﻿12 GANOID FISHES OF THE CARBONIFEROUS FORMATION. 



*6. Acrolepis, Agassiz . . . Old Red Sandstone (?), Carboniferous, 



Permian. 



*7. Nematoptychius, Traquair . . Carboniferous. 



*8. Cycloptychius, Huxley . - . Carboniferous. 

 9. Centrolepis, Egerton . . . Lias. 

 *10. Microconodus, Traquair . . Carboniferous. 

 *11. Gonatodus, Traquair . . . Carboniferous. 



12. Amblypterus, Agassiz . . . Permian. 1 

 *13. Bhadinichthys, Traquair . . Carboniferous. 



14. Oxygnathus, Egerton . . . Lias. 



15. Cosmolepis, Egerton . . . Lias. 



16. Thrissonotus, Agassiz . . . Lias. 



17. Pyyopterus, Agassiz . . . Permian. 



18. Myriolepis, Egerton . . . Carboniferous. 



19. Urosthenes, Dana . . . . Carboniferous. 

 (*?)20. Eurylepis, Newberry . . . Carboniferous. 



21. (?) Saurichthys, Agassiz . . Trias. 



22. (?) Coccolepis, Agassiz . . . Lower Oolite. 



The genus Gyrolepis of Agassiz must be cancelled, as from deficiency of distinct 

 characters all definition of it is impossible. G. Bankinei, Ag., of the British Carboniferous 

 rocks, is in my opinion an Acrolepis, and the scattered scales occurring in the Trias, 

 referred to Gyrolepis by Agassiz, but which also much resemble those of Acrolepis, have 

 been a subject of much dispute among palaeontologists, — Giebel referring them partly to 

 " Amblypterus," partly to Colobodus, while Dr. Martin has suggested that they probably 

 belong to SauricMhys, and also that the proper place of the last-named genus is among 

 the Palaoniscida. The fragmentary condition, however, in which the fish-remains of 

 the Muschelkalk ordinarily occur, naturally interposes great difficulties in the way of 

 their satisfactory description and determination. 



As regards Coccolepis, classed as one of the " Lepidoidei Heierocerci " by Agassiz, its 

 relationship to the Palaoniscida seems to be indicated both by Agassiz's figure and 

 description. 2 The late Dr. Wagner did not, during the preparation of his work on the 

 fishes of the Bavarian Lithographic Limestone, succeed in seeing a specimen ; however, he 

 considered it as probably related to the Caluri, and possibly identical with his genus 

 Liodesmus? 



1 I regret that I have had no opportunity of forming an opinion as to the true generic position of the 

 Triassic forms Amblypterus Agassisii of Munster, and A. ornatus and latimanus of Giebel, except that, 

 judging from the descriptions, they do not seem to belong to the genus Amblypterus as restricted by 

 Troschel. 



2 ' Poissons Fos8.,' vol. ii, pt. ii, p. 300 ; ' Atlas,' vol. ii, pt. ii, tab. xxxvi, figs. 6 and 7. 



3 ' Monographie der fossilen Fische aus den lithographischen Scbiefern Bayerns,' Munich, 1863, 

 pp. 13G and 138. Reprinted from the ' Abh. der k. bayerischen Akad.,' 2 Classe, Bd. ix. 



