428 Reviews — Wisnioski — Microfauna of Groj'ce, Galicia. 



folded. Among Elasmobranch Fishes, Orthacanthus is retained as a 

 genus distinct from Pleuracanthus ; a new form of tooth is named 

 Diplodus eqiiilaferalis ; and a specimen of CtenoptycMus apicalis is 

 described as showing minute dermal tubercles, but no fin -spines. 

 Ctenodus Murcldsoni is briefly described for the first time ; and 

 Dendroptychius is relegated to the synonymy of Strepsodus scmroides. 

 A description of Megaliclitliys pygmceus, sp. now, is contributed by 

 Dr. Traquair, with figures ; and to the same ichthyologist, or to 

 Mrs. Traquair, are due several drawings of Palaaoniscid and Platy so- 

 mid Fishes, notably those of Elonicldhys inicrolepidotus, Gonafodus 

 Molynenxi, Bhadiitichthys Wardi and Platysomus parvulus, all of which 

 appear for the first time. Brief notes on the Labyrinthodonts con- 

 clude the catalogue, and these are illustrated by figures of Kera- 

 terpeton Galvani, and a mandibular ramus of Loxomma Allmani. 



The North Staffordshire Institute and their publishers are to be 

 congratulated on the excellent style in which this volume is issued ; 

 and it is to be hoped that at least the pal aeon tological aspect of the 

 subject will be still further treated by Mr. Ward in more special 

 publications. A. S. W. 



IV. — Wisnioski, Thaddeus. Mikrofauna ilow ornatowych 

 okolicy Krakowa. Czesc 1. Otwomice gornego Kellowayu 

 w Grojcu. [Foraminifera of the Kelloways Beds of Grojce.] 

 Pamietnik Ak. Umiej. Krakowie, vol. xvii. 3 plates. (1890.) 



THE author describes the rich foraminiferal fauna of the Kelloways 

 beds (Callovian) of Grojce. These marls, about six feet thick, 

 are on the horizon of Cosmoceras ornatum (Schloth.), and we are 

 already indebted to M. Teisseyre for a description of the Cephalopoda 

 found therein. The author notes 124 " species " of Foraminifera, 

 60 of which he unfortunately sets down as "new." With most of 

 these determinations we are forced to disagree ; and cannot help 

 feeling that many of them might have been correlated with forms 

 previously described, the well-known variation in the test of these 

 simple animals having been shown to have but little specific or 

 even generic value by Parker and Jones, Brady, Goes, and other 

 authors, who, from a long and careful study of the recent forms, 

 have contributed so much to the reduction of the "species" of earlier 

 authors. We regret, therefore, that recent writers, who have not 

 the same advantage of studying fine collections from present-day 

 deposits, do not hesitate to name as specific the smallest individual 

 variations. Thus figs. 29 to 36 of pi. ii. (ix.) in M. Wisnioski's 

 paper cannot be referred to more than one and the same " species," 

 the variation being mei'ely individual ; and the same may be said of 

 figs. 7 to 16 and 18 to 20 of the same plate. Fig. 28 of plate iii. (x.) 

 is a true Cristellarian, as evidenced by the characteristic mouth 

 shown in fig. b. ; figs. 1, 3, 4, 5, and 11 of pi. iii. (x.) also all 

 belong to one " species " ; and it is difficult to imagine how the 

 author arrives at the conclusion that he is here dealing with distinct 

 species. We are much indebted to M. Wisnioski for figuring these 



