96 Dr. F. Baron Nopcsa on Kerunia. 



In the first description of Kerunia, given by Professor Mayer- 

 Eymar, tliis fossil was regarded as a Cephalopod, but in a 

 later paper by Dr. Paul Oppenheim it was placed among the 

 Hydractinians. Remarkable peculiarities in the structure of 

 this fossil have brought about this discrepancy of views as to 

 its systematic position in the animal kingdom ; but after a 

 careful study of a fairly complete set of specimens I find 

 myself in accordance with Mayer-Eymar, as well as with 

 Oppenheim, and consider Kerunia to be both a Hydractinian 

 and a Cephalopod. 



(A) Kerunia inhabited hy a Cephalopod. 



Contrary to Oppenheim's criticism on Mayer-Eymar's 

 reconstruction of Kerunia, an examination of several ex- 

 amples in the British Museum, in the Museum of the 

 Egyi)tian Geological Survey at Cairo, in my own collection, 

 as well as a specimen portrayed in one of Oppenheim^s figures 

 (Oppenheim, lac. cit. p. 46, fig. 1), all exhibit the accuracy 

 of Mayer-Eymar's views, although between the different 

 specimens there exists a good deal of what may perhaps be 

 termed individual variation. Kerunia is a bilateral, calca- 

 reous, mostly recrystallized mass, always showing, however, 

 a rapidly augmenting, strongly bent, cone-like, median cavity 

 (PI. III. fig. 6), the outer wall (convex) of which carries 

 in its median line a row of lofty spines (fig. 9), while from 

 each side wall of the cavity mentioned one long spine-like 

 projection is given off (fig. 3). The cone-like cavity, which 

 evidently contained the soft parts of the animal, shows on its 

 internal (convex) side a projecting lip, forming the margin of 

 its opening (fig. 1). Tlie opening itself is someiimes large 

 and somewhat lobate (fig. 1), although quite as frequently 

 round and rather constricted (fig. 4). In one case, to be 

 referred to later on, it is perfectly closed (fig. 10). As shown 

 in figs. 1-10 of Plate III., Kerunia is a perfectly regularly 

 built organism, and Oppenheim's aggressive phrase, " Es 

 bedarf daher eigentlich kaum einer Versicherung, dass auch 

 mir nichts Aehnliches vorliegt, und dass es die Phantasie des 

 Autors, nicht wie dieser meint, diejenige der Natur war, 

 welche gescliiiftig dieses Fabelwesen geschaffcn hat," is 

 entirely without foundation. 



Looking over my specimens of Kerunia with Mr. R. Bullen 

 Newton, of the British Museum, to whom all students of 

 Dibranehiata are greatly indebted for his very useful paper 

 (written in conjunction with Mr. G. F. Harris) " A Revision 

 of the British Eocene Cephalopoda,'' he at once indicated to 



