574 Kahl A. Grönwall. 



to distinguish our form from tlie species mentioned. Sp. Sirangwaysi 

 is of considerably less thickness, and has a larger number of ribs 

 — 10 to 14 on each side of the sinus — which continue to the 

 edge of the shell. 



Our specimens are derived from the bituminous limestone {N:o 

 WO), at a height of 200 m. above the sea, in the Conglomerate 

 section. 



Spirifer sp. indet. 2. 



Of undeterminable Spirifer fragments we consider that we ought 

 to mention two specimens of wide forms. 



The one, which is silicified, was found on the mainland behind 

 Henrik Kröyers Islets {N:o 206) and belongs to a species with a very 

 Avide shell, about 3 times as wide as it is long; the shell is rather 

 flat, with 12 — 15 flattened ribs on each side of the shallow sinus, 

 which, at the anterior margin, is almost half as broad as the length 

 of the shell (which was about 20 mm.). 



The other is a cast of a shell preserved in a free-lying boulder 

 of limestone {N:o 153), found at the Mallemukfjæld. The fragment 

 shows only the one flank of the shell, but points to its being a 

 specimen with a width of approximately 60 mm,, the width being 

 somewhat more than 3 times as great as the length. The shell has 

 had 10 — 12 flattened ribs on each side of the sinus and sinuous, 

 imbricate striæ of growth. This sculpture, as well as the form of 

 the shell, points to a relationship with that group of Spirifers that 

 includes the Sub-Carboniferous Sp. triangularis Martin, Sp. Dieneri 

 TscHERN. from the Schwagerina horizon of Russia, and the Permian 

 Sp. alatus V. Schloth. 



N:o 11. Martinia corciiium Kut. 



For synonyms see Tschernyschew 1902, p. 180. 



A few specimens of smooth brachiopods have been found in a 

 free-lying boulder of red limestone {N:o 168,2) obtained at the foot 

 of the Mallemuktjæld, and very much recalling the red limestone 

 found in many places in the lower part of the profiles, e. g., west 

 of Koch's section. They should, probably be referred to the species 

 above-mentioned. 



These specimens are rather badly preserved, and only two give 

 any reliable evidence as to the relationship of the form to the 

 species as formerly described. But these two specimens, too, are 

 incomplete at the anterior margin. It should seem, however, as 

 if our specimens were somewhat wider than Tschernvschew's figures 



