SUPPLEMENT.— HYPERLIOCERAS. cxxv 



8. Hypebliocekas liodiscites, 8. Buchman. Plate XVII, figs. 1, 2; Suppl., 



Figs. 95, 96, p. cl.w. 



1889. Hyperlioceeas discites a, This Monogr., PL xvii, figs. 1, 2 only. 

 1902. liodiscites, Emend. Amin. Norn., p. 4. 



Description. — Subconcavumbilicate ; levigate. 



Bemuds. — This is a thin form with narrow periphery and prominent carina. 

 Ribs, if present, would only belong to quite the 

 young stage. As regards the inner margin, the , ^P^o 

 upper edge tends to overhang the umbilicus. 



Distinction. — From H. discitiforme, smoothness, 

 greater compression, smaller umbilicus. From 

 H. discites, the smooth test. There is general 

 likeness also to Toxolioceras tenerum (see below, F - %££?$£ ^T^' 



p. cxxvii), but radial line and suture line are dis- 

 tinctions ; also the narrower, more carinate periphery, and the deeper, more con- 

 centric umbilicus. 



Localities and Strata. — Dorset: Bradford Abbas, Fossil Bed, evidently upper 

 part. Somerset : Dundry, middle of " Limestone and Marl Beds " (' Quart. Journ. 

 Geol. Soc.,' vol. lii, p. (577, Bed 13). 



Date of Existence. — Discitse hemera. 



££m 



f/1 < 



ifr 



In the next species the radial line lacks the long peripheral projection charac- 

 teristic of the previous forms. 



9. Hyperlioceeas? occltjsum, S. Daelnnaa. Suppl., Plate XXI, figs. 34 — 36. 



Description. — Perplatyleptogyral; concavumbilicate ; spissiparvicostate to striate; 

 periphery tabulate ; alticarinate. 



Distinction. — From H. Desori, finer style of costation; broader periphery, with 

 less projected radial line. 



BemarJes. — It does not seem to be actually related to //. Desori, though it lias 

 somewhat the appearance of that species. There is nothing else to compare 

 with it. 



Locality and Stratum. — Dorset: Bradford Abbas, Fossil Bed. 



Date of Existence. — Discitae hemera. 



