54 CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES [Proc. 4th Ser. 



extent that Cretaceous and Martinez fossils are found very 

 close to those of Vaqueros age in a point on the coast. No 

 attempt will here be made to differentiate them positively, but 

 generally the formations are shown in their proper relation on 

 the map, page 51, fig. 3. 



Eocene Correlation 



Venericardia planicosta Lamarck and V. planicosta regia^^ 

 Conrad, range from lower Chickasawan, Lignitic or Wilcox, 

 mto the upper Chickasawan, Lignitic or Wilcox. This range is 

 practically that of the Aquia formation. These species com- 

 pare most closely with V. planicosta hornii (Gabb) of the lower 

 Tejon of California. 



V. planicosta var. 5 Harris", V. m^rylandica Harris^% V. 

 potapacoensis Harris^*, and V. planicosta Harris'' (not Lam- 

 arck?) range from upper Chickasawan into the Claiborne. 

 This range is the range of Harris' Nanjemoy in Maryland and 

 corresponds to that of V. planicosta ionensis Waring'** of the 

 Umpqua or Arago formation in Washington, and the lone at 

 Merced Falls, California. 



V. planicosta venturensis of the upper Martinez of the 

 Camulos quadrangle is of an entirely different horizon and 

 represents sediments of Midway age and older. This species 

 agrees more closely with V. planicosta Lamarck of Harris," 

 which seems deserving at least of subspecific rank. 



V. planicosta Harris'* seems to represent the typical V. plani- 

 costa of Lamarck of which the writer has access to several 

 specimens from the Paris basin. It seems then that the typical 

 V. planicosta is confined to a horizon which is to be correlated 

 with the Lignitic of the Gulf States. The turritellas especially 

 show the close relationship, and both the pelecypods and gas- 

 teropods are very close to many Midway species. 



It will be seen, then, that the Tejon is higher than Dall'^ 

 placed it in 1896. It surely is to be correlated with the lower 



"Maryland Geol. Surv. Eocene, pis. 38, figs. 1, la; 39, figs. 1, la; 40, figs. 1. 2 

 and 3. 



" Bull. 9, Am. Pal., p. 54, pi. 16, fig. 5. 



=3 Maryland Geol. Surv. Eocene, p. 179, pi. xl, figs. 7 and 7a. 



2* Maryland Geol. Surv. Eocene, p. 179, pi. xl, figs. 4-6. 



2= Bull. 9, Am. Pal., p. 54, pi. 16, figs. 1-4. 



^''Jour of Geol., vol. 22, No. 8, p. 785, Nov.-Dec, 1914. M'ap folio accompanymg 

 Bull., 69. Cal. State Min. Bur., pi. 1, 1914. 



" Bull. Am. Pal.. No. 4, p. 58, pi. 4, fig. 13. 



2s Bull. Am. Pal., No. 9, p. 54, pi. 9, figs. 1-3. 



='U. S. Geol. Surv., 18th Annual Report, pt. 2, p. 327. 



