158 REPORTS ON THE STATE OF SCIENCE. 
Fig. 2.—The right side of the same skull as it would appear if bisected by a 
sagittal section and viewed from the middle line. 
To show that the basis cranii lies far below the level of the palate. Reference 
letters as in fig. 1. 
Fig. 3.—Photograph of the upper surface of the back of the skull. x 13 approx. 
To show the epiotic (Ep.) overlying the squamosals (sqg.), which in turn overlie 
the parietals (par.), 
Bibliographical Notes upon the Flora and Fauna of the British Keuper. 
By A. R. Horwoop. 
Lists dealing with the paleontology of the Leicestershire Upper 
Keuper and some neighbouring localities, and a bibliography relating to 
the same, were published in the Trias Report for 1907. In the last 
year’s Report (1908) a list of the fossils from certain counties, which 
had not so far found a place in these Reports, was published, together 
with a bibliography of works relating to the flora and fauna from 1826 
to 1876. The present communication is complementary to the two 
former lists, bringing the literature up to date from 1877 onward, and 
bringing together in one accessible bibliography all the works included 
in the Reports not so far arranged chronologically ; and to these are added 
2 number of papers not hitherto noted therein. Furthermore, the 
analysis of the paleontology of each work given at the end will serve, it 
is hoped, as a useful summary of the subject-matter in this connection. 
In view of the fact that certain beds previously classed as Permian 
exhibit a typical Triassic vertebrate fauna, as remarked by Mr. H. A. 
Allen (Trias Report, 1908), some of the records which were regarded 
as referring to the Permian are included here. At the same time, the 
fact must not be ignored, in questions of this kind, that footprints 
resembling Triassic footprints have been discovered in the Permian beds 
of Mansfield,t Nottinghamshire, and in the Lower Sandstones of the 
Exeter district.2 Indeed, there is, according to Mr. G. Hickling, some 
doubt as to whether the Elgin sandstones are not also Permian,’ though 
Dr. F. von Huene* correlates these latter with the Dolomitic Con- 
glomerate and German Lettenkohle (Lower Keuper). 
1. Agassiz, L.—1835-1844 ‘Recherches sur les Poissons Fossiles,’ ii. pt. i 
p. 303. Palcwoniscus catopterus (Ag.), Keuper, Roan Hill, Tyrone. 
2. Riley, H., and S. Stutchbury.—1836 ‘A Description of Fossil remains of 
three distinct Saurian animals recently discovered in the Magnesian Conglomerate 
near Bristol’ (‘ Geol. Trans.,’ v. 2nd series, 1836, p. 549). Palawosaurus platyodon 
(R. and 8.), P. cylindrodon (R. and S.), and 7'hecodontosaurus sp., Magnesian 
Conglomerate, Durdham Down. 
3. Buckland, Rev. W.—1837 ‘Geology and Mineralogy considered with 
ceference to Natural Theology,’ 2nd edition (vol i. pp. 259-266; vol. ii. pl. 26). 
Cheirotherium, Trias, Dumfries. 
4. Egerton, Sir P. de Grey.—1838 ‘ On two casts of Impressions of the Hind 
Foot of a gigantic Cheirotherium from the New Red Sandstone of Cheshire’ 
(‘ Proc. Geol. Soc.,’ iii., p. 14). Cheirotherium, Trias, Tarporley. 
5. Ward, Dr. O. D.—1839 ‘ On Footprints and Ripplemarks of the New Red 
Sandstone at Grinshill, Shropshire’ (‘ Brit. Assoc. Rep.’). (?) Rhynchosaurus, 
Lower Keuper, Grinshill. 
2 Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. lxii. 1906, pp. 125-131. 
2 Tbid., vol. lxiv. 1908, pp. 496-500 and pl. li. 
3’ Mem. Manch. Geol. Soc. 1909, paper in press. 
“ Geol. Mag. 1908, pp. 98-99. 
