“Kammleisten” of Professor Fritsch. 93 
of these two, or perhaps three, have been recognized by 
previous observers. Mr. Barkas’s* figures in the ‘ Geological 
Magazine’ | apparently represent members of two distinct 
series. Fig. 1 may be identifiable with the specimen that [ 
have drawn on Pl. VI. fig. 1. The pectination is coarser, 
. however, and the teeth less numerous. Fig. 2 may possibly 
be referable to my No. 2 (Pl. VI. fig. 2). Mr. Barkas’s 
figures, however, are a little roughly drawn; and I have not 
been able to see the original specimens. An examination of 
these might perhaps show that they are distinct. These two 
Specimens were named, I believe, Ctenoptychius unilateralis. 
I have not been able to see either the figures or description of 
Ctenoptychius marginalis, Barkas ; nor have I yet seen any 
specimens in collections so labelled. I cannot, therefore, say 
whether it is a ‘‘ Kammplatte” or not. The doubt which I 
am thus unfortunately obliged to leave surrounding Mr. Bar- 
kas’s work is of the less importance, as there does not appear 
to be any immediate necessity of distinguishing the different 
forms by names. Well characterized fragments or perfect 
specimens of the animals that bore them may be discovered 
at any moment with the comb plates attached ; and it is per- 
haps better to wait till the connexion can in this way be 
satisfactorily established before giving names to their scat- 
tered fragments. 
The unexpected revelation of these singular bodies in con- 
nexion with a genus of Labyrinthodonts, if they do really 
belong to the genus {, makes it probable that as the history 
of other and allied genera is gradually elucidated, variously 
modified dermal structures will be disclosed, of whose exist- 
ence we are at present in ignorance. 
Description of the British Specimens of ““Kammplatten ”’ in the 
Cabinets of Messrs. Taylor and Ward and in my own 
Collection. 
No. 1 (Plate VI. fig. 1, nat. size) —Length 1 inch. Handle 
less than one half of the entire length, thick, gradually 
tapering to a blunt poimt. The lamella gradually rises to a 
* Mr. Barkas has kindly supplied me with the reference to ‘ Scientific 
Opinion,’ but omitted to give me the volume and page. I am also in- 
debted to him for a plate from the ‘Colliery Guardian,’ giving figures of 
two specimens, apparently the same as those represented in the Geol. 
Mag. (vide infra). As I have not been able to see ‘Scientific Opinion ’ 
(a rather obscure and now defunct publication), I am unable to discuss 
Mr. Barkas’s contributions to our knowledge of these bodies as fully as I 
~ could wish. 
+ Geol. Mag. vol. vi. p. 43. - 
} A microscopic examination would help to settle the point. 
