F, B. Meek—Fossils of the Illinois Geological Report. 588 
tucky Geological Reports, It is certainly always narrower in 
proportion to its length, and has, at both extremities, different 
outlines from Prof. Cox’s figure; while it also wants the rather 
distinct undulations shown on the same. If specifically dis- 
e have elsewhere stated reasons for believing that Prof. 
King’s name -/aneia may possibly yet have to be retained for 
the Carboniferous and Permian species usually referred to 
Solenomya (= Solemya), notwithstanding the fact that Prof. King 
withdrew it at a later date.* 
Placunopsis carbonaria M. & W.; pl. XXvul, figs. 2a, 6, ¢, d. 
It is quite probable that this shell may have to take the name 
Anomianella carbonaria, as it seems to agree with a genus pub- 
lished under the name Anomianella by Rychholt, in 1852, from’ 
the Carboniferous rocks of Belgium. I have not seen a figure or 
good description of Rychholt’s genus; but it is said to be thin, 
more or less oval, without any perforation in the lower valve, 
and to grow attached to other shells—all of which characters 
above suggested change would almost certainly still be neces- 
long back, to this genus, in this Journal. At the time he 
showed me his specimens at Washington, I had not seen the 
original drawings of our type (which were at Springfield, Il.) 
for several years; and, from having confounded it, im mind, 
with another form, I supposed Prof. Bradley’s shell to belong 
to our genus. A moment’s comparison with our figures cited 
abuve, however, will show that the very broad flattened colu- 
mella of Prof. Bradley’s shell at once places it in an entirely 
distinct and, as I think, undescribed genus, probably of differ- 
ent family relations. : : 
Euomphalus rugosus Hall; pl. XXIx, figs. 11a, b, co—This - 
shell was referred by Prof. Geinitz, in his work on the Nebraska 
fossils, to the articulate genus Sprrorbis. I have elsewhere in- 
sisted, however, not only that it is serene’! and generically 
distinct from the foreign form-with which Prof. Geinitz sup- 
posed it to be identical, but that we have a group of larger 
* See Proceed. Acad. N.S. Philad., April, 1870, p. 44. 
+ See page 151 of this volume.—Ens. 
Am. Jour, Sor.—THIRD -— Vou. VII, No. 42.—Juneg, 1874, 
