NO. 144(1. NE W PA LEOZOTC OSTRA CODA — VLRICH A ND BAS8LER. 155 



the matter, and it is hoped that .such studies may finall}^ result in a 

 satisfactor}^ classitication of the species. 



The relations of the Carboniferous Beyrichiidte under consideration 

 to KhMjya are more apparent than real. At the best they rest on 

 resemblances e^xhibited by what may be justly regarded as aberrant 

 species of K'lrlfhya (e g., A" tricoUina)^ or by species whose true 

 characters and generic alliances have been misinterpreted. K. amiec- 

 tens of Jones and Kirkby (1866) is such a species. In 1896, however, 

 the same authors made it the type of a new genus. Recognizing the 

 resemblance shown by K. ann.€cten>< to such widely different types as 

 Prhnltia^ Kirlxhya^ JJlricJna^ Drtpwnella^ and Beyricluopsis^ they 

 proposed to distinguish it under a name ''indicative of its connective 

 character, viz, Synaphe.'' The studies of the present writers tend, in 

 the manner already set forth, to support the observations of the British 

 authors except that part which refers to the alliance of Synaphe with 

 Kirl'hya. The latter genus, namely, seems not to be genetically rela- 

 ted to Synaj}/n\ representing, in the writers' opinion, a distinct family 

 that was distinguished nearl}^ or quite as early as the true Beyrichiidae. 

 The Kirkb3'ida3, as the family maj^ be called, had its inception in such 

 early Ordovician ostracoda as MaeronotelJd. Other Ordovician and 

 Silurian genera that should be referred to the new family are Moorea 

 and Placentula. 



As to the genus Klrlvbya^ as now understood, it doubtless is suscep- 

 tible of subdivision, if indeed it may not be divided into two and per- 

 haps three equally good generic groups. Restricting the genus to 

 species conforming in general shape and markings to the genotype 

 K. perm/ana Jones — a species of which in passing it may be remarked 

 is much like the Ordovician Macronotella — it is evident that the trino- 

 date forms, such as K. tricoUlna Jones and Kirkby and K. centronata 

 of the present paper, are worth}^ of a separate generic designation. 

 These nodate forms at first sight suggest intimate generic relations to 

 Be3n-ichiida?, but it seems to the writers as more likely to be a case of 

 mere similarity in final development. However, pending the conclu- 

 sion of the detailed comparisons now in progress, it has seemed advis- 

 able to defer the suggested restriction of the genus to a more fitting 

 opportunity. 



Finally, of all the Paleozoic ostracoda, the Kirkby id^ only seem to 

 afford the stock from which the great family Cytherida? might have 

 been derived. Several Silurian species have been referred to Cythere 

 by Jones, but it seems highly improbable that any of these is strictly 

 referable to that genus. The same might be said of certain Carbonif- 

 erous species described by Jones and Kirkby. Cythere f haworfJd of 

 this article is one of three species in the United States National Museum 

 that nearly fill the requirements. Though rather obviously allied to 

 Kirkby idffi, they are most probably Cytherida;, but whether true 

 Cythere can not be decided now. 



