TRANSACTIONS OF WAGNER 

 674 



TERTIARY FAUNA OF FLORIDA 



He mentions that the G. angulata was still (1805) undescribed, and that it 

 was not even known in what collection it then was. Cuvier follows in 1817, 

 and gives a diagnosis of the genus and refers for illustration to plate 189 of 

 the Encyclopedic, figures I and 2 of which were originally named by La- 

 marck G. arcuata. 



It is certain that an undescribed species cannot be accepted as a type, and 

 the type must be selected from the described species of the original list accord- 

 ing to the rules of nomenclature. It would seem from the above notes that 

 this type must be the G. arcuata or, if they are identical, the G. gryphus (L.), 

 from which the genus derived its name. 



In 1819 Lamarck describes the genus again and gives a longer list of 

 species, in which for the first time G. angulata is described. In this list, as 

 the third column of the above table shows, nearly every one of the species 

 of the original list had its name changed, for what reason is unknown ; while 

 the reference to Encyclopedic, plate 189, figures i and 2, is transferred from 

 G. arcuata to G. cymbium, perhaps by a copyist's error. To G. arcuata is 

 added as a synonym G. incurva Sowerby, from the Min. Conch., ii., p. 21, pi. 

 112, fig. I, 1818. 



In his remarks Lamarck states that the group has long been known 

 under the name of Gryphites, which is the name Linne applied to his Aiioinia 

 gryplius in the Museum Tessinianum, 1753. 



In 1825, in the first section of his Grypluea, Blainville cites as examples 

 Lamarck's G. cymbium (Enc. Meth., pi. 189, figs. I, 2) and G. arcuata Lam., 

 which he figures to illustrate the genus. Woodward in 1851 cites G. incurva 

 Sby. 



In spite of all this, we find in Gray, Fischer, Tryon, Stoliczska, and Sacco 

 the assumption that G. angulata is Lamarck's type, an opinion entirely with- 

 out proper foundation. Hanley and Salter, from an examination of Linne's 

 type, refer it to the G. obliquata Sby. The relations of this to the G. arcuata 

 I am unable to determine, and therefore retain the specific name of Lamarck. 



It is perhaps fortunate that G. angulata is not the type of Gryplicea, as 

 anatomical and embryological investigation has shown that this species is 

 simply an oyster of the same type as 0. virginica, and has only a slightly 

 twisted beak to connect it with the fossils properly called Gryphcea. This 

 fact was recognized by Sowerby as soon as he became acquainted with the 

 species, and is now beyond question. 



The characters of this group can hardly be held to be generic, unless by 



