lO SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. "/ ;}, 



Konig in 1825 (Icones Foss.) proposed the name Trigonofrcta for a miscel- 

 laneous collection of forms including species now assigned to Spirifer and 

 Orthis. He mentions rcsupinatus, cuspidatus, minimus, in his text but figures 

 and describes only stokesii and speciosus. 



Dalman in 1828 (K. Svensk. Vetensk. Acad. Hand!., p. 99) referred Spirifer 

 nisptdatiis to Cyrtia with Cyrtia cxporrccta as one of the syntypes, subse- 

 quently lectotype. Von Buch in 1840 (Mem. Soc. geol. France, ser. I) and 

 M'Coy in 1844 (Syn. Carb. Limestone P'ossils of Ireland) referred cuspidatus 

 to genus Cyrtia Dalman. M'Coy considered Cyrtia to be a subgenus of Spirifer. 

 He describes Spirifer striatns as being "very well known on the continent as 

 the species in which Mr. Sowerby first discovered spiral appendages," a state- 

 ment which may have been correct but had no bearing on the nomenclature. 



King in 1850 (Permian Fossils) quoted Spirifer Sow., 1815 = Cyrtia Dalman, 

 1828, and stated: "This genus is typified by the Anomitcs cuspidatus of Martin 

 .... as the typical species Anomitcs cxporrcctus Wahlenberg of Dalman's 

 Cyrtia agrees with type of Sowerby's Spirifer in form . . . . T am led to as- 

 sume that these genera are one and the same . . . . " lie revived the genus 

 Trigonotreta Konig as ^^ Spirifer auctt., but gave no type and did not refer to 

 Spirifer striatus. 



H any choice had existed before, the (juestion of genotype of Spirifer was 

 thus definitely settled. 



Confusion was first introduced l)y Davidson in 1853 ( Mon. Foss. Brach., 

 Vol. I) who in discussing the genotype of Spirifer stated that Sowerby in- 

 tended Anomia striata as his type and not cuspidatus of whose internal charac- 

 ter he was not quite certain. He also quoted in support of his views M'Coy, 

 1844, and the alleged fact that King had at first taken cuspidatus as type of 

 Spirifer and later abandoned it. 



In 1857 Davidson (Mon. Foss. Brach.. Vol. 2, p. 44) described cuspidatus 

 as belonging to " Spirifera " and not to the subgenus Cyrtia, and also quoted 

 Spirifera striata as the type of the genus " Spirifera." 



In spite of Davidson, Meek & Hayden, 1864 (Smithsonian Contributions to 

 Knowledge, Vol. 14, p. 18) accepted Spirifer cuspidatus as the genotype of 

 Spirifer and revived Trigonotreta Konig, 1825 for Spirifer striatus and related 

 species. The genotype of Trigonotreta Konig is, however, T. stnkesii which is 

 not synonymous with Spirifer striatus. 



Meek in 1865 (Palaeontology of the Upper Missouri, p. k)) accciits cuspidafus 

 as genotype of .Spirifer and took .Spirifer striatus as genotype of Trigonotreta 

 Konig. This is inadmissible since this species was not mentioned by Konig. 



In 1863 A. Winchell described his genus Syringofhyris (Proc. .^cad. Nat. 

 .Sci. Philadelphia, Vol. VII, p. 6) with genotype S. typa Winchell. 



In 1867 Davidson and Meek, in Geol. Mag., Vol. IV, pointed out the simi- 

 larity in structure of Spirifer cuspidatus with Syringothyris of Winchell. 



King in 1868 (Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist., 4th ser., Vol. 2, p. i) assigned 

 "cuspidatus" to genus Syringothyris and assumed its identity with .V. typa of 

 Winchell. 



In 1877 Dall (" Index to Nanus wliich liave been applied to the Subdivisions 

 of the Class Brachiopoda," Bull. V. S. Nat. Mus., No. 8) stated correctly that 

 .Spirifer cuspidatus, the sole species mentioned by Sowerby in Min. 'Conch., 

 1816, after his definition of Spirifer, should be the genotype. In spite of this 

 he was in favor of retaining Spirifer striatus as the type of Spirifer and of 



