352 REPORT—1885. 
19. Crratrocarts (?). 
An obscure hinder moiety (25 x12 mm.) of a carapace possibly refer- 
able to Ceratiocaris, is in the Mus. Pract. Geol. 33, ‘ Catal. C. S. Foss.’ 
1878, p. 72. From the ‘ Upper Llandovery; Onny River.’ 
20. CERATIOCARIS ? PERORNATA, Salter. 
1878. Ceratiocaris perornatus (Salter MS.), Huxley and Etheridge. ‘Catal. Camb. 
Sil. Foss.’ M. P. G. p. 142. 
Very little is known of this obscure form. One specimen M.P.G.x 74, 
and two in the Cambridge Museum, are only fragments (one rather more 
than an inch long, and the others less) of what seem to be cylindrical 
spines (like those of Echinoderms), about 5 mm. in diameter, two pitted 
all over (?) and one tuberculate. They are from the Upper Ludlow of 
Benson Knot, near Kendal, Westmoreland. 
C. Genera distinct from Ceratiocaris. 
21. CERATIOCARIS ? ELLIPTICA, M‘Coy. 
1849. Ceratiocaris ellipticus, M‘Coy. ‘Ann. Mag. N, H.’ ser. 2, vol. iv. p. 413. 
1851. . i 33 ‘ Brit. Pal. Foss.’ fasc. i. p. 137, pl. 1 E, fig. 8. 
1854. F Fr Morris. ‘Catal. Brit. Foss.’ 2nd edit. p. 103. 
1859. - ay Salter. In ‘Siluria,’ 2nd (3rd) edit. p. 538. 
1860. ie i, # ‘Ann. M.N. H.’ ser. 3, vol. v. p. 157. 
1867. - ms . In ‘Siluria,’ 3rd (4th) edit. p. 516. 
1873. a F ‘Catal. Camb. Sil. Foss.’ p. 178. 
1877. +4 Mi H. Woodward. ‘Catal. Brit. Foss. Crust.’ p. 71. 
This interesting species, one of the first two established, is represented 
in the Cambridge Museum by specimen b/15 (M‘Coy’s fig. 8), and in 
the Museum of Practical Geology by $$ (‘ Catal.’ 1878, p. 118) and x 5 
(‘ Catal.’ p. 142). The carapace is long-ovate in outline, not very 
convex, greatest convexity of surface and curvature of ventral margin ‘at 
about one-third from the anterior end’; obliquely rounded in front; 
obliquely truncate at the upper portion of the hinder end. There is a 
spot like a definite ocular tubercle in the anterior fourth and above the 
median line of each valve, and this gives it a distant likeness to a guinea- 
pig’s profile. The surface is neatly marked with delicate, longitudinal, 
parallel lines, rather far apart. The published figure of the specimen, 
6/15 (32mm. long and 13 mm. high) is reversed, and drawn too angular 
behind. It came from the Upper-Ludlow sandstone of Benson Knot. 
Specimen M. P. G. $3 is from the Lower-Ludlow beds of Leintwardine, . 
near Ludlow, and is not quite so large nor so well preserved as b /15. 
Specimen M. P. G. x75, from the Upper-Ludlow of Combe Wood, 
Presteign, is larger and more ovate or elliptical than the others, but, un- 
fortunately, is imperfect. The last two have been incorrectly labelled 
‘C, Murchisoni.’? .In 1860 Mr. Salter thought that C. elliptica was only 
a badly preserved variety of C. inornata (‘A. M. N. H.’ J. c.), but in the 
‘Catal. Cambr. Sil. Foss.’ p. 178, he recognised it as ‘ quite distinct.’ 
The above-mentioned three specimens supply the only evidence of an 
eye-spot in these British Ceratiocaridoid Phyllopods.! It is not only a 
generic character distinguishing them from Ceratiocaris, but an important 
1 The ‘ocular tubercles’ mentioned int e footnote at p. 236, Siluria, 3rd (4th) 
edit. 1867, are without doubt due to the presence of ‘teeth’ within the valves. ; 
