342 OAKBONIFEEOUS FORMATIONS AND FAUNAS OF COLORADO. 



the citation.s in litoraturo, would be a task of difficult}' even if it could be accom- 

 plished at all in an acceptable manner without more abundant and better preserved 

 material than most of that which has come into ni}' hands. 



Rlionihopora. lepidodendro'ides is very abundant at station 221.5 in the San Juan 

 region, and it seems to be common also at 2281 in the Leadville region. 



Locality and horizon. — San Juan region (stations 2186, 2215, 2235); Molas forma- 

 tion and middle portion of the Hermosa formation. Leadville district (stations 

 2265, 2281); base of the Weber formation. Grand River region (station 2329b). 

 Uinta Mountain Region, overlooking Yampa River (station 2191). 



BRACHIOPODA. 



LINGULA Brugoiere, 1792. 

 LiNGULA CAKBONARiA Shumard. 



1858. lAngula carbonaria. Shumard, Acad. Sci. St. Louis, Trans., vol.1, p. 215. 



Coal Measures: Clark County, Mo. . 

 1873. lAngula mytiloidesf Meek and Worthen, Geol. Surv. Illinois, Kept., vol. 5, p. 572, pi. 25, fig. 2. 



Coal Measures: Illinois. 

 1887. Lingula wnhonataf Herrick (non Cox), Sci. Lab. Denison Univ., Bull., vol. 2, p. 144, pi. 14, 

 fig. 2. 



Coal Measures: Flint Ridge, Ohio. 

 1899. Lingula mytiloidesf Girty, U. S. Geol. Surv., Nineteenth Ann. Eept., pt. 3, p. 575. 



Upper Coal Measures: Atoka quadrangle, Hartshorne, Ind. Ter. ; roof shale of the Grady or 

 Hartshorne coal. 



I have only one specimen of this form, and it is too imperfect to be identified with 

 certainty. It seems to belong to the type of shell often referred in this country to 

 Lingida mytiloides Sowerby. This type differs from Sowerby's figures in being 

 smaller and as a rule more quadrate before and behind. It is probable that Shumard's 

 Lingula cafbona/ria was founded upon a shell belonging to this group, for his descrip- 

 tion answers to it quite closely. It might be well, therefore, to employ Lingida car- 

 honaria for American shells of the mytiloides type. 



Lingida lomhonata? Herrick (non Cox) is probably another example of the species 

 for which L. carbona/ria was proposed. Indeed, if one may depend upon the accu- 

 racy of published figures, none of the identifications of Cox's species are correct. 

 White," Kej^es,* and Beede '^ appear to have had in hand a slender elongate form of a 

 shape differing material^ from that depicted by Cox's figure. Judging from the 

 literature, therefore, I would look to find four species involved — the slender form 

 figured by White et al. as L. umbonata, L. umhonata as figured by Cox, L. carbon- 



aGeol. Surv. Indiana, Thirteenth Eept., 1884, p. 120, pi. 25, flg. 11. 



!> Missouri Geol. Surv., vol. 5, 1894, p. 38, pi. 35, flg 4. 



cUnlv. Geol. Surv. Kansas, Rept., vol. 6, 1900, p. 54, pi. 8, flg. 5. 



