226 Annals of the Carnegie Museum. 



9. Camarotoechia major Raymond. 



(Plate XXXIV, figures 11-14.) 

 Carnarolcechia major Raymond, 1905. American Journal of Science, 4th scries, 



Vol. XX. p. 369- 



Outline somewhat oval, widest a little in front of the middle. 

 Brachial valve with ten to fourteen strong plications. The ventral 

 valve has from nine to thirteen. The fold and sinus are hardly defined 

 except by a gentle arch to be seen in viewing the shell from the front. 

 The fold bears five plications, the median one being stronger than the 

 others, while the sinus has four plications, the two strongest in the 

 middle. The ventral beak is incurved, but does touch the dorsal 

 valve. The interior has not been seen. 



Length of the figured specimen, 23 mm.; width, 21 mm. 



Locality. — This species is very rare, and has been found only at 

 Cystid Point, Valcour Island, New York, in the Upper Chazy. The 

 holotype is in the Carnegie Museum. 



Key to the Preceding Species. 

 Camarotoechia plena. — Plications uniformly strong. 

 Camarolcechia orientalis. — Median plication of sinus and central ones on fold 



stronger than the others. 

 Catnarotcechia pristina. — Median plication of sinus and central ones on fold weaker 



than the others. 

 Camarotoechia major. — Middle plication of fold strongest. Fold and sinus very 



weak. 



Genus Protorhyncha Hall and Clarke. 

 10. Protorhyncha dubia Hall. 



Alrypa dubia Hall, 1847. Paleontology of New York, Vol. I, p. 21, PI. 4 bis, fig. 5. 

 Rhynchonella dubia Hall, 1859. Twelfth Annual Report New York State Cabinet 



Natural History, p. 66. 

 Protorhyncha dubia Hall and Clarke, 1893. Paleontology of New York, Vol 



VIII, pt. 2, p. i8o. 



Atrypa dubia was described by Hall from a small exfoliated speci- 

 men oi)taincd from the upper part of the Chazy at Chazy, New York. 

 The location of the type is not now known, and the description given 

 by Hall is not sufficient to identify more material. The original 

 specimen may have been a young Camarotcechia plena, a young Cam- 

 arotoechia pristina, or a broken and exfoliated Hebertella. The name 

 should be dropped as the species was not so defined as to be recogniz- 

 able. 



