8 S. W. WILLISTON 



examined the type specimen, and am more firmly convinced of its 

 congenerousness with Goniopholis. We may, therefore, assume that 

 both Amphicotylus and Diplosaurus are synonyms of Goniopholis, 

 as did Zittel.' 



Marsh has also referred to the genus Diplosaurus a fragment of 

 a propodial bone discovered by him in 1868 in the Baptanodon 

 beds of the Uinta Mountains.^ Inasmuch as it must be almost, if 

 not quite, impossible to determine with any degree of assurance 

 the generic affinities of his species from such very incomplete mate- 

 rial as he possessed, and as his specimen has never been described 

 or figured in the slightest, the name D. nanus Marsh must be con- 

 sidered as purely nomen nudum. The specimen may be of a brevi- 

 rostrate crocodile, but, considering the beds in which it was found, 

 it is far more probable that it really belongs with a dohchostomous 

 form. 



Very recently Dr. W. J. Holland has described and figured ^ an 

 excellent skull from the upper Morrison beds of Freeze Out Moun- 

 tains, Wyoming, as Goniopholis? gilmorei. While the author was 

 justified in assigning a new specific name to his specimen, he has given 

 us no distinctive characters, nor was it possible for him to do so. 

 The pitting of the superior surface of the skull is quite unknown 

 in either G. lucasi or G. felix. The former species was, as we 

 have seen, based exclusively upon vertebrae, and no description or 

 figure has ever been given of any part of a skull presumably or 

 definitely conspecific with the type. The type specimen of G. felix 

 does not exhibit the superficial markings, though doubtless it will 

 when fully extricated from its matrix, to which is yet adherent the 

 thin exterior portion from which the major part of the skull has 

 been removed. 



Such pitting of the superior surface of the skull is quite character- 

 istic of the genus Goniopholis and alHed forms, and while it is 

 possible that a close comparison of uninjured specimens might 

 reveal specific characters, such is doubtful. The low parapet of 

 bone bordering the posterior inner margin of the superior temporal 



1 Zittel, Handbuch der Paleontologie (1890), Vol. Ill, p. 676. 



2 Marsh, American Journal oj Science, Vol. XIV (1877), p. 346. 



3 Holland, Annals 0} the Carnegie Museum, Vol. Ill (1905), p. 431. 



