74 BULLETHS" 10 4, UNITED STATES NATIONAL. MUSEUM 



vol. 25, No. 9, 1894, p. 117, pi. 22, figs. 883, 884.— Chapman, Proc. Zool. 

 Soc. London, 1895, p. 8.— Goes, Bull. Mus. Comp. Zool., vol. 29, 1896, p. 

 86.— Flint, Ann. Rep't U. S. Nat. Mus., 1897 (1899), p. 294, pi. 39, fig. 3.— 

 KiAER, Rep't. Norwegian Fish. Mar. Invest., vol. 1, No. 7, 1900, p. 26. — 

 SiDEBOTTOM, Mem. Proc. Manchester Lit. Philos. Soc, vol. 48, No. 5, 

 1904, p. 4. — Bagg, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 34, 1908, p. 117. — Cushman, 

 Bull. 71, U. S. Nat. Mus., pt. 6, 1917, p. 81, pi. 34, fig. 1.— Sidebottom, 

 Journ. Roy. Micr. Soc, 1918, p. 4. — Cushman, Proc U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 

 56, 1919, p. 640; Bull. 100, U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 4, 1921, p. 477, pi. 96, 

 figs. 3 a, b. — Heron-Allen and Earland, British Antarctic Exped., Zool. 

 vol. 6, 1922, p. 62. — Hanzawa, Jap. Journ. Geol. Pal., vol. '4, 1925 (1926), 

 p. 38 (table). 



Test subglobular, the chambers very much inflated, in end view 

 subcircular; suture distinct, incised; wall ornamented with numer- 

 ous, fine, longitudinal costae; aperture elongate, with a tooth often 

 with winghke extensions at the ends. 



Length, up to 2.5 mm.; thickness, 1.85 mm. 



There are a number of records for this species in the Atlantic, 

 mostly in deep water. It is a beautifully ornamented species and 

 not likely to be confused with any other. 



PYRGO INFLATA (J. Wright) 



Biloculina ringens Balkwill and Wright, var., Trans. Roy. Irish Acad., 



vol. 28, Sci., 1885, p. 322, pi. 12, figs. 6, 7. " 

 Biloculina infiaia J. Wright, Proc. Liverpool Geol. Soc, vol. 9, 1902, p. 183, 



pi. 13, figs. 1-4. — Heron-Allen and Earland, Trans. Linn. Soc. London, 



ser. 2, vol. 11,1916, p. 206. 



This peculiar form has been recorded off the British Isles in the 

 above references. Nothing more is known of its distribution, and I 

 have had no specimens for study. 



There are many records from the Atlantic and elsewhere which 

 have been referred to Biloculina ringens (I^amarck) and B. hulloides 

 d'Orbigny. So many of these are evidently erroneous, especially 

 since the researches of Schlumberger have shown what are the essen- 

 tials of these two species in section, that they all need reexamining. 



As long ago as 1891, Schlumberger in his " Revision des Biloculines 

 des Grands Fonds " '° gave many excellent sections as well as exterior 

 figures of numerous species from the Gulf of Gascony and elsewhere. 

 These, for the most part, have not been followed up by later authors, 

 most of them being content to refer their species to a few of the older 

 names where they evidently do not belong. A study of either Recent 

 or fossil species of Pyrgo should be studied with adequate sections 

 and distinctions carefully drawn as indicated in the above paper of 

 Schlumberger. 



Schlumberger's species Pyrgo sarsi, P. lahiata, P. hradyi, P. vesper- 

 tilio, P. Jischeri, P. milne-edwardsi, P. pisum and P. anomala have 

 been found elsewhere and their ranges should be checked. 



iDMem. Soc. Zool. France, vol. 4, 1891, pp. 15:-191, pis. 9-12, text figs. 1-46. 



