80 ON A DEVONIAN FOSSIL ALLIED TO WORTHENIA. 



The author describes five species of Worthenia, two of which are 

 from America, whilst four belong to the carboniferous of Belgium. 



He diflerenciates this genus from the others belonging to the 

 same family by the following characters : — 



" The angular shape of the whorls, the small width of the 

 band (' bande ') of the sinus, comparatively to the size of the 

 species, by the position of this band on the angle of the whorls 

 and its crenulated form." And he adds : 



'•' T don't know any other species in the lower paleozoics that 

 can be referred to this genus." 



The want of paleontological works is not very favourable 

 to a further inquiry on the subject. The best marked character 

 which seems to associate the specimen referred to, with Prot. de 

 Koninck's new genus, is the crenulated nature of the periphery. 



In short the only specimen in the Museum, can be sketched as 

 follows : Height of spire about }Jth inch ; width about j^th inch. 

 Shell conical, turriculate, whorls 6 or 8 (1) angular and crenulated 

 on the periphery. Sinus not known, the mouth being broken : 

 mouth slightly polygonal. Number of crenulations in the last 

 half whorl above the periphery about six, large and long, conical ; 

 number of crenulations in the centre about eight, narrow ; below 

 the periphery crenulations lose and indistinct. 



The suture which, in the upper whorls corresponds with the last 

 loosely crenulated border does not show any ornament. Apical 

 angle from 64 to 70° according to position, difficult to appx-eciate in 

 consequence of the imperfection of the specimen and the size of the 

 ornaments. 



If we compare this short description with the five species 

 described by de Kordnck, we find a gi-eat difference in the crenula- 

 tions, some of the species from America and Belgium presenting 

 in the last half whorl, 50-60 crenulations above the periphery, 

 while there are only six in the Australian specimen, 



Pi'of. de Koninck's new genera seem to be very closely related to 

 each other, and according to this system one would probably make 

 a new genus of the present fossil, but I will not take the responsi- 

 bility of it until further works on the subject can be consulted. 



