42 



I^eptaeiia^ Kiug. Strop1iomenul(e. 184©. 



Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist, xviii, pp. 28, 36. Ist sp. L. rugosa, Dalin. (= rhom- 

 Jmidalis). Ibid. Perm. Foss. 1850, p. 81, 104, same type, and adds L. analoga, 

 Phillips, as also typical, = ie2)<acHrt, Dalman, pars, not Dslx . ^ Stropho- 

 mciia, Davidson pars. {= Plcctambonites, Pander.) 



lieptaeaaa, Davidson. StroplwmenidfE. 18«lt5. 



Intr. p. 108. Type L. transversaVis, Dalm. pi. viii, f. 170-180. Ibid. 

 1856, p. 205, same type, i)l. xii, f. 1-5. Syu. Flectamhoniics, King; not 

 Lep1aena,Kiu<^. 



lieptsieisat'ca, F. Braun. Arthropomata. 1 840. 



Bayr. Petref. p. 45. Fam. Bracli. cont. Leptaena. 



I^e|>taeBBaII©i?iia, King. Productulw. 1845. 



Murcb. Vcrneuil & Keys. Geol. Rus. Ural, ii, p. 281. (King, olim.) 

 {= Strophaloaia, King.) 



lieptag'OQBia, M'Coy. Strophome7iidce. 1 844. 



Carb. Foss. Ireland, p. 116, f. 11-13. First sp., also mentioned in diag- 

 nosis, Producta analoga, Pbillips, Geol. Yorksbiro, 1836, p. 215, pi. vii, f. 10. 

 M'Coy, 1. c. p. 117, f. 13. (= Flectamboniies, Paud.) 



LeptoflKolHSj Hall. OboUdce. 1871. 



24th Regent's Rep. p. 226, pi. vii.f, 19-20. Oct. (Hudson R. group). 

 Type L. lepis, Hall, 1. c. Ibid. Hall & Whitfield, Ohio Pal. ii, p. 09, 1875. 

 (See Aulonotrtia, Kutorga.) 



I^ei9t©i5ialBES, Hall. OboUdce. 1871. 



24th Regent's Rep. p. 226, passim, lapsus, = ZfjjtoZ>oZ«s. Ibid. U. P. 

 James, Cat. Foss. Cincin. 1875. 



l«eptocoeIJ:i, Uall. Atrypidce. 1857. 



lOth Regent's Rep. p. 107. No diagn. First sp. L. concava, Hall, Pal. 

 N. York, iii, pi. 38, f. 1-7. (Group heterogeneous.) 



Sit'ptocoeMa, Hall. TcrebratuUdw ? 1859. 



12th Regent's Rep. pp. 32-3, f. 1,2, 4. First figure, L.JlabeUUes, Hall, 

 1. c. (Comp. Tropidoleptus, CentroncUa.) 



After excluding the L. concava [Coclospira, nail), this 

 group appears to belong to the TerehratuUdw. It is true 

 that the shell-structure appears to be fibrous, which, if nor- 

 mal, would remove it from this family- as generally defined, 

 although the cases of Ehynchopora and Syringothyris warn 

 the student that too much confidence is not to be placed in 

 the family value of this character, and that there is a possi- 

 bility of metamorphism rendering the punctation imper- 

 ceptible, so as to deceive the most eminent and careful ob- 

 servers. The character of the loop, if correctly interpreted 

 and figured, is certainly very similar to that of the Terebra- 

 tuUdce, where it seems best to leave it until more is known. 



