﻿74 PROCEEDINGS OF THE GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY. [Dec. 18, 



Remarks on the Terebratula diphya, fyc. 



Among the Terebratula is T. antinomia, Cat., described and re- 

 presented in the ' Zoologia Fossile,' which appeared in print in the 

 year 1827*. Some years afterwards the Baron von Buch took into 

 consideration what I had written on this singular brachiopod ; but, 

 not being aware of the figures of other examples I had given j* in 

 1828, only speaks of those which under different aspects I had pub- 

 lished in plate 5 of the ' Zoologia Fossile,' printed the year before. 



The Baron von Buch persists in considering the Terebratula del- 

 toidea, T. triquetra, and T. antinomia, as merely varieties of the 

 Terebratula diphya, which has not hitherto been found by any mo- 

 dern naturalist, but which we find only figured in the * Ecphrasis 

 stirpium minus cognitarum' of Fabio Colonna, published in 1616 : 

 to this union of species I made a vigorous opposition in a paper, ac- 

 companied by figures, which has been inserted in the fifth volume of 

 the ' Proceedings of the Academy of Padua' for the year 1838. 



Subsequently I sent to the French palaeontologists drawings and 

 originals of the Terebratula antinomia, in order that they might 

 tell me what they thought of the new species that I was proposing 

 to add to the genus Terebratula, and M. Buchard, the same natu- 

 ralist who found, not long ago, the necessity of separating the 

 Terebratula pumila of -Lamarck from the Terebratulce, to place it 

 (contrary to the opinion of Von Buch) in the genus Magas of Sow- 

 erbyj, writes to me on this subject in the following terms : — "As 

 regards the Terebratulce deltoidea, diphya, and antinomia, I entirely 

 concur in your opinion, and I am, like you, convinced that there 

 are several species, of which, on account of the manner in which they 

 are pierced near the centre, we may form a charming group." 



Von Buch, on the other hand, is of opinion that the Terebratulce 

 which have a longitudinal incision, as is the case with the species 

 above-mentioned (and consequently also all those lately published by 

 Prof. Zeuschner of Cracow), must be considered as individuals of 

 Terebr. diphya, whatever may be the form of the dilated part of the 

 furrow, and of the dorsal and ventral perforations. I, on the con- 

 trary, have satisfied myself, that the more or less deep furrow on the 

 back, and the presence of the dorsal and ventral perforations, are 

 characters which may serve to establish the genus that I have called 

 Antinomia ; while the different forms, as well of the furrow as of the 

 perforation, and the shape of the base, sometimes angular, sometimes 

 round, will afford excellent specific distinctions. And I am the rather 

 induced to admit these distinctions, because there are some of these 

 forms which are never found save within the limits of the neocomian 

 formation, while there are others entirely confined to the upper epio- 

 litic limestones. Guided by these principles, I propose, for the neo- 

 comian formation, the species Antinomia diphya, A. deltoidea, and 

 A. triquetra ; and I refer to the epiolitic limestone the Antinomia 



* Page 169. tab. 5. figs, p, q, r. 



t Gli Annali delle Scienze Naturali di Bologna, 1828. 

 % Bull, de la Soc. Geol., Seance du 17 Juin, 1848. 



