286 SMITHSONIAN MISCELLANEOUS COLLECTIONS VOL. 53 



(S^Sg) in the Groom Mining- District, at the south end of the Timpa- 

 hiite Range, near the Hne between Nye and Lincohi counties ; all in 

 Nevada. 



Genus HOLMIA Matthev^^ 



Paradoxides Ford (in part), 1878, American Journ. Sci., 3d ser., Vol. 15, 

 p. 130, footnote. (Discusses the generic relations of Paradoxides as 

 represented by P. kjcridfi and P. aciilcafiis with Olciidhis as repre- 

 sented by O. asaphoides.) 



Olenellus Holm (in part), 1887, Geol. Foren. i Stockholm Forhandlingar, 

 Bd. 9, Hafte 7, pp. 498-499. (Described in Swedish. As described and 

 discussed throughout the paper the genus includes many of the forms 

 now placed in the family Mesonacidse.) 



Gen ? Matthew, 1888, Canadian Record Sci., Vol. 3, pp. 75-76. (Linnars- 

 son's species, Paradoxides kj'crnlfi, is discussed as the representative 

 of a new genus intermediate between Paradoxides and Olenellus, and 

 Matthew says : " It is to be hoped that his countrymen will see 

 reason to connect Holm's name with this new genus.") 



Holmia Marcou, 1890, American Geologist, Vol. 5, pp. 365-366. (Linnars- 

 son's species is discussed and Marcou accepts Matthew's suggestion 

 [1888, p. 76] and places the species under Holmia.^ 



Holmia Matthew, 1890, Trans. Roy. Soc. Canada, Vol. 7, Sec. 4. p. 160, 

 footnote. (Points out differences between Olenellus kjerulft and the 

 American species of Olenellus, and proposes the generic name Holmia.) 



Cephalacanthus Lapworth (in part) [not Lacepede], 1891, Tenth Ann. 

 Rept. U. S. Geol. Survey, by Chas. D. Walcott, p. 641. (Proposed as a 

 new genus to include Olenellus kjerulii, O. broggeri, and O. eallavei. 

 The name, however, was preoccupied by Lacepede, 1802, Hist. Nat. 

 Poiss., Vol. 3, p. 32^.) 



Cephalacanthus Lapworth (in part), 1891, Geol. ]Mag., Dec. 3, Vol. 8, 

 P- 531- (Gives reasons for proposing the genus. The reference to the 

 original place of publication of Cephalacanthus is given as " Geol. Mag., 

 1888, p. 641 " it should be " Tenth Ann. Rept. U. S. Geol. Survey, by 

 Chas. D. Walcott, 1891, p. 641.") 



Holmia Cole, 1892, Natural Science, Vol. i, p. 344. (Discussed. In the 

 legend of figure 3, p. 343, Holmia is placed as a subgenus of Olenellus.) 



Holmia Peach, and Horne (in part), i8g2, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. Lon- 

 don, Vol. 48, p. 236. As defined this genus includes forms now re- 

 ferred to both Holmia and Callavia.) 



Holmia (Olenellus) Peach (in part), 1894, Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. Lon- 

 don, Vol. 50, pp. 671-674. (Compares certain characters of Holmia 

 with those of Olenellus and Mesonacis. As discussed in these pages, 

 however, the genus includes forms now referred to both Holmia and 

 Callavia.) 



Holmia Beecher, 1897, American Journ. Sci., 4th ser., Vol. 3, p. 191. (Con- 

 siders facial sutures of Holmia as in a condition of synthesis. Places 

 Holmia in family Paradoxincr.) 



Holmia Frech, t'897, Lethjea geognostica, pt. i. Lethrea Palceozoica. Bd. 

 2, p. 41. (Considers Holmia and Olenopsis Borncniann as identical.) 



