Vol. 52.] ON THE UPPER PORTION OF DUNDRY HILL. 701 



Palosontological Notes upon certain Species mentioned in 

 the foregoing Table. [S. S. Buckman.] 



Stephanoceras contractual. — The type came from Dundry ; whether 

 the name Sauzei may also be used for a coarser form than Sowerby's 

 is a matter for future determination. It seems probable ; but the 

 two forms are closely allied. They are not true Stephanocerata. 



Sphceroceras Brocchi. — The larger of the specimens figured by 

 Sowerby must be taken as the type, and it is from Sherborne 

 (Dorset). The smaller is a different species, much more umbilicate, 

 and is from Dundry. It is a common form, but it has no name. 



Strigoceras compression (Etheridge). — In the communication in- 

 corporated in Wright's paper, Etheridge quotes a species as ' Ammo- 

 nites Truellii, var. compressus^ l This may be translated as an 

 ammonite with characters like Truellii, but more compressed. The 

 description applies to more than one species of Dundry ammonite, 

 but probably the largest of the forms of Truellii-like ammonites 

 may merit the Dame best. 



Oppelia subracliata (J. de C. Sowerby). — The author says 2 : — 

 4 Found ... on the road from Bath to Bristol ; it has been broken 

 out of a mass of Ironshot Oolite.' The species now usually called 

 by this name lived during the niortensis hemera, but, as there are 

 no strata of that date at Dundry Hill, there must be some mistake 

 in the present identifications. The type presumably came from the 

 Ironshot bed of the Sauzei hemera, or from the softer stratum just 

 below ; but I am unable to say anything concerning it. As 

 subradiatus is the type of the genus Oppelia, its correct identifi- 

 cation is a matter of great importance, and the result may alter 

 entirely the present application of the generic term Oppelia. As 

 Sowerby's type is in the British Museum, a further comparison of 

 the Dundry Oppelice therewith will be the solution of the difficulty. 



Lissoceras ? ' subradiatum ' (S. P. Woodward), non J. de C. 

 Sowerby. — This is not the same species as the Ammonites sub- 

 radiatus of Sowerby, and in fact S. P. Woodward himself notes 

 points of difference. 3 It may not be the same genus, for it possibly 

 is a parent of ooliihicus, d'Orbigny, the type of Lissoceras, which 

 Sowerby's subradiatus certainly cannot be. 



H. B. Woodward states that the specimen came from the Parlcin- 

 soni-zone* but this must be an oversight. The probable horizon 

 is given in Table V. It certainly did not occur above the Iron- 

 shot, but the exact identification of the fossil, for there are several 

 allied forms, is not possible from the figure given by S. P. Wood- 

 ward. This also is a matter for comparison with the actual specimen 

 in the British Museum. 



1 Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. xvi. (1860) p. 24. 



2 ' Min. Couch.' vol. v. p. 23. 



3 ' The Geologist,' vol. hi. no. 33, p. 328. 



4 Mem. Geol. Surv., ' The Lower Oolitic Rocks of England,' in ' Jurassic Rocks 

 of Britain,' vol. iv. (1894) p. \) ( J. 



3n2 



