Reviews — Paleontology of New York. 37 



Brachiopoda." The text of the second part, just issued complete, 

 has already been noticed in this Magazine, 1 as it was circulated in 

 two fasciculi among students on account of the long delay interposed 

 in the printing of the plates, now most happily accomplished. They 

 form a magnificent series, over sixty in number, with many hundreds 

 of beautiful figures illustrating the Palaeozoic Spiriferidse, Rhyncho- 

 nellidse, and primitive Terebratulidae, skilfully delineated by former 

 assistants, Mr. R. P. Whitfield and Mr. E. Emmons, and finely litho- 

 graphed by Mr. P. Ast. Each plate is accompanied by descriptions 

 and legend, with a textual reference facilitating comparison. Nearly 

 468 preparations of internal structure were made by Trof. Clarke 

 for this volume. Two figures are given on pi. lxxxiv — figs. 34 and 35 

 — of the new genus Torynifer, of which but a single fragment is known. 

 It bears, however, the critical structure which separates it from other 

 genera. The type, T. criticus, is from the Lower Carboniferous 

 St. Louis group of La Rue, Kentucky. This genus, " with general 

 relations less athyroid than orthoid," was thus briefly described in 

 the " Annual Report of the State Geologist of New York" for 1893, 

 p. 943, vol. ii, Palaeontology: "The shells athyroid in external 

 aspect, but with a well-defined cardinal area and a distinct spon- 

 dvliiim in the pedicle valve supported by a median septum." The 

 systematic classification finally adopted has also been already 

 epitomized. 2 We now quote in full a frank additional statement 

 appended on page 385^- (vol. viii, pt. ii). 



" The preceding table of Classification of the Brachiopoda is pre- 

 sented with many reservations and in deference to the general opinion 

 expressed by brachiopodists at the present time ; but the author 

 believes that it is not the grouping which will be finally sustained. 

 While much of it is an expression of the natural relations and suc- 

 cession of types, there are some portions which are not satisfactory. 

 There seems a more natural succession in the line of the Peuta- 

 meroids through the Amphigenidae and the Rensseloeridae to the 

 Centronellidae than directly from the Rhynchonellidae. There is also 

 quite as much, or more, reason for believing the Rhynchonellids to 

 be the progenitors of the spire-bearing forms than that they are the 

 progenitors of the loop-hearing forms. The Rhynchonelloid typa 

 began early, is persistent and abundant through all the Palaeozoic 

 faunas, ami, although the transition from these forms to the loop- 

 bearers may be considered the more simple, there is yet much 

 required to show the natural succession, which is more completely 

 accomplished from the Pentameroids to the loop-bearing forms 

 through Amphiyenia and Rensselceria. That the brachia of Rhyn- 

 chonellids may unite and form a loop seems a very natural inference, 

 and in some forms is nearly accomplished. It would appear that in 

 the Zygospiroids, which have externally a Rhynchonelloid aspect, the 

 loop is completed by the formation of a jugum ; but it goes still 



1 Geol. Mag., Dec. Ill, Vol. X, No. 353, p. 518, Nov. 1893. 

 Ibid., Dec. IV, Vol. I, No. 358, p. 172, April 1894. 



Ibid., Dec. IV, Vol. II, No. 369, pp. 103-113, March 1895. 



2 Geol. Mag., Dec. IV, Vol. II, No. 369, pp. 103-113, March 1895. 



