Glass Mountains. A comparison between the fauna of our zone of Waagenoceras (Word formation) and that of Sicily shows at once the intimate rela- tions hetween the two. There is not one genus in our fauna which does not also exist in the Sosio beds, and most of the species have some near relative even in the Sicilian beds, as is shown by the fol- lowing table: SPECIES FROM THE WORD FORMATION OF .CORRESPONDING FORMS FROM OTHER THE GLASS MOUNTAINS LOCALITIES Medlicottia Burckhardti n. sp. M. Vernewili Gemm. Sosio beds Gastrioceras roadense n. sp. G. sosiense Gemm. Sosio beds Gastrioceras sp. nov. indet. G. sp. Girty Delaware beds Paraceltites multicostatus n. sp. P. Hoeferi Gemm. Sosio beds Paraceltites aff. elegans Girty. P. - plicatus Gemm. Sosio beds Agathiceras Girtyi n. sp. : Adrianites marathonensis n. sp A. insignis Gemm. Sosio beds Stacheoceras Bowmani n. sp. Stacheoceras gilliamense n. sp. St. globosum Gemm. Sosio beds Waagenoceras Dieneri n. sp. W. Nikitini Gemm. Sosio beds s The occurrence of Waagenoceras at both localities is of the greatest importance. While this genus has never been found anywhere else, it is extremely frequent in the Glass Mountains and in the Sosio beds. The occurrence of this genus alone would make it highly probable that 34 Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains both faunas are synchronous. The rest of the genera in our zone of Waagenoceras confirms this opinion, especially Medlicottia, Gastri- oceras of the G. Zitteli group, Paraceltites, Adrianites and ‘Stacheo- ceras. Our fauna is much poorer in species than that of the Sosio beds and that explains, perhaps, why a number of genera that occur in the Sosio beds have not yet been found in the Word formation. The principal ones of these genera are: Hyattoceras, Popanoceras (posst- bly represented by some forms that have been taken for Stacheoceras), Propinacoceras, Parapronorites, Sicanites, Daraelites, Thalassoceras, Doryceras. and Clinolobius. While many of these genera are very rare also in the Sicilian deposits, the absence of some of them, such as Hyattoceras, Popanoceras, Propinacoceras and Thalassoceras, is some- what surprising; although some of them may be found in the future. If, according to Gemmellaro, Hyattoceras had not been found to- gether with Waagenoceras, we might suppose that it is represented in the Glass Mountains by Perrinites; but this latter genus always occurs below the strata with Waagenoceras! In another chapter we have tried to show that the fauna of the zone of IV aagenoceras is intimately related to that of the zone of Perrinites. At the same time it appears that the fauna of this latter zone does not show very great differences from that of the Sosio beds, although a comparison is made difficult by the reduced number of species col- lected until now in the zone of Perrinites. The following table will explain those relations: SPECIES FROM THE LEONARD FORMATION CORRESPONDING FORMS FROM OTHER OF THE GLASS MOUNTAINS LOCALITIES Medlicottia Whitneyi n. sp. M. bifrons Gemm. Sosio beds Gastrioceras altudense n. sp. G. Waageni Gemm. Sosio beds Perrinites vidriensis n. sp. Hyattoceras (?) Sosio beds Perrinites compressus n. sp. Paralecanites altudensis n. sp. Perrinites is so nearly related to Hyattoceras that we might take it for its precursor, but unfortunately the evolution of the suture of the latter genus is unknown, so that we do not know if it passes through some stage similar to the suture of Perrinites. We might also suppose that this latter genus vicariates for Hyattoceras, and that the zone thus simply represents a certain phase of the Sosio beds. University of Texas Bulletin 35 The other forms found are mostly very similar to some from the Sosio beds. Medlicottia Whitneyi is not only very nearly related to MU. Burckhardti from our zone of Waagenoceras, but also to MW. bifrons Gemm. from the Sosio beds. Gastrioceras altudense belongs without doubt to the group of G. Zitteli. Paralecanites altudensis cannot easily be compared with any other form described. We may add that Perrinites is much more highly developed than anything found until now in the cephalopod-bearing sandstones of the Artinsk; which indicates that this latter horizon is still older and that our Perrinites beds represent perhaps a zone between the cephalopod- bearing sandstones of the Artinsk and the Sosio beds. The fauna of the Perrinites beds is more nearly related to that of the latter horizon. We shall now try to show the relations between our lower horizons (the zone of Prothalassoceras and zone of Uddenites) and the Artinsk and Sosio beds. This comparison is somewhat hampered by the ex- treme scarcity of ammonoids in the zone of Prothalassoceras and also by the circumstance that a certain part of the zone of Uddenites has been destroyed by erosion during the Permo-Carboniferous time. The only two ammonoids so far found in the zone of Prothalasso- ceras, both of which show intimate relations to forms from the Artinsk sandstone, are Prothalassoceras Welleri n. sp, and Marathonites Har- gisin. sp. The only relatives of these forms seem to exist in the ceph- alopod-bearing sandstone of the Artinsk. Prothalassoceras Welleri with its characteristic simple suture, has a great similarity to Thalas- soceras Gemmellarot Karp., although it is certainly specifically dif- ferent. The resemblance of the suture in both species is really sur- prising, but as we shall explain in the description of our new species, it is possible that Thalassoceras Gemellaroit represents an immature stage of a real Thalassoceras and that larger specimens may show a more complicate suture, in which case it would be proven that our Prothalassoceras is a real precursor of Thalassoceras. Just at present we do not know the development of the suture of this latter genus. Marathonites Hargisi n. sp. has its nearest relative in Popanoceras sp. indet. (cfr. Parkeri Heilpr.) Karpinsky, but a complete comparison cannot be made because in the Russian form the auxiliary saddles and lobes are unknown. 36 University of Texas Bulletin The small number of ammonoids found in the lowest part of the zone of Prothalassoceras and the imperfect knowledge we have about those Russian forms which appear to be their nearest relatives, impedes us in drawing accurate conclusions with re- spect to the age of our horizon. Nevertheless, the circumstance that upon that zone rests one whose fauna has intimate relations with that of the Sosio beds, and which for its part is covered by another zone the fauna of which without doubt is synchronous with that of the Sosio beds, makes it very probable that our Hess limestone is a representa- tive of the cephalopod-bearing sandstone of the Artinsk. This opinion is confirmed to a certain degree by the fauna of the zone which is found below the Hess limestone. The ammonoids contained in the Wolfcamp formation or zone of Uddenites have an entirely archaic character and are different from any fauna so far described. The following table shows these features more clearly and will serve as a base for further discussion. SPECIES FROM THE WOLFCAMP FORMA- CORRESPONDING FORMS AT OTHER TION, GLASS MOUNTAINS , LOCALITIES Daraelites texanus n. sp. D. elegans Tchernow, Artinsk, Russia Uddenites Schucherti n. sp. Uddenites minor n. sp. Gastrioceras modestum n. sp. G. subcavum M. a. G., Cisco forma- tion, Texas. Schistoceras diversecostatum n. sp. Sch. Hyatti Smith, Cisco formation, Texas. Paralegoceras incertum n. sp. ——— Agathiceras Frechi n. sp. A. uralicum Karp., Artinsk, and Upper Carb., Russia. Marathonites J. P. Smithi n. sp. ? Stacheoceras Romanowskyi Karp., Artinsk, Russia. Marathonites sulcatus n. sp. ? Stacheoceras Ganti Smith, Cisco formation, Texas. Marathonites vidriensis n. sp. ? Stacheoceras Ganti Smith, Cisco formation, Texas. Vidrioceras Uddeni n. sp. Vidrioceras irregulare n. sp. We recognize at once how little similarity there is between our fauna and any other. Forms like Uddenites, Paralegoceras incertum and Vidrioceras are types unknown from any other locality, and it is Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 37 still very doubtful if any of our species belonging to Marathonites have anything to do with Stacheoccras Romanowskyi and St. Gantt. Of the first of these species we do not know the internal suture and in the second the internal lobes seem to be entirely different from those of Marathomtes. On the other hand, Agathiceras Frechi is not of great importance, because the species of this genus change very little from the Carboniferous up to the Permian. More interesting is the occurrence of Daraelites as this genus so far has only been found in the Permo-Carboniferous; but the species is very different from those described from the Artinsk and the Sosio beds. Most interesting is also the genus Uddenites. There is no doubt that it represents a branch of Pronorites, as the inner whorls show the typical Pronorites suture. Pronorites is known to exist in the up- per Carboniferous as well as in the Permo-Carboniferous, but it seems that not before this latter period does it begin to split up into different branches. Uddenttes apparently represents the oldest of these branches which developed from the type genus as a side branch be- cause the type continued to exist until the Artinsk stage. No branch of the Pronorites tribe seems to have developed during the upper Carboniferous. Only two forms in our list are strongly related to upper Carboni- ferous forms; namely, Gastrioceras modcstum and Sclustoceras diver- secostatum, but their relatives also have only been found in the very highest part of the Pennsylvanian. The absence of all more highly developed ammonoids, especially Medlicottia, the presence of types that are nearly related to such as have been found only in the highest Pennsylvanian and others that are exclusively from the Permo-Carboniferous, the occurrence of gen- era that are different from anything so far discovered in the Carbon- iferous and the Permo-Carboniferous, makes our fauna a unique one and shows at the same time that it represents one older than the oldest Permo-Carboniferous so far known, but younger than the highest Carboniferous. Our fauna would thus range between the Uralian and the Artinsk; or, as we take this latter expression as the name of a stage, .we might say that our fauna belongs to the Artinsk but is older than the cephalopod-bearing sandstones of this stage. This also 38 University of Texas Bulletin confirms our opinion expressed above, i. e., that the cephalopod-bear- ing sandstone of the Artinsk is most probably represented by the Hess limestone as it is certainly older than the zone of Perrinites and younger than that of Uddenites. The faunas so far discussed here are those which contain a great number of ammonoids, but there is known quite a number of localities where at least a few ammonoids have been found, and it will be inter- esting to see if we can establish the relation in age between these strata and those of the Glass Mountains. The most important of these is probably that of Mrzla-Vodica in Croatia. The sandy, micaceous, argillaceous shales of that locality contain the following ammonoids: Gastrioceras Roemeri Gemm.( ?) Adrianites elegans Gemm. Adrianites isomorphus Gemm. Adriamtes Hauert Gemm. Stacheoceras sp. Medlicottia (?) croatica Vogl. Propinacoceras Galilaei Gemm. sp. Paraceltites Hoefert Gemm. There can be no doubt that the fauna corresponds to some part of the Sosio beds although the highly developed Cyclolobinae are missing ; the presence of three Adrianites, of a Gastrioceras belonging to the group of G. Zitteli, and of Paraceltites is quite decisive. It is thus nearly certain that this horizon corresponds to our zone of I’aageno- ceras (Word formation). Kossmat’ has already pointed out the somewhat surprising circum- stance that those strata which contain an undoubtedly Permo-Carboni- ferous fauna are developed in a sandy-shaly facies quite similar to that of the Auernigschichten of the upper Carboniferous in the Carn- ian and Julian Alps, while in these latter parts the Permo-Carbonifer- ous is represented by the light-colored Trogkofel limestones. The brachiopod fauna of these limestones described by Schellwien makes it evident that they really belong to the Permo-Carboniferous although it does not allow the exact determination of the horizon; but the oc- currence of Popanoceras and Thalassoceras in the Trogkofel limestone .N. Jahrb. f. Min., 1915, I, p. 413. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 39 indicates that these strata may also correspond to some part of the Sosio beds. Kossmat has also indicated that there seems to be a great similarity between the strata of Mrzla-Vodica and the cephalopod-bearing shales of St. Girons in the Pyrenees which are known to contain Daraelites, Gastrioceras and Paraceitites. Unfortunately, these fossils are not ‘well preserved-and the fauna might as well correspond to that of the cephalopod-bearing sandstone of the Artinsk as to that of the Sosio beds. Very little is known about the cherty beds of Spitzbergen and Barent Island, which are considered by Frech as belonging to the Permo-Carboniferous. The only ammonoid known from that part is A gathiceras and as this genus occurs as well in the uppermost Carbon- iferous as in the Permian, it does not prove anything. Some ammonoids have been described by Diener from the upper- most Permian (Bellerophon limestone) of the Alps. All these be- long to the genus Paralecanites which is found also in the Triassic of California. Haug has pointed out the near relationship between Paralecanites and Nomismoceras and we have been able to show that a form from our Leonard formation may also belong to Parulecanites. Thus this tribe probably begins in the Carboniferous and ends in the Triassic. There is no doubt that the main bed of Paralecanites be- longs to the uppermost Permian. We shall now turn our attention to the relation which might exist between our faunas and those of the Permian of Asia. There are several localities known where ammonoids have been described. These are Darwas and Woabjilga in Central Asia, the Himalayas, the Salt Range of India, several localities in China, the Island of Timor, and Djulfa in Armenia. The faunas described from these localities range from the Permo-Carboniferous to the uppermost Permian. We shall try to discuss their relations to the European and American faunas beginning with the oldest of them. Karpinsky established the fact that the fauna of Darwas is synchron- ous with that of the cephalopod-bearing sandstones of the Artinsk. The fauna is composed of the following species: Pronorites praepermicus Karp. Propinacoceras darwasi Karp. Agathiceras wralicum Karp. 40 University of Texas Bulletin Stacheoceras Romanowskyi Karp. Thalassoceras sp. ind. This list does not leave any doubt that the fauna really corresponds in age to that of the Artinsk sandstone. If our conclusions are right, the Darwas fauna would correspond to that of our Hess limestone or zone of Prothalassoceras. A very similar fauna seems to have been found by Wanner’ at Bitaunu in the district Maubesi on the island of Timor. These strata contain hundreds of Agathiceras, large Gastrioceras, Popanoceras, Propinacoceras, and Parapronorites aff. Konincki Gemm. The fauna is apparently very similar to that of the Sosio beds and probably synchronous with it. The Chinese localities which carry ammonoids seem to belong mostly to the Permo-Carboniferous, but the few cephalopods so far found do not allow the exact determination of the horizon. The famous fossil-bearing strata of Lo Ping only yielded Gastrio- ceras (?) Richthofent Frech, a not very characteristic form, on which a conclusion as to the age of the beds cannot be based. In the lower part of his section of Ta-Pa-Shan, near Tshau-Tien, province of Sz’-Tshwan, Richthofen discovered a number of spiral tests which have been determined by Frech as A gathiceras cf. Suessi Geanm. and Gastrioceras cfr. Zitteli Gemm. These fossils do not leave much room for doubt that those strata correspond either to the Sosio beds or the Artinsk sandstone. Some very peculiar ammonoids have been found by Richthofen near Ning-Kwo-hsein, province of Nyan-hwei. Frech has described one of them as Paraceltites pseudo-opalinus Frech and thinks that ths other form is a new genus similar to Gasitrioceras. He supposes that the strata are more or less of Artinskian age. A very interesting fauna from the Himalayas has been described by Diener. The fossils were collected in the Productus shales near Lilinthi by F. H. Smith. Diener describes the following species: Hyattoceras nov. sp. ex. aff. H. Cumminsi, White. Adrianites (Hofmannia) sp. ind. Gastrioceras sp. ind. ex aff. G. Marianum, Vern. Pericyclus sp. ind. Iilinthiceras nov. gen. sp. ind. ‘J. Wanner, Geol. Ergebn., p. 143-144. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 4I Agamdes sp. ind. Nomismoceras Smithi n. sp _ Most of these ammonoids show a very characteristic and well de- veloped sculpture but extremely simple sutures, with the exception of the so called Hyattoceras aff. Cumminsi. This interesting form ap- parently belongs to a genus related to Hyattoceras, but certainly has nothing to do with Perrinites Cumminsi. I have compared a specinuen of Perrinites vidriensis of about the same size as the Hyattoceras aff. Cumminsi Diener and I have been able to state that the character of the suture is very different. In Perrinites the saddles are stout, of pyramidal form, with shallow secondary lobes; and they end in a broad, rounded leaf like those of the large specimens, only that the phyl- loid end is relatively much broader. The saddles of Hyattoceras Cum- minst Diener are much more slender and the incision deeper, and there does not exist the well rounded terminal phyllum. While Perrinites shows even in the younger stages a very high median saddle which divides the siphonal lobe into two parts, the Indian species has a very low median saddle in the rather shallow siphonal lobe. The Indian form differs also generically from Hyattoceras by its rather evolute form, the smaller number of saddles, and lobes, and the less phylloidal terminals of the saddles. But it has to be taken into consideration that Diener’s shell is very small and that one cannot quite know the final form of the suture. It seems that the genus belongs to the Cyclolo- binae and that its position is nearer the less developed forms (Perrin- ites, Hyattoceras) than the higher ones (Waagenoceras, Cyclolobus). The occurrence of this form may indicate that the Productus shales of Lilinthi correspond more or less to our zone of Perrinites, or to some part of the Sosio beds, but a real proof for this supposition does not exist. The other ammonoids described from Lilinthi do not give any in- dication of the age of those strata. I doubt very much that Diener’s Adrianites (Hofmannia) sp. has really anything to do with Hofman- nia. The suture is entirely different on account of the enormously high median saddle in the siphonal lobe and of the rather tongue- shaped saddles; those of Adrianites showing always a distinct con- striction above their base. 42 University of Texas Bulletin ~ Somewhat surprising is the occurrence of the new genus Lilinthi- ceras with its complicate sculpture which, as Diener justly remarks, recalls the upper Triassic Clionites; unfortunately the suture is only imperfectly known. The remaining ammonoids have a rather archaic character; they could very well come from the Upper Carboniferous. It is therefore impossible to decide with any amount of certainty the exact age of the Productus shales of Lilinthi. For a long time a controversy has been going on with regard to the age of the Productus limestone of the Salt Range of India. Notwith- standing the astonishing number of fossil species discovered in and described from these strata, the most different opinions have been ex- pressed with regard to their age. There is no necessity to enter into the details of this controversy as its history has been given by Fr. Noetling in his ‘““Beitrage zur Geologie der Salt Range.” The fossils of the Productus limestone were first regarded as Car- boniferous (Verneuil, Davidson, Koninck) ; an opinion which was ac- cepted by Wynne and, at first, also, by Waagen. Waagen, however, little by little changed his views until at last he came to regard the Speckled sandstone, the lower and part of the middle Productus lime- stone (Katta beds) as the equivalent of the Permo-Carboniferous, while the rest of the middle Productus limestone is considered as the equivalent of the Rotliegendes and Weissliegendes (Virgal and Kala- bagh beds), and the upper Productus limestone as the representative of the rest of the Zechstein. Noetling gets to a somewhat different result. Like Waagen he be- lieves that the Carboniferous does not exist in the Salt Range and that the strata above the important unconformity on top of the Cam- brian belong to the Permian. But he does not recognize the existence of the Permo-Carboniferous in the Salt Range, and believes that only the Rotliegendes or Penjabien, and Zechstein or Thuringien are re- presented. He considers his three lower groups, the Talchir, Dandote and Warcha groups, as representing the Rotliegendes; and the three upper, i. e., the Amb, Virgal and Chideru group, as synchronous with the Zechstein. The three lower groups correspond to Waagen’s mid- dle and lower Speckled sandstone, while the upper three groups are the same as Waagen’s Productus limestone; the Amb group being the Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 43 lower, the Virgal groups the middle, and the Chideru group the upper Productus limestone. In another paper, Noetling? says he considers that the Sicilian Fusulina limestones (Sosio beds) are older than the Russian Artinsk and this older than the Productus limestone. Thus neither the Artinsk nor the Sosio beds would be represented in the Salt Range. An entirely different opinion is held by Tschernyschew. He thinks that the Talchir, Dandote and Warcha groups represent the middle Carboniferous, that the lower and middle Productus limestones are equivalent to the upper Carboniferous, and that only the highest part of the middle and the lower part of the upper Productus limestone are of Permo-Carboniferous age, while the rest of the upper Productus limestone would correspond to the lowest part of the Russian Permian. Tschernyschew based his views principally on the character of the brachiopods contained in the Salt Range deposits, which he compared with those of the Russian Carboniferous. Tschernyschew’s views have not been accepted -by most of the authors who had an opportunity to compare the Indian faunas with those of other parts of the world; neither Noetling, nor Frech, nor Diener, nor Haug, are’ inclined to adopt the opinion of the Russian scholar. Haug (Traité de géologie, p. 808) says that if the base of the deposits is Uralian, the Artinskien is probably represented by the lower part of the middle Productus limestone, while the upper part of the middle Productus limestone would be equivalent to the Saxonian and the upper Productus liniestone correspond to the Thuringien. oe Most of the modern authors base their classification of the Salt Range on the cephalopods contained in them. Unfortunately am- monoids have been found only from the upper part of the Middle Pro- ductus limestone (Kalabagh beds) upwards, but practically all the modern authors concede that the ammonoids contained in those beds are of a very highly developed Permian type. The upper part of the middle Productus limestone carries the genus Xenas pts, which has its nearest relatives in the Triassic; and Xenodis- cus, which occurs much more frequently in the Triassic than in the Per- mian. Its ancestors in the Permo-Carboniferous are not well known, tNoetling, Medlicottia u. Episageceras, p. 354. 44 University of Texas Bulletin but as J. P. Smith thinks, may be found in the Prolecanitidae. These genera suggest at once the conclusion that the strata in which they are found imbedded must belong to a higher division of the Permian and certainly not to the Permo-Carboniferous where similar forms are en- tirely unknown. This conclusion is confirmed by the circumstance that at Chitichun I in the Himalayas, Xenaspis carbonaria has been found together with Krafftoceras, a near relative of Cyclolobus or possibly a subgenus of the latter group. The form has a much more highly developed suture than even Waagenoceras or Perrinites, and Diener has very justly sustained the opinion that Chitichun I and the upper portion of the middle Productus limestone are of the same age and that they are certainly younger than the Permo-Carboniterous. The upper portion of the middle Productus limestone contains also Medhicottia ‘primas. This species has also been found in the upper Productus limestone in the zone of Episageceras Wynnei (Chideru group). But the fossil which is most characteristic for the upper Productus limestone is Cyclolobus Oldhami. The genus Cyclolobus has a much more highly developed sutural line than any of those de- scribed until now from the Permo-Carboniferous, and certainly in- dicates that the strata in which it occurs are younger than the Artinsk or the Sosio beds. Cyclolobus and its near relative Krafftoceras have been found by Diener in the Kuling shales of Spiti (Himalaya). Cyclolobus has also been described by Rothpletz from the Permian strata of Ajer Mati near Kupang on Timor (Cyclolobus persulcatus). Wanner’ has made known another locality where Cyclolobus exists on Timor. Ina collection made by Lieutenant v. Grube, Wanner found a number of species described from the Ajer Mati and among them the Cyclolobus. But possibly there exist different horizons in the col- lection; it contains at least two species of Medlicottia, one of which has been determined as M. magnotuberculata Tchernow, a very character- istic form from the Artinsk. Possibly the whole series from the Ar- tinsk to the Permian may be developed in that place and it may very well be possible that the true relations between the Artinsk, Sosio beds and upper Productus limestone can be ascertained in that region of Timor. 1J. Wanner, Perm-, Trias-, und Jura-Formation des indo-australischen Archipel, p. 737. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 45 The upper Productus limestone contains also Stacheoceras anti- quum and Popanoceras priscum, probably the youngest and last mem- bers of these long living genera. Stacheoceras occurs also in the Permian strata of Timor described by Rothpletz (Stacheoceras tri- dens) and in the Chitichun I limestone of the Himalaya (Stacheoceras Trimurti Diener). Very little is known about the strata of Woabjilga (Karakorum Pass) where Stoliczka collected ammonites with ceratitic sutures which may belong to Xenodiscus. These strata may not even be Permian, but if they are, they certainly correspond to the upper part of the Productus limestone. There is another Permian locality of. Asia which contains a great number of ammonoids and which has been known for a long time: Djulfa in Armenia. The fauna has first been described by Abich and later on revised first by Méller and again by v. Arthaber. The fauna contains the following species of ammonoids: Gastrioceras Abichi Moller. Gastrioceras sp. ind. Hungarites Raddet_Arth. Hungarites pessoides Abich. Hungarites nov. form. spec. ind. Otoceras djoulfense Abich. Otoceras tropitum Abich. Otoceras Fedoroffi Arth. Otoceras trochoides Abich. While both Hungarites and Otoceras are very frequent also in the Triassic, Gastrioceras is a distinctly anthracolitic genus. It is re- markable that one of the species described from Djulfa seems to be much nearer related to the upper Carboniferous and the lowest Permo- carboniferous species than to those which constitute the group of G. Zitteli. The other species may belong to this last named group. It is of some interest that a species which seems to belong either to Hun- garites or to Dalmatites has been found by Udden in a limestone near Shafter, Presidio County, Texas, which certainly is synchronous with our Word formation; it corresponds to some part of the Sosio beds. The species has been determined by James Perrin Smith; through the courtesy of Dr. Smith, I have been able to study the specimen and 46 Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains I do not doubt that the determination is exact. This shows that the genus ranges still lower than has been supposed. Arthaber has convincingly shown that the fauna of Djulfa belongs to the upper Permian, that it is certainly younger than the Sosio beds, and that it is synchronous with the Kund-Gkat and Jabbi beds of the Upper Productus limestone in the Salt Range of India. The preceding review of Permian cephalopod-bearing strata demon- strates that a correlation of the beds is extremely difficult on account of the enormous distance between the different localities, the circum- stance that nearly nowhere a succession of different faunas exists at the same place, and the incomplete descriptions of several of the faunas. Notwithstanding these difficulties, I have tried to make the apparent relations between the different faunas more evident by uniting our results in the following comparative tables, following in the second one the method used by Frech. Up to the present time, the question of marine communications be- tween the Trans-Pecos Permo-Carboniferous and the Asiatic and European localities of a similar facies, remains a matter of pure specu- lation. Our data are still extremely incomplete. The Trans-Pecos Permo-Carboniferous is known to exist in a facies that changes rela- tively little in the Guadalupe Mountains, the Glass Mountains, and the Shafter region near the Rio Grande; it is very probable that it continues toward the south into Mexico, and that the locality near Las Delicias northeast of Torreon, Coahuila, is the southernmost place where it has been discovered so far. This locality, which was dis- covered by Haarmann while its fauna was described by Haack, is the only one found in Mexico, so far. In general, the lowest strata of northern Mexico are known to belong to the upper Jurassic or even possibly in some localities in Chihuahua and Sonora, to the Liassic or the Dogger. Marine Triassic has been found by Carl Burckhardt at Zacatecas. where it rests unconformably on older, possibly Paleozoic, schists. It may be possible that older strata than the upper Jurassic could be found some day in the Sierra de Catorce in the state of San Luis Potosi; where according to Joseph Burkart, the rocks of the Jurassic rest unconformably on older shales. Burkart, of course, did not recognize those strata as Jurassic when he described them in 1836, and thought they represented the Carboniferous, but apparently he can- TABLE 1! APPROXIMATE CORRELATION OF THE AMMONOID BEARING BEDS OF THE PERMOCARBONIFEROUS AND THE PERMIAN NORTH AMERICA EURASIATIC MCOITERRANEAN URAL CENTRAL ASIA HIMALAYAS SALT RANGE OF INDIA ISLAND OF TIMOR R Gus Srar ren Recion a LEONARD BEDS) |(BRECCIATED zone) ONE OF PROTHALASSOCERAS GROUP SPECKLED TRANSITION Be05| Hueco Beos BEARING SANDS TONE ALBANY BEARING BEOS Overtvinc pecs | cretaceous |cretaceous| ————[Trussic Reo Beos| Lower Triassic | | | ___ierarire ors] Lower Triassic |_| BELLEROPHON LIME STONE ZONE oF OF THE ALPS < E uk UPPER s HUNGARITES OTOCERAS : prtatiats AS] CHIDERU YNNEI > Beos or DUULFA oO PRoDuCTUS - ARMENIA Z Ly ZONE OF CYCLOLOBUS 9 Sf. CrcLocosus LimMESTONE|. 6£0S5 OF > 2 = Ovonamn __ AVYER__MATI_ § O c x Z rd CEPHALOPOD BEARING] LIMESTONE or SPiTi XENASPIS Ww Unconrormty| = a asf ti ru SE eT a aco We oe VI GAB DONAIIA < yO » Gittiam BEOS ¥ PRODUCTUS CQ < Qo’ Y VioRIO BeEos |reLLow LIMESTONE 0 ss Lime STONE O | Fewer oe rene or wu uarires es ae hoon 6 Treen Th eeanntase w £Onm OF fae peonen soney, eee DOuB@E 9°) PRODUCTUS SHALES OF Z AmB GROUP ProoueruSs Stanwo Becs WAAGENOCERAS WAAGENOCERAS | MouNTAIN 88 3 aciaenns = peoeve. Ua ING g (WorRD Beos) (DELAWARE BEOS) DIviSiON an mn TWarcna BITAUNU = ZONE OF ZONE OF ZONE g MBeLeAke TT Toe > PERRINITES PERRINITES or 2 2 RRINITES|OIVISIO g DANDOTE LOWER = WwW < OW O za TALCHIR GROuP OF DARWAS WICHITA SANDSTONE ew ew em em wm on wm & o£ & we ow we ee owe ee = PERMOCARBQNIFEROUS DIVISION USDENITES CAMP BEOS) UNDERLYING Beos/ Cisco BEDS (HianesT CarsonireRous ) OGKOFEL BEDS OF THE CARNIAN ALPS UNCONFORMITY UNCONFORMITY Senwacenina BeosScHWAGERINA BEOS| URALIEN Barus Beos of KAsHmiR CAMBRIAN Avernio Seos | CORA Beos (UpPeRmosT CARBONIFEROUS) Cisco BEos (UPPERMOST CARBONIFEROUS) EGUITA BEOS Ceeerwre ROUS) TABLE II Correlation table of Cephalopod-bearing Permian Beds. Name of strata Genera of ainmonoids Triassic Lower Triassic Otoceras, Episageceras, Hungarites, ete. gq |4. Bellerophon limestone of the Alps/Paralecanites. 8 ‘bo 3. Djulfa beds in Armenia. Otoceras, Hungarites, Gastrioceras. a 2. Upper Productus limestone of the/Episageceras, Medlicottia, Cyclolobus =} Salt Range of India. Popanoceras, Stacheoceras, Xenod- = iscus, Xenaspis. Limestone of Ajer mati in Timor. Cyclolobus, Stacheoceras. 1. Upper part of the middle Produc-|Xenaspis. tus limestone of the Salt B ‘Range of India. A Kuling shales of Spiti, Himalaya./Xenaspis, Cyclolobus, Krafftoceras. R Limestone of Chitichun I, Him-|Xenaspis, Stacheoceras, Krafftoceras., a alaya. Limestone of Woabjilga, Kara-|Xenodiscus (?) korum. 2. Sosio limestone of Sicily. hWaasennearad, Hyattoceras, Popano- ceras, Stacheoceras, Adrianites, Hofmannia, Medlicottia, Propinaco- ceras, Parapronorites, Sicanites, Daraelites, Thalassoceras, Paracel- tites, Agathiceras, Doryceras, Clino- lobus, Gastrioceras, Nomismoceras. ie) Word beds of the Glass Moun-|Medlicottia, Gastrioceras, Paracel- tains, West Texas. tites, Agathiceras, Adrianites, Stacheoceras, Waagenoceras. Delaware Mountain beds, West|/Waagenoceras, Agathiceras, Gastri- Texas. oceras, Paraceltites, Peritrochia, Thin-bedded limestone of Shaf-}| Dalmatites. ter, West Texas. Beds of St. Girons, Pyrenees. Daraelites, Gastrioceras, Paraceltites. a : Sandstone of Mrzla-Vodica, Croa- |Gastrioceras, Adrianites, Stacheocer- 3 5 tia. as, Paraceltites, Medlicottia. a = Trogkofel limestone of the Car-|Popanoceras, Thalassoceras. ha P nian Alps (ex parte?) 2 Beds of Lo Ping, China? Gastrioceras. A Beds of Tshau-Tien, China? Gastrioceras, Agathiceras. = Productus shales of Lilinthi,)Hyattoceras?, Hofmannia?, Gastric. g Himalaya? ceras, Pericyclus, Lilinthiceras, a |4 Aganides, Nomismoceras. 5 Cephalopod-bearing beds of Bi-/Agathiceras, Gastrioceras, Popano- s taunu in Timor. ceras, Propinacoceras, Paraprono- P| rites, Medlicottia. ° % 1. Leonard beds of the Glass Moun-/Medlicottia, Gastrioceras, Perrinites, oO tains, West Texas. Paralecanites. ° 5 Brecciated zone of Shafter, West) Perrinites. oo Texas. Cephalopod-bearing beds of Cen-)Perrinites, Gastrioceras, Stacheo- tral Texas, Double Mountain] ceras, Medlicottia. division. 2. Hess limestone and congl »m-/Prothalassoceras, Marathonites. erate of the Glass Mountains, West Texas. Cephalopod-bearing beds of Cen-|Perrinites, Paralegoceras, Stacheo- tral Texas (upper Wichita and} ceras, Medlicottia. Clear Fork). Cephalopod-bearing sandstones /Pronorites, Parapronorites, Propina- ey (lower Arta beds) of the Ural.| coceras, Gastrioceras, Agathiceras, = Adrianites, Stacheoceras, Mara- 5 thonites?, Popanoceras, Medlicot- 4 tia, Paraceltites?, Prothalassocer as?, Goniatites?, Daraelites. | Cephalopod-bearing limestones of/Pronorites, Propinacoceras, Agath- Darwas, Bokhara. iceras, Stacheoceras, Thalasso- ceras. 1. Wolfcamp beds of the Glass/Daraelites, Uddenites, Gastrioceras, Mountains, West Texas. Schistoceras, Paralegoceras, Aga- thiceras, Marathonites, Vidriocer- as. Carbon- Upper Carboniferous. Schistoceras, Stacheoceras?, Parale- iferous. goceras, Gastrioceras, etc. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 47 not mean anything other than those rocks which yielded the rich fauna described by J. G. Aguilera. Thus the data we possess at the present day do not furnish any proof for the hypothesis that a marine communication existed from the Tor- reon region toward the east, connecting the Trans-Pecos Permo-Car- boniferous sea with that of the European Mediterranean. But neither do they exclude the possibility of the existence of such a waterway; the ammonoids of our Trans-Pecos Permo-Carboniferous make it evident that some kind of a marine communication must have existed at least at the time of our zone of Waagenoceras. It does not seem that this communication went through the northern states of the Union, because the Permo-Carboniferous strata of those parts indicate the existence of a shallow sea or even brackish water, while the fauna of the Trans-Pecos beds must have lived in deeper water or at least farther from a coast. Directly east from the Trans-Pecos region, no fauna like that of our zone of Waagenoceras has been discovered so far, but the zone of Perrinites seems to be well represented in the middle part of the Double Mountain formation and in the Clear Fork and Wichita-Albany beds. Unfortunately, Perrinites is known only in Texas and even related forms have not been found anywhere else, if we do not consider Perrinites as a form vicariating for Hyattoceras. But the other fossils which accompany the former genus are very sim- ilar to those found near Palermo in Sicily, and make it probable to a certain degree that the Permo-Carboniferous of Central Texas was in direct communication with the European Mediterranean. This com- munication may not have existed in the northern part of the state, but rather farther to the south; because the character of the beds in north Texas indicate very shallow littoral waters in the lower forma- tions as well as in the upper, while to the south (Runnels and Cole- man counties), at least the lower strata (Albany formation) have the character of deposits in waters that were somewhat farther from the coast. It may even be that the marine communication did not exist in Texas at all, but in Northern Mexico. That a marine communication has existed also between the Trans- Pecos and the Indian Permo-Carboniferous sea appears to be very probable. There are no ammonoids known in the Salt Range strata which seem to correspond to ours in age, but the brachiopod fauna es- 48 University of Texas Bulletin pecially of our Leonard beds (zone of Perrinites) seems to have very intimate relations with that of the lower and middle Productus lime- stone. Especially characteristic seems to be the frequency of the group of Productus sino-indicus Frech, represented by extremely large individuals, as well as of the group of Productus gratiosus and of Rhipidomella corallina Waagen sp.; which, with the exception of the second one, do not seem to be well represented in the European Permo-carboniferous of the Alps and Sicily. Significant to a certain degree is also the frequent occurrence of a Camarophoria very similar to C. mutabilis Tschern., of the Schwagerina limestone of the Ural. Not less important is the existence of numerous specimens of Lyt- tonia, Oldhamina, and Pichthofenia, the latter one being much more similar to those of India than those of Sicily, as has been shown in another publication. Thus there is no doubt about a direct marine communication with the Asiatic Pernto-Carboniferous sea; but again, we do not know in which direction and at what place the channel existed, little or nothing being published about the Permo-Carboniferous strata west of the Trans-Pecos region, especially in Arizona and California; although a direct communication through these two states and New Mexico, with Asia, seems to be extremely probable. Thus it seems that there existed an uninterrupted marine com- munication between Europe and Asia through the actual American continent during the Permo-Carboniferous, at least at the time of the zone of Waagenoceras, and probably also during the zone of Per- rimites. The brachiopod fauna, however, seems to be more nearly related to that of Asia than to the European fauna, while the principal ammonoid genus Perrinites is not known anywhere else than in Texas. I am not able to give more than a few slight indications with respect to marine communications between the Trans-Pecos sea and those of Asia and Europe, because ammonoids are rather scarce in most parts of the earth during the Permo-Carboniferous; but a study of the com- plete fauna of the Glass Mountains will certainly show much more clearly how more or less intimate are the relations between it and the other faunas of the same age known in different parts of the world. PALEONTOLOGICAL PART heb el daa Faia PALEONTOLOGICAL PART PROLECANITIDAE Hyatt PROLECANITINAE Frech Daraelites Gemm. This genus was established by Gemmellaro! for moderately involute, smooth forms, with elliptical cross-section and a suture consisting of entire rounded saddles and slightly serrated lobes. The siphonal lobe is very wide and divided into three branches, the median of which is extremely narrow, while the two lateral ones are broad and serrated at the bottom. The external saddle is club-shaped, constricted at the base, and rounded at the top. The first lateral lobe is less wide than the preceding one, but deep and has a serrated bottom. The first lateral saddle has the same form as the external one, but is much higher. The second lateral lobe is much narrower and shallower than the first one. but also serrated at the bottom. The second lateral saddle is a little higher than half the first one, club-shaped, somewhat constricted at the base, entire and rounded at the top. The rest of the lobes and saddles are entire, rounded and directed obliquely backward. Gemmellaro compared his genus with Xenodiscus, Meekoceras and Hungarites from the Permian of the Salt Range and Armenia, but at the same time recognized that it had some relationship to Parapro- norites. Although the evolution of the suture in Daraelites was unknown at that time, Karpinsky’ demonstrated at once that this genus could only be derived from Paraprolecanites. That his supposition was ab- solutely correct has been shown much later by Tchernow® who was able to study the development of the suture. According to the figures given by this author it is evident that the suture of Daraelites develops from that of the so called /bergiceras stage and passes through that of Paraprolecanites* and what by Tchernow is called the Prodaraelites stage, and finally ends in the Daraelites stage. 1Gemmellaro, Calc. c. Fusulina, p. 63. *Karpinsky, Amm. d. Artinsk-Stufe, p. 42, fig. 27. *"Tchernow, L’Etage d’Artinsk, p. 371, et. seq., p. 297, pl. 1, fig. 9. ‘Tchernow calls this (explanation of his fig. 9-k) the beginning of the Daraelites stage. 52 University of Texas Bulletin Karpinsky regards Daraelitcs as belonging to the tribe of the Lecan- itinae, in which he unites [bergiceras’, Prolecanites, Paraprolecanites, I ecanites, and as a side branch, Daraelites. J. P. Smith’ regards Daraelites as belonging to the Noritinae, but the suture line shows that this genus does not pass through the Pronorites stage. It would therefore be preferable to unite this genus provisionally with the Pro- lecanitinae, although we do not know its predecessors during the later time of our Carboniferous. Daraelites has a wide distribution, although very few species are known. It was first described from the Sicilian Sosio beds (Daraelites Mecki Gemm.). The genus has been found also in the Permian of the Pyrenees’, together with Gastrioceras and Paraceltites, unfortunately all specifically undeterminable. Another species ( Daraelites elegans) has been described by Tchernow‘ from the Artinsk of Russia. We can add to this list our discovery of Daraelites in the lowermost part of the Permo-Carboniferous of Texas. The species found there is rare and fragmentary but its genus cannot be doubted and specifically it is evidently different from any other Daraelites so far described. Daraelites texanius, n. sp. Pl. I. Fig. 1-8 Shell discoidal, moderately involute, with compressed flanks and rounded venter. Cross section elliptical higher than broad in the adult whorls, nearly as broad as high in the younger whorls. Umbilicus moderately narrow, but shallow; the flank curves down into the um- bilical wall without forming a shoulder, the umbilical wall not being well limited. No ornamentation and no constrictions are visible on the cast. The body chamber is unknown. The septa are well separated from each other (pl. I, fig. 4). The siphonal lobe is large and is divided into three branches, the middle one being very narrow, prominent and pointed, while the lateral ones are rounded and finely serrated at the bottom; the siphonal lobe is much narrower at its upper part than above the bottom. The first lateral ‘Holzapfel has shown that Ibergiceras igs not an independent genus, but only an im- mature form of Pronorites cyclolobus. *J. P. Smith, in Zittel-Eastman, Textbook of Paleontology, 2nd ed., Vol. i, p. 633. 5Caralp, Le Permian de 1’Ariége, etc. ‘Tchernow, |’Etage d’Artinsk, p. 374, pl. 1, fig. 9, Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 53 lobe is extremely broad, and somewhat oblique, the bottom being a little nearer to the siphon than the upper part. The bottom is finely serrated. The second lateral lobe is narrow, having only about one- third of the width of the first one. It is curved with the convexity toward the siphonal region, and the bottom is finely serrated. The first and second auxiliary lobes are slightly curved similarly to the preceding one, but seem to be rounded at the bottom and not serrated. The third and fourth auxiliary lobes are very small, straight and less deep than the preceding ones; the fourth lobe is on the umbilical bor- der. All the lobes from the second lateral to the fourth auxiliary are a little oblique, the upper part being somewhat nearer to the siphonal region than the bottom. All the saddles are entire and rounded at the top. The external saddle is moderately high and much constricted a little below the middle. The first lateral saddle is much higher than the external, constricted above the base, but much less than the pre- ceding one. The second lateral saddle is only about half as high as the first, and constricted above the base. The first auxiliary saddle has only about two-thirds of the height of the preceding one and is constricted above the base. From the first to the fourth auxiliary saddle, the height decreases steadily, the second and perhaps even the third show very slight constriction above the base. The fourth, which lies on the umbilical wall, is of a very simple form, broader be- low than above, and rounded at the top. The internal suture (pl. I, fig. 8) could only be observed in the whorl preceding the outer one on which the external suture appears as described above. This inner whorl shows only five external lateral lobes and five saddles. The internal suture shows a rather deep, lance- olate antisiphonal lobe, the lower part of which touches the inner walls of the internal saddles belonging to the next smaller septum. The first lateral lobe it not quite as deep as the antisiphonal one, slightly curved with the convexity toward the antisiphonal region, and rounded at the bottom. A second and very small lobe lies on the umbilical seam so that one of its flanks belongs to the internal, the other to the ex- high and slender, rounded at the top, but not constricted. The first ternal suture. It is only a slight indentation. The internal saddle is lateral saddle is somewhat tongue-shaped, oblique and very small. 54 University of Texas Bulletin Dimensions: Height of the last whorl...............4-. 5.6 mm (1) Width of the last whorl................ 4.2 0.75 Height of the preceding whorl............ 2.1 (1) Width of the preceding whorl............ 1.9 0.90 Relation to other species: As we have only two fragments, it is difficult to compare their shape to that of the species described from other localities. It seems that our form has the flanks more flattened and the ventral part somewhat broader than Daraelites Meeki, as well as Daraelites ele- gans. The real distinguishing characteristic is to be found in the suture line. In our species, the first lateral lobe is nearly as broad as the siphonal, while in D. Meeki it is about half as wide, and in D. ele- gans much less than half as wide, as the siphonal. Our species has seven saddles while D. Meeki has only six. D. elegans has apparently the same number of saddles as our species. Age: Wolfcamp formation, lower Permo-Carboniferous. Number of specimens examined: Two fragments. The species is evidently very rare at the locality. Locality: Immediately northwest of Wolf Camp, Glass Mountains. NORITINAE Karpinsky Uddenites nov. gen. Type: Uddenites Schucherti Bose While the Noritinae in the Russian Artinsk are well represented by numerous species of Pronorites and especially Parapronorites, and in the Sicilian Sosio beds by. an abundance of specimens of at least one Parapronorites, this sub-family has very few representatives in the Permo-Carboniferous of the Glass Mountains and even these few belong exclusively to the very lowest horizon, the Wolfcamp forma- tion. The only member of the Noritinae in our region is the new branch, Uddenites, which is represented by two species. Karpinsky* has shown that the Prolecanitidae developed during the end of the Carboniferous and the Permian, three different branches: the Medlicottinae, the Noritinae, and the Lecanitinae. Most of these forms have a discoidal shape with strongly compressed flanks, but while the Noritinae and Lecanitinae show a rounded ventral region, the Medlicottinae develop a more or less deep furrow in this part. Our new genus unites to a certain degree the characters of the Nori- tinae and the Medlicottinae; it shows the typical sutures of Pronorites (pl. I, fig. 26) on the inner whorls and later on develops a suture which, though different from that of Pronorites, is still intimately related to it; and while the inner whorls show the general form of Pronorites with its rounded ventral region (pl. I, fig. 33, 36) the larger ones develop a deep furrow (pl. I, fig. 37, 38) in that place, so that the outer form somewhat resembles that of Propinacoceras, although it does not have the tubercles on the ventral region. Uddenites cannot: be considered as a stage in the development of Medlicottia, Sicanites or Propinacoceras, as such a stage is not observed in the evolution of the suture of these genera, and we have to consider our genus as an independent, although possibly local, branch developed from Pro- norites, parallel to Parapronorites and belonging to the same sub- family, the Noritinae. The characters of our new genus are: 1Karpinsky, Amm. d, Artinsk-Stufe, p. 41-45. 56 University of Texas Bulletin Shell discoidal, involute, with flat flanks and flattened ventral re- gion, which in the inner whorls is somewhat rounded, while later on it develops a deep furrow somewhat narrower than the lateral flattened and elevated portions of the ventral region. The cross-section of the adult whorl is nearly rectangular if we do not consider the furrow on the ventral region; the small whorls have a similar cross-section only with slightly curved flanks and ventral region, so that there the cross- section is rounded subrectangular. The inner whorls are absolutely smooth and very evolute; where the Pronorites suture is visible the flanks show fairly strong trans- versal ribs slightly curved backward, with the convexity toward the front, beginning at the umbilicus and disappearing before they reach the ventral shoulder. (Pl. I, fig. 32.) They are separated by shallow interstices with rounded bottom, nearly twice as wide as the ribs. At the stage where the furrow begins to develop, the umbilical border shows very fine radial lines of growth, slightly bent backward; the rest of the cast does not show any ornamentation. The septa are very near together but without touching each other in the largest whorl, while on the inner whorls they are farther separated. ‘The suture is nearly straight. On those inner whorls which have a rounded although flattish ventral region, the suture corresponds to that of the typical Pronorites. There the siphonal lobe appears to be divided into three different parts, by the appearance of two second- ary saddles on the sides; the middle part is open below, on each side is a small secondary saddle, and a pointed secondary lobe. The siphonal lobe is deep and much narrower at the upper end than below the middle, at the height of the secondary lobes. The first lateral lobe is very broad and divided into two branches by a small secondary saddle. Both branches, as well as the secondary saddle, are rounded. The second lateral lobe is about half as broad as the first one, rounded at the bottom and much narrower at the upper part than below. The first and second auxiliary lobes are much smaller and less deep than the two lateral ones. The saddles are all entire and rounded at the top. The external saddle is not very high and bends slightly toward the sipho; the first lateral saddle is higher than the external, and con- stricted above the base; the second lateral saddle is similar to the first, but a little lower; the first auxiliary saddle is much lower than Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 57 the preceding one, and also much narrower and not constricted; the second auxiliary saddle, which is on the umbilical wall, is an insignifi- cant saddle. The suture described above is visible still near the point where the furrow on the ventral region begins. From here on, the suture begins to change materially. The secondary saddle in the first lateral lobe develops a slight bulge on its inner side and so becomes asymmetrical ; at the same time the number of auxiliary saddles and lobes on the flank near the umbilical region increases rapidly and constantly. The umbilical portion of the secondary saddle in the first lateral lobe then begins to grow much quicker than the siphonal one. At about the fourth part of a whorl from the point where the furrow begins, this secondary saddle becomes still farther subdivided. Its siphonal por- tion, which has developed into an independent secondary saddle, shows a slight notch which divides it into two equal parts, while the umbilical portion of the original secondary saddle has grown so far that it can almost be considered as an independent lateral saddle. If we still con- sider this saddle as a secondary one, we count in this part eight saddles and eight lateral and auxiliary lobes. This is apparently the final stage of development. In the largest whorl there is only one more change, insofar as the notch on the siphonal part of the secondary saddle -deepens so much as to cause two little secondary saddles, the umbilical one of which is a little higher than the siphonal one. Before continuing, I shall try to describe the final stage of the suture in our genus. The evolution of the suture proves that the highest saddle has to be considered as the first lateral one, and that all the pro- tuberances between it and the external saddle must be regarded as se- condary saddles of the broad first lateral lobe. In the final stage, the siphonal lobe is extremely narrow and deep. It occupies only the width of the furrow on the ventral part. It is narrower at its upper part than below the middle, and its bottom is divided into three branches by two lateral, relatively long and pointed, saddles which lean over towards the sipho. The middle branch does not seem to be closed and is much longer than the lateral branches. The first lateral lobe lies on the ventral shoulder, is extremely broad, and is divided into four branches by three secondary saddles. The deepest of these branches is the outer one (counting always the part toward the sipho as the 58 University of Texas Bulletin inner, and t!:ose toward the umbilicus as the outer ones). It is not nearly so deep as the siphonal lobe, but deeper than the second lateral one. This branch is leaning toward the outside; i. e., the bottom is nearer to the sipho than its top. It is separated from the next second- ary lobe by a relatively high secondary saddle which leans over to the outside. It is entire and rounded at the top. The other three secondary lobes are very small and shallow and together with the two saddles which separate them, resemble the teeth of asaw. The second lateral lobe is nearly symmetrical, tongue- shaped, narrower at the top than below the middle, and ending in a point. The first auxiliary lobe is asymmetrical and curved with the convexity toward the inner side, pointed at the lower end. The second and third auxiliary lobes are again symmetrical, pointed, narrower at the upper part than below the middle. The fourth and fifth aux- iliary lobes are symmetrical, pointed, but about equally wide in their upper half. The fifth auxiliary lobe lies near the umbilical border and there follow still two more lobes on the umbilical border and wall. The sixth is similar to the fifth, but smaller; while the seventh is ex- tremely small and rather like an indentation. The saddles are all entire and rounded, but differ in height. The ex- ternal saddle is moderately high and leans over toward the sipho. It is not constricted. All the lateral saddles on the flank are of the same shape; i. e., rounded at the top and more or less constricted above the base. The first and second lateral saddles are higher than the external and very similar to each other in width and length. The first auxiliary is considerably shorter. From the first to the fifth (on the umbilical shoulder ) the saddles decrease steadily in length and width, but all are more or less of the same shape. The sixth and seventh auxiliary sad- dles, which lie on the umbilical wall, reach with their top to the contin- uation of the line formed by the upper end of the preceding saddles, but their base lies much higher than that of the saddles on the flank. The internal sutures could be studied only in a specimen whose furrow on the ventral part is not yet developed, but in an adult whorl the general outline of the internal suture is visible and it does not materially differ from the one we are about to describe. The internal suture shows a very deep antisiphonal lobe of lance- olate form, much narrower at the top than below the middle. The Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 59 first lateral lobe is not even half as long as the antisiphonal one; it is slightly asymmetrical and somewhat curved with the convexity toward the antisiphonal side. Then follows a second and quite in- significant lateral lobe, the top of which is about as high as that of the first lobe, while the depth is about one-fourth of that of the preceding one. This lobe lies near the umbilical seam. The internal saddle is high, slender, slightly curved with the con- vexity toward the antisiphonal region, and a little constricted. The first lateral saddle is very small and narrow, rounded at the top and constricted near the base; it leans a little over toward the antisiphonal region. A second insignificant saddle develops on the umbilical seam and forms the internal flank of the seventh auxiliary saddle of the external suture. While the lateral saddles and lobes are far apart in two suture lines following each other, the antisiphonal lobe touches the inner flanks of the internal saddles of the next older septum. The development of the sutures in our genus shows clearly that it was derived from Pronorites, the inner whorl still showing the general form and the suture of that genus. The later developmnt is entirely different, somewhat similar to Propinacoceras, but the suture is en- tirely different. If we regard the general features of the adult suture, we find that it shows a certain relation to Parapronorites on one side, and to Daraelites on the other. Characteristic is the low external saddle and the excessively broad first lateral lobe. The short ex- ternal saddle occurs in both those genera named above, while the broad -first lobe is especially pronounced in Parapronorites, although in Darae- lites this element is certainly wider than any of the following ones. The first lateral lobe has very different secondary elements in our genus, while in Parapronorites they consist more or less of little saw- tooth-like saddles and lobes and in Daraelites we observe only a very minutely serrate first lobe. All the rest of the lobes in Parapronorites are bifid with the exception of the last ones, which end in a point. In Daraelites they are serrated or rounded. These relations show that our genus holds a position similar to that of Parapronorites and Daraelites, which latter one has also similar internal lobes; and that Uddenites is to be regarded as an in- dependent branch of the Noritinae. \ 60 University of Texas Bulletin Uddenites so far has been found only in the Wolfcamp formation, the very lowest part of our Permo-Carboniferous. Uddenites Schaucherti nov. sp. Pl. I. Fig. 9-23 Shell discoidal, involute, with flat flanks and flattened ventral re- gion, the latter with a median furrow in the adult whorls, and slightly rounded in the juvenile ones. The furrow is slightly narrower than each of the flattened parts on its side; flanks and ventral part form a right angle but the ventral border is somewhat rounded. The cross- section of the adult whorl is nearly rectangular, with the exception of that part which embraces the next smaller whorl, and not taking into account the furrow on the ventral part. The cross-section of the smaller whorls is rectangular, but the ventral part is slightly curved. The umbilicus is very narrow, its border is rounded, its- wall is nar- row but steep. No ornamentation is visible on the cast. The body chamber is unknown. The septa are very near together but without touching each other. The suture forms a nearly straight line. The final stage of the suture consists of a siphonal and eight lateral and auxiliary lobes, the last one on the umbilical shoulder, and a ninth on the umbilical wall. These are separated by eight saddles on the ventral part and flank, and two or more on the umbilical wall. The siphonal lobe is deep and trifid, the middle part most promi- nent but apparently not closed. The lateral points are small and sharp. The lobe is much narrower at its top than near the base; it occupies about the width of the furrow on the ventral part. The first lateral lobe is extremely broad; it occupies part of the ventral region, the ventral shoulder and part of the flank; it is subdivided into four branches by three secondary saddles, the outer one of which is large and bent over toward the umbilicus. The branch between this sec- ondary saddle and the first lateral one is not nearly as deep as the siphonal lobe, but deeper than any of the lateral lobes. It is curved with the convexity toward the umbilicus. The other two sec- ondary saddles with their three lobes form a saw-tooth-like line, the outer secondary saddle being a little higher than the other one. The second lateral lobe is symmetrical, not as deep as the first one, some- Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 61 what pointed, narrower at the top than below the middle. The first auxiliary lobe is asymmetrical, pointed, curved with the convexity toward the ventral side. The second and third auxiliary lobes are again symmetrical, pointed, narrower in the upper part than below the middle. The fourth and fifth auxiliary lobes are symme- trical, pointed, but about equally wide in their upper half. The fifth lobe lies near the umbilical border and there follow still two more lobes on the umbilical border and wall. The sixth is similar to the fifth, but smaller; while the seventh is extremely small and not more than a slight indentation. The saddles are all entire, and rounded at the top, but they differ in height. The external saddle is moderately high and leans over toward the sipho; it is constricted. The lateral and auxiliary saddles are of equal shape, rounded at the top and more or less constricted above the base. The first and second lateral saddles are of equal length and higher than the external and the rest of the saddles on the flank; they are also similar in shape and width. The first auxiliary saddle is considerably shorter than the two preceding ones. From the first to the fifth auxiliary (on the umbilical shoulder) the saddles decrease in length and width, but have more or less the same shape. A sixth and seventh which lie on the umbilical wall reach with their top to the prolongation of the line formed by the upper ends of the preceding saddles, but their base is much higher than that of the saddles on the flank. The seventh auxiliary saddle reaches with its flank over to the in- ternal suture. This (pl. I, fig. 23) consists of a very deep antisiphonal lobe of lanceolate form, much narrower at the top than below the middle. Its bottom reaches far down and touches the upper and inner sides of the internal saddles of the next suture. The first lateral lobe is not quite half as long as the antisiphonal one; it is slightly asym- metrical and somewhat curved with the convexity toward the anti siphonal side. There follows a second and quite insignificant lateral lobe, the top of which is about as high as that of the first lobe, but its depth is only about one-fourth of that of the preceding one. This lobe lies near the umbilical seam. The internal saddle is high, slender, slightly curved with the convexity toward the antisiphonal region, and a little constricted. The first lateral saddle is very small and narrow, 62 University of Texas Bulletin rounded at the top and constricted near the base; it leans a little over toward the antisiphonal region. A second and very insignificant saddle begins on the umbilical seam and is really not more than the flank of the seventh auxiliary saddle on the umbilical wall. The internal sutures described above were observed on a whorl which does not yet show the furrow on the ventral region. Dimensions: DIAN 6t OP wcaane-ctekea-0 aS od SA Dew 0-6 15.2 mm (1) With: cg Svapasace hat ely cas aera as Wor Be 4.5 mm 0.30 Height of the last whorl................. 8.2 mm 0.54 Diameter of umbilicus, about............. 2.5 mm 0.16 Relation to other species: The only species the present one can be compared with is Uddenites minor n. sp., but this latter species is much more evolute. I have been somewhat in doubt if there :an Permo-Carboni- ferous. This is because all the secondary lobes are cut deeply into the base of the saddles of the Sicilian genus, while they are always very shallow in the lower part of the saddles in the Texan species. In the foregoing part we have only referred to Waagenoceras Hilli and MW aagenoceras Cummuinsi, but in the Glass Mountains occur two more species which belong to the same genus and which differ very little from W. Hil. These permitted of a much better study of the suture than has been possible in the species described until now, and they show especially that the internal suture is generically different from that of Waagenoceras. The internal sutures of Hyattoceras are not known. After having made clear the differences between the Texan species and those forms which belong to Waagenoceras and Hyattoceras, we are justified in uniting the American forms already described with those which were found in the Glass Mountains in a new genus, Per- rinites, named after James Perrin Smith, to whom we owe the great progress made in the knowledge of Triassic and Anthracolitic ceph- alopods of America. This new genus has the following character: Shell discoidal, compressed on the flanks, rounded on the venter, and involute. Cross-section generally parabolical and higher than broad, or only a little broader than high. Umbilicus deep and narrow with a steep wall and rounded shoulder. The smaller whorls always show on the mould rather deep constrictions, radial or slightly flexuous on the flanks and curved on the venter with the convexity toward the back. These show also on the shell, but there they are very narrow. The ornamentation consists of fine lines of growth, slightly flexuous 158 University of Texas Bulletin on the flanks and strongly curved on the venter, with the convexity toward the back, parallel to the constrictions. The septa are very near, sometimes almost touching, each other. The suture! (pl. VIII, fig. 4, 7; pl. TX, fig. 10) follows a straight line between the umbilicus and the sipho. The external suture consists of a siphonal lobe divided in two branches by a high median saddle, two lateral lobes and three auxiliary lobes, one external saddle, two lateral and three auxiliary saddles. The siphonal lobe is very broad, shows a number of adventive saddles which augment and become longer with age, and each branch ends in a long sharp point. The first lateral lobe is scarcely deeper than the branches of the siphonal lobe, its walls are deeply scalloped and it ends in a long, sharp point. All the other lobes are similar to this one, only shorter and narrow, decreasing gradually in depth and width toward the umbilicus. The median saddle of the siphonal lobe is high, slender, broader at the bot- tom than at the top and always shows several adventive lobes on both sides. At the top it is notched by a shallow indentation. All the lateral saddles are broad at the base and taper toward the top; they have a number of adventive lobes, which cut deep down near the upper end, but grow gradually shallower toward the base where they are very small. All the saddles end in one phylloid point and nearly all their branches end ina similar way. The external saddle is much higher and broader than any other one; the lateral and auxiliary saddles are very similar to the external one, but they decrease in height and width gradually toward the umbilicus while at the same time the number of secondary lobes and branches diminishes. The internal suture (pl. X, fig. 21) is not entirely known, but the most important part could be uncovered. It consists of a very deep and very narrow antisiphonal lobe of lanceolate form and an undeter- mined number of lateral and auxiliary lobes, a very high internal saddle and an undetermined number of lateral and auxiliary saddles. The long and narrow antisiphonal lobe has several secondary saddles, the longest near the top, the smallest and last below the middle. The internal saddle is very high and very narrow, ending in a phylloid point and possessing several branches that end in a similar manner. It is broader at the base than at the upper end and the secondary 1Compare also the Appendix to this work, p. 187-190. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 1 59 lobes cut into it deeply in the upper half while in the lower half they are extremely shallow. The first and second lobes are similar to the antisiphonal, but much shorter and comparatively broader; the onlv auxiliary lobe clearly visible is more irregular, and asymmetrical but ends likewise in a sharp point. The first and second lateral saddles are similar in shape to the internal, but less complicate and relatively stouter; the only auxiliary saddle visible is similar to them but much simpler. Saddles and lobes decrease rapidly in height and depth from the antisiphonal lobe and internal saddle toward the umbilicus. The foregoing diagnose shows that our genus is not very nearly related to Waagenoceras. Especially characteristic are the internal lobes. While in Waagenoceras’ the antisiphonal lobe is relatively short and broad, with two high adventive saddles inclined toward the center of the antisiphonal region (compare pl. X, fig. 28), that lobe is extremely long and narrow in Perrinites with two pairs of short adventive saddles inclined toward the center of the antisiphonal re- gion. While in Waagenoceras the internal saddles are curved and bent over toward the center of the antisiphonal region, they are straight in Perrinites. The differences between our new genus and Hyattoceras have been demonstrated already above. The two genera are to a certain degree related, but the differences in shape, especially with respect to the um- bilicus, and the suture, are constant. Diener’ has described from the Productus shales of Byans, India, a Hvyattoceras nov. sp. ex. aff. H. Cumminsi White. IT doubt very much that this species belongs to Hyattoceras because it does not show the characteristic phylloid ends of the saddles and has only two lateral and two auxiliary lobes. It certainly is generically different from Perrinites, which in specimens of the same size shows already the typical suture with the high median saddle of the siphonal lobe and the saddles ending in phylloid points; although the number of saddles and lobes is not larger than in the Indian specimen. The genus Perrinites is of great stratigraphical importance for Texas. It has been found, so far, in the Clear Fork and in the middle part of the Double Mountain formation of north Texas, and in the 1Gemmellaro, Calc. c. Fusulina, App., pl. A, fig. 3, 7. "Diener, Perm. foss. of the Central Himalayas, p. 115, pl. 5, fig. 20. 160 University of Texas Bulletin Leonard formation of the Glass Mountains and the Mt. Ord range of Brewster County, West Texas. The gentis seems to be represented by numerous specimens wherever it appears. White says that he found about forty specimens at the Military Crossing of the Big Wichita River, Baylor County. In the Glass Mountains we have collected in a short time about fifty specimens in one very limited locality, and we found them numerous wherever the genus was re- presented, with exception of only one place, where not more than two specimens could be found; although the locality was extremely rich in brachiopods. In west Texas, Perrinites so far seems to be limited to only one horizon, the Leonard formation,’ while in the horizon above it, the Word formation, Waagenoceras appears. In north Texas it is probably also limited to a certain stratigraphical zone al- though appearing in two petrographical subdivisions; at least, J. P. Smith remarks that P. Hilli was found associated with Popanoceras, Medlicottia and other forms possibly identical with those described by Dr. Chas. A. White from the Clear Fork division. This would indi- cate that the faunas of the Clear Fork and the lower part of the Double Mountain formation are similar and belong to stratigraphical zones not very different in age.’ We may add that J. P. Smith presumed, when he established his genus Shumardites, that the Cyclolobinae were. Jerived from this genus. As we shall show in the description of P. vidriensis n. sp, this species develops on very small whorls a suture (pl. X, fig. 20) which in general corresponds to that of Shumardites which proves that J. P. Smith was entirely right. Perrinites certainly is derived from Shumardites. It may be remarked here that the Waagenoceras Cuimmuinsi var. Guadalupensis described by Girty® certainly does not belong to Perrin- ites. It may perhaps, represent several species of IVaagenoceras or even of different genera. The very imperfect illustrations do not allow a full recognition of its shape and the form of the sutures. We shall discuss this species in our paragraph on Jl’aagenoceras. *I have lately seen some ammonoids from the Delaware beds which seem to belong to Perrinites with respect to their form, but the suture could not be made visible. ?Compare Appendix to this work. ‘Girty, Guadalupian Fauna, p. 502, pl. 29, fig. 23-26. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 161 Perrinites vidriensis nov. sp. Pl. VIE, Fig. 1-10; Pl. TX, Fig, 1-10; Pl. X, Fie, 1-21 Shell discoidal, involute, with compressed flanks and rounded ven- ter; greatest width at the umbilical shoulder in smaller specimens, and a little above in the larger individuals. Whorls not very deeply em- bracing, the involution being in the smaller whorls a little more than one-third of the height, and in the largest ones a little less than one- half of the height of a whorl. The cross-section is parabolical to elliptical, the height being greater than the width. There are four to six constrictions on the whorl, straight to slightly sinuous on the flank and strongly curving on the venter, with the convexity toward the back. The constrictions are deep on the cast, while on the shell they are noticeable by a thickening of the lines of growth on both sides of it; almost no depression is visible on the shell. The ornamentation consists of very fine lines of growth entirely parallel to the constric- tions. The umbilicus is narrow, and the umbilical shoulder is com- paratively sharp in the younger whorls, while in the older ones it be- comes considerably rounded. The umbilical wall is steep and broad, although not perpendicular. The body chamber is unknown; even specimens with a diameter of 125 mm. do not show its beginning. The septa are very near and often even almost touch each other in certain parts. The suture (pl. VIII, fig. 4, 7; pl. IX, fig. 10; pl. X, fig. 19) follows a straight line between the sipho and umbilicus. The siphonal lobe is divided in two branches by a high median saddle. Each of the branches ends in a long and sharp point. It tapers from the upper part toward the bottom. The first lateral lobe is scarcely deeper than the branches of the siphonal lobe; it is generally somewhat broader and more symmetrical and a little more scalloped. The second lateral lobe is similar to the first, but also deep and wide. The three auxiliary lobes are similar to the lateral ones, but decrease gradually in depth and width, as all the lobes do from the first lateral to the umbilicus. The third auxiliary lobe is on the umbilical shoulder. The median saddle of the siphonal lobe is very high, broader at the base than at the top, where it is notched by an indentation. Ina mature specimen (130 mm.) it has three secondary lobes on each side and several rudimentary ones; in those somewhat smaller (65 mm.) it shows only the three secondary lobes and in smaller whorls it loses 162 University of Texas Bulletin these also, gradually showing still one secondary lobe at each side ona whorl with 7 mm. diameter, while on one of 5.5 mm. diameter, the sides of the median saddle are almost entirely straight; the whole hav- ing a trapezoidal form with slightly concave sides. In the mature form the external saddle is very high, broad at the base and narrow above. Leaving out of consideration the secondary lobes, the whole saddle has a triangular form. It is scalloped on each side by about four secondary lobes, which cause the existence of slender secondary saddles; all those nearer the upper portion of the saddle end in phyl- loid points, one of them forming the highest part of the saddle; while two more branch off, not quite at the same height, somewhat below the upper end of the saddle. The secondary lobes become gradually shorter nearer to the base, where they constitute only small indenta- tions. In the very largest specimens (110-130 mm.) there are a num- ber of rudimentary lobes within those mentioned, which do not change, the general character and only scallop farther the outside of the saddle. The first and second lateral saddles are practically built on the same plan as the external one; they also end in a phylloid point, but the next lower secondary saddles branch off at the same height. The same may be said of the first two auxiliary saddles, while the third seemingly is also similar to them, though its form could not quite be made out. It lies on the umbilical wall. In smaller whorls the general outline of the saddles does not change, although the secondary lobes become simple and are not more subdi- vided by rudimentary saddles. In a specimen of about 10 mm. dia- meter we still see the same number of saddles, but the number of se- condary lobes on the external saddle is now reduced to two on each; at a diameter of 7 mm. there are only four saddles visible—the ex- ternal, two laterals and one auxiliary; but the general shape remains the same. One half whorl farther back, the external saddle shows only one slight adventive lobe on each side, while the other three are simple. On specimens with a diameter of 4 mm. the external saddle shows still a slight indentation on the side nearer to the umbilicus, but all the four saddles visible are of about the same height. One- half whorl farther back, the first auxiliary saddle splits up in three branches, the middle one of which is the highest. One half whorl farther back, the side branches, especially the one nearer towards the rail Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 163 sipho, diminish in height and the latter one even disappears, while the middle branch of the auxiliary saddle becomes now as high as the external saddle. The two lateral saddles are of equal but much lower height than the external and the first auxiliary. The suture line reaches here clearly the stage of Shumardites (pl. X, fig. 20). J. P. Smith already presumed, when he established the genus Shumard- ttes, that this would prove to be the precursor of the Cyclolobinae, a hypothesis which is confirmed by our find. The internal suture (pl. X, fig. 21) of the present species is not entirely known, but the most important part could be uncovered. The antisiphonal lobe is very long and extremely narrow. It is lanceolate in its general outline but has three pairs of secondary saddles of which the upper one is by far the largest, the middle one long and thin, while the lowermost in about one-third of the total depth is only a pair of sharp corners. All lean over toward the median line of the lobe. While the antisiphonal lobe is entirely symmetrical, the first lateral lobe is entirely asymmetrical. It ends in a long and sharp point and the shape and size of the secondary saddles which scallop its sides are entirely different. This lobe is shorter than the foregoing one. The second lateral lobe is also long and ends in a sharp point, but is shorter than the first. Its form is similar in general to that of the first lateral lobe, although the details are different. The first auxiliary lobe also ends in a long point, but is comparatively broader and more asymmetrical than the lateral ones. All the lobes decrease gradually but rapidly in depth from the antisiphonal to the first auxiliary lobe; the number of the auxiliary lobes is unknown. The internal saddle is extremely long and slender, and _ tapers slightly from the base toward the upper end. It ends in a broad phylloid point and has several rounded branches farther down. The secondary lobes which scallop its sides are broad and deep near the upper portion and grow very shallow near the base. The first and ‘second lateral saddles are built on exactly the same plan as the internal saddle, with the one exception that they do not show the same number of branches. Those near the base disappear. The first auxiliary saddle shows exactly the outline of the upper portion of the internal saddle, but all the secondary lobes and secondary saddles of the latter are missing on the auxiliary saddle. The exact number of auxiliary 164 University of Texas Bulletin saddles is unknown. This internal suture is taken from a fairly mature specimen. Dimensions + I II Ill DIaMEter™ cacaa ce ceawee 125.7 mm (1) 102.6 mm (1) 63.4 mm (1) Width.) ic sedated eas es 58.1 mm _ 0.46 49.5 mm 0.48 33.4 mm _ 0.53 Height of last whorl..... 67.5 mm 0.54 54.1 mm 0.53 33.5 mm 0.53 Diameter of umbilicus.... 15.0 mm _ 0.12 13.0 mm 0.13 6.7 mm 0.11 IV Vv VI Diameter .........+.0-. 56.6 mm (1) 44.8 mm (1) 43.1 mm (1) Width. sish% So oie gas ea he 30.7 mm 0.54 25.0 mm 0.55 24.1 mm 0.56 Height of last whorl..... 30.0 mm 0.53 23.6 mm 0.53 23.5 mm 0.54 Diameter of umbilicus.... 6.2 mm 0.11 5.0 mm 0.11 4.1 mm 0.10 a vVIil2 VIII Ix Diameter. «a seewnws aees a BS 36.1 mm (1) 29.0 mm (1) 16.5 mm (1) Width os cad gees Sodan 20.7 mm 0.57 16.5 mm 0.57 10.2 mm 0.62 Height of last whorl..... 18.7 mm 0.52 15.0 mm 0.52 8.0 mm 0.48 Diameter of umbilicus... 4.1 mm 0.11 24.0 mm 0.14 23.0 mm 0.18 x XI XII Diameter: ws ee a wus se ste 13.0 mm (1) 7.6 mm (1) 4.4 mm (1) Width. iis iad oe ae aes 8.0 mm 0.62 5.7 mm 0.75 2.9 mm 0.66 Height of last whorl..... 5.3 mm 0.41 3.4 mm 0.45 1.88 mm 0.41 Diameter of umbilicus... 1.1 mm_ 0.085 0.6 mm 0.08 0.4 mm 0.09 Relation to other species: Very nearly related to our species is P. Hilli Smith.? It is a little more involute, its cross section is less elliptical than that of our speci- mens of the same size; the saddles of the suture are a little stouter, and the lobe narrower than in our species; the points in which the lobes end are somewhat shorter in P. Hilt than in P. vidriensis. These differences are relatively small, but one cannot expect great variety in such a simply built genus as the present one. Less similar yet is P. Cumimtinsi White,* the whorls of which are less high, while the umbilicus is much larger than our species. 1In the very small specimens the measurements, especially those of the umbilicus, are not entirely exact, on account of the relative coarseness of my instrument. 7While all the rest of the measured specimens come from a point about two miles west-northwest of Iron Mountain, this one comes from a point three miles north of the old oil derrick on Wedin’s Ranch on the north side of ‘“‘Round Point ridge,” Glass Mountains. J, P. Smith, Carb. Amm. of N. America, p. 140, pl. 27. ‘Ch. A. White, The Texan Permian, p. 20, pl. 1, fig. 4-8. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 65 The saddles of the suture are much shorter and stouter, although the general arrangement of the suture is the same. The small speci- mens of this species, like that figured by White in his pl. 1, fig. 4 and 5, are extremely similar to specimens of the same size of our species. Perrinites compressus n. sp. is also a species which is very similar to P. vidriensis but its involution is more than one half of the height of a whorl and its umbilicus is wider than that of the latter species; the saddles of the suture are somewhat higher and less deeply scal- loped. There exists probably another species similar to P. vidriensis. Some specimens were collected by Udden' about 2% miles N 20° E of the old oil derrick on Wedin’s ranch on the top of the first ridge, and others were brought by Mr. Chas. L. Baker and myself from the first ridge northwest of Iron Mountain. Unfortunately, the specimens are too badly preserved and too small for a description. They seem to belong to a species the cross-section of which is similar to that of P. Cumminsi, while the umbilicus is extremely narrow. This species occurs in the lower part of the Leonard formation and may possibly allow a subdivision of that horizon. Age: Leonard formation, Permo-Carboniferous. Number of specimens examined: More than a hundred. Locality: Two miles west-northwest of Iron Mountain, at the base of a large clay slide (very frequent); 1% miles west-northwest of Iron Moun- tain (frequent) ; 3 miles north of the old oil derrick on Wedin’s ranch; valley north of Leonard Mountain (all these localities are in the Glass Mountains) ; three miles south of Bird’s mine north of intrusive plug of Capt. James’s ranch (very frequent) ; region of the Altuda Moun- tain in the Mt. Ord range. “Through an error this was cited by Udden (Univ. Texas Bull. 1753, p. 13) under the name of Waagenoceras. 166 University of Texas Bulletin Perrinites compressus nov. sp. PI, X, Fig. 22-27 Shell discoidal, involute, with compressed and flattened flanks, rounded venter, greatest width near the umbilical shoulder. Whorls deeply embracing, the involution being somewhat more than one-half of the height of the whorl; the cross-section is parabolical, as the height of the whorl is less than the width. No constrictions have been observed on the type specimens, but this may be due to the state of preservation. Both specimens are casts and no kind of ornamenta- tion is visible on them. The umbilicus is narrow and deep, the umbili- cal shoulder is rounded, the umbilical wall is steep. The body chamber is unknown. The septa are very near together and in places nearly touch each other, The suture (pl. X, fig. 25, 26) follows a straight line between the sipho and the umbilicus. The siphonal lobe is divided in two branches by a high median saddle; each of the branches ends in a long and sharp point. It tapers from the upper part toward the bottom. The first lateral lobe is very little deeper than the branches of the siphonal lobe, but broader, more symmetrical and more scalloped. The second lateral lobe is similar to the first one in every detail. but less deep and wide. The same may be said of the first, second and third auxiliary lobes, although the last two are not very well preserved. All the lobes decrease gradually in depth and width from the first lateral to the umbilicus. The third auxiliary lobe lies on the umbilical wall. The median saddle of the siphonal lobe is unusually high, broader at the base than at the top, where it is notched by an indentation. It has three secondary lobes on each side. The external saddle is very high, broad at the base and narrow above; leaving out of considera- tion the secondary lobes, the whole saddle has a triangular outline. It is scalloped on each side by about three to four secondary lobes which cause the existence of slender secondary saddles; all those on the upper portion of the saddle end in phylloid points, one of them form- ing the highest part of the saddle, while two more branch off, not quite at the same height, somewhat below the upper end of the saddle, giv- ing it a tripartite aspect. The secondary lobes become shorter grad- ually nearer to the base of the saddle, where they form only small in- Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 167 dentations. The first and second lateral saddles are practically built on the same plan as the external one. They also end in a phylloid point but the next lower pair of secondary saddles branches off from the same place. The lateral saddles are lower than the external one. The three auxiliary saddles are more or less similar to the lateral one, but have a smaller number of branches. The third auxiliary saddle lies on the umbilical seam, the second one on the umbilical shoulder. The internal suture is unknown in this species. Dimensions: Diameter sya vnarnccay ene ata aan Coen nba lay, 39.8 mm (1) WAC gens 88 Soe Ducae hs Seat el adler Aron Miecohreett a Arsateint tnt ak 20.4 0.51 Height of last whorl......... 0... ccc cece cee eens 18.5 0.46 Diameter of umbilicus. ....... 000... e eee ees 7.0 0.18 Relation to other species: At first glance, our species is very similar to Perrinites vidriensts, but it is easily distinguished by its different involution and the deeper embracing whorls. When we compare the ratio of dimensions of P. compressus with the nearest one in size (No. VII of the table of di- mensions) of P. vidriensis, we find that they are very different, the ratio being in the present species 1:0.51:0.46:0.18, and in the other one 1:0.57:0.52:0.11. We may still add that the flanks of our species are more flattened and that the branches of the saddles in the suture are more delicate than in P. vidriensis. It should be noticed that the third auxiliary saddle in our species is on the umbilical seam, while in P. vidriensis it is on the umbilical wall. P. Hilli is easily distinguished by its manner of involution, its gen- erally greater width and its much smaller umbilicus; also the saddles on its suture are much stouter than in our species. P. Cumminsi is entirely different with respect to the ratio of dimen- sions, and the umbilicus seems to be still wider than in our species; the suture is very different. Age: Lower part of Leonard formation, Permo-Carboniferous.* Through an error Udden (Univ, Texas Bull. 1753, p. 46) has cited the rest of the fauna occurring together with P. compressus as belonging to the Hess formation. 168 University of Texas Bulletin Number of specimens examined: Two. Locality: Near the top of ridge about 2 miles N 65° W of Wolf Camp at head of valley leading down to tank one-half mile west of Wolf Camp, Glass Mountains. W aagenoceras Gemini. The genus Waagenoceras has been established by Gemmellaro’ for ammonoids similar in form to the Triassic Arcestidae. Gemmellaro’s original diagnosis says that the species belonging to this group are covered with fine transversal striae, are more or less globose, involute, and slow-growing, with convex ventral region, narrow and deep um- bilicus; and that the form of the last whorl is different fram that of the preceding ones. The internal whorls have two to three internal varices presented as straight and narrow constrictions on the cast, and extending from the umbilicus to the venter. The aperture is low, semilunar, and restricted by a strong and broad internal swelling on the margin; has no lateral ears and no ventral prolongation. Body chamber is one whorl and a half long; suture line curved; siphonal lobe strongly narrowed at the base and deeply divided in two curved branches by a high and broad median saddle. Six lobes exist between the siphonal one and the umbilicus. They are coarsely dentate; be- tween them are seven deeply scalloped saddles which have phylloid ends. Gemmellaro compares his genus with Cyclolobus and says that Waagenoceras differs from this genus because it has six lobes instead of fifteen; that it has no adventive lobes and that the siphonal lobe is narrowed at the base and has curved branches; and that the internal varices are straight instead of falciform. Mojsisovics” tried to show that Waagenoccras cannot be separated from Cyclolobus, but Gemmellaro did not accept this view. He tried to show in an appendix to his works, that the two genera are very different from each other. ’;Gemmellaro, Cale. c, Fusulina, p. 9, ibid., App., p. 5. *“Mcjsisovics, Arkt. Trias-Amm,, p. 18. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 149 Gemmellaro does not make any remarks about the curious para- bolical course of the suture of Cyclolobus, which alone probably would be sufficient to separate it generically from W aagenoceras, but his reasoning is entirely justified. The difference in the external form and the suture of the two genera are so great that one cannot even think of uniting them. Waagenoceras certainly belongs to the same subfamily as Cyclolobus, but the latter genus represents a much more highly developed form, and is at least as similar to Joannites as to Waagenoceras. It must be taken into account that the shape of the siphonal lobe of Cyclolobus is somewhat imperfectly known, as has been pointed out by Diener.t Waagen apparently has reconstructed the median saddle of the siphonal lobe in his figure of Cyclolobus Old- hams” and the suture of the very nearly related Krafftoceras Diener® shows that the median saddle of the siphonal lobe of Cyclolobus is possibly still much more different from that of }/’aagenoceras than we could suppose. Whatever be the shape of the median saddle, there is no doubt that the branches of the siphonal lobe are much more subdivided than those of Waagenoceras and that their shape is entirely different, as Gem- mellaro has shown. The external saddle in Cyclolobus Oldhami is curved with the convexity toward the siphonal region, while that of Waagenoceras has the convexity on the umbilical side. The most important feature is the parabolical curve followed by the suture be- tween the sipho and the umbilicus, which is not only found in C. Old- hami but also in C. Kraffti Dien. and in C. persulcatus Rothpl. from the Permian of the Island of Timor, and which has the greatest simil- arity to the curvature of the suture in Joannites. Waagenoceras, on the contraty, always shows a suture the curvature of which is part of a circle, as has been pointed out by Mojsisovics. Diener‘ is certainly right, when he says that “Cyclolobus is linked as closely to Joannites Mojs. on the one hand as it is to Waagenoceras Gemm., on the other.” Most of the authors seem to have accepted the genus Waagenoceras. Haug’ considers it as belonging to his Joannitidae together with Cyclo- ‘Diener, Permian foss. Centr. Himalayas, p. 167. *Waagen, Productus limestone fossils, I, p. 24, pl. 1, fig. 9. ‘Diener, Permian foss. Centr. Himalayas, p. 162, pl. 6, fig.9. ‘Diener, loc. cit., p. 14. ‘E. Haug, Les Amm. du Permien et du Trias., p. 394. 170 University of Texas Bulletin lobus, Stacheoceras, and Joannites, while J. P. Smith’ regards the genus as belonging to the family of the Arcestidae and unites it with Shumardites and Cyclolobus in the subfamily Cyclolobinae Zitt. J. P. Smith, however, does not figure a real Cyclolobus, but in its stead Waagenoceras Stachei Gemm., under the name of Cyclolobus Stachet Gemm.; while he figures on the same page, as a typical Waagenoceras, his W. Hill, which we have discussed in our description of the new genus Perrinites, and shown to be generically different from Waageno- ceras. Waagenoceras has been cited from Texas Permian on several oc- casions but most of them belong to our genus Perrinites, as we have shown above. The only specimens which might really belong to Waag- enoceras are some of those which have been described by Girty” as W. Cumminsi var. Guadalupensis. The shape of most of these speci- mens does not seem to be that of a real Waagenoceras. Girty says that they have a flattened subglobose shape, probably such as is shown in his fig. 24a. The suture taken from this specimen does not look much like that of Waagenoceras, showing hardly any curve at all. I doubt very much that fig. 25 belongs to the same species or perhaps even to the same genus, as the number of lobes is so different, and the suture follows entirely different lines. There must be some error in the explanation of this plate, as it is impossible that both sutures are en- larged twice or the suture fig. 24 could not belong to fig. 24a; nor that of 25a to fig. 25. The only specimen which may represent a real Waagenoceras is that shown in Fig. 26; at least the antisiphonal lobe and the internal saddles are very similar to those of the typical Waag- enoceras. ‘This latter specimen evidently belongs to a very globose shell which has certainly no sort of similarity to the rest of the speci; mens figured under the same name. Of course it is impossible to say if this specimen belongs to the new species of Waagenoceras which will be described below. So far Waagenoceras has only been found in Sicily (if the above mentioned somewhat doubtful specimen figured by Girty in pl. 29, fig. 1J, P. Smith, in EHastman-Zittel, Textb. of Pal. 2nd ed., p. 642. *Girty, Guadalupian Fauna, p. 502, pl. 29, fig. 23-26. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 171 26 does not belong to that genus'). In the Glass Mountains the genus is represented by only one species, W. Dieneri n. sp., but this one is exceedingly common at most of the localities where the horizon occurs. It is found in the lower mass of limestone of the Word formation, where it occurs in greater numbers than most other species. The nature of the rock does not allow of breaking the specimens up and studying the suture on the interior whorls. It has therefore not been possible to show if this genus has any ontogenetic relation to Perrinites, which always occurs in beds far below the Waagenoceras limestone. Waagenoceras Dieneri nov. sp. Pl. X, fig. 28-31; Pl. XI, fig. 1-27 Shell subglobose, involute, slightly flattened on the flanks, well rounded on the venter, whorls very deeply embracing and slowly growing. Cross-section semilunar, much broader than high. Um- bilicus narrow and deep with a rather sharp umbilical shoulder; the umbilical wall is broad and nearly perpendicular. The involution is nearly four-fifths of the height of the whorl in the larger specimens, and about four-sevenths in the interior whorls. The casts of the inner whorls generally show about four deep constrictions which pass ‘over the whole whorl in a practically straight line without having any inflection on the venter; these contrictions correspond to internal varices of the shell. On the larger whorls these constrictions grow more shallow and even seem to disappear entirely. The surface of the shell is not known but does not seem to have possessed any very strong ornamentation. The body chamber is unknown. The septa are rather near together and in some places almost touch each other. The suture (pl. X, fig. 31; pl. XI, fig. 3, 5, 6, 10) fol- lows a strongly curved line between the sipho and the umbilicus. The suture consists of the siphonal lobe, seven lateral and auxiliary lobes, and seven saddles between the sipho and the umbilical shoulder ; there are one saddle and one lobe more on the umbilical wall. 1When the manuscript of this paper was already finished, I had the opportunity to look through a number of fossils collected by Mr. Ch. L. Baker in the west gide of the Delaware Mountains at a point north of the Apache Mountains, West Texas. This collection contains not only several specimens of typical Waagenoceras but also generically different forms which seem to correspond to Girty’s “Waagenoceras” Cumminsi var. Guadalupensis. re University of Texas Bulletin The siphonal lobe is divided into two branches by a moderately high and narrow median saddle. Each of the branches is strongly curved with the convexity toward the umbilical side; and they are bifid, the point on the siphonal side being a little longer than that on the um- bilical side. There are two indentations on the umbilical side of the branch. The first lateral lobe is not as deep as the siphonal one. It is trifid and not quite symmetrical, and the middle point is longer than the lateral ones; the lobe has two more indentations on each side, and is narrower at the top than in the middle. The second lateral lobe is very similar to the first one, but less deep. The first and second auxiliary lobes are very similar to the lateral ones but less deep, but in the second auxiliary lobe the lateral point on the siphonal side becomes somewhat longer than that on the umbilical side. This character is still more pronounced in the third auxiliary lobe, which thus takes on the aspect of being bifid. The fourth auxiliary lobe is still more asymmetrical and ends in a long point, while a smaller point exists on each side of it, of which the one on the umbilical side is far longer than the other. A fifth and very small auxiliary lobe exists on the umbilical shoulder. The depth of the lobes begins to decrease from the first lateral, the second lateral being much less deep than the first one, while the first auxiliary is very little different from the second lateral. From the second auxiliary lobe to the umbilicus the lobes begin to decrease rapidly in depth. The lobe and saddle on the umbilical wall seem to be very simple and rounded, but they could be seen only on immature specimens. The median saddle of the siphonal lobe (pl. X, fig. 31) is relatively low, narrower at the base than at the top, where it is notched by a slight indentation. It has also a slight indentation on each side above the base. The external saddle is about twice as high as the median saddle; it is distinctly curved with the convexity toward the umbilical side. It ends in a large phylloid point and has four short lateral branches. It is narrower at the base than at the top. The first lateral saddle is nearly as large as the external, but it is a little narrower and more delicate. On account of the curvature of the suture it looks as if it were higher than the external saddle. It ends in a large phylloidal point and has four lateral branches. The second lateral saddle is prac- tically equal to the first one in size and shape, but perhaps a little Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 173 . broader. The auxiliary saddles are built after the plan of the second lateral, but they lose first the lower pair of lateral branches and then the upper, while the phylloid end becomes longer. The fifth auxiliary saddle which lies on the umbilical wall is simple and entire. The internal sutures are not completely known, but the most impor- tant part could be uncovered. The internal suture (pl. X, fig. 28) fol- lows a slightly curved line. It is composed of the antisiphonal lobe, two lateral and probably five auxiliary lobes with one internal, two lateral and four auxiliary saddles between them. The antisiphonal lobe is divided into three branches by two high and narrow secondary saddles, which lean considerably over toward the median line of the lobe. The two lateral branches are much less deep than the middle one, have two lateral indentations, and end in a long and sharp point. The middle branch has two short lateral points, and one long and sharp median point. The first lateral lobe is distinctly trifid, the median point being longer than the lateral ones. It has one secondary saddle on each side and is much narrower at the top than at the base. The details of the rest of the lobes could not be observed but they are probably similar to those of the first lateral lobe. The internal saddle is very narrow at the base and in the middle, but ends in a very large phyllum which is a little higher than broad; it has one branch at each side, but these are of a different height; it is curved, bending over toward the antisiphonal lobe. The first lateral saddle is similar to the internal but not curved, the phyllum in which it ends being still a little longer with respect to the width than that of the pre- ceding saddle. The following saddles are certainly built in a similar manner, but the details could not be made out. Dimensions: I II Ill Diameter ........-+-2455 47.6 mm (1) 25.5 mm (1) 23.7 mm (1) Width sake nsreei su lesiecs 41.6 mm 0.87 721.5 mm 0.84 20.8 mm 0.86 Height of last whorl..... 20.6 mm 0.438 11.5 mm 0.45 11.5 mm _ 0.49 Diameter of umbilicus.... 8.7 mm 0.18 4.7mm 0.19 > 4.8 mm = 0.20 (between the shoulders) : IV Vv VI Diameter... 055666502804 19.7 mm (1) 17.4 mm _ (1) 16.1 mm (1) WHER iis Sacer ese bakass 17.6 mm 0.89 16.3 mm _ 0.87 14.4 mm _ 0.89 1There are fragments of much larger specimens, one of which must have had a diameter of about 100 mm. 174 University of Texas Bulletin Height of last whorl..... 9.7 mm 0.49 8.7 mm 0.50 7.8 mm 0.48 Diameter of umbilicus.... 3.8 mm 0.19 3.3 mm 0.18 3.1 mm 0.19 (between the shoulders) VII VIII DIaMetenr > 4 gba serea wes 14.5 mm (1) 11.6 mm (1) Width: . ss. 2eese sees wee 12.5 mm_ 0.86 10.3 mm 0.89 Height of last whorl..... 7.0 mm 0.48 5.7 mm 0.49 Diameter of umbilicus.... 2.7 mm 0.19 2.2 mm 0.18 (between the shoulders) Relation to other species: All the species of Waagenoceras described from Sicily are more or less similar to our species, there being no varying sculpture to distin- guish them by, and all of them being very globose forms. When we compare the ratio of dimensions, W. Nikitint Gemm." is certainly the species which most resembles our Texan form. Its ratio seems to be ap- proximately 1:0.82:0.45:0.17, against 1:0.87:0.43:0.18 in a specimen of about the same size belonging to W. Dieneri n. sp. The principal differences between our species and W. Nikitini are to be found in the suture. Although the general character is very similar there are some distinctive features in the detail. The median saddle of the siphonal lobe is higher in the Sicilian species, the saddles in general are more slender and probably higher, the external saddle shows a much more triangular phyllum at its end, and in it as well as in all the rest of the saddles this terminal phyllum is larger and the connection between it and the lower part of the saddle is thinner. The siphonal lobe has in each branch one point much longer than the other, while in our species both points show very little difference in length. Similar differences exist with respect to the other lobes. The antisiphonal lobe also shows some differences; the secondary saddles in our species lean farther over toward the median line than in the Sicilian species, the median branch is broader, the lateral branches are not bifid as in the Sicilian form. The internal saddle leans more over toward the median line of the antisiphonal lobe in our species than in the Sicilian one; its highest branches begin at different heights while in [V. Nikitimi they branch off from the same point. Taking everything together, the internal suture of our species resembles more that of W. Mojsisovicsi Gemm.? 1Gemmellaro, Calc. c. Fusulina, App., p. 4, pl. A, fig. 1-4; pl. B., fig. 1. ?Gemmellaro, Calc. c. Fusulina, p. 10, pl. 1, fig. 1-3; pl. 2, fig. 1-2; pl. 7, fig. 35; app., pl. A, fig. 5, 7. ' Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 175 than that of any other species; the external suture resembles that of our species also, somewhat, although the saddles are more scalloped and more slender, but the external shape of the Sicilian species is entirely different from that of W. Dieneri n. sp. : W. Stachei Gemm." is similar to our species in its external shape, although not quite identical with regard to the ratio of dimensions, and also the sutures are somewhat similar; but the saddles are more scal- loped and their side branches are longer and the whole saddle straighter; the external saddles are much more curved than in our species. A real Waagenoceras has probably been described from the Guada- lupian of Texas. I refer to W. Cumsminsi var. Guadalupensis Girty,? but of the different specimens figured, only one can be referred to Waagenoceras with any degree of certainty. This specimen shows part of the internal suture, especially the antisiphonal lobe and the internal saddle. The antisiphonal lobe differs from that of our species, because the lateral branches are nearly as long as the median branch, while in our species these are much shorter. The internal saddle seems to be much stouter than in our forms, while the first lateral saddle has apparently the same shape as that of W. Dieneri. The gen- eric determination of the other specimens figured by Girty is uncertain. Figure 23 may represent a Waagenoceras, but the sutures, fig. 24 and 25a, are very different from each other. Figure 25a has a very uncom- mon siphonal lobe and apparently a very low median saddle, while Fig. 24 shows a very uncommon position of the suture, although the siphonal lobe seems to be similar to that of Waagenoceras. None of the specimens reproduced by Girty has anything to do with the so-called Waagenoceras Cumminsi White, which, as we have shown, belongs to our new genus Perrinites. W. Dieneri is a very common species in the higher part of our Permo-Carboniferous, the Word formation, but it is difficult to separate it from the rock. Age: Word formation, Permo-Carboniferous. 1Gemmellaro, Calc. c. Fusulina, pl. 1, fig. 4-6; pl. 2, fig. 3-4; pl. 4, fig. 1; App., pl. A, fig. 6. *Girty, Guadalupian fauna, p. 502, pl. 29, fig. 26 (not fig. 23-25). 176 University of Texas Bulletin Number of specimens examined: About fifty. The species is extremely common at the different localities. Locality: Surroundings of the junction of Road and Gilliam Canyons; moun- tains north of Leonard Mountain, Glass Mountains. MBEKOCERATIDAE Waagen. LECANITINAE Hyatt Paralecanites Diener The subgenus Paralecanites was established by Diener? for am- monites similar to Lecanites Mojs. but distinct from it by the absence of the second lateral lobe. To Paralecanites belong very evolute forms with low and little embracing whorls, wide umbilicus, practically no sculpture and simple septa consisting of a siphonal lobe, one external, one lateral and the beginning of an auxiliary saddle. Frech’ proposed to unite Paralecanites with Paraceltites Gemm. but Diener,’ in a later article, showed that there was a fundamental dif- ference between the two genera in so far as Paraceltites has an undi- vided siphonal lobe and always shows a rather strong sculpture. Hyatt and J. P. Smith* accept Paralecanites as an independent genus and refer to it a form found in the Meekoceras beds of the Lower Triassic, Paralecanites Arnoldi Hyatt a. Smith.’ This species is in so far interesting as it shows apparently one lobe more than the type species Paralecanites sextensis Dien. The authors explain that this lobe is not an auxiliary. one, but an internal lobe which becomes visible outside of the umbilical seam on account of the evolution of the shell. It is to be supposed that the internal lobes of the genus “would consist of an antisiphonal lobe flanked by an internal lateral as this is the case with all primitive ammonites of this group.” In the case of P Arnoldi, the authors actually observed that there exists a divided anti- siphonal lobe and that the next lobe, the internal lateral, appears be- yond the umbilical seam. . In the region of Altuda Mountains, Dr. J. A. Udden has found a very evolute cephalopod which shows a peculiar suture, very similar to that of Paralecanites Arnoldi. This cephalopod is so evolute that the dorsal portion touched and excavated by the next smaller whorl is ‘Diener, Amm. u. Orthoc. d,. Siidtirol. Bellerophonkalk, p. 66. *Frech, Lethaea Palaeozoica, 2 Bd, 3 Lief, p. 552. ’Diener, Ueb. d. syst. Stell. d. Amm. d. Siidalp. Bellerophonkalkes, p. 426, et seq. ‘Hyatt and Smith, Triass. ceph. genera of America, p. 136. ‘Hyatt and Smith, loc. cit., p. 136, pl. 64, fig. 1-16; pl. 77, fig. 9-12. 178 University of Texas Bulletin so narrow that there is probably no more room than for an antisiphonal lobe, which makes it probable that we have a similar case as in Paralecanites Arnoldi. In our species the siphonal lobe is divided by a low saddle. There are the high external and first lateral saddles while the next one is extremely low and apparently has to be considered as an auxiliary saddle. The first lateral lobe is deep, while the next one is much smaller and may be considered as an auxiliary lobe; another lobe is visible in part near the umbilical seam. If our interpretation is right, we would have the same case as in P. Arnoldi. We would then regard the smaller lobe following the first lateral as the second lateral, and the lobe partly visible on the umbilical seam as an internal lobe. There would be no second lateral saddle but the small saddle following the first lateral would have to be regarded as the first lateral saddle of the internal suture. As long as the internal suture of this species is unknown, there is no possibility of proving our contention, but the case of P. Arnoldi makes it very possible that our species really belongs to Paralecanites and differs from the type by showing some of the internal elements beyond the umbilical seam. Paralecanites has been first described from the Bellerophon lime- stone of the Alps, the highest member of the Alpine Permian, and cer- tainly much younger than the beds in which our species has been found. Paralecanites altudensis nov. sp. Pl. XI, Fig. 28-45 Shell discoidal, evolute, strongly compressed on the flanks, rounded on the ventral part, whorls not deeply embracing; cross-section sub- oval, much higher than broad; greatest width about one-third above the umbilical seam. No umbilical shoulder is developed, the flank curving gradually down to the umbilical seam; the umbilical wall is little defined and has an inclination of not more than 30°. The um- bilicus is very wide and shallow. No constrictions are visible on the whorls. ; All the specimens are casts; no trace of ornamentation is visible. The body chamber seems to be more than one whorl long. The septa are not very near together ; the external suture (pl. XI, fig. 35) forms a straight line. The siphonal lobe is not very deep but broad and divided in two branches by a low median saddle. Each of Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 179 the branches ends in a point. The first lateral lobe is large, funnel- shaped, and apparently rounded; the second lateral lobe is similar to the first one, but at the outer side limited by a much lower saddle. A third and much more shallow lobe must exist right on the umbilical seam. The first two lateral lobes are much deeper than the siphonal one. The saddles are all entire and tongue-shaped. The median saddle of the siphonal lobe is less than half as high as the first lateral, is broad at the base, tapering toward the top, which is notched by an indentation. Unfortunately, this part of the suture is not very well preserved. The external and the first lateral saddle are high and nearly of the same size and shape. The third saddle is about half as high as the first two, but is not very well preserved. Dimensions: I II III IV Diameter ... 30.8 mm (1) 19.8 mm (1) 19.4 mm (1) 11.5 mm (1) Width ...... ? 3.3 mm 0.17 3.8 mm 0.17 1.8 mm 0.16 Height of last whorl .... 7.5 mm 0.24 6.1 mm 0.81 6.1 mm 0.31 3.5 mm 0.30 Diameter of umbilicus . 14.6 mm _ 0.47 9.3 mm 0.47 9.5 mm 0.49 6.0 mm 0.52 Relation to other species: There is no species described which could be well compared with the present one. The form of this ammonoid is rather similar to that of Paraceltites but the characteristic ornamentation of the latter is lack- ing, and the suture seems to be entirely different, especially the siphonai lobe. The generic determination remains somewhat doubtful, but better preserved specimens may be found later and allow a better drawing of the sutural line. We have already indicated that our species has some similarity with P. Arnoldi Hyatt a. Smith, and that the lobe at the umbilical seam may in reality be the first lateral lobe of the internal suture, becoming visi- ble beyond the seam on account of the narrowness of the dorsal por- tion. As long as we do not know the internal suture of our species, it is impossible to prove that our interpretation is right, but there exists certainly a great resemblance between the suture of our species and that of the form from the Lower Triassic of Idaho. Even the external shape is very similar, especially when we compare our specimens with the mature form illustrated by Hyatt and Smith on their pl. 77, fig. 180 University of Texas Bulletin 9-12. The principal difference between our species and the Triassic species is that the latter shows a serrated first lateral lobe in a speci- men of about 16 mm. diameter, while the lobes in ours are apparently all rounded. The different species of Paralecanites described by Diener’ are all less evolute and the dorsal portion is broader, which would account for the difference in the suture. Age: Leonard formation, Permo-Carboniferous. Number of specimens examined: Fourteen. The species appears to be very frequent at the locality but it is never very well preserved. Locality: South of the intrusive plug on Capt. James’s ranch, Altuda Moun- tain, near Marathon.” ‘Diener, Amm. u. Orthoc. i. stidtirol, Bellerophonkalk, p. 68-71, pl. 1, fig. 3-8. APPENDIX ON SOME NEW AMMONOIDS AND THE SUCCESSION OF THE AMMONOID-BEARING HORIZONS OF THE PERMO-CARBONIFEROUS IN CENTRAL TEXAS APPENDIX ON SOME NEW AMMONOIDS AND THE SUCCESSION OF THE AMMONOID- BEARING HORIZONS OF THE PERMO-CARBONIFEROUS IN CENTRAL TEXAS. After the plates for the present work had been finished and the printing of the text begun, Dr. J. W. Beede, of Austin, sent me two small collections of Permo-Carboniferous ammonoids. One of these were collected by Mr. W. E. Wrather in 1914, in beds about 200 feet below the top of the Wichita formation, four miles south of Dundee, Baylor County, Texas. Mr. Wrather considers this horizon as being somewhat lower than the one of the old Military Crossing in the same county, where W. F. Cummins collected.the material later on described by Dr. Charles A. White. The other collection was made by Dr. Beede himself on the Colorado River, in western Runnels County, Texas, about four miles east of the western county line and 300 feet below the top of the Clear Fork beds. Dr. Beede considers this horizon as being approximately 675 feet higher than the one which contains the fossils described by Chas. A. White. Unfortunately, the printing of the present paper is so far advanced that I cannot include here a description dnd illustrations of these fossils, but I have carefully studied them and drawn the sutures, and can at least add the main results I obtained, hoping that I may be able to publish later on a detailed description with the necessary illustra- tions of these new ammonoids and perhaps of some more material. The stratigraphically older horizon found by Mr. Wrather four miles south of Dundee contains the following ammonoids: Medlicottia n. sp. (aff. M. artiensis Gruenew.) Perrinites n. sp. (aff. P. Cumminsi White) Stacheoceras (Marathonites?) n. sp. (aff. St. Romanowsky: Karp.) Agathiceras sp. ind. (aff. A. uralicum Karp.) The fauna is entirely different from the one described by Chas. A. White and possibly slightly older. To show this we shall have to dis- cuss every one of the species a little more in detail. 184 University of Texas Bulletin Medlicottia n. sp. The shell is discoidal, very involute, flattened on the flanks and has a deep furrow on the venter. The cross-section of the whorl is sagittt- ‘form but truncated above and notched by the furrow, much higher than broad, the greatest width existing at about two-thirds of the height of the flank, counted from the umbilical border. On these lower two-thirds the flanks are nearly flat while in the upper third, the shell curves itself slightly toward the venter. On the venter are two lateral keels separated by a deep furrow; these keels are not sharp but rather strongly beaded; the nodules are rounded and separated from each other by narrow, nearly lineal, shallow depressions; the nodules are wider across the keel than in the direction of the spiral line. They occupy the same height on both keels and do not alternate as in cer- tain stages of growth of M. artiensis. The umbilicus is very narrow, its border is rounded, the umbilical wall seems to be very steep. All the specimens are casts and no ornamentation could be observed on the flanks, only on the venter the shell is sometimes preserved and the nodules show in it as well as on the cast. The suture is surprisingly simple, the septa stand very near each other, the points of the saddles touching the base of those of the next younger line. The external lobe is apparently clearly bifid, narrow but not very deep, compared with other species of Medlicottia. The first lateral lobe is less deep than the second one and bifid, the branch nearer to the umbilicus being a little stouter than the one nearer to the venter. The second lateral lobé is similar to the first but much deeper. Neither is entirely symmetrical. The seven auxiliary lobes now following are much shallower than the lateral lobes and only the first three are still clearly bifid, while the rest are simply funnel-shaped. The external saddle is divided in two very unequal branches by a bifid adventive lobe “A’’; the branch on the venter and the contiguous part of the flank which, with Noetling, we shall call Es:, is much higher and more complicate than the one nearer the umbilicus, Es». The former one is notched on its ventral flank by only one rudimentary lobe, and on the flank toward the umbilicus by two considerably deeper rudimentary lobes, which cause two rather long and not quite parallel rudimentary saddles. The adventive lobe “A’ is bifid and symmetri- Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 185 cal, but not nearly as deep as the first lateral lobe and not half as wide. It is divided into two parts by a small saddle at its base. The branch nearer to the umbilicus Es: of the external saddle is simply tongue- shaped and in its form similar to the following lateral saddles but much smaller and rather resembling one of the rudimentary saddles of Es:. The two lateral saddles are high, slender, narrow, tongue-shaped, ana _in the lower half slightly constricted. The auxiliary saddles, at least six in number, are much shorter than the lateral ones, and decrease slowly in height toward the umbilicus; the first two are still similar in form to the lateral saddles, while the next ones are triangular and rounded. A seventh and very low auxiliary saddle exists on the um- bilical border; apparently there follows another one on the umbilical wall. This species is represented by seven specimens. The similarity between this species and M. artiensis Gruenew. is rather surprising. In both species we find the strongly beaded keels, although those of M. artiensis are much broader in adult individuals, while those of our species resemble more the keels of the younger specimens of M. artiensis, as figured by Karpinsky.* The ribs on the flanks observed by this author do riot seem to exist in our species. The sutures are very similar, especially on account of the low and broad ventral branch Es: of the external saddle, with only two rudi- mentary lobes on the umbilical flank. M. artiensis has two rudi- mentary lobes on the ventral flank of Es:, while our species has only one. The adventive lobe “A” is also very similar in both species,” as well as the form of the first two lateral saddles and lobes. In both species the difference in depth between the first and second auxiliary lobes is very great, and a quite characteristic feature. The form of the lateral and auxiliary saddles and lobes is in both species practically the same. The main difference between M. artiensis and our form may be found in the siphonal lobe and the external saddle, the former being much deeper in the Russian species and the latter somewhat broader, but these differences are only specific, while the general character of both forms shows that they belong to the same group. “1Karpinsky, Amm. d. Artinsk. PI. I, fig. 1 ¢, 1 4. *Wspecially fig. I-l, pl. I of Karpinsky, while later on A does not seem to be bifid. 186 University of Texas Bulletin Still much more similar to our species is the suture of the juvenile specimens of M. Orbignyana with a diameter of about 10 mm. For example, the suture reproduced by Karpinsky (loc. cit. pl. 2, fig. I-j) can scarcely be distinguished from that of Medlicottia n. sp., the only real difference being that the Russian form has two auxiliary saddles less than ours. But the shape of Es: is practically the same, as well as the form of the lobes and saddles on the flank. We note that in the Russian juvenile form the branch Es: also shows only one rudimentary adventive lobe on the siphonal side and two on the umbilical side, the higher one being developed only as an insignificant notch, while in ours it is very little deeper. The adventive lobe A is not yet divided by a secondary saddle in the Russian form, which saddle develops in a later stage (pl. 2, fig. L-k), while in ours it is very distinct. Another difference is the greater depth of the siphonal sinus in the Russian form, but this character changes quickly and in pl. 2, fig. I-k we note a siphonal sinus similar to the one in our species. Considering the similarity of this juvenile form of M. Orbignyana we are probably justified in concluding that our species represents a form somewhat older than the Russian species, because it evidently possesses a suture which in the latter one is only found in the internal whorls where these develop from the Sicanites stage. Our new Medlicottia can be considered as the first American form found that is distinctly related to a species of the Russian Artinsk. This confirms our opinion expressed in the first part of this paper, that at least a part of the cephalopod-bearing sandstone of the Artinsk is represented in America by part of the Wichita formation. Another part may be represented by the Clear Fork formation, as we shall see farther on. Our Medlicottia is entirely different from M. Copei White, which has been found in the same county and, according to Wrather, at a little younger horizon. The branch Es:, of the external saddle, is much higher and more complicated in the species described by White, the number of the auxiliary lobes is greater, the keels are apparently less beaded,’ and the cross-section is quite different. Still there are some features in both species which show that the younger one may have J. P. Smith, Carb. Amm., p. 48, says that the keels of M. Copei are slightly beaded while White does not mention this characteristic at all. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 187 developed from our form, because in general form the lateral and auxiliary lobes and saddles are quite similar, and it may be easily thought that in the younger form the external saddle simply was a little more highly developed. Very characteristic in both species is the great difference in length between the first and second auxiliary lobes. We shall see later on that there exists a still younger form which may have developed: from M. Copei. No other species in Texas or elsewhere shows any marked relationship with our species. Perrinites n. sp. Shell moderately involute, flattened on the flanks and strongly rounded on the venter. Cross-section of the whorl elliptical, much broader than high. The greatest width is a little above the umbilical border in medium-sized specimens, but in very young ones and in the completely mature forms the greatest width is at the umbilical border. Older specimens appear to have had a much higher whorl than very young ones. Flanks flattened on the third nearest the umbilical bor- der, while in the upper two-thirds they are strongly convex and pass in a continuous curve into the rounded venter. Umbilicus moderately narrow and very deep, the umbilical border moderately sharp, slightly rounded; no real edge exists. Umbilical wall very steep and rather broad, nearly vertical. The casts are smooth, the shell shows an ornamentation by extraor- dinarily numerous broad, flat, fine, transversal ribs, which on the flank are slightly curved backwards and which on the venter fori a dis- tinct curve backward, so that their fore side appears slightly concave. The transversal ribs or lines are separated from each other by very fine, deep, extremely narrow depressions. This ornamentation is ap- parently less delicate than the similar one seen in the other species so far described. The septa stand very near each other, the saddles of the older suture touching the sides of the lobes of the next younger line. The suture is relatively quite complicate; between the sipho and the umbilical border it follows in general a straight line. The suture which shall be described here belongs to a mature specimen (height of the whorl about 25 mm.) and is the first complete one between the sipho and the umbilical seam that has been described so far. It is not essentially 188 Umiversity of Texas Bulletin different from the suture of the younger specimens down to a height of the whorl of 11 mm., while the suture of an individual of a height of the whorl of 4 mm. shows somewhat simpler elements, of the same general character. The mature suture consists, between the sipho and the umbilical border, of six lobes and five saddles; on the umbilical border we find a sixth saddle, on the umbilical wall a lobe and a saddle as well as half of another lobe, the middle line of which coincides nearly with the um- bilical seam. The siphonal lobe is extraordinarily broad and is divided into two branches by a median saddle. .This median saddle is very slender and high, its flanks are concave in the upper half and a deep rudi- mentary lobe causes the formation of a kind of shelf above a broad base, which toward both sides sends out a small but distinct rudi- mentary saddle. Each of the two branches of the siphonal lobe is nearly as wide as the first lateral lobe, but strongly asymmetrical, end- ing in a long point. The first lateral lobe is wide and deep, of a tri- angular form, if we do not consider the lateral ramificaticns; very wide at the mouth, terminating at the lower end in a long joint, which reaches a little deeper than the branches of the siphonal lobe. The second lateral lobe is very similar in all its details to the first one, but shallower and narrower. The first auxiliary lobe has stil! a general similarity with the second lateral lobe but its ramifications are con- siderably simpler; this one also ends in a long point. Stil! more sim- ple is the second auxiliary lobe, which shows nothing more than three in part rather shallow lateral incisions or notches; the point in which it ends is very short and not very sharp. The third auxihary lobe near the umbilical border is still simpler and more irregular; it shows also three lateral notches and the terminal point is short and broad, but the lobe itself is uncommonly wide in relation to its height. Still wider is the fourth auxiliary lobe, which lies entirely on the umbilical wall; it is of an irregular form, shows on the flank nearer to the um- bilical border a long point, and at the base two very shcrt points of nearly equal length. Of a fifth auxiliary lobe only one half is visible; it seems to be of triangular form, and the umbilical seam appears to go through its median line. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 189 In the description of the lobes we have not paid much attention to their ramifications, but in the discussion of the saddles, we shall indi- cate the form and number of the secondary saddles, and thus implicitly show the number and form of the secondary lobes not mentioned in the description given above. The external saddle is very high, broad at the base and tapering toward the upper end. The rest of the saddles on the flank have the same form. The external saddle ends in a somewhat oblique phyllum, and it sends further out, at different heights and in alternating posi- tions on both its flanks, three phylloidal branches or secondary saddles, which are separated by deep and asymmetrical secondary lobes ending in a rounded point; at the base of the saddle we see in different height at each side, a small, non-phylloidal branch. Of the phylloidal branches, one is directed toward the siphonal side, and two toward the umbilical side. The first lateral saddle is quite analogous in form to the external one and shows the same number of branches, but it is lower and narrower and the terminal phyllum is not quite so oblique. In general we must say that the height of the saddles decreases slowly from the external saddle to the last auxiliary saddle near the umbilical border. The second lateral saddle is also similar to the first one, but here one of the branches on the umbilical side is missing, and the terminal phyllum is still less oblique. Much more simple is the first auxiliary saddle; it also ends in a very little oblique phyllum, but on the ventral side, only one non-phylloid branch exists, while on the um- bilical side no real branch develops, although a rounded secondary saddle is indicated between two rounded notches at the base. On the contrary, the following second auxiliary saddle shows a very broad terminal phyllum, a short branch on the ventral side and a longer one on the umbilical side. The third auxiliary saddle is quite analogous to the second one, only much lower and narrower; the phyllum is on the umbilical border, the ventral branch ison the flank and the um- bilical one on the umbilical wall. The fourth auxiliary saddle is of a very simple form, asymmetrically triangular, terminating in a rounded point with the steeper flank toward the umbilical border and the less steep one toward the umbilical seam. This Perrinites is similar to P. Cumuininsi White, especially with respect to the general form and the number of the branches of the 190 University of Texas Bulletin saddles of the suture, but the saddles are much more slender in our species and the lobes are narrower. The number of the saddles and lobes is probably the same. In its external form our species distin- guishes itself from P. Cumminsi by a still wider umbilicus, more flattened flanks and a much higher whorl. But both species are en- tirely distinct from the younger species of the genus. This refers especially to the form and number of branches on the siphonal saddle, which in the older forms is much simpler than in the younger ones, as we shall see even in the description of the new species found by Beede in the Clear Fork beds. Much more complicated are all those species described from the Double Mountain beds (P. Hilli Smith, P. n. sp. of Quanah) and of the Leonard formation (P. compressus, P. widriensis). There does not seem to exist any doubt that our older forms, the one described here and P. Cumminsi, are the oldest ante- cessors known of the whole tribe of Perrinites. It should be men- tioned also, that in the younger forms cited above, the branches of the siphonal lobe are much less asymmetrical and much deeper than in the older ones. In general we can say that Perrinites is not a genus which may easily serve to distinguish horizons as all the species which belong to it are very similar to each other. The external form differs little, and the lobes have always the same general form. The genus lives through a relatively great number of quite different stratigraphical and pale- ontological horizons without changing much. Still, with care, it is possible to distinguish the different species quite clearly; but a deter- mination of age should not be based entirely on a single specimen of Perrimites, although it might help in combination with other am- monoids. At the locality four miles south of Dundee, our Perrinites is by far the most frequent form, being represented in our collection by twenty- one specimens. Nearly everywhere Perrinites has been found it is much more frequent than any other ammonoid genus. Stacheoceras n. sp. Shell very involute, slightly flattened on the flanks, well rounded on the venter. Cross-section of the whorl elliptical, nearly as wide as high, greatest width about one-third above the umbilical border. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains IQI Flanks flattened on the third nearest to the umbilical border, on the upper two-thirds the flanks pass into the venter in a continuous curve. Umbilicus very narrow and deep with a distinct though somewhat rounded border ; umbilical wall very steep, nearly vertical. Cast smooth, shell ornamented by extremely numerous and fine transversal lines, which on the flank in the region near the umbilical border are bent backward while on the upper part of the flank they are curved forward and on the venter slightly curved backward, the con- cavity being on the front side. Septa rather well separated from each other, never touching each other. Suture very simple, following a slightly curved line between the sipho and the umbilical border, and consisting there of five lobes and four saddles, a fifth lying on the umbilical border. The siphonal lobe is extraordinarily wide and is divided into two branches by a median saddle. The median saddle is high, slender, of the form of the upper part of a bottle, broader at the base than at the upper end, with slightly concave flanks. Each of the two branches of the siphonal lobe is much narrower than the first lateral lobe; each branch is asymmetrically bifid, the longer point lying nearer to the sipho; in its middle part the branch is wider than at the mouth. The first lateral lobe is much wider and a little shallower than the branches of the siphonal lobe; it is distinctly trifid, the central point being con- siderably longer than the lateral ones; in its lower half the lobe is a little wider than at the mouth. The second lateral lobe is extremely similar to the first in its form, equally symmetrically trifid, the middle point being much longer than the lateral ones; the lobe is a little shallower and narrower than the first and the flanks are only very slightly concave. The first auxiliary lobe is wide, triangular, funnel- shaped, ending in a sharp point; at the mouth it is as wide as the second lateral lobe. The second auxiliary lobe is similar to the first, but rounded at the base, with straight flanks, of triangular form, very wide at the mouth. The external saddle is very high and broad, tongue-shaped rather than club-shaped, only very slightly constricted in the middle. The first lateral saddle is similar in form to the external one but much lower, narrower, and not constricted. The second lateral saddle is slightly asymmetrical, the flank nearer to the umbilicus being less 192 University of Texas Bulletin steep than the one nearer to the venter; its form, therefore, is rather obliquely tongue-shaped. The first auxiliary saddle is broad, trian- gular, rounded at the end, at the base as broad.-as the lateral saddles. The second auxiliary saddle is only visible in two-thirds of its form; it is similar to the first one but much lower and narrower. We have described this form under the generic name of Stacheoce- ras. It certainly belongs to this genus, which probably should be con- sidered a family, as it includes a great number of very different forms. It is very possible and even probable that this species belongs to Marathonites, but this question can only be decided when the in- ternal suture will be known, or when the study of more material and of different species shows that all those Stacheoceras with very few lobes and saddles possess the characteristic internal suture of Maratho- nites. The only species which can be compared to our form is Stacheoceras Romanowskyi Karp.’ It has a very similar simple suture and shows also the bifid branches of the siphonal lobe and the trifid lateral lobes with a middle point much longer than the lateral ones. There are small differences in the suture, especially in the form and the number of the saddles, no second auxiliary saddle showing on the fiank of the Asiatic species; this is enough to demonstrate that the two forms are specifically different, although they probably belong to the same group. With Stacheoceras Walcotti White, our species has nothing in com- mon. The species of White belongs to a much more highly developed section of the genus, and resembles rather those described by Gem- mellaro from the Sicilian Sosio beds. This species also indicates the relationship between our strata and the cephalopod-bearing sandstone of the Artinsk, or at least with the nearly synchronous strata of Darwas in Bokhara, Central Asia. No similar form has as yet been found in higher strata. Only Stacheoce- ras pygmacuin Gemm.” could possibly be compared with it, but the branches of the siphonal lobe are not bifid. The species does not seem to be very rare at the locality four miles south of Dundee, our collection containing four specimens. 1Karpinsky, Amm. d. Artinsk, p. 77, pl. V, fig. 6. *?Gemmellaro, Calc. c, Fusulina, p. 39, pl. VIII, fig, 15-17. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 193 ‘ A gathiceras sp. ind. In our collection is a fragment belonging to A gathiceras which 1s sufficiently preserved for a description. Shell very involute, slightly flattened on the flanks, especially toward the umbilicus, strongly rounded on the venter. Cross-section of the whorl elliptical, broader than high. Umbilicus very narrow, umbilical wall apparently rather deep, umbilical border rounded. Flanks flat- tened on the third nearest to the umbilicus, the rest being well rounded and curving continuously toward the venter. Greatest width near the umbilical border. Ornamentation on the mold consists of fine and sharp spiral ribs, about 20 to 22 between the sipho and the umbilical border, separated from each other by shallow, wide furrows with rounded bottom, much wider than the ribs. Septa rather well separated, never touching each other. Suture very simple, following a line slightly curved forward, and consisting between the sipho and the umbilical border of four lobes, with a fifth on the umbilical border, and four saddles. The external lobe is very broad and divided into two branches by a high median saddle; each of these branches is wider than the first lateral lobe, slightly pointed at the base, below the middle a little wider than at the mouth. The median saddle is high, slender, and in the middle rather well constricted. The first lateral lobe is a little deeper than the branches of the siphonal lobe, it is symmetrical, slightly pointed at the bottom, wider in its lower third than at the mouth. The second lateral lobe is very similar in form to the first one, but a little shallower and perhaps also narrower. The first auxiliary lobe is asymmetrical, its flank nearest to the venter being convex while the flank toward the umbilicus is concave. The second auxiliary lobe on the umbilical border is apparently funnel-shaped, but not entirely visible. The external saddle is very high and slender, higher than the median saddle and also a little higher than the first lateral saddle, strongly constricted at the base, club-shaped at the upper end. The first lateral saddle is very similar to the external one but lower and nar- rower. The second lateral saddle is asymmetrical, its flank nearest to the venter is concave, the flank nearer to the umbilicus is convex; the 194 Umiversity of Texas Bulletin upper end is club-shaped; this saddle is lower than the first lateral saddle. The first auxiliary saddle is very broad and asymmetrical, its flank nearest to the venter being concave, while the upper part and the flank nearer to the umbilicus form a wide, rather regular curve. The fragmentary state of the only specimen found at four miles south of Dundee does not allow a comparison with other species, especially as most of the species belonging to Agathiceras are very similar even in their suture. Of course, in general this species is similar to A. Suesst and A. uralicum, but the state of preservation does not allow of drawing any conclusions. The species must be very rare at the locality. The collection of ammonoids which was made by Dr. Beede in Run- nels County comes from a hard dolomite; all the specimens are casts or molds, and it is often impossible to separate the fossils from the rock. The state of preservation is thus very bad, but in most cases we are able to get a good idea of the form and sutures of the am- monoids. The little fauna consists of the following species: Medlicottia n. sp. I. Medlicottia n. sp. II. Perrinites n. sp. Gastrioceras n. sp. This fauna is also entirely different from the one described by White as well as from the one collected by Wrather and discussed above. This does not surprise us, as it is considerably younger than these. To demonstrate this we shall discuss also these species somewhat in detail. Medlicottia n. sp. I Shell discoidal, very involute, flattened on the flanks, with a rather deep and moderately broad furrow on the venter, and two lateral keels. Cross-section of the whorl saggittiform, much higher than broad, greatest width at about three-fourths of the height of the flanks above the umbilical border, truncated on the venter and notched by the furrow. The flanks near the umbilicus, up to three-quarters of their height, are nearly flat, while the upper quarter is rather curved toward the venter. Both borders of the venter are formed by Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 195 sharp keels, which are not beaded at all, and are separated by a mod- erately wide and deep spiral furrow. The umbilicus is not preserved in any of our specimens. No ornamentation is visible on the casts. The suture is in general very similar to that of Medlicottia n. sp. II, but shows also some very characteristic differences. The septa are very near each other, the ends of the saddles touching the base of those of the next younger line. The suture follows a slightly curved line, a very characteristic feature of it being that the lobes become very shallow from the second auxiliary lobe, although this feature is not quite so pronounced as in Medlicottia n. sp. II. The siphonal lobe is long and narrow and clearly bifid, the small median saddle is relatively high, pointed, and narrow; the lobe reaches down to about the height of the small rudimentary saddle which divides the adventive lobe “A” on the umbilical flank of Es: into two parts. ‘The first lateral lobe is less deep than the second lateral one. It has an extremely characteristic form. A club-shaped, high, narrow, secondary saddle, constricted near its base, divides it in two branches of which the one nearest to the venter is considerably longer and more strongly curved than the one nearer to the umbilicus; this latter one is again divided into two branches by a short, stout, tri- angular saddle, a complication which as yet never has been observed in another species of this genus. In both of our specimens, this bifid branch is clearly visible. The second lateral lobe is deeper than all the rest of the lobes; it is bifid, the branch nearer to the venter being a little broader than the one nearer to the umbilicus; in depth they are scarcely different. The first auxiliary lobe is very similar to the sec- ond lateral one, but the branch nearer to the umbilicus is a little longer than the one toward the venter. On the specimens we possess only five auxiliary lobes are preserved; all of them are bifid and the branch nearer the umbilicus is always longer than the one nearer the venter, but the difference is small. The auxiliary lobes are much shallower than the two lateral ones and toward the umbilicus decrease uniformly in depth. How large the number of auxiliary lobes really is in this ‘species cannot be determined with our material, but the number must be rather large. The external saddle is very high and relatively broad; a deep and bifid adventive lobe “A” divides it into two unequal parts. The 196 University of Texas Bulletin branch Es., lying on the venter, and the flank, is considerably higher and more complicate than the one nearer the umbilicus, Es:. On its flank near the ventral furrow Es: is notched by five rudimentary lobes directed obliquely downward; on the flank nearer to the umbilicus it shows five rudimentary lobes which are much deeper and in a position nearly perpendicular to the spiral line. The lowest shows a slight swell- ing in the middle of its bottom; the bottom of the rest is rounded. At _ the end of Es: two lateral and very shallow notches produce a button- like point. We count, therefore, altogether, ten, or if we count the two notches, twelve rudimentary lobes on a specimen which has about the same size as the one of Medlicottia n. sp. II, the suture of which will be described later on. The rudimentary saddles lying between the rudimentary lobes on the flank near the ventral furrow are very short and rounded; those on the opposite flank are very long, the longest one being the lowest which forms the limit of the adventive lobe ‘‘A’’; the next higher one is much shorter and the following decrease rapidly in length, this flank of Es: taking thus the form of one side of a pyramid tapering upward. The adventive lobe “A” is much larger than the rudimentary ones, it is divided by a slender and rather long secondary saddle in two parts, the lower one of which is deeper than the higher one; the lobe is much narrower at its mouth than at the bottom. The following branch, Es», of the external saddle is simply tongue-shaped, but a slight lateral swelling on each side indicates an inclination to- ward a trilobate form; this saddle is high, slender and slightly con- stricted near the base. It is much shorter and narrower than the first lateral saddle and leans strongly over toward the first lateral lobe. The first lateral saddle is much larger than Es:, shows a slight lateral swelling on each side without becoming trilubate; it is rather tongue- shaped, high, slender and well constricted near its base. The second lateral saddle is very similar to the first-one, but a little higher; in the same way, the first auxiliary saddle is only a little shorter than the second lateral one. These two also show the lateral swelling on both sides, but the constriction lies a little higher above the base than in the first lateral saddle. The next three auxiliary saddles which can be seen in one of our specimens are very similar to the lateral ones, only less high. Their height decreases slowly in the direction toward the Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 197 umbilicus. The exact number of auxiliary saddles cannot be observed but is certainly great. Only two specimens of this form have been found at the locality. As the species is very similar to the next one, we shall defer a discus- sion of its relationships until we have described Medlicottia n. sp. IT, Medlicottia n. sp. II. ‘Shell discoidal, very involute, flanks very little curved, nearly flat in the portion near the umbilicus, venter truncated and provided with a deep and wide furrow, limited on both sides by a sharp keel. Cross- section of the whorl sagittiform, much higher than broad, greatest width in the middle, truncated at the ventral part and notched there by the furrow. The inner half of the flank near the umbilicus is almost flat, while the outer one is rather regularly curved toward the ventral keel. The borders of the venter are formed by sharp keels which do not show any tubercles or beads. The spiral furrow on the venter is wide and deep. The umbilicus is very narrow, the umbilical wall seems to be narrow and steep, the umbilical border is rounded. All the specimens are casts and do not show any ornamentation. The suture is that of a typical Medlicottia. Between the sipho and the umbilicus it follows a curved line. A very characteristic feature of it is that the auxiliary lobes are considerably shallower than the two lateral ones and the first auxiliary. The septa stand very near together, the points of the saddles touching the base of those of the next younger line. The following description refers to a specimen with a whorl about 30 mm. high. The external lobe is clearly bifid, but the form of the siphonal saddle could not be entirely recognized; the lobe is moderately deep, and reaches down to the base of the secondary saddle, which divides the adventive lobe “A” in two parts. The first lateral lobe is bifid and asymmetrically oblique, the branch nearest to the venter being con- siderably longer and stouter and much more curved than the one lying toward the umbilicus; it is shallower than the second lateral lobe. The second lateral lobe is deeper than all the rest of the lobes, bifid, the branch nearer to the venter being a little deeper than the one nearer to the umbilicus. The first auxiliary lobe is similar to the second lateral one although a little shallower but the branch nearer to the venter is 198 University of Texas Bulletin somewhat shorter than the one nearer to the umbilicus. The follow- ing ten auxiliary lobes are much shallower than the two lateral and first auxiliary ones. The first four are still bifid, while the last six seem to be rounded at the bottom or only slightly pointed. A twelfth auxiliary lobe lies apparently on the umbilical wall. The number of the auxiliary lobes and saddles varies with the age of the whorls; a specimen with a whorl 12 mm. high shows only six to seven auxiliary lobes and the corresponding saddles; but here also the first five are clearly bifid. In the first auxiliary lobe of this small individual the branch nearest to the umbilicus is clearly longer than the one nearer to the venter. In the bifid auxiliary lobes the branch nearer to the umbilicus is much longer than the other one, not only in the small but also in large whorls; the lobes are thus entirely asymmetrical. The external saddle is very high and relatively broad, an adventive lobe “A” divides it in two unequal parts. The branch Es:, lying on the venter and the contiguous portion of the flank is much higher and complicate than the one nearer to the umbilicus. The ventral flank of Es: is notched by four oblique rudimentary lobes, the opposite flank by four much deeper ones, the lowest of which shows a slight swelling in the middle of the bottom. At the end of Es: very shallow notches at both sides produce a button-like point. Therefore we count on Es:, eight, or if we count the two notches, ten rudimentary lobes. The rudimentary saddles between these lobes are very short and rounded on the ventral flank but very long on the umbilical flank of the branch, the largest being the lowest, which forms the limit of the adventive lobe “A”; the next higher is shorter, and the following ones decrease rapidly in size, this side of Es: imitating a flank of a tapering pyramid. The adventive lobe “A” is quite conspicuous, oblique, strongly bifid, a relatively high and rather stout, somewhat triangular secondary sad- dle dividing it in two parts. The branch Es» of the external saddle is tongue-shaped with very slight lateral swellings, constricted at the hase; it leans strongly over to the first lateral lobe and is much shorter and narrower than the first lateral saddle. The first lateral saddle is simply tongue-shaped, but shows in its outline an inclination to be- come trilobate; it is high, slender, narrow with slight lateral swellings near the middle, constricted at the base and in general quite similar Permo-C arboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 199 to the second lateral saddle, only a little lower. The second lat- eral saddle is high, slender, nearly symmetrical, with slight lateral swellings on both sides, but at different heights, which causes an in- dication of trilobate form. The first auxiliary saddle is very similar to the first one and nearly as high. The ten auxiliary saddles visible on the flank are much shorter than the two lateral ones and decrease in height toward the umbilicus. The first three are similar in form to the lateral saddles, while the rest have a tongue-shaped form. This species is quite common at the locality; in our collection it is represented by more than a dozen specimens. Both our Medlicottia belong to the same group, notwithstanding the exceptional form of the first lateral lobe in one of them. They have a certain relationship with M. Copei White, although they are specifically distinct. While our forms have sharp keels those of the older species are slightly beaded. The suture is also somewhat distinct although the ground. plan is similar. The main differences are the greater number of rudimentary saddles and lobes, and of auxiliary saddles and lobes in the individuals from Runnels County, notwith- standing that the specimen figured by White is larger than most of . : those from Runnels County. There are still more differences in the details, as for example, the greater width of the first lateral saddle in the species from the old Military Crossing; the non-existence of a real secondary saddle in the adventive lobe “A” and the rounded bottom of the lowest rudimentary lobe on the umbilical flank of Es: in White’s species. Nevertheless, both our species and M. Coper belong certainly to the same group of Medlicottia or at least to groups not very distinct. We must not forget that beaded keels are often found in the smaller whorls of species which have distinctly sharp keels in the larger ones (M. Whitneyi n. sp., M. Orbignyana Vern.). The nearest relative of our species, and belonging certainly to the same group, is M. Orbign- yana Vern.’ The similarity in the general form of the lobes is cer- tainly surprising; we see the same general development of the external saddle and the lateral and auxiliary ones even down to details, as are the forms of the rudimentary lobes both on the umbilical and-on the ventral flank of the branch Es:, the form of the adventive lobe, the two laterals, etc. There is also the distinguishing feature of the sudden 1Karpinsky, Amm. d. Artinsk, p. 32, pl. 11, fig. 1. 200 University of Texas Bulletin shallowing of the lobes beginning with the second auxiliary lobe. The character of the saddle is also very similar, especially the tongue-like shape with the lateral swellings at different heights. We can distin- guish our species from the Russian one only by minor details, as the greater width of Es: in M. Orbignyana, the somewhat narrower lat- eral and auxiliary saddles, the higher secondary saddles which divide the lobes, the narrower venter, etc., in our species; but the general form and the character of the suture are certainly surprisingly similar. Thus we find in the lower Permo-carboniferous of Central Texas another form which is intimately related to a species from the Artinsk, and we may say that this latter formation corresponds to at least two different formations or horizons of our region, (the Wichita at least in part) and the Clear Fork formations. If we compare now the different forms of Medlicottia which have been found in Central Texas, we see that they probably constitute only different stages of development in a single tribe. The relationship between the Medlicottia from Runnels County and M. Copei is quite evident. There is scarcely a doubt that the one developed from the other, although this has to be proven later on when the development of the lobes in both species can be studied. But there is even a pos- sibility that the older form of Medlicottia collected by Wrather at four miles south from Dundee in Baylor County, also may be ante- cessor of the later ones. If we compare the development of the sut- ure in M. Orbignyana Vern., we see that at the stage where the Medli- cottia suture develops from the Sicanites stage (compare fig. te and 1j, in Karpinsky’s work), which corresponds to a height of the whorl of not quite seven millimeters, this suture is surprisingly similar to that of our Medlicottia from four miles south of Dundee. In this stage the keels are also strongly beaded, while later on they become sharp. This circumstance allows us to conclude that there may possi- bly be a similar development in our own species and that the three different forms of Medlicottia discussed here may belong to the same tribe and constitute simply different stages of development. We do not know yet in what relationship M. artiensis and M. Orbignyana stand, and if they are found always at the same horizon, but even if this were the case, we should not be surprised as it is very possi- ble that only part of the tribe developed a more differentiated suture, Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 201 and that another part of it persisted in the more archaic form through several horizons. We shall presently see that such development can also be shown to exist in the species of Perrinites in Central Texas. Medlicottia Copei has been cited from higher horizons in Central Texas, but as long as the species is not described in detail nor figured, we cannot draw a conclusion, as these determinations may only be provisional and a close study of those forms may show that in reality they belong to different species. The two new species from Trans-Pecos country, described in this paper (M.Whitneyiand M. Burckhardti) belong certainly to a different group. They are much more similar to some Sicilian species from the Sosio limestone and show an entirely different form of the saddles, which are distinctly trilobate. We see that at least in Texas it seems to be possible to distinguish the different horizons in the Permo-carboniferous by the different form of development of Medlicottia and that possibly Haug and Noet- ling may not have been so far off of the truth, when they contended that such was the case generally; although this idea has been declared to be wrong by several distinguished authors. If we take into account the development of Medlicottia in higher stages of the Permian and the Triassic, including also Episageceras, with the extension of our knowledge of those forms, we may find that there is a very definite order of development in this tribe of the ammonoids. When Haug’ first conceived the idea of subdividing the Permian into zones based on the different groups of Medlicottia, our knowledge of these forms was still very restricted and it therefore was too early to undertake this task; but at the end it may be shown that Haug’s idea was en- tirely right, and that he only did not have sufficient material, at that time. Perrimites n. sp. Unfortunately, the numerous casts and molds collected by Beede are so fragmentary and badly preserved that a complete description of, the species remains impossible, for the moment; even the suture can be observed only partly and on different specimens. But on the ‘Haug, Et. s. 1, Goniatites, p. 70. 202 Umiversity of Texas Bulletin other side this species is so characteristic that even an incomplete description is of a certain value, the more so as better preserved speci- mens may be found at other localities. The species is extremely com- mon in Runnels County, more than twenty specimens existing in Dr. Beede’s collection. Although our form is extremely similar externally to the one found by Wrather in a much deeper horizon, it can be easily distinguished from it by its more complicated suture. Our species shows the following features: Shell semi-globular, rather involute, less curved on the flanks than on the venter. Cross-section of the whorl elliptical, a little broader than high, greatest width about one fourth above the umbilical border. The flanks are slightly flattened; or, better said, they are very slightly curved but pass higher on in an uninterrupted curve into the strongly rounded venter. The umbilicus is narrow and deep, the umbilical border is rounded, the umbilical wall steep and rather broad. No or- namentations could be observed on the casts or molds. The septa stand very near together, but do not seem to touch each other. In none of the specimens could the whole suture between the sipho and the umbilical border be observed, only the elements from the siphonal lobe to the first lateral saddle being clearly visible. The siphonal lobe is very wide, a median saddle dividing it into two branches. This median saddle is very high and slender, and shows two branches on each side, which are separated by deep secon- dary lobes and give the saddle the appearance of being extremely slen- der. Each of the branches of the siphonal lobe is rather narrow, a little wider at the mouth, its position is somewhat oblique with respect to the line of symmetry of the siphonal saddle, and rather ramified by the branches of the siphonal and the external saddle. The first lateral lobe is wider and a little deeper than each branch of the siphonal one; it ends in a long and sharp point and widens considerably toward the mouth. The branches of the external and first lateral saddles cause a number of ramifications of this lobe. The second lateral and the first auxiliary lobe seem to be entirely analogous to the first lateral in their form. . The external saddle is very high, broad at the base, and fairly regularly tapering toward the point. It ends in a somewhat oblique phyllum and at different heights sends out on both sides alternatingly Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 203 three branches to the ventral and three others to the umbilical side. In medium-sized specimens only the upper side branch is phylloid, but the two next ones show at least an inclination to a phylloid termina- tion, while the lower ones rather seem to be somewhat pointed. The first lateral saddle is entirely analogous in its form to the external saddle, being only a little lower and narrower. Also the following saddles seem to have a similar form to the first ones. In one specimen part of the internal suture could be observed. We see there the characteristic deep and slender anti-siphonal lobe and the extremely high and slender internal saddle which ends in an ob- lique phyllum, the first lateral lobe is similar to the anti-siphonal one but less deep and quite asymmetrical. These internal lobes and saddles correspond in their construction entirely to those of the type of the genus Perrinites vidriensis, described in another part of this paper. Our species is similar to that occurring in the Wichita, found by Wrather and described above. It is perhaps a little stouter and more globular, certainly much more involute. The ventral part is flatter in our species. Much greater is the difference in the suture. In our species the siphonal saddle has two long branches on each side, while in the other species it has only a narrow shelf-above the base. Sim- ilarly, the external and the first lateral saddle of our species show a greater number of side branches. Very different is the form of the siphonal lobe, each branch of which in the older form is much shorter and stouter, and also much more asymmetrical than in the species de- scribed here. The other saddles are similar to those of the older form but more ramified. Similar differences we find between this species and Perrinites Cum- minsi White, the lobes and saddles of our species being in general more ramified than those of the older form; another distinguishing feature is that the saddles of our species are much higher and the lobes much deeper and more slender than in P. Cumminsi. On the other hand, if we compare our species with specimens of higher forms, as P. Hilli Smith, P. compressus, and P. vidriensis, we find that the suture of our species is very much simpler, the ramifica- tions of the saddles and lobes in those younger forms being much more numerous and varied than in the specimens from Runnels County. Especially different is the form of the siphonal saddle and the first 204 University of Texas Bulletin lateral lobe, although the ground plan in all the species of the genus is evidently the same, and shows the near relationship between them. Evidently we have here another example of development of one tribe in different horizons, the oldest form showing the simplest su- tures, while the youngest have the most complicated. But the differ- ences are much more difficult to describe, because the external form of the species varies very little, and the suture is more uniform, as for example in Medlicottia. The differences are mainly found in the secondary elements of the suture and only very close observations show that a real development exists. There may even be recurrences in higher horizons, as is shown by the relatively simple suture of the Perrinites found in the high horizon of Quanah. No Perrinites has been found elsewhere than in Texas; this genus therefore cannot serve to correlate our horizons with those of, other countries. We shall discuss this point later on, and refer also to what has been said in an earlier chapter. Gastrioceras n. sp. Shell discoidal, very evolute, whorls very little embracing, generally covering only the ventral part of the next older one, very slowly grow- ing in height in the greater part of the inner whorls. Cross-section of the inner whorls much broader than high, nearly forming a rect- angle or a trapeze with rounded edges; in the larger whorls broader than high, but nearly semi-circular, in the largest whorl apparently trapezoidal. On the inner whorls the flanks are only slightly convex and inclined toward the umbilicus while the venter is flattened, thus causing the cross-section to become somewhat angular. In whorls of medium size, flanks and venter are rather regularly rounded, no edge existing between the border and the flanks. In the largest whorl the flanks are nearly flat, strongly inclining toward the venter which is narrow and slightly rounded. The umbilicus is very wide and shal- low, the umbilical border is strongly rounded and passes in a contin- uous curve into the narrow and not very steep umbilical wall; only in the largest whorls the umbilical border is more pronounced in conse- quence of the different relative position of the umbilical wall and the flank. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 205 The specimen is preserved as a cast but shows a characteristic sculp- ture, which is different on the inner and the outer whorls. On the inner whorls we find on the flank numerous rather thick transversal ribs which commence at the umbilical seam, about forty to the whorl; these are thinner near the umbilical seam and thicken toward the rounded edge between the flank and the venter, where they disappear suddenly. They are slightly inclined forward. On the venter we find extremely fine transversal ribs or lines, nearly invisible to the naked eye, which are strongly curved forward and separated by very fine depressions; their number is at least twice or three times as high as the ribs on the flanks. On the whorls of medium size, the ribs on the flanks begin to disappear, becoming shorter as well as thinner. They bifurcate toward the venter, which thus shows a much greater number of fine rounded transversal ribs not curved forward, but straight and separated by shallow furrows with rounded bottom, al- most as wide as the ribs. The ornamentation of the largest whorl could not be observed; it appears to be smooth, but that is frequently the case in casts of Gastrioceras, even where the shell shows strong spiral ornamentations. In our case no spiral sculpture could be ob- served on any of the whorls, although such are nearly always present on Permo-carboniferous Gastrioceras; but they may possibly have existed on the shell of our specimens. The septa are rather distant from each other on medium-sized whorls, while on the smaller ones they are much nearer together, the flanks of the saddles touching the base of those of the next younger line. The mature suture is very simple. It consists between the sipho and the umbilical seam of three lobes and two saddles. The siphonal lobe is very wide and is divided into two branches by a stout and not very high median saddle. This saddle is not more than half as high as the external saddle, broad at the base and slightly tapering toward the upper end. [ach of the branches of the siphonal lobe is tongue-shaped, and ends in a sharp point. The first lateral lobe is a little less deep than the branches of the siphonal one and a little broader than either of them; it is tongue-shaped ending in a sharp point. The second lateral lobe is much shallower and a little narrower than the first one, but similar in form, terminating also in a sharp point. 206 Umiversity of Texas Bulletin The external saddle is twice as high as the median one, rather slender, and rounded at the end. The first lateral saddle is similar in form to the external one, but stouter and shorter. The second lateral saddle is only half visible, of more triangular form. The internal lobes are very simple. They consist, between the anti- siphonal line of symmetry and the umbilical seam, of two lobes, one saddle and the larger half of the second lateral saddle of the external suture. The anti-siphonal lobe is lanceolate, very long and narrow, ending in a long and sharp point; the internal saddle is very high, slender and a little.inclined toward the anti-siphonal lobe. The first lateral lobe is much shorter than the anti-siphonal, and slightly asym- metrical, the anti-siphonal flank being steeper than the umbilical one. The next saddle is considerably lower than the first one and much broader, the internal flank being much steeper than the one on the other side of the umbilical seam. Unfortunately, this part is not quite easy to recognize, but there does not seem to be room for doubt that there is only one very broad saddle between the internal saddle and the first lateral saddle on the external part of the suture. This species represents a rather uncommon form of Gastrioceras. I do not refer to the sculpture or the involution, but to the suture. Gen- erally, Gastrioceras shows between the sipho and the external border, only the siphonal and one lateral lobe, while in our species we observe two lateral lobes. The first lateral saddle is commonly very low and different in shape from the external one, while in our species it is nearly identical, in its form. The general outline of our external su- ture resembles more that of Paralegoceras than that of Gastrioceras. Evidently we have a similar case to that of G. russiense Zwetaev where the second lateral (or suspensive lobe) also lies on the flank. But the number of lobes and saddles as well as the sculpture shows that our species undoubtedly belong to Gastrioceras. On account of the deficient preservation of the sculpture and the exceptional form of the suture, no comparison can be made with species from other localities. Conclusions. The new faunas discussed here allow us to draw some conclusions with respect to the different horizons of ammonoids in the Permo- Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 207 carboniferous of Central Texas and their relations to other strata of the earth. In the Permo-carboniferous of Central Texas we know at the present time at least five different horizons characterized by am- monoids. All of these have in common the preponderance of Perrin- ites belonging to different species. The succession of these horizons is as follows: 5. Horizon of Quanah with large Perrinites and large Gastrioceras. 4. Horizon of Salt Croton Creek with Perrinites Hilli and undescribed Popan- oceras, Medlicottia, ete. 3. Horizon of Runnels County, with Perrinites n. sp., Medlicottia n. sp. I, M. n. sp. II, Gastrioceras n. sp. 2. ‘Horizon of the old Military Crossing of the Wichita, with Perrinites Cum- minsi, Medlicottia Conei, Stacheoceras Walcotti, Paralegoceras Baylorense 1. Horizon of Dundee with Perrinites n. sp., Medlicottia n. sp, Agathiceras sp. ind., Stacheoceras n. sp. While the youngest horizon has been found rather high up in the Double Mountain formation, the lowest one seems to be still far above the limit between the Carboniferous and the Permo-carboniferous. Possibly there exists another horizon near San Angelo, Tom Green County, but only a Medlicottia has been cited from this locality, which is probably below the Runnels County locality. We have seen that those genera which are found in several of these five horizons show a distinct development of species from simpler to higher stages of the suture; these genera are principally Perrimites and Medlicottia and in second line, Stacheoceras. If we now extend our comparisons to the Trans-Pecos region of West Texas, we find that our lowest horizons 1 and 2 have not yet been identified there, while on the other hand, the lowest horizon with Uddenites of the Glass Mountains has not yet been found in Central Texas. But our horizon 3 may possibly correspond with the lower part of the Leonard formation (horizon of Perrinites) ; at least the difference in age can- not be very great. Our upper horions 4 and 5 certainly correspond exactly to the horizon of Perrinites vidriensis or the upper Leonard formation. The Word formation is certainly younger than any of the ammonoid-bearing horizons so far found in Central Texas. The species of Medlicottia described from the Leonard and Word forma- tions are clearly much younger and higher developed forms than those found in our horizons 1, 2, and 3. They are forms with distinctly trilo- 208 University of Texas Bulletin bate saddles as are most of the Sicilian species and M. primas Waag. of India. Our two lowest horizons, 1 and 2, probably correspond to some part of the Hess limestone in which no larger fauna of ammonoids has yet been found. If we now extend our comparisons to strata of the old world, we find for the first time distinct signs of relationship between a horizon of Texas and the cephalopod-bearing sandstone of the Artinsk. In our horizon 1 we found a Medlicottia which is nearly related to M. artien- sis; in our horizons 2 and 3 we see a Medlicottia very similar to Medli- cottia Orbignyana. In horizon 1 we also found a Stacheoceras nearly related to St. Romanowski, while horizon 2 contains a Stacheoceras with a much higher developed suture showing a great number of auxiliary lobes and saddles. These forms begin to develop in the ceph- alopod-bearing sandstone of the Artinsk, but are much more fre- quent in the younger Sosio limestone of Sicily, and in the correspond- ing Word formation of Trans-Pecos Texas. The Medlicottia in horizon 3 is so similar to M/. Orbignyana that one is nearly inclined to unite them in one species. All this induces us to regard our horizons I to 3 as more or less corresponding in age to the cephalopod-bearing sandstone of the Artinsk. This is entirely in accordance with what we have found in the Trans-Pecos region. There we considered that the rocks contain- ing Prothalassoceras are probably the equivalent of the Artinsk, while the underlying horizon with Uddenites is certainly older than the Artinsk, and may correspond to the period of erosion preceding it. But we must not forget to mention that in the Artinsk one form is missing which in Texas is the most frequent one. I refer to Perrinites. No species belonging to the Cyclolobinae has been found in the Russian Artinsk; the first forms belonging to this group were discovered in the Sicilian Sosio limestone, certainly a little younger than the Rus- sian strata. But it seems that as yet Perrinites has to be considered as a local Texan branch of the Cyclolobinae, and J. Perrin Smith has first advanced the theory that this branch developed from the American genus Slumardites, a theory which has been proven right in the present paper. It might thus be possible that the tribe of Perrinites developed in America and from there migrated to the oceans of the Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 209 old world. We find a very intimate relative of Perrinites in the Sici- lian Hyattoceras, which may very well have been derived from the Texan form. Another genus which may have developed from Per- rimites is Waagenoceras, which is found in Sicily, together with Hyat- toceras and in Texas in a horizon overlying the zone of Perrinites. It cannot yet be decided if Perrinites persists still in the zone of Waagen- oceras, although I have seen some ammonoids from the Delaware beds of the Guadalupe Mountains which look suspiciously like Perrinites; unfortunately I have not had an opportunity to study the suture. In India we do not find either Perrinites nor Waagenoceras, but a much higher developed form of the Cyclolobinae, the type of the genus Cyclolobus, and quite a number of species nearly related to it. Karpinsky was surprised by the non-existence of any Cyclolobinae in the cephalopod-bearing sandstone of the Artinsk of the Ural, as well as of Darwas in Bokhara, Central Asia. This led him to suppose that the Artinsk sandstone might be a little older than the Sosio lime- stone. But he justly remarks that those Cyclolobinae may simply not have developed in the Ural and may belong to a more southern province. Now we see that in the strata in Texas which most probably represent the cephalopod-bearing sandstone of the Artinsk, Cyclolo- binae exist in great numbers; in fact, are the most frequent fossils. But these types are not known in other parts of the world. I think it would be somewhat dangerous to suppose that the Cyclolo- binae prove the existence of a southern province with a different fauna from that of the more northern regions. This might lead us to the supposition of climatic belts or provinces, for which I do not see suff- cient reason at the present time, taking into account our limited know- ledge of the marine fauna of the Permo-carboniferous and the Per- mian. We must always keep in mind that the faunas so rich in species and genera described from these formations occur in very few local- ities which are separated by extremely long distances. For the time being, I think it would be much more prudent to suppose that the Cyclolobinae originated in America, that they then migrated in part to southern Europe, and still later to the waters of the Australasian Ocean. San Antonio, Texas, DR. EMIL BOSE. August, 1918. SnoleyImMoqiey) aq} jo UOZIOY BVULIeseMYOS snoleyimoqiey) aq} JO u0z “OY VULIAseMYIS UOl}BUMI10J ODSID sovueppn ToOlemMIo; Ayyuatoymooun Jo u0Zz11O dureoy [om AyULLoyUONu ‘divy Wnorpein “y ‘ype ‘ds svleoiqyesy “diey 1éysmourmoy UOl}eULIOJ ‘ serooosseleuiOld | gorneuaos ssp |S “We “ds “u seiedooepeIg “UenIH sapung ‘T) 4UeqTV-eIIYOIM Jo WoZzWoH sIsMoTWe “WW ‘Ye “ds ‘WU eNIODITpeTW TsulMMND ‘q ‘Ye ‘ds “uU soeqyUldeg ‘OUUM oSuaI0[ -keq SBlad0SeTV1eg ‘PUA TOTTRM SUIYOIM Jo: (ysuINy ) se1o00eqoeIs ‘OMYUAA 1edoQ ¥I}}00|SUISSOID AIVHTA apapeutior ‘semieqd pue [eiQ ey} IOMO] “TIPOW ‘SUYA ISUIMUIND sezUlded : 410, IRIID Jo ejeijs Suriveq podoreydap ‘ds ‘u sezeo WOTVULIOJ -OLIISeyH ‘UIaA eUBAUSIQIO ‘"W ‘ye| 4}UN0D sjouuny ¢€ paeuoery “ds ‘U BI}ODITPEW “ds “U SazluTIIEg i reddn ‘SIVOOI[PeW pue se1eoouvdog “19 W010 ea: éxsurey 5 peqiiosepun ‘WyWg MPH seyueg Hee EB ay} jo oyWmofoq szeddQ SOPULI19 I UOTVUIOJ Jo wOztIoH ‘ds ‘U sere00lijsey “ds ‘UW seqUliieg yeueng ‘g/treyunoy etqnog SVIQIOMOSVE AA OUIeIeq JO PMOYSETHI] O1SOG jo woztr0fy UWOTVULLOJ PLO AA syUeTeaA nda suozlloH SUOT}VUIO,T STISSOT suozlioH SUOTIVUMIO semieg pue [eig ‘ATIOIS UOIs9Y Sodvdg-suUBLL SBxa], [e1}UeD ‘AadOUND GNV SVXHL LSHM AO HSOHL GNV SVXHL IVULNAD JO SCIONOWNVY HLIM SNOZINOH FZHL NAEMLAGA NOILVIGUUOD AHL DNIMOHS ATIEAVL PLATES Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 213 Plate I Fig. 1-8. Fig. 9-23. Fig. 24-40.. .Daraelites texanus nov. sp.—Zone of Uddenites (Wolfeamp forma- tion.) —Wolf Camp, Glass Mountains. Fig. 1, side view; fig. 2, front; fig. 3, venter. Natural size. Fig. 4, side view; fig. 5, front; fig. 6, venter, of the same specimen ; twice natural size. iS Fig. 7, external suture of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 8, internal suture of the inner whorl of the same specimen; four times natural size. .Uddewites Schucherti nov. gen. nov. sp.—Zone of Uddemtes (Wolf- camp formation) —Wolf Camp, Glass Mountains. Fig. 9, side view; fig. 10, front; fig. 11, venter; natural size. Fig. 15, side view; fig. 16, front; fig. 17, venter, of the same speci- men; twice natural size. Fig. 12, side view; fig. 13, front; fig. 14, venter; natural size. Fig. 18, side view; fig. 19, front; fig. 20, venter, of the same speci- men; twice natural size. Fig. 21, external suture, not quite mature, taken from specimen il- lustrated in Fig. 9-11, 15-17; twice natural size. Fig. 22, external suture, mature, taken from specimen illustrated in fig. 12-14, 18-20; twice natural size. Fig. 23, internal suture of the next smaller whorl of specimen illus- trated in fig. 9-11, 15-17, 21; four times natural size. Uddenites minor nov. gen. nov. sp.—Zone of Uddenites (Wolfcamp formation).— Wolf Camp, Glass Mountains. Fig. 24, mature external suture of specimen illustrated in fig. 27-29 and fig. 38-40; twice natural size. Fig. 25, mature suture of specimen illustrated in fig. 30-33, 35-37; twice natural size. Fig. 26, immature external suture, Pronorites stage of inner whorl of specimen illustrated in fig. 32 and 34; four times natural size. ‘Fig. 27, front; fig. 28, venter; fig. 29, side view; natural size. Fig. 38, venter; fig. 39, front; fig. 40, side view, of the same speci- men; twice natural size. Fig. 30, side view; fig. 31, venter; fig. 33, front; natural size. Fig. 35, side view; fig. 36, front; fig. 37, venter, of the same speci- men; twice natural size. Fig. 32, side view, showing faint radial ribs on lower righthand side; natural size. Fig. 34, side view of the same specimen ; twice natural sixe. 214 Fig. 41-45a. Fig. 46-52... University of Texas Bulletin. Medlicottia Whitneyi nov. sp—Zone of Perrinites (Leonard forma- tion).—Two miles west-northwest from Iron Mountain, Glass Mountains. Fig. 41, external suture of specimen illustrated in fig. 42-45, 45a; natural size, Fig. 42, venter; fig. 43, front; fig. 44, side view; natural size. Fig. 45, front of inner whorl of the same specimen, showing the two rows of tubercles replacing the sharp keels; natural size. Fig. 45a, the same; twice natural size. Medlicottia Burckhardtt nov. sp.—Zone of Waagenoceras (Word formation) —Junction of Gilliam and Road canyons, Glass Mountains. Fig. 46, side view; fig. 47, venter; fig. 48, cross-section of small specimen; natural size. Fig. 49, internal suture of the preceding specimen, but belonging to the next larger whorl; natural size. Fig. 50, the same; twice natural size. Fig. 51, side view of mature specimen illustrated in Plate II, fig. 1-2; natural size. Fig. 52, cross-section of the same specimen ; natural size. Plate I Carl Christianson, photo. Permo-Carbomiferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 215 Plate II Fig. 1-3..Medlicottia Burckhardti nov. sp—Zone of. Waagenoceras (Word formation).—Junction of Gilliam and Road canyons, Glass Moun- tains. Fig. 1, venter, showing part of the furrow and keels. Specimen figured in Plate I, fig. 51, 52. Natural size. Fig. 2,mature suture of the same specimen; natural size. Fig. 3, part of nearly mature suture of a smaller specimen. Fig. 4-27..Gastrioceras modestum nov. sp—Zone of Uddenites (Wolfcamp formation).—Wolf Camp, Glass Mountains. Fig. 4, front; fig. 5, side view; fig. 6, venter; natural size. Fig. 7, venter; fig. 8, side view; fig. 9, front, of the same specimen ; twice natural size. Fig. 10, front; fig. 11, side view; fig. 12, venter; natural size. Fig. 13, venter; fig. 14, front, showing traces of ornamentation; natural size. Fig. 15, side view, of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 16, side view; fig. 17, front; natural size. Fig. 18, side view; fig. 19, front, showing traces of ornamentation, same specimen ; twice natural size. Fig. 20, venter; fig. 21, side view; natural size. Fig. 23, venter; fig. 22, side view, of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 24, external suture of specimen shown in fig. 4-9; natural size. Fig. 25, external suture; natural size. Fig. 26, external suture of specimen shown in fig. 16-19; natural size. Fig. 27, external suture of specimen shown in fig. 20-23. Fig. 28-47. .Gastrioceras roadense nov. sp.—Zone of Waaycenoceras (Word form- ation).—Different localities, Glass Mountains. Fig. 28, side view of young specimen; natural size. Junction of Gilliam and Road canyons. *Fig. 29, side view of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 31, side view of young specimen; natural size. Junction of Gilliam and Road canyons. Fig. 30, side view of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 32, front; fig. 33, venter; fig. 34, side view of a young speci- men; natural size. Mountain north of Leonard Mountain. Fig. 35, side view; fig. 36, front; fig. 37, venter, of the same speci- men; twice natural size. 216 University of Texas Bulletin Fig. 38, cross-section; fig. 39, side view; fig. 40, venter, of inner whorl of the specimen figured in fig. 41; natural size. Junction of Gilliam and Road canyons. Fig. 41, side view. Plaster cast of outer whorl of the specimen illustrated in Fig. 38-40; natural size. Junction of Gilliam and Road canyons. Fig. 42, ornamentation on a large specimen; natural size. Moun- tain north of Leonard Mountain. Fig. 43, parts of two external sutures of specimen illustrated in fig. 42; natural size. Fig. 44, external suture of the specimen illustrated in fig. 38-41; natural size. Fig. 45 and 46, external sutures of smaller specimens; natural size. Junction of Gilliam and Road canyons. Fig. 47, internal suture of small specimen; natural size. Mountain north of Leonard Mountain. Plate I] Carl Christianson, photo, Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 217 Plate III, Fig. 1-6..Gastrioceras altudense nov.sp—Zone of Perrinites (Leonard form- ation).—South of Bird’s mine near the intrusive plug on Capt. James’s ranch, Altuda Mountain, near Marathon, Brewster County. Fig. 1, side view; fig. 2, front; fig. 8, venter, of a medium-sized specimen; natural size. Fig. 4, side view; fig. 5, front; fig. 6, venter, of a smaller specimen; natural size. Fig. 7-8..Gastrioceras sp. nov. indet.—Zone of Waagenoceras (Word forma- tion).—Junction of Gilliam and Road canyons, Glass Mountains. Fig. 7, side view; natural size Fig. 8, ornamentation on venter of the same specimen; natural size. Fig. 9-16. .Schistoceras J. P. Smitht nov. sp.—Gaptank formation, Pennsyl- vanian.—Two miles south of Gap Tank, Glass Mountains. Fig. 9, front; fig. 10, side view; fig. 11, venter; fig. 12, external suture; natural size. Fig. 13, front; fig. 14, side view; fig. 15, venter; fig. 16, external suture; natural size. Plate III Carl Christianson, photo. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 219 Plate IV. Fig. 1-36. .Schistoceras diversecostatwm nov. sp.—Zone of Uddenites (Wolf- camp formation).—Wolf Camp, Glass Mountains. Fig. 1, side view; fig. 2, front; fig. 3, venter; natural size. Fig. 4, side view; fig. 5, venter; fig. 6, front; natural size. Fig. 7, venter; fig. 8, side view; natural size. Fig. 9, venter; fig. 10, front; fig. 11, side view; natural size. Fig. 12, side view; fig. 13, front; fig. 14, venter, of the same speci- men; twice natural size. Showing ornamentation. Fig. 15, venter; fig. 16, front; fig. 17, side view; natural size. Fig. 18, venter; fig. 19, front, of the same specimen; twice natural size . Fig. 20, side view; fig. 21, front; fig. 22, venter; natural size. Fig. 23, venter; fig. 24, front; fig. 25, side view, of the same speci- men; twice natural size. Showing gastrioceran ornamentation. Fig. 26, external suture of the specimen figured in fig. 7, 8; natural size. Fig. 27, side view; fig. 28, front; fig. 29, venter; twice natural size of the specimen figured in fig. 30-32. Showing the ornamenta- tion. Fig. 30, front; fig. 31, side view; fig. 32, venter; natural size. Fig. 33, side view; natural size. Fig. 34, side view of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 35, internal suture of specimen illustrated in fig. 27-32. The suture belongs to the next larger whorl. Natural size. Fig. 36, external suture of the specimen illustrated in fig. 1-3. Plate IV Carl Christianson, photo. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 221 Plate V. Fig. 1-13.. Fig. 14-18.. Fig. 19-32.. Fig. 33-38. . Paralegoceras incertum nov. sp.—Zone of Uddenites (Wolfecamp formation).—Wolf Camp, Glass Mountains. Fig. 1, side view; fig. 2, front; fig. 3, venter; natural size. Fig. 4, front; fig. 5, venter, of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 6, external suture of the same specimen; natural size. Fig. 7, front; fig. 8, venter; fig. 9, side view, of a small specimen; natural size. Fig. 10, side view; fig. 11, front; fig. 12, venter, of the same speci- men; twice natural size, Fig. 13, external suture of the same specimen; natural size. Prothalassoceras Wellert nov. gen. nov. sp.—Zone of Prothalasso- ceras (Hess formation).—Two and a half miles north 20 degrees east from the old oil derrick on Wedin’s ranch at the foot of the first range of hills, Glass Mountains. Fig. 14, venter; fig. 15, side view; fig. 16, front; natural size. Fig. 17, external suture; fig. 18, last siphonal lobe, of the same specimen; natural size. Paraceltites multicostatus nov. sp—Zone of Waagenoceras (Word formation).—Two and a half miles north 70 degrees east from second tank, above the headquarters ranch house of the Hess ranch, Glass Mountains. Fig. 19, side view; fig. 20, cross-section; natural size. Fig. 21, cross-section; fig. 22, side view, of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 23, side view; natural size. Fig. 24, side view, of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 25, eross-section; fig. 26, side view; fig. 27, venter; natural size. Fig. 28, venter; fig. 29, side view; fig. 30, cross-section, of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 32, side view; natural size. Fig. 31, side view of the same specimen; twice natural size. Paraceltites aff. elegans Girty—Zone of Waagenoceras (Word formation).—Two and a half miles north 70 degrees east from second tank above the headquarters ranch house of the Hess ranch, Glass Mountains. Fig. 33, venter; fig. 34, side view; fig. 35, cross-section; natural size. to lo bo Fig. 39-54... University of Texas Bulletin Fig. 36, cross-section; fig. 37, side view; fig. 38, venter, of the same specimen; twice natural size. Agathiceras Frechi nov. sp.—Zone of Uddenites (Wolfcamp forma- tion)— Wolf Camp, Glass Mountains. Fig. 39, venter; fig. 40, front; fig. 41, side view; fig. 42, external suture; natural size. Fig. 43, front; fig. 45, side view; fig. 46, venter; fig. 47, external suture; natural size. Fig. 44, side view; natural size. Fig. 48, side view; natural size. Fig. 49, venter; fig. 50, side view; fig. 51, front; natural size. Fig. 52, front; fig. 53, side view; fig. 54, venter of the same speci- men, showing the ornamentation; twice natural size. Plate V Carl Christianson, photo. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 223 Plate VI. Fig. 1-26.. Fig. 27-46.. Agathiceras Frechi nov. sp.—Zone of Uddenites (Wolfeamp forma- tion).—Wolf Camp, Glass Mountains. Fig. 1, side view; fig. 2, external suture taken from the same speci- men; natural size. Fig. 3, internal suture taken from a large specimen; natural size. Fig. 4, side view; natural size. Fig. 5, side view; natural size. Fig. 6, side view; natural size. Fig. 7, side view; natural size. Fig. 8, side view; fig. 9, venter; fig. 10, front; natural size. Fig. 11, side view; fig. 12, front; fig. 13, venter, of the same speci- men; twice natural size. Showing the ornamentation. Fig. 14, side view; natural size. Fig. 15, venter; fig. 16, front; fig. 17, side view; natural size. Fig. 18, side view; fig. 19, venter; fig. 20, front, of the same speci- men; twice natural size. Fig. 21, venter; fig. 22, front; fig. 23, side view, of very juvenile specimen ; natural size. Fig. 24, side view; fig. 25, front; fig. 26, venter, of the same speci- men; twice natural size. Agathiceras Girtyi nov. sp.—Zone of Waagenoceras (Word forma- tion).—Junction of Gilliam and Road canyons, Glass Mountains. Fig. 27, side view; fig. 28, front; natural size. All the septa which on the side view nearly resemble ribs, on this and the following specimens, are internal septa of the next larger whorl. The orna- mentation seen in these with exception of figs. 39-42 is shown from the opposite side and belongs to the interior of the next larger whorl, the ribs showing as furrows and the furrows as ribs. Fig. 29, front of the same specimen ; twice natural size. Fig. 30, side view; fig. 31, venter; natural size. Fig. 32, venter of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 33, venter; fig. 34, front; fig. 38, side view; natural size. Fig. 35, front; fig. 36, side view; fig. 37, venter, of the same speci- men; twice natural size. Fig. 39, venter; fig. 40, side view, of small specimen; natural size. Fig. 41, side view; fig. 42, venter, of the same specimen, showing the real ornamentation of the species; twice natural size. Fig. 43, 44, 45, external sutures of different specimens, fig. 45 be- longing to one larger than any of those figured. Natural size. Fig. 46, internal suture; natural size. Fig. 47-56. Fig. 57-69.. fig. 70-76... Fig. 77-89.. University of Texas Bulletin .Adrianites marathonensis nov. sp—Zone of Waagenoceras (Word formation).—Junction of Gilliam and Road canyons, Glass Moun- tains. Fig. 47, venter; fig. 48, side view; fig. 49, front, of largest speci- men found; natural size. Fig. 50, side view; fig. 51, venter, of smaller specimen; natural size, Fig. 52, external suture of specimen illustrated in figs. 47-49, 53- 56. Twice natural size. Fig. 53, the same in natural size. Fig. 54, side view; fig. 55, front; fig. 56, venter, of specimen illus- trated in Fig. 47-49, 52, 53. Twice natural size. Stacheoceras Bowmani nov. sp.—Zone of Waagenoceras (Word form- ation).—Junction of Gilliam and Road canyons, Glass Mountains. Fig. 57, side view; fig. 58, front; fig. 59, venter (upper part of fig. 57) ; natural size. Fig. 60, part of external suture; the umbilicus on the right side indicates how many lobes are missing. Natural size. Fig. 61, side view; fig. 62, cross-section; fig. 63, venter, showing the characteristic ornamentation; natural size. Fig. 64, front; fig. 65, venter; fig. 66, side view, showing traces of the suture; natural size. Fig. 67, venter; fig. 68, side view showing ornamentation; fig. 69, front; natural size. Stacheoceras gilliamense nov. sp.—Zone of Waagenoceras (Word formation ).—Junction of Gilliam and Read eanyons, Glass Moun- tains. ; ‘ Fig. 70, venter; fig. 71, side view; fig. 72, front; fig. 73, part of internal suture; natural size. Fig. 74, front; fig. 75, venter, of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 76, side view of another specimen; natural size. Marathonites J. P. Smithi nov. subgen. nov. sp.—Zone of Uddenites (Wolfeamp formation).—Wolf Camp, Glass Mountains. Fig. 79, internal and external suture taken from a fairly large specimen. The umbilical seam coincides with the straight limit _ between the black and white. Natural size. Fig. 80, the same; twice natural size. Fig. 81, side view; fig. 82, front; fig 83, venter; fig. 78, external suture of largest specimen found; natural size. Fig. 84, side view; fig. 85, cross-section; fig. 86, venter; fig. 77, external suture; natural size. Fig. 87, venter; fig. 88, front; fig. 89, side view; natural size. Carl Christianson Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 225 Plate VII. Fig. 14... Fig. 5-32.. Fig. 33-39.. Fig. 40-61.. Marathonites sulcatus nov. subgen. nov. sp.—Zone of Uddenites (Wolfcamp formation).—Wolf Camp, Glass Mountains. Fig. 1, side view; fig. 2, venter; fig. 3, front; fig. 4, external suture; natural size. Marathonites vidriensis nov. subgen. nov. sp.—Zone of Uddenites (Wolfeamp formation).—Wolf Camp, Glass Mountains. Fig. 5, side view; fig. 6, front; fig. 7, venter; fig. 8, external suture; natural size. Fie. 9, front; fig. 10, venter; fig. 11, side view, of the same speci- men; twice natural size. Fig. 12, front; fig. 13, venter; fig. 14, side view; fig. 15, external suture; natural size. Fig. 16, front; fig. 17, venter; fig. 18, side view; natural size. Fig. 20, side view; fig. 21, venter; fig. 22, front, of the same speci- men; twice natural size. Fig. 23, venter; fig. 24, side view; fig. 25, front; fig. 26, external suture; natural size. Fig. 27, side view; fig. 28, front; fig. 29, venter; natural size. Fig. 19, external suture; fig. 30, the same; twice natural size of medium-sized specimen. Fig. 31, internal suture, natural size; fig. 32, the same, twice natural size of large specimen. Marathonites Hargist nov. subgen. nov. sp.—Zone of Prothalas- soceras (Hess formation).—Anticline on Hlargis’s ranch near Southern Pacific R. R. mile-post 580, near Marathon, Brewster County. ae Fig. 33, side view; fig. 34, front; fig. 35, venter; fig. 36, external suture; natural size. Fig. 37, front; fig. 38, venter; fig. 39, external suture of the same specimen; twice natural size. Vidrioceras Uddeni nov. subgen. nov. sp.—Zone of Uddenites (Wolf- camp formation) —Wolf Camp, Glass Mountains. Fie. 40, front; fig. 41, venter; fig. 42, side view; fig. 43, external suture; natural size. Fig. 44, front; fig. 45, side view; fig. 46, venter; fig. 47, external suture; natural size. Fig. 48, side view; fig. 49, venter; fig. 50, front; natural size. Fig. 51, venter; fig. 52, front; fig. 53, side view, of the same speci- men; twice natural size, Fig. 62-73.. University of Texas Bulletin Fig. 54, venter; fig. 55, front; fig. 56, side view; natural size. Fig. 57, side view; fig. 58, front; fig. 59, venter, of the same speci- men; twice natural size. Fig. 60, external and internal suture of largest specimen; natural size. The umbilical seam coincides with the straight limit between black and white. Fig. 61, external and internal suture of the same specimen; twice natural size. . Vidrioceras irregulare nov. subgen. nov. sp.—Zone of Uddenites (Wolfecamp formation).—Wolf Camp, Glass Mountains. Fig. 62, side view; fig. 63, front; fig. 64, venter; fig. 65, external suture; natural size. Fig. 66, front; fig. 67, external suture of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 68, side view; fig. 69, front; fig. 70, venter; -fig. 72, external suture ; natural size. Fig. 71, front; fig. 73, external suture of the same specimen; twice natural size. Plate VIL Carl Christianson, photo. Permo-Carboniferous Ammonoids of the Glass Mountains 227 Plate VIII. Fig. 1-10. .Perrinites vidriensis nov. gen. nov. sp.—Zone of Perrinites (Leonard formation).—Two miles northwest of Iron Mountain, Glass Moun- tains. Fig. 1, front; fig. 2, side view; fig. 3, venter; fig. 4, external saddle of large specimen; natural size. Fig. 5, side view; fig. 6, venter; fig. 7, external suture of medium- sized specimen ; natural size. Fig. 8, side view; fig. 9, venter; fig. 10, front, of a specimen found in lower part of zone of Perrinites at three miles north of the old oil derrick in Wedin’s ranch, Glass Mountains. Plate VIII Car! Christianson, photo. Permo-Carboniferous Alimmonoids of the Glass Mountains 229 Plate 1X. Fig. 1-10. .Perrinites vidriensis nov. gen. nov. sp.—Zone of Perrinites (Lieon- ard formation).—Two miles northwest of Iron Mountain, (lass Mountains. Fig. 1, venter; fig. 2, side view; fig. 3, cross-section of one of the largest specimens; natural size. Fig. 4, front; fig. 5, venter; fig. 6, side view, of medium-sized speci- men; natural size. Fig. 7, front; fig. 8, venter; fig. 9, side view, of small specimen; natural size. Fig. 10, siphonal lobe; external and first lateral saddle of medium- sized specimen; natural size. Plate 1X Carl Christianson, photo. o f i ; ‘ . ; Permo-Ca bomferous Amimonoids of the Glass Mountains 231 Plate X. Fig. 1-21..Perrinites vidriensis nov. gen. nov. sp—Zone of Perrinites (Leon- ard formation) —Two miles northwest of Iron Mountain, Glass Mountains. Fig. 1, front; fig. 2, side view; fig. 3, venter; natural size. Fig. 4, venter; fig. 5, side view; fig. 6, front; natural size. Fig. 7, front; fig. 8, venter, of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 9, venter; fig. 10, front; fig. 11, side view; natural size. Fig. 12, front; fig. 138, venter, of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 14, venter; fig. 15, side view; fig. 16, front; natural size. Fig. 17, venter; fig. 18, front, of the same specimen; twice natural size. : Fig. 19, external suture of a small specimen; natural size. Fig. 20, external suture of a specimen about 3 mm. in diameter, Shumardites stage; four times natural size. Fig. 21, internal suture (partial) of medium-sized specimen, nat- ural size, showing the antisiphonal, two lateral and one auxiliary lobe, the internal saddle, the two lateral and one auxiliary saddle. Fig. 22-27. .Perrinites compressus nov. gen. nov. sp.—Zone of Perrinites, lower part (Leonard formation).—Near top ridge about two miles north 65 degrees west of Wolf Camp, at head of valley leading down to tank one half mile west of Wolf Camp, Glass Mountains. Fig. 22, side view; fig. 23, venter; fig. 24, front; fig. 25, part of external suture; fig. 26, siphonal lobe and external saddle of an- other suture a little nearer to the living chamber of the same specimen; natural size, Fig. 27, side view of another specimen; natural size. Fig, 28-31. .Waagenoceras Dienert nov. sp.—Zone of Waagenoceras (Word form- ation ).—Glass Mountains. Fig. 28, internal suture (partial), natural size, showing the anti- siphonal and the first and second lateral lobes, the internal and the two lateral saddles. From specimen illustrated in Plate XJ, fig. 1-3. Junction of Gilliam and Road canyons. Fig. 29, side view of largest specimen found; fig. 30, cross-section ; fig. 31, siphonal and first lateral lobe, external and first lateral saddle, natural size. Mountain north of Leonard Mountain. 6 Plate X Carl Christianson, photo. es + Sp z . . Permo-Carboniferous climmonoids of the Glass Mountains 233 Plate XI. Fig. 1-27.. Fig. 28-45.. Waagenoceras Dieneri nov. sp—Zone of Waagenoceras (Word form- ation).—Junction of Gilliam and Road canyons, Glass Mountains. Fig. 1, side view; fig. 2, front; fig. 3, nearly complete external suture, natural size. The internal suture of this specimen, illus- trated in Plate X, fig. 28, is taken from the whorl immediately following the one figured in fig. 2; part of the whorl where the internal suture was taken from, can still be seen on the lower righthand corner of fig. 2. Vig. 4, front; fig. 5, external suture taken from. tha outermpst whorl; fig. 6, external suture taken from the smaller whorl of the same specimen; natural size. Fig. 7, venter; fig. 8, front; fig. 9, side view; fig. 10, external su- ture; natural size. Fig. 11, front; fig. 12, venter, of the same specimen; twice natural size, Fig. 13, venter; fig. 14, side view; fig. 15, front; natural size. From mountain north of Leonard Mountain, Glass Mountains. Fig. 16, front; fig. 17, venter, of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 18, venter; fig. 19, side view; fig. 20, front; natural size. Fie. 21, venter; fig. 22, front, of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 23, venter; fig. 24, side view; fig. 25, front; natural size. Fig. 26, front; fig. 27, venter, of the same specimen; twice natural size. Paralecanites alludensis nov. sp.—Zone of Perrinites (leonard formation).—South of intrusive plug on Capt. James’s ranch, Altuda Mountain, Brewster County. Fig. 28, side view of one of the largest specimens; natural size. Fig. 29, side view of a large fragment; fig. 30, venter; natural size. Fig. 31, venter of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 32, side view; fig. 33, venter; fig. 34, cross-section; fig. 35, ex- ternal suture; natural size. Fie. 36, venter; fig. 37, cross-section, of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 38, side view of small specimen; fig. 40, front; natural size. Fig. 39, front of the same specimen; twice natural size. Fig. 41, side view of small fragment; fig. 42, cross-section ; fig. 43, venter; natural size. Fig. 44, cross-section; fiz. 45, venter, of the same specimen; twice natural size. Plate XI Carl Christianson, photo, INDEX {Figures in heavy-faced type indicate the page on which the description Page Abbreviations ................0006 9 Abich, His oie ev se is eee Nacses dite Seatac 9, 45 Acme Cement Mills............... 26 Adrianites 220684 06 6644 586 cw eee ..+-19, 29, 30, 38, 118, 121, 124, 125 ANCEDS sions Foes Be. Beta Wal bes 125 BlESANS <)da-8 4 ee ane 4am waned 38, 126 Hauer. asvseawee 26s bee deea es 38 ONSiLer: (jos. eee dea we OAL Os ole eas 125 (Hofmannia) sp. ind............ 40 PST E TB a! Sie Weve water eas 2 aS 33, 126 isomorphus ............0000 38, 125 marathonensis 18, 338, 123, 224 Stuckenbergi .......... 120, 123, 126 CIMOPENSIS. 2. esieurede Se ee eee 126 Aganides, sp. ind...............006. 41 Agathiceras: ce. cece sow vwed wees 29, 30, 39, 40, 92, 98, 113, 114, 121, 124 A@NCEPS:. wash tee Geeta va caee es 117, 125 ciscoense ............65 113, 117, 120 Frechi..... 18, 36, 114, 119, 222, 223 Girtyl. .ancdewss 18, 38, 117, 124, 223 KrotOwl easing ie tice Hees cls ges OS 129 SPs Ds cst ae eee hs cared & 183, 193, 207 Stuckenbéregi, haa © 24 SOSICNSe: yscnsaid Sim erechal eee ea Giee eee 67 177 Schopenl ontesneieing aes ad ya eas 67, 68 5a Trautscholdi ......... 31, 67, 68, 71 48 Verneuili ....... Laveen 6h, Th, 9 WItMOYT isitss. ost eget ahead ese a We es 18, 34, 35, 71, 72, 74, 199, 201, 214 DOF | WYDNEL- feos acdised Gee Geet ky Ga ee 67, 63 176 | Medlicottia (?) croatica............ 38 46 | Meekoceras Etta Garde nin evils 51 41 DEdS™ Seats Aiwa eleone eee tes Sets. SET 42|Meekoceratidae Waagen............ LUT 40| Mesozoic, the................2000. 29 216 PUGS 4p ewe Gi wee KER Ae es 25 Gr MEORTCO, ss ccps cv acer ooren AS Gaisussoheeaass 27, 46, 47 40 | Military Crossing............. Bie 22) eeasess 24, 25, 26, 100, 188, 199, 207 179 |) Mojsisoviecs, H. v..........-...-2.. MN) ) oestriol 10, 1138, 121, 127, 168, 169 MONG: psa gs ees dace a eee eek ee 48 180: | Mount: O80 20. .63 we peewee ee ee . 169 Mrzla-Vodica beds.... ...... 28, 38, 39 193 | Murchison, R. J.............06 11, 25 295- New Mexico......... ...... bees 48 Ning-Kwo-hsein ..............0-.- 40 294 NoOeCting Pia g ce w as wae eae ewe ; ..10, 81, 42, 48, 68, 70, 71, 184, 201 225 3 Nomismoceras ...........0000000s 39 225 SHIH cag ea a, PA OSS Se SO Ree 4l 40 NOTIUNGG: sinc chs eae BS ORs ,o2, 86 47 North AMe@ried..c.c cae wba eww 113 NY@nshwel g.44 8604 eiikblewed Jeaey eas 40 907 PORAHOMAS: aceite ska ome ee alae 8 24 OU AMT ess eras 28 oyu deb ales 48 208|Omphalotrochus (?)............005 22 75 ODDS Ge cag dla oe ays al etomidate 122 Ord) Mountalitty ocean eds beets ead 165 215 | Otoceras djoulfense................ 45 69 MO MOROM 2 355 23feve.wid es gy aians aus aoe Re 45 trochoides ........... le Rome adanthar 45 207 tropitum .........,. tsb iesea aea aa 45 Paleontological Part............... Palermo), 205.0 Weg aca ake wort sup isc na Ue ates os Paraceltites: ncc4 aaad goa eek od a Sede 29, 38, 39, 52, 92, 107, 177, ClORANS) wasn dace e Bia 108, 110, aff. elegans.......... 18, 33, 110, PLAT vataitte o2ha jr aelante afb od deed tay aes Hoeferi .... ...38, 38, 107, 109, multicostatus ...18, 33, 108, 109, MUDSUCE sive c6 38 det ene sig dost Ges dig ee PLic@tUs: 4 sos doe vals wae ewe oo 33, pseudo-opalinus .............. 40, Paragastrioceras ............ Rides te Paralecaniteg ............. 39, 107, altudensis ........... 18, 35, 178, APNOlGL 6409 ed diac ee ee 177, 178, SCXCENSIS: Gaia dei ci di ew Sheed sob esas Paralegoceras .............. 93, 99, Baylorense .................. 25, incertum .......... 18, 36, 100, Parapopanoceras ..............005 Paraprolecanites ............... 51, Parapronorites ee ee 29, 51, 55, aff. Konincki................0.. Penjabien, the. ....%s cas esesenwwes Pennsylvanian, the................ ere ae s 20, 23, 95, 134, 140, 146, AUN AY a5 oe ale Ach Baie ang earache areola ee PericyClus: is i308 wei ge ag Rea oy Perisphinctes .. 2... eee eee ee Permfauna aus Mexico............. Permian, the............... 16, 20, 39, 45, 55, 146, 169, 170, 178, 201, Of HULOD Gs) 5 asec ga ea ees esas dace: Sess RUSSIAN) ede Gare ee ek eee es Permo-Carboniferous, the........ 37, 38, 39, 47, 102, 110, 146, 147, 155, correlation of sediments Perrinites 41, 44, 47, 155, 159, 160, 170, 171, 175, 183, 190, 194, 204, 207, 208, compressus compressus nov. gen. n. sp Cumminsi 24, 25, 26, 41, 164, 165, 167, 189, 190, 203, Hilli 25, 26, 160, 164, 167, 190, 203, 187, COS PEEKS RODE Ce Ree He Index 239 Page Page 51 VIGEICDSIS! su sa eaow Mele ey ¥ ea Gehaes 47 -...18, 25, 26, 34, 41, 160, 161, 164, 167, 190, 208, 207, 227, 229, 231 179 LOWES Obs ois, wikia as uhh onan devas ge heey Goev 111 ..18, 19, 20, 24, 26, 34, 38, 47, 48 221 Pleurotomaria altaica.............. 22 11 PoOpanOtenas: <2. :adunn aes dh aie eee 111 25, 29, 38, 40, 127, 134, 145, 146, 207 221 CIAUSUM. ssas nd oa ete as ada aeaes 1390 109 Ganl, ssce es Sees aa cakes eee wes 127 111 Krasnopolskyi .. .......-.ee eee 128 108 Medlicottia: .465 can vaeneasives es 160 Moelleri ............ 130 ae PAT Ori cedex give ae dedrtioee og) anid CPE 127 ATT) ef: Parkerissc sce cccay cave aves 35 233] priscum . ...... 0. eee ee tee eee 45 179) Sobolevskyi ...............00-. 127 177) Walcotti ......... 0. ce ee ee eee 127 206) Porcellia. «ss s.es2 dk bea se See Seeks 21 207| Presidio County................... 45 221|Prodaraelites ..... 0 ........0000. 51 128] Productus giganteus............... 22 52 BYAOSUS: eS eeed aed AeA ees 48 59 guadalupensis comancheanus 22 40 HumMboldti. nsec coe neeacawase 4 22 42 limestone ...25, 42, 438, 44, 45, 70 SU AIOS: enw Rana Heed 40, 41, 42, 159 147 sino-indicus ............-.. 24, 48 21|Prolecanites ............ 0.000. 52, 92 40 | Prolecanitidae .... 44, 51 122 |) Pronerites ascends a ancics eo hues eed 27 ...19, 29, 37, 55, 56, 59, 62, 68, 68 praepermicus ....... Oo ian oeeke. Blo 209 | Propinacoceras ...29, 40, 55, 59, 67 28 GAT W ASE awane Grad hv ea SOW aca ede aes 39 43 GalBel ieee aie. ora odund aoe 38 sakimanraey 0) sd guste eadewe nd ews 67 209j|Prothalassoceras ................ 23 .28, 31, 40, 102, 104, 106, 208 17 Welleri ........ 18, 35, 104, 105, 221 zone of..... ..... 18, 19, 20, 35, 36 Pugnax rockymontana............. 21 209|Pyrenees .. .... ...... 28, 31, 52, 107 203]Quanah ........... ..24, 26, 204, 207 231 Richthofenia, 2.432 sacea ee alae 48 207|Rhipidomella corallina.... 48 Rio Grande River........ Reine ae 46 207} Road and Gilliam canyons, junction of 201 .. 81, 88, 92, 121, 127, 131, 138, 176 210 RIG CMER, Wiss a aah Seta s i wee aS Rothliegendes, the................. ROHDPIEtA As. ads «acess eyes 10, 44, Runnels County..............0000- - -47, 183, 194, 199, 200, 202, 2038, FRUISSIOs stacy eG sear. shkceaed ly dB acack 28, Sageceras primas...... ..... ee as SE.) GIB ONS ier icicctbend a tacnee aeawee al S ace 28, Salt Croton Creek....... 24, 25, 26, Salt, Range ssi ex da swameds yew aeie ars brands) bee 39, 42, 48, 46, 47, 51, 68, Polt DUSClOsces ta caaeavasaa eens 24, San LWis: POUSi ja. sacnse bas eee awardee Sappers, (Cath. suis h case gana aes Saxonian, thes... sss%6 seas = weds Schistoceras ........0 0... e eee hs diversecostatum ............4. cea ..17, 36, 37, 98, 95, 96, LULLONENSS: 6 eee gene ade dad oe Aildretht 243 asne0ed oie ase 92, Hyatti ....21, 36, 92, 98, 95, 98, MISSOUTICNSE oe vica Se veda oben SMIthT. jad wearers 21, 98, 95, 98, Schwagerina ........ Mile. Sys acis NMEStONe! vg .oee seared. Ree es ees SHAtter c-23c dae cay anes epiterens MING, CHE: 2s. Roose sd acen T6ziION, thess< sus ava eedoxageess Shumardites .160, 1638, 170, Sicanites ... .29, 32, 55, 68, 186, SiGHy’ © i. ase eeeee Shaseeces s 25, 28, 38, 47, 155, 170, 174, 208, Sierra de Catorce... ..... 2.2.20. Sierra del Vidrio...............00- Sierra. Nevada. ..i44 «seve sees Solna Ae 10, 438, 52, 82, 92, 938, 95, 107, 117, 1138, 121, 134, 140, 144, 146, 155, 156, 157, 160, 163, 164, 170, 177, 179, 185, HONORE. ¢aucken theese boos Ve ES ex Sosio beds the........ ..... 25, 28, 29, 31, 32, 36, 38, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 52, 55, 70, 104, 107, 108, 117, limestone ......... . gneee UB, Speckled sandstone, the............ Spirifer aff. musakheylensis...... 21, Spiti (Himalaya) <.0- es... eed eas SPItZDerBen. 4 cases eeey cone dy ve 28, Index 207 115 67 31 207 70 207 46 27 43 92 219 93 93 99 98 217 21 43 45 46 208 200 209 46 27 49 208 46 192 209 49 22 44 39 Stacheoceras .19, 21, 25, 29, 38, 127, 134, 146, 147, 170, 192, ANTIGQUUM: geieasewas cure, eae see Benedictinum .............. Bowmani ... GaUdTy 2 eeGeade.: sets ea ee gilliamense.. ...18, 33, 128, 131, SIODOSBM ose. sass ib Koes eons» 33, Karpinskya ay eae aleve on aged Kineiqn ose gc ie eee weed wee HKPasnopoisky] oackess ee euex 13%, TiaWUSeni. © sacccsioa eh 4 are Sa Oe 130, metliterraneum ........ 00 renee Ty SDs ghee atalotnas cia eee sae ‘ Parkeri..133, 138, 140, 144, 145, PePSPOCCLIVUM 2 nce vee eee ee deed pygmaeum 138, 188, 144, FGMANOWERYE «ease e ka Pewee enews 36, 37, 40, 1338, 138, 144, 193, subinterruptum {PidENS wacex 4 ee eae eee ea eS ee 45, THIMUPE ones tye wie ee 2.45, Waleotth. adidas eas 25, 131, 192, Stacheoceras (Marathonites?)...... StOlteZ a aes ea wheats Reet Stolley; Bi sseegeee nig Fees saa Stratigraphi¢al Part. «cnc ase ee daa. Strawn formation, the.... ..... SZ-TSHWan 4. ssw d Seelis gsi Ta=ParShan: sags ssid gare ea wae da Talehir group, these.< «i084 42, Tchernow, A... «1... esses eens ane eee 10; 30, 52, 71; 74, 113, 127, Tessey formation, the........... 14, PD OX US yb. sar tet) setae 1h eee aga 24, 45, 47, 48, 52, 75, 93, 102, 155, 156, 159, 170, 171, 175, 188, 204, 208, Thalassoceras Gemmellaroi....35, 102, 108, 104, PHINTPSE aot nteescotacda. scien subreticulatum ... ............ VATICOSUM, dione ace ae wae eee bowa Thalassoceratidae~...........0.. 19, Thuringien, the................-. 42, Timor, island of. .389, 40, 44, 114, Tom Green County.............. 24, Torreon, Mexico............. 27, 46, Trans-Pecos, the...46, 47, 201, 207, SOA biti asoh werase, Sires ee 47, ....29, 38, 40, 108, Page 207 45 134 224 144 133 224 133 130 133 133 133 134 199 146 133 192 208 128 131 131 207 183 45 20 15 148 40 40 43 127 15 209 104 105 103 103 102 102 43 169 207 47 208 48 es PPIASBIC, thes. wiar soa eee ka ev eae ea ...-39, 43, 46, 68, 157, 168, 180, Trogkofel limestone............. 28, LOD AC! x saci. dentag amele are aa teas ane Tschernyschew, Th................ Tsan-Clen occsk a esss28S: dees wed een oes Tshan-Tien ............0.000 cues Tzwetaev, Marie................ 11, Udden,. Ji As cca ees ada 0 eciavad es 5, 6, 8, 11, 23, 45, 90, 93, 165, 167, Uddenites...19, 20, 23, 37, 55, 207, minor ........... 17, 36, 62, 63, Schucherti ....17, 36, 60, 62, 65, ZONE; OE eis. bale lek Hower 18, 35, 36, Uncinulus aff. wangenheimi...... 215 Upper Coal Measures............ 25, Upper Carboniferous............... Upper Cretaceous. ............2.05. Ural; #00 a5 ia-ced nie hg ka dee .33, Uralian, the............. 37, 438, 93, Verneuil, E. de..11, 25, 42, 74, 88, Vidrioceras .......... 19, 146, 147, irregulare..18, 36, 151, 152, 154, VWadent:) 32422 dee ware eis Ewa eee 18, 36, 146, 149, 152, 1538, 154, Vidrio formation, the........... 15, Virgal beds: .. 6s 08% viaedeasnws eer STOUP ;. CH Cr irs ea anya ey Shh a aaa Vogel; De Viasee wens tans eee eee ne 69, WOGly ViICtOR cane nae od Oke hw wean e S ‘Waagen, W....11, 42, 67, 155, 157, Waagenoceras ......-.. ee eee ee eee Eiken 23, 24, 28, 30, 32, 44, 155, 156, 159, 160, 165, 168, 170, 171, G@UMMINS) osc haw leas Ee Sone Ges ...155, 156, 157, 160, 170, 171, Index 241 Page Page DICWE RL oe fay eld wile ne aeons aged AOU) eeepc 18, 33, 127, 171, 231, 238 38 PRU a tedeuit, Suel dt Ripeds 155, 156, 157, 179 107 MoJSisovicSi .2. sia cseee yee a ae 174 43 INDICE cs echea apatinie de wy elecacd ata 5% 174 114 Stachet. . geiasuwies tuew seats 170, 175 40 zone of....18, 19, 20, 24, 33, 38, 47 100! Wanner, J........0.000. 11, 40, 55, 114 Warcha group, the.............. 42, 43 177 Wedin’s ranch............ 106, 164, 165 20x | Weissliegendes, the................ 42 213} Wewokella .........0 00 cece eeeeee 21 213/}White, Chas. A... ......... 11, 25, 38 131, 160, 164, 165, 183, 192, 194, 199 a Wichita-Albany beds............... 47 42 Wichita formation, the............. 29 ...24, 25, 27, 183, 186, 200, 2038, 207 48 WO PPO, CMG. 3 35 ae ee iw nig aac 26 G5 | WOMDS Bay «sic erase a eta see aes 39, 45 Wolf Camp...16, 20, 28, 54, 62, 66, 90 85, 101, 189, 141, 144, 152, 154, 163 148 |Wolfcamp division................. 117 226 36, 54, 55, 60, 62, 66, 85, 93, 99, 101, 114, 117, 138, 141, 144, 146, 152 225 ]Word formation, the.............. Dot caoke acme 5, 15, 16, 18, 20, 24, 26, 33, 42 45, 80, 88, 92, 110, 112, 114, 126, 43 131, 133, 134, 160, 171, 175, 207, 208 107 |Wrather: Wi Deedes cuasaasencaeas TA?) sta wattensd 188, 185, 194, 200, 202, 203 169: | MEMASPIS: cass hace Woes saan Baie 43 CAPDONATIA. soc ek eae a Sues Bde 44 XNeMOdiscus: wa sivssseceven ou 43, 45, 51 209 ZACAtOCas: 3 goes jaws ey eea RESETS € 46 17d \Zeehstein, the... 2.6 eee ee ne 42 PUBLICATIONS OF THE BUREAU OP ECONOMIC GEOLOGY AND TECHNOLOGY. ane copy of each of the following will ‘be furnished to an address in Texas, on request, thout charge, For extra copies, or for copies sent outside the State, the prices shown a wee ae accepted. e Fuels Used in Texas. William B. ‘Phill s and > H. Worrell, Uni ersit: of Tex: Bulletin No. 307, Dec, 22, 1913. . Price, 40 pent - y % “