64 I'ALEONTOLIXIY OF NEW JEKSEY. 



The shell is(|uite variable in its oeiieral (•utliiie, being- soiuetmies much 

 l<»n<;er than high, in whieh case the prolon-iation is mostly auteriorly, 

 niakin<>- the hinye line appear proportionally short, and throwing the beak 

 farther back. 



Loailif//: All the sfjeeimens which 1 have seen are from Jericho, N. J., 

 and ai'e from the National Museum collection. 



LUCINA TRISULCATA. 



Plate X, figs. 1-4. 



Liwinn irisulcata Conrad: Am. Jour. 8ci., vol. 41, 1st ser., p. 346; Miocene Foss., p. 

 71, PI. XI, fig. .5; Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Pliil., 1862, p. i")77; Meek, Check List 

 Miocene Foss., p. 8; Heilprin, Proc. Acad. N. Sci. I'liil., 1887, pp. 400 and 403. 



"Obovate, convex; with concentric lines, and two oi' three di.stinct 

 concentric furrows; linuile ])rofound. Dirt'ers from L. alveufa of the lower 

 Tertiarv in being less ventricose, and in the nuich more profoundly impressed 

 lunule; the cardinal teeth are also very different." (Conrad in Journal 

 of the Academy of Natiu-al .Sciences of Philadel[)hia.) 



In the Pliocene Fossils TVIr. Conrad gives the following description: 

 "()vate, «-onv(^x, eh^vated, with two or three remote concentric furrows and 

 numei'ous concentric lines; anterior side rather longer than the posterior; 

 posterior margin subtruncated; beaks prominent; lunule cordate and very 

 protbimd; iimer margin creiuilated; cardinal and latei'al teeth distinct." 



The onlv specimens which I have seen from New Jersey are two 

 valves from the well-boring at Atlantic City, which, while differing very 

 materially troiii the figiu-e given by Mr. C'Oiu'ad, and, in some of their feat- 

 ures, from the (lescri))ti()ns, still possess characters that ally them specifically 

 with those from more southern localities. One of the principal differences 

 that I find is in the less convexity of these New Jersey specimens, which 

 are quite flat as compared with specimens from the Neuse River in North 

 Carolina. They are also more coarsely marked concentricall)', the lines 

 being thicker and more recur\'ed, while one of them is entirely destitute of 

 any indication of the deep concentric furrows. The shells are also thinner 

 on the hinge, and the teeth much less pronounced; Avhile the lunule in both 

 examples is very small and (juite the opposite from "very profound," as 



