26 



NATURE 



[May 12, 1892 



ninckina Leopoldi Austria nov. spec" Here the author 

 is following the bad example oi^^ Spin/erina Maximiliani 

 Leuchtenbergcnsis Klipstein sp." and similar preciositi-is 

 of the older writer. If emperors and dukes need such 

 distinctive appellations, what must be done for ordinary 

 mortals ? Some day we shall see " Robinsonia Gulielmi- 

 Smithi-South-Kensingtonensis Jones sp." Seriously, no 

 amount of snobbishness can make these names binomial. 

 Mr. Bittner will need no apology for these remarks, for he 

 has written : — 



" Es ware nur zu wiinschen, dass man sich auch gegen 

 andere . . . Uebelstande und Missbrauche in derNo- 

 menclatur ... in so eifriger Weise aussprechen . . . 

 mochte." 



In his investigations into the internal structure of some 

 of these Biachiopods the author has received much help 

 from the researches of Mr. H. Zugmayer, many of which 

 are here published for the first time. Like the Rev. 

 Norman Glass, Mr. Zugmayer has devoted much atten- 

 tion to the shape of the lophophoral support. While Mr. 

 Glass, however, works his specimens out by careful dis- 

 section, Mr. Zugmayer adopts the fashionable method of 

 cutting a series of sections. Morphologists, as we know, 

 look down on palaeontologists, and their real reason is 

 that the latter cannot use the Caldwell microtome ; but 

 the figures here published will go far to remove that re- 

 proach. One could wish, however, for more diagrams 

 elucidating the results obtained by the sections. 



The author has mkde a large number of new subgenera 

 and a few new genera, the details of which are too tech- 

 nical for reproduction here. The following forms may 

 be noted as strictly characteristic of the Trias : —The 

 Koninckinidae, especially Koninckina and A^nphiclinaj 

 the Thecospiridae ; certain Rhynchonellidas, viz. 

 Halorella, Dimerella, and the subgenera Austriella and 

 Norella; Camerothyris and Cruratula, which are two 

 subgenera of Waldheiviia ; Nucleatula and Juvavella^ 

 two new genera of theCentronelline type of Terebratulidas ; 

 long-beaked forms oiRetsiaj most of the diplospire Spiri- 

 gerce ; the septate Spirigerce {Amphttomelld) ; Ment- 

 zelia, a subgenus oi Spinferina j the doubtful Badiotella ; 

 and some peculiar Cyrtince. 



Turning now to Part II. of the work, we may note the 

 following details concerning some of the above forms. 



The numerous groups of Spiriferina, though con- 

 venient, are of uncertain value ; for it is uncertain 

 whether, in determining affinities, more weight should be 

 attached to the structure of the beak or to the ribbing. 

 Ribbing varies greatly in forms with the same beak-struc- 

 ture, e.g. the Hirsuta group. This is an instructive in- 

 stance of the difficulty of classifying on other grounds 

 than those of phylogenesis. 



The CyrtincB are interesting. C. Fritschii is a new 

 species in which the pseudo-deltidium, which in other 

 Brachiopods is a single plate closing in the peduncular 

 aperture, consists of two rows of separate scale-like plates 

 alternating with one another. C. Buchiidind C. Zittelii 

 appear to have been attached, at least in youth, by the 

 apex of the larger valve, which is often curiously distorted 

 This fact may explain the pseudo-deltidium of C. Fritschii 

 for it may have been flexible to allow of the passage of a 

 short peduncle or byssus. These forms lead up to Cyrto- 

 NO. [ 176, VOL. 46] 



theca, which was attached by one of the broad surfaces 

 supporting the beak of the larger valve. The unique 

 original of this genus has unfortunately been lost. 



The genus Spirigera is divided into numerous groups, 

 many of which have a secondary lamella running along- 

 side of the main lamella that supports the spires of the 

 lophophore ; they are therefore said to be " diplospire."' 

 This structure is extremely rare in Palaeozoic species of 

 the genus. 



The Koninckinidae form the most widely distributed 

 family of the Upper Alpine Trias ; and of it, as well as of 

 the four genera belonging to it, a complete description is 

 given. In Mr. Bittner's opinion this family has been 

 shown by the researches of Mr. Zugmayer to be closely 

 allied to the Spiriferidas. The lophophore support is 

 diplospire. Amphiclinodonta, a new genus of this family, 

 has an extremely complicated hinge and teeth. 



Badiotella is a remarkable genus founded on a single 

 unsymmetrical large valve. Its resemblance to Strepto- 

 rhynchus suggests that it is probably a relic of the 

 Strophomenidae. 



Juvavella and Nucleatula are two new genera of the 

 Centronellinae found in the Hallstatt limestone. This 

 group has not hitherto been found in rocks of so late 

 an age. 



The general relations of the Triassic Brachiopods of 

 the Alps may be summarized as follows : — 



In the Lower Trias there are only two species, a 

 Lingula and a Discina. 



In the Muschelkalk there are forty-two species, refer- 

 able to Lingula, Discina, Terebratula, Waldheimia 

 Rhynchonella, Spirigera, Retzia, Spiriferina, and Ment- 

 zelia. All these, in closely allied or even identical 

 forms, appear again in the Upper Trias. 



The Upper Trias contains over 300 species, including 

 all the types already mentioned. This, therefore, is a 

 truer representation of the Brachiopod fauna of the 

 Triassic period. The faunas of the Lower and Middle 

 Trias are less, merely because the conditions were no 

 so favourable in the Alpine area. 



In the Triassic fauna hingeless genera are very rare. 

 Among the hinged genera two families, each containing 

 over 100 species, are noticeable : the Spiriferidas for the 

 large number of genera, subgenera, and minor groups, 

 combined with a paucity of individuals ; the Rhyn- 

 chonellidas for the large number of individuals, with few 

 well-marked genera or subgenera. The philosophic 

 naturalist is tempted to suggest that the few divisions 

 recognized in the latter family may be due to the very 

 richness of the material. 



The spire-bearers almost exactly equal the non-spire- 

 bearers in the number of species. The latter, however, 

 exceed in individuals, and, from this period onwards, in- 

 crease in importance, while the spire-bearers soon dis- 

 appear from the rock record. It is, therefore, very 

 noteworthy that, just before their extinction, the spire- 

 bearers should not only develop new branches— the 

 Koninckinidae and (.^) Thecospiridae— but should also 

 break up into so many genera, subgenera, and minor 

 groups. A similar efflorescence, as Mr. Bittner observes, 

 marked the later history of the Terebratulidae, a family 

 now almost extinct. 



