Dr. F. A. Bather—Fossil Annelid Burrovs. ts 
pp. 169-74) are P. caeca Oersted, P. flava Claparéde, P. cf. quadrilobata 
Jacobi, and P. Carazzi n.sp. 
Professor Douvillé is inclined to refer to an annelid of the same 
Family (Spionide) some U-shaped galleries described by Professor 
Carlos I. Lisson (19041) under the name Tigillites Habichi n.sp. 
These occur in stratified quartzites around Chorillos, south of Lima 
(Peru), and are assigned by Professor Lisson to a post-Neocomian but 
pre-Tertiary age, because the quartzites are covered (though not quite 
conformably) by nodular and vari-coloured quartzites containing 
ammonites which he refers to Sonneratia. Mr. G. C. Crick does not 
consider that the figures and descriptions warrant this reference, and 
he inclines to agree with Mr. W. M. Gabb, who regarded the 
ammonite described by himself from this horizon as of Kimmeridgian 
or Corallian age. However this may be, Professor Douvillé seems 
to have made a slip in calling these rocks ‘‘ quartzites paléozoiques 
des environs de Callao.”’ 
While it seems probable that these tubes are not congeneric with 
the somewhat larger paleozoic Zigillites, there are objections to 
classing them with the smaller Polydora. The latter annelid makes 
littoral or inter-tidal borings into the hardened rocks of the shore. 
The tubes of 7. Habichi, on the other hand, were formed in soft sand, 
part passu with its deposition, a fact clearly indicated by their upward 
passage through successive laminz, and the successive withdrawals of 
the curved bottom of the U to a higher level. The mere fact that 
weathering occasionally reduces the double opening of the tube to 
a single more or less keyhole-shaped opening, as in Polydora, is not 
enough to outweigh these differences. 
That a keyhole-shaped opening is not in itself sufficient evidence of 
the work of Polydora follows from the studies of Dr. D. Carazzi 
on ‘‘La perforazione delle rocce calcaree per opera dei. datteri 
(Lithodomus dactylus)” (1892, Atti Soc. Ligustica, ii, pp. 279-97), 
where it is shown that the aperture of the burrow, at first circular, 
soon assumes an elliptical outline, which eventually becomes con- 
stricted along the minor axis, until the shape is almost that of an 8, 
with one half smaller than the other. The fragment of bored rock- 
surface, as figured by Dr. Carazzi on a reduced scale (p. 293), forcibly 
recalls the traces of Polydora. But the burrows have no septum 
to give them a U-shape, and their natural size (to judge from specimens 
in the British Museum) is about half-an-inch along the major axis. 
Professor Douvillé, accepting the views expressed by Mr. Clifton J. 
Sarle in February, 1906,” proceeds to discuss some forms hitherto 
referred to TZuonurus. Mr. Sarle came to the conclusion that 
Arthrophycus Hall, Dedalus Rouault (= Veaillum Rouault), Zaonurus 
Fischer-Ooster (= Spirophyton Hall, Alectorurus Schimper, Physophycus 
Schimper, Cancellophycus Saporta, Glossophycus Saporta & Marion) 
were traces of burrows formed by sedentary Polycheta in rather 
1 «Tos Tigillites del Salto del Fraile y algunas Sonneratia del Morro Solar : 
contribucién 4 la geologia de los alrededores de Lima,’’ Bol. Cuerpo Ingen. de Minas 
Pera, No. 17, 64 pp. Lima, 1904. 
2 «< Arthrophycus and Deedalus of Burrow Origin,”’ pp. 203-10 ; and ‘‘ Prel. Note 
on the Nature of Taonurus’’, pp. 211-4: Proc. Rochester Acad. Sci. iv. 
