72 Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society. 



Amongst other species this was some years ago selected by 

 Professor M'Coy to represent his section Ewphemiis* a name 

 proposed for globose Bellerophons, with a spirally striated 

 surface, and, as it was thought, no dorsal hand. Although 

 tlie latter point is a misconception, as Professor M'Coy himself 

 pointed out afterwards,-}- it may be with advantage employed, 

 in a sectional sense, for such forms as B. Urei. A variety 

 of names have been proposed for various sections of tlie 

 genus Bcllerophon, in addition to the two just mentioned, but 

 it is questionable if any of them can be applied to the British 

 Carboniferous forms. Such sub-genera are Tropidodiscus 

 (Meek), Salpirigostoma (F. Eoemer), and Tremanotus (Hall). 



Much difference of opinion exists in regard to the 

 systematic position of the Bellerophons. By most authors 

 they are placed in the Family Atlantidae of the Order 

 Heteropoda, but Professor M'Coy established for them a 

 distinct family under the name of Bellerophontida3.:[: He 

 regarded them as Monothalamous Tetrabranchiate Cephalo- 

 pods, here following many of the older writers, but although 

 we cannot agree with him in this step, we believe the es- 

 tablishment of the family one in the right direction. A 

 very interesting paper, " Note on the Affinities of the Bel- 

 lerophontid8e,"§ has been written by the late Mr Meek. In 

 it he calls attention to a much overlooked suggestion of Pro- 

 fessor de Koninck made in 1844,11 who placed Bellerophon 

 near Emarginnla (in the Scutibranchiate order of the Pro- 

 sobranchiata), '* viewing them as Emargimdm with a greatly 

 extended and strongly involuted apex." More recently Dr 

 Waagen has entered on this subject, and proposed still 

 further sub-divisions of tlie genus Bellerophon, under the 

 names of Patellostiuni, Mognlia, Warthia, and Stachella, all 

 with reference to the form of the mouth and striation of the 

 shell. Their application to British species remains to be 

 worked out.lF 



Mr Meek believed this reference on the part of the distin- 



* Synop. Carb. Lime. Foss., 1844, p. 25. t Erit. Tal. Foss., p. 380. 



X Ibid, p. 307. § Proc. Chicago Acad. Science, 1866, i. (separate copy). 



II Anim. Foss. Terr. Carb. Bclgique, p. 337. 



II Pal. Indica, Ser. xiii.. Salt Kaiige Fossils, pt. 2, 1880, pp. 131, mO, 158, 

 and 171. 



