Fauna of the Lower Devonian of Torquay. 323 
margin, where it equals about three lateral ribs. The concentric 
growth-ridges are conspicuous on the whole surface of the valve. 
Horizon.—Meadfoot Beds. 
Locality.—Kilmorie (8. 60). 
Spiifer parcefurcatus Spriesterbach ? 
1915. Spirifer parcefurcatus Spriesterbach, Abh. k. preuss. geol. Landesanst, 
N.F., Heft Ixxx, p. 16, t. iv, figs. 7-14; t. v, figs. 1-3. 
1920. Spirifer Bischofi ? Reed, Journ. Torquay Nat. Hist. Sec., vol. ii, No. 6, 
Pp- 340, 342. 
This species is closely allied to Sp. bischofi A. Roem.,! to which an 
example from Smugglers’ Cove is an imperfect condition has been 
previously referred by me. But according to Spriesterbach (op. cit.) 
it differs in the ribbing of the fold and sinus. Scupin ? included this 
form in Sp. bischofi, and Drevermann 8 has also discussed the variable 
characters of the latter species and its relation to other species. 
It is almost certain that the shell from Lynton, figured by Whidborne* 
as Sp. daleidensis Stein., which is a closely allied form, should be 
referred to Sp. parcefurcatus or to Sp. bischoft. 
Horizon.—Red Beds (Staddon Grits). 
Locality Smugglers’ Cove (8S. 57). 
Spirifer dechent Kayser ? 
In the Whidborne collection of fossils from Meadfoot in the 
Sedgwick Museum there is a crushed and distorted specimen, 
35-40 mm. in length and rather more in width, which shows the 
external impression and internal cast of a large species of Sporifer, 
and is apparently referable to Sp. decheni Kayser,’ which Scupin ° 
and Assmann ‘ consider identical with Sp. fallax Giebel,® and closely 
allied to Sp. primevus. Our shell specially resembles Oehlert’s ° and 
Barrois’™” figure of Sp. dechent, and is subrhomboidal in shape with 
10-12 coarse angular ribs on each side of a broad angular sinus in 
the pedicle valve. 
Horizon.—Meadfoot Beds. 
Locality.—Meadfoot (8. 80). 
1 A. Roemer (Giebel), Silur. Fauna Unterharz., 1858, p. 29, t. iv, fig. 3. 
2 Scupin, Palwont. Abhandl., Bd. iii, 1900, p. 73, t. vii, figs. 1-3. 
3 Drevermann, Paleontogr aphica, Bd. 1, 1904, p. 252, t. xxix, figs. 15-17. 
4 Whidborne, Grou. Maa., Dec. IV, Vol. VIII, 1901, p. 531, Pi. XVU, Fig. 6. 
5 Kayser, Abh. geol. specialK. Preuss., Bd. ii, Heft iv, 1878, p. 165, t. xxii, 
figs. 1, 2. 
6 Scupin, op. cit., p. 85. 
7 Assmann, Jahrb. k. preuss. geol. Landesanst., 1910, Bd. xxxi, Hefti, p. 138, 
t. vi, figs. 5-11. 
8 A. Roemer (Giebel), Silur. Fauna Unterharz., 1858, p. 32, t. iv, fig. 1. 
9 Oehlert, Bull. Soc. Geol. France, ser. 3, vol. xvii, 1889, p. 779, pl. xxi, fig. 3. 
10 Barrois, Faune Calc. d’Hrbray, Mem. Soc. Geol. Nord, iti, 1889, p. 127 
pl. vii, figs. 1, laf. 
