The Geology of Cincinnatt, 87 
Fossils do not appear to be nearly as abundant as in beds 
underlying or overlying. But these beds have received little 
attention from collectors. Careful collecting may show a 
large and varied, as well as characteristic fauna.* About 
thirty-five feet below the top of these beds occurs the stratum 
of the noted Dinorthis retrorsa (Salter), of very limited extent 
vertically, but very persistent horizontally. This Orthid is 
abundant in this stratum, but seems to be restricted to it. 
The following species are considered to occur in the War- 
ren beds in addition to those given as ranging through the 
Lorraine: 
BRYOZOA. 
Amplexopora sp. Homotrypa bassleri Nickles. (c) 
Batostoma varians (James). (c) Leptotrypa? dychei (James). 
Berenicea sp. Lioclemella sp. 
Callopora sp. Mesotrypa sp. 
Ceramoporella granulosa Ulrich, Nicholsonella sp. 
variety. Peronopora compressa (Ulrich). 
Ceramoporella whitei (James). ay decipiens (Rominger). 
‘ sp. Proboscina frondosa (Nicholson). 
Cceloclema sp. Rhopalonaria venosa Ulrich. 
Heterotrypa sp. 
BRACHIOPODA. 
Dinorthis retrorsa (Salter). 
PELECYPODA. 
Anomalodonta alata Meek. Cymatonota cylindrica (Miller and 
Ctenodonta madisonensis Ulrich. Faber). 
Cymatonota constricta Ulrich. - Modiolodon subovalis Ulrich. 
*[t is quite probable that a few of the forms, which in this paper are listed as 
belonging to the lower Richmond, will prove to belong to the Warren beds. The 
recognition of the fact that the Cincinnati period consists of the three well-marked 
groups, Utica, Lorraine, and Richmond, is comparatively recent. And still more 
recently has it been seen that in each are well-marked divisions, easily recognized 
when once the faunal and lithological differences are known. A very large number 
of the fossils described from the Cincinnati period are rare forms; some are unique, 
but a single specimen being known. So long asthe idea prevailed that the Cincinnati 
group, as it was then called, was homogeneous and indivisible, collectors were indif- 
ferent as to the exact horizon of their finds. Hence, when those who described fos- 
sils. give simply Cincinnati, Ohio, as the locality, it is often a matter of conjecture 
from just which particular division the fossil came. For this reason the lists given 
in this paper must be considered largely provisional. I have to acknowledge grate- 
fully the very great help I have received in placing the fossils in their various beds 
from my friends, Messrs. E. O. Ulrich and R. S. Bassler, whose full and accurate 
knowledge of the Cincinnati fossils and their horizons has been freely at my service. 
39 
