UPPER PALEOZOIC FORMATIONS OF KANSAS 7 2 7 



to the Dyas (Permian)" ' ; while in considering the list of fossils 

 given by Cummins he said : " It is a fauna related with the Russian 

 fauna of the Artinsk beds, and may be considered as the American 

 representative of a part of the Russian Dyas (Permian)." 2 



Professor James P. Smith stated that "the Ammonite-bearing 



beds of northern Texas, described by Dr. C. A. White 



belong above the Artinsk stage, and in the true Permian, and are 

 probably of the same age as the middle division of the Middle 

 Productus limestone of the Salt Range [India]." 3 



Dr. Keyes in discussing the parallelism between the Texas and 

 Kansas beds said, "The Double Mountain beds are, in a broad 

 way, manifestly approximately equivalent to Cragin's Cimarron 

 series. This leaves a considerable part of the Clear Fork beds 

 representing the Chase and Marion of Kansas." 4 Professor de 

 Lapparent considered that in northern Texas the Uralian with 

 Productus cora and Athyris subtilita is succeeded conformably by 

 300 meters of sandstones and shales, occasionally calcareous, in 

 which the red color predominates, the base of which appears to 

 belong in the Artinsk. 5 He stated that the red gypsiferous 

 beds with Pleurophorus which in the western part of Texas sur- 

 mount the Wichita formation belong in the Upper Permian. 6 

 Finally, Dr. Freeh puts the Wichita and Clear Fork beds in the 

 Palaeo-Dyas and the Double Mountain beds in the Neo Dyas 7 

 and states that the Ammonoids described by Dr. White — Medli- 

 cottia Copei, Popanoceras Walcotti and P. (Hyattites) Cummi?isi have 

 their nearest relatives in the marine Dyas of Sicily. 8 



Provisional correlation of the Kansas formatiojis. — The above 

 statements indicate clearly enough the differences in opinion 

 among geologists more or less acquainted with the Upper Paleo- 

 zoic formations of the Great Plains, regarding their correlation. 

 It is to be noted, however, that there is a more general agreement 

 regarding the Permian age of the Texas deposits, and if Professor 



1 Amer. Geol., Vol. X, 1892, p. 370. -Ibid., p. 371. 



3 Jour. Geol., Vol. II, 1894, p. 194; and see "Correlation Table" on p. 204. 



4Jour. Geol., Vol. VII, 1899, p. 325. 



STraite de Geologie, 4th ed., 1900, p. 981. 6 Ibid., p. 994. 



7 Lethaea palceozoica, Bd. II, 3 Lief., 1901, p. 514. 8 Ibid., p. 515. 



