L. F. Spath—Ammonites from Spitsbergen. 301 
Prionites. A third form, at last, has these Prionites-folds very close, 
resembling in shape Anasibirites hircinus Waagen sp.,! but with the 
cost pronounced only at the middle of the side, not near the 
periphery. The cross-sections of the last two forms approach to 
that of Prionites tuberculatus Waagen.” 
A new species of Prionites is like the above in the character of 
the inner whorls. These somewhat resemble Meekoceras sibiricwm 
Mojsisovics,? but are more evolute, i.e. more like M. sp. ind. aff. 
jolinkense Krafft in Diener.4 On the other hand, the outer whorl 
agrees with that of the example of Prionites tuberculatus (Waagen), 
figured by Frech.> The periphery, however, still suggests the 
Goniodiscus- Anasibirites stock ; and since Waagen’s type of Prionites 
is a much earlier form, it is quite possible that the forms of the 
Stephanites-zone do not belong to this genus. A large but 
fragmentary specimen of a Prionites sp. nov. aff. tuberculatus 
Waagen, has a more rounded outer whorl that strikingly suggests 
a transition to Keyserlingites. 
A small specimen, probably belonging to a new form of Tellerites, 
but shghtly malformed and not showing the suture-line, has the 
sigmoidal ornament of 7’. furcatus (Oberg), but the deeply channelled 
periphery of Hedenstremia already at the diameter of Mojsisovics’ 
small specimen,° which latter, then, is still rounded. This ammonite, 
also, cannot be separated from the other ‘‘ Meekoceras’”’-like forms 
here discussed, and certainly has nothing to do with the Middle 
Triassic Norites, with which Tellerites has been associated by 
Mojsisovics and Haug. 
The genus Anasibirites is represented by thirteen examples from 
the Nodule Bed of the Trident, Sassendal, including one curious 
new form, transitional to Goniodiscus, and others comparable with 
such species as A. ibex (Waagen), A. angulosus (Waagen), and 
A. spiniger (Krafft). Several more small examples are attached to 
large specimens of Keyserlingites, of which the collection includes 
nine fine examples, belonging to a new species, near to K. middendorfi 
(Keyserling).". The Spitsbergen form, however, has a simpler suture- 
line, with only bifid external lobe. 
The numerous specimens here referred to Prosphingites ? include 
1 Tb., p. 123, pl. ix, fig. 4. 
= JO) 1 Wey le ives eR Oe 
3 Loe. cit., 1886, p. 85, pl. xi, figs. 1-6. 
4 Loc. cit., 1913, p. 25, pl. iv, fig. 3. 
> Letheea Geogn.: II. Mesozoic; vol. i, Trias, pt. ii, 1905, pl. xxviil, fig. 2. 
® Loe. cit., 1886, pl. x, fig. 19a-b, p. 80. Oberg’s original figure (loc. cit., 
pl. ili, fig. 6) is much nearer the new form. 
7 In Mojsisovics, loc. cit., pl. iii, p. 38. The form figured and described 
by Diener (“ The Cephalopoda of the Muschelkalk ’’: Mem. Geol. Surv, India, 
Pal. Indica, ser. xv, Himalayan Fossils, vol. ii, Trias, pt. ii, 1895, p. 28, 
pl. v, fig. 7) as Ceratites sp. ind. ex aff. C. middendorfi (Keyserling) from the 
Muschelkalk, like his Middle Triassic Sibirites prahlada (ib., p. 37, pl. vii, 
fig. 5), have nothing to do with the Lower Triassic forms here discussed. There 
is not one Muschelkalk form found in association with the latter at Spitsbergen. 
