﻿CARYOCARIS SALTER!. 



95 



exemplifies the same condition and similar breakage. These conditions are 

 compatible with the nature of Phyllopods. 



With reference to Goniatites having Aptychi or Anaptychi, and as to some of 

 the so-called Phyllopodous shields being really such parts of Goniatites? we have 

 to state that, in confirmation of Herr Kayser's discovery of a " Spathiocaris' in 

 the body-chamber of a Devonian Goniatite, 2 we have seen some similar examples 

 from Bicken ; and that we believe some of the so-called little shield-like fossils 

 which come from Goniatitiferous Devonian strata will have to be referred to 

 Goniatites. Thus w T e must look with some doubt on the following Devonian 

 forms : 



Discinocaris dubia (Roemer) . See our Second Report, 1884 (1885), p. 79. 



,, lata (Woodward) . ,, ,, 



,, congener (Clarke) . ,, ,, p. 80. 



Spathiocaris ungulina, Clarke . p. 81. 



Pholadocaris Lecii, Woodward 

 „ sp. ) 



Ellipsocaris Dewalquei, Woodward 

 sp. 



Cardiocaris Boemeri, Woodward 



„ hi partita, Woodward 

 Veneris, Woodward 



,, Koeneni (Clarke) 

 Dipterocaris pea-cercse, Clarke *\ 



,, vetusta (d'Arch. and de Vern.) > „ ,, P- 85. 



,, p roc ua, Clarke ' 



These, then, require further investigation ; but as numerous specimens having 

 undoubted structural features of Phyllopods occur in the Silurian strata that 

 do not yield Goniatites, and as some even of the genera enumerated above 

 are not always associated with Goniatites, there is no reason why members of the 

 group should not occur even in Goniatitiferous strata, Thus some of the fore- 

 going species may have no relationship with the Cephalopods among which they 

 have been buried, but were lineal descendants of Silurian forms. 



In his paper in the ' Neues Jahrbuch,' &c, 1884, Band i, p. 275, &c, " On 

 the Phyllopod-nature of Spathiocaris, Apty chop sis, and similar bodies," met with 

 in strata of Silurian, Devonian, and Carboniferous ages in Europe and North 



1 See our Second Report, 1884, p. 76. 



2 See Kayser, ' Zeitsch. d. deutsch. geol. Ges.,' vol. xxxiv, 1882, pp. 818, 819; and von Koenen, 

 'Neues Jahrb. f. Min ' &c, 1884, pp. 45, 46. 



P- 32. 



} „ „ P. 33. 



p. 84. 



