GUELPH FAUNA IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK 45 



Whitfieldella nitida Hall is not reported from the Guelph 

 limestone of Canada. It is there replaced by W. hyale Billings (sp.) 

 which is said to be abundant at all localities. The Rochester specimens 

 are distinctively different from the latter, which is broader shouldered, has 

 its greatest width more posteriorly and is less convex. The majority of 

 them however have a broader outline than the typical Lockport specimens, 

 a feature in which they approach W. nucleolata Hall, the Coralline 

 limestone representative of the genus, but they still differ from the latter in 

 not having a distinct sinus and indentation of the anterior margin. Hall 1 

 makes the interesting statement that these broader forms occur in the 

 Lockport limestone of eastern Wayne county and in Cayuga county, that 

 they have not the full development which the same species has in the shale 

 at Rochester, and that they are not easily distinguished from the less 

 characteristic specimens of W. nucleolata. The forms from the Guelph 

 dolomite here considered seem to agree most closely with these eastern 

 shells from the Coralline limestone. 



Whitfieldella hyale is reported by Whitfield from the Wis- 

 consin Racine and Guelph beds, while W. nitida is mentioned only from 

 the Racine beds. As the latter species has not been cited from the 

 Guelph of Ohio it appears to be present in that formation only in New 

 York. It is entirely absent from the lower horizon at Shelby. 



cAMAitoTOKCHiA Hall & Clarke. 1892 

 Camarotoechia (?) neglecta Hall (sp.) 



Plate 4, fig. 38-31 



Atrypa n e g 1 e c t a Hall, Paleontology of New York. 1852. 2: 274, pi. 57, fig. la-p 

 Rhynchonella n e gl ec t a Hall, N. Y. State Mus. 28th An. Rep't. 1879. p. 162, 



pi. 26, fig. 1-6 

 Rhynchonella neglecta Beecher & Clarke, N. Y. State Mus. Mem. 1. 1889. 



p. 37, pi. 4, fig. 3, 6-8 



Characteristic specimens of this species are quite common in the white 

 chert of the Rochester and the upper Shelby dolomite. They seem to 



»Pal. N. Y. 2:329. 



