96 A MEGALOSilJEOID JAW FROM BRIDGEND. [Feb. 1 899, 



Prof. SoLLAS pointed out that Palceosaurus and Thecodontosaurus 

 had priority over Zanclodon by at least 12 years, and consequently 

 species rightly referred to these genera should retain the names 

 originally given to them. 



Dr. Woodward said that, as one of those who was present, with 

 Dr. Hinde, at the exploiting of the Wedmore Dinosaur, he confessed 

 to a feeling of doubt as to the existence of two genera (Avalonia 

 and Picrodon) founded on a few detached bones and two teeth, which, 

 according to the present Author's showing, might have been derived 

 from the jaw of one animal ; indeed, he ventured to think that the 

 weight of evidence was in favour of this view. For if, as the 

 Author had pointed out, the slight variation in the serration of 

 Megalosaurian teeth could be shown to exist in individual teeth in 

 the same jaw, this character was insufficient for generic separation ; 

 and if the Author had erred, he had done so on the side of caution, 

 in refraining from adding a new generic appellation to those already 

 given. 



Mr. C. W. Andrews and the E.ev. H. H. Winwood also spoke. 



The Author, in reply, said that he agreed with Prof. Seeley as to 

 the close resemblance between the teeth of the Bridgend specimen 

 and that which had been named Avalonia, but differed in preferring 

 to place the former fossil in the genus Zanclodon, which he under- 

 stood to include Teratosaurus. The serrations observable on the tooth 

 referred to Picrodon by Prof. Seeley did not appear to him to be of 

 the type found in Thecodontosaurus to which allusion had been made, 

 nor did he think it sufficiently different from Avalonia to justify its 

 separation from that form, or indeed from Zanclodon, 



