STUDIES IN FORAMINIFERA 



Family Heterohelicidae Cushman, 1927 



Genus Chiloguembelina Loeblich and Tappan, 1956 



Chiloguembelina crinita (Glaessner) 



Plate 21, Figure 4; Text-figure 14 (1-4) 



GUmbelina crinita Glaessner, 1937, p. 383, pi. 4, fig. 34 

 (Paleocene or lower Eocene, Caucasus, U.S.S.R.). 



The general shape of the test, the spinose surface of 

 the wall and the semicircular aperture agree well with 

 the type description. Chiloguembelina crinita is closely 

 related to C. midway ensis (Cushman), but differs in the 

 more globular shape of its chambers and the more rapid 

 increase in chamber size. The wall of C. crinita is 

 more spinose and resembles that of C. midwayensis 

 strombiformis, new subspecies. This subspecies, how- 

 ever, has less inflated chambers and in general a lower 

 and more elongate aperture. 



Length: 0.2-0.3 mm. 



Occurrence: Lower Lizard Springs formation (Pale- 

 ocene) , Globorotalia pseudomenardii zone (common) and 

 Oloborotalia velascoensis zone (lower part, rare). 



Types: Figured hypotypes (USNM P5753, P5754) 

 and unfigured hypotypes (USMN P5755). 



Chiloguembelina cubensis (Palmer) 

 Plate 21, Figure 21; Text-figure 14 (5-8) 



GUmbelina cubensis Palmer, 1934, p. 74, text-figs. 1-6 (upper 

 Eocene and lower Oligocene, Cuba). — Palmer and Ber- 

 MUDEz, 1936, p. 284 (lower Oligocene, Cuba). — Bermudez, 

 1938, p. 11 (Eocene, Cuba).— Cushman, 1939, p. 63, pi. 10, 

 fig. 54 (Eocene, North Atlantic Ocean). — Palmer, 1940, 

 p. 292 (Oligocene, Cuba). — Cushman, 1946, p. 22, pi. 4, 

 fig. 28 (Eocene, Alabama, U. S. A.). — Cushman and Todd, 

 1946b, p. 90 (Oligocene, Mississippi, U. S. A.). — Renz, 

 1948, p. 138, pi. 6, fig. 9 (Oligo-Miocene, Venezuela).— 

 Bandy, 1949, p. 124, pi. 24, fig. 3 (upper Eocene, Alabama, 

 U. S. A.).— Bermudez, 1949, p. 175, pi. 11, fig. 40 (middle 

 Oligocene, Cuba). — Beckmann, 1953, p. 364, pi. 21, fig. 2 

 (Oligocene, Barbados, B. W. I.) . 



GUmbelina cubensis Palmer var. heterostoma Bermudez, 1937, 

 p. 143, pi. 17, figs. 5-7 (upper Eocene, Cuba). — Cushman 

 and Stone, 1947, p. 11, pi. 1, fig. 29 (Eocene, Peru). — 

 Bandy, 1949, p. 124, pi. 24, fig. 7 (upper Eocene, Alabama, 

 U. S. A.) 



Most well-preserved specimens from Trinidad have 

 the slightly asymmetrical aperture described in Guem- 

 belina cubensis var. heterostoma Bermudez. Forms with 

 a symmetrical aperture, as shown in D. K. Palmer's 

 type figures of 6. cubensis, are rare and seem only to be 

 extreme variants of the group. By courtesy of Dr. 

 Bermudez, the author obtained topotypes of Chilo- 

 guembelina cubensis and the variety heterostoma. Speci- 

 mens with asynametrical apertiu-es occur at both locali- 

 ties. The author is therefore inclined to consider the 

 variety heterostoma as a synonym of C. cubensis. 

 H. M. Bolli (personal communication) came to the same 

 conclusion after a comparison of the types deposited 

 in the U. S. National Museum. 



Length: 0.12-0.25 mm. 



Occurrence: Eocene and lower Oligocene, Porticu- 

 lasphaera mexicana zone to Globorotalia opima opimxi 

 zone. 



Single, badly preserved specimens, which may be 

 closely related to Chiloguembelina cubensis, are foimd in 

 the lower part of the Navet formation {Hantkenina 

 aragonensis and Globigerapsis kugleri zones. 



References to Chiloguembelina cubensis from Cuba 

 (Palmer, 1940), Venezuela (Renz, 1948) and the 

 Dominican Republic (Bermudez, 1949) seem to be 

 from younger strata than the highest occurrence of 

 the species in Trinidad. A re-examination of these 

 localities will be necessary to check the possibility of 

 reworking. 



Types: Figured hypotypes (USNM P5756, P5757) 

 and unfigured hypotypes (USNM P5758). 



Chiloguembelina martini (Pijpers) 

 Plate 21, Figure 14; Text-figure 14 (9-11, 14-18, 20-23) 



Textularia martini Pijpers, 1933, p. 57, figs. 6-10 (upper Eocene, 

 Bonaire, D. W. I.). 



GUmbelina martini (Pijpers), Drooger, 1953, p. 100, pi. 1, 

 fig. 2; text-fig. 4 (upper Eocene, Curacao and Bonaire). 



GUmbelina goodwini Cushman and Jarvis, in Cushman, 1933, 

 p. 69, pi. 7, figs. 15, 16 (upper Eocene, Trinidad, B. W. I.).— 

 Bermudez, 1938, p. 11 (Eocene, Cuba). — Cushman and 

 Renz, 1948, p. 23 (Eocene, Trinidad, B. W. I.). 



GUmbelina venezuelana Nuttall, 1935, p. 126, pi. 15, figs. 2-4 

 (upper Eocene, Venezuela). — Cushman, 1939, p. 62, pi. 10, 

 figs. 50-53 (Eocene, North Atlantic Ocean). — Cushman 

 and Todd, 1945b, p. 94, pi. 15, fig. 9 (upper Eocene, 

 Mississippi, U. S. A.). — Cushman, 1946, p. 22, pi. 4, fig. 29 

 (upper Eocene, Alabama, U. S. A.). — Cushman and Stone, 

 1947, p. 10, pi. 1, fig. 28 (Eocene, Peru).— Cushman and 

 Stainforth, 1951, p. 149, pi. 26, fig. 23 (upper Eocene, 

 Peru). 



The long list of references and synonyms indicates 

 that Chiloguembelina martini is widespread in the 

 American Eocene and shows considerable variability. 

 The synonymy is, in principle, that proposed by 

 Drooger (1953). The range of variation at various 

 stratigraphic levels is illustrated by a series of text- 

 figures. The yoimger specimens (text-fig. 14, Nos. 

 20-23) are usually slightly larger than those from the 

 lower part of the Navet formation (text-fig. 14, Nos. 

 9-11) and their chambers are often more inflated and 

 show a greater increase in size. Yet these minor 

 differences are overshadowed by the individual varia- 

 bility within one sample. 



Length: 0.2-0.32 mm. 



Occurrence: Upper Lizard Springs (Globorotalia 

 aragonensis zone) , Navet and San Fernando formations 

 (Eocene) . 



Types: Figured hypotypes (USNM P5759, 5760a-c, 

 5761a-e, 5762a-d) and unfigured hypotypes (USNM 

 P5763). 



Chiloguembelina c£. mauriciana (Howe and Roberts) 



Plate 21, Figure 15; Text-figure 14 (12, 13, 19) 



IGUmbelina mauriciana Howe and Roberts, in Howe, 1939. 



p. 62, pi. 8, figs. 9-11 (Eocene, Louisiana, U. S. A.). 

 Gumbelina mauriciana Cushman and Todd, 1945a, p. 16, pi. 4, 



fig. 2 (Eocene, Alabama, U. S. A.). 



The Trinidad specimens are mostly shorter and 

 thicker than the holotype of Ouembelina mauriciana, 



