58 W. E. Eudleston—On the Yorkshire Oolites. 



of granulations make it difficult to believe that this can represent the 

 young form of section B. 



Hence it may be fairly regarded as a distinct species, which I 

 have not yet succeeded in tracing elsewhere. Bearing in mind that 

 the specimen is unique, and that the aperture cannot be seen, it 

 would be premature to make a new species ; but should a name be 

 required, I would suggest that it be known as Turbo gemmuliferus. 



72.— Turbo ? species. PI. II. Fig. 14. 



Description. — Specimen from the Dogger (zone 1), Peak (Blue 

 Wyke). Bean Collection, British Museum. 



I Height 6-25 millimetres. 



Approximate I Width 6-5 ,, 



( Spiral angle 90°. 



Shell small, subdepressed, step-like. The sjoire consists of about 

 4 whorls, the apical ones being smooth and inflated. The penult 

 is angular, and partially bicarinate anteriorly, the upper keel mark- 

 ing the chief salience : traces of extremely fine spiral ornamentation. 

 Body-whorl large, both in height and width, relatively to the spire, 

 and strongly angular; three well-marked carinse of nearly equal 

 strength occupy the median prominence, the upper keel being slightly 

 double : fine spiral lines without granulation ornament the whole of 

 the body-whorl, including the base. Suture moderately close. 

 Other indications wanting. 



JRelations and Distribution. — Less depressed, and with a more 

 symmetrical spire than Delphinula granata, this form is further dif- 

 ferentiated by the non-granulated character of the keels and spiral 

 lines. At present I have failed to trace the exact counterpart else- 

 where. Bearing in mind the apparently local character of certain 

 forms, and the fact of this specimen being unique, it would be pre- 

 mature to recognize it as a named species. Should it be found to 

 occur more plentifully, 1 would suggest the name of Turbo {Delphi- 

 7iula) IcBvior. 



Genus Tkochtjs, Linngeus, 1758. 



The three zones of the Inferior Oolite in Yorkshire are extremely 

 poor in shells referable to this genus. I have already expressed a 

 belief that " Trochus " hisertus, Phill., belongs to the so-called 

 Littorince : and even if this group is ultimately restored to the 

 Turhinidce, T. bisertus cannot be regarded as a Trochus. 



In Trochus monilitectus, Phil., we possess a well-marked and 

 characteristic Trochus, almost the only one hitherto noted from any 

 portion of the I. 0. of Yorkshire. The Lias of Yorkshire, accord- 

 ing to Tate and Blake, has yielded three species of Trochus, only one 

 of which is at all plentiful. Hence we are prepared to have the 

 genus poorly represented in the Dogger. 



73. — Tegohus, near to dimidiatus, Sowerby, 1818. PI. II. Fig. 15. 

 1818. Trochus dimidiatus, Sowerhy. Min. Conch, pi. 181, fig. 4. 



Bibliography. — Sowerby described his species from a single speci- 



