DERMATEMYDID&. 269 
side of the bone the descending sulcus is narrow and shallow, like those of the costals. This 
bone is strongly concave on the upper surface and has an acute free border. It was very 
loosely articulated with the contiguous costal; and in the upper border there is a pit for the 
extremity of the costal rib. Fig. 334a is a section of this bone. 
Professor Cope thought that this species attained about the size of Baptemys wyoming- 
é m . . . . * ~ eI o 
ensis, but none of the bones described by him indicates a size so great. From the width of the 
costal represented by fig. 331 the writer estimates the length of the carapace at something less 
than 200 mm. 
Genus NOTOMORPHA Cope. 
A little-known genus. Anterior, and probably posterior, peripherals with obtuse free 
borders. Apparently intergulars large; the gulars small and removed far from the midline. 
Type: Notomorpha gravis Cope. 
The materials on which the genus Notomorpha was based are in the U. S. National 
Museum. In the original description of the genus (Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., x11, 1872, p. 474) 
characters were attributed to it which were derived from bones of the species called in the 
present work Echmatemys testudinea. These bones, altho portions of the first costals with 
articular scars for axillary buttresses, were supposed by Cope to be xiphiplastrals with scars 
for the pubis. On the strength of these, the genus was assigned to the Pleurodira. Cope’s 
discovery of his error regarding the character of the plastron, his removal of his species testu- 
dinea to Emys, and his reduction of the species N. garmanii to a synonym of N. gravis, left 
the latter the type of the genus. This he concluded was also a member of the Emydidz, but 
associated with Dermatemys and Agomphus. As the dermatemyd turtles are now regarded as 
a distinct family, Notomorpha must be arranged in that family. 
As stated above, Cope made his N. garmanii a synonym of N. gravis, a proper course in 
case there is only a single species involved; but of this there may be permitted grave doubts. 
Of his gravrs he described a hyoplastron and an epiplastral of one individual and a costal of 
what was doubtfully another. The costal had a width of 58 mm., which indicated a very large 
turtle. Cope at first recognized important differences between the epiplastrals; but later he 
considered these of less importance. We may, then, have doubts regarding the specific iden- 
tity of the two lots of bones. Besides this, the materials figured all belong to his N. garmanit. 
Notwithstanding all this, until future discoveries shall have thrown additional light on 
Notomor pha, it will be best to place the few known remains under the specific name gravis. 
Notomorpha gravis Cope. 
Figs. 335) 336. 
Notomorpha gravis, Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., x11, 1872, p. 476. 
Notomorpha garmanit, Cope, Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc., x11, 1872, p. 477. 
Emys gravis, Cope, Sixth Ann. Report U. S. Geol. Sury. Terrs., 1872 (1873), p- 626. 
Notomorpha gravis, Cope, Vert. Tert. Form. West, 1884, p. 143, plate xxiii, figs. 14-16.—Hay, Bibliog. 
and Cat. Foss. Vert. N. A., 1902, p. 448. 
The bones on which Notomorpha gravis was based appear to have been lost. Those 
which Cope described as N. garmanii are now in the U. S. National Museum, some of these 
bearing the number 4103; others, belonging apparently to the same individual, have the 
number 4129. It is not known whether all the bones accompanying the figured specimens 
belonged to the same individuals or even the same species. We shall have to regard as types 
the remains which were figured by Cope. All three of these are numbered 4103. The bones 
originally described under the two specific names had been discovered in the Wasatch beds 
at a point near Bear River, 6 miles north of Evanston, Wyoming. 
The bone which was regarded as characteristic of Notomorpha is the supposed epiplastron, 
the subject of Cope’s fig. 14, plate xxiii, of his work on The Vertebrata of the Tertiary For- 
mations of the West. The writer has been unable to convince himself that this is the epi- 
plastron, altho it may be such. It may bea first peripheral. The upper border of the original 
of Cope’s fig. 14, which was supposed to be the front of the lip, has the appearance of having 
