FROM GURNET BAY, ISLE OF WIGHT. 345 
Mr. A’Court-Smith has likewise been fortunate in discovering nu- 
merous fragmentary remains of plants, such as leaves of palm 
(Flabellaria), seeds of water-lily (Welumbium), leaves of rushes and 
other aquatic plants. With these plant-remains and insects were 
also found two forms of Crustacea belonging to the Edriophthalmia 
and the section Isopoda, also abundant remains of a minute Phyl- 
lopod Crustacean allied to Branchipus or Artemia. 
Bivalved Entomostraca, as already stated, had been noticed and 
described by Prof. T. Rupert Jones from these beds to the number 
of some 14 species and six genera (Candona, Cythere, Cythereis, 
Cytherella, Cytheridea, Cytheriders) ; but these, it must be borne in 
mind, are represented by their calcareous bivalved carapaces, not by 
the remains of appendages, no limbs (save in a single instanco*) 
having been met with. 
Even the Isopoda haye a tolerably firm though thin crust; and 
the paper-like valves of Hstheria have sufficient chitine in them to 
give them consistence, and enable them, like the elytra of insects, 
to be preserved in a fossil state. But that a Crustacean like Bran- 
chipus, destitute of shelly covering, having along slender diaphan- 
ous many-segmented body and 13 pairs of laminar branchial feet, 
should undergo the process of fossilization, and leave any trace behind, 
is truly remarkable. 
The preservation of these delicate little Phyllopods is, no doubt, due 
to the admirable nature of the fine argillaceo-calcareous mud-rock in 
which they have been entombed in such numbers, the iron having 
collected around them and stained the outline of the delicate gill-feet 
and appendages upon the stone, as if painted by some photographic 
process. 
In the first Heft of his ‘Fauna Sareepontana Fossilis,’ 1873 (Die 
Fossilen Thiere aus der Steinkohlenformation von Saarbriicken), Dr. 
Friedrich Goldenberg has described and figured, on Taf. 1. fig. 15 (16), 
six somewhat doubtful-looking segments which he attributes to 
Branchipus, and names Branchipusites anthracinus. Without a 
careful examination it would be imprudent to pronounce a judgment 
upon this specimen ; I annex a translation of Dr. F. Goldenberg’s 
remarks upon it. 
“Of this animal,” he says, *‘ cight segments are to be seen in the side 
view ; but of these, the first and last are very imperfect. The middle 
segments are also very imperfectly preserved, so that one can only find 
indications of their segmentation. The lateral appendages (side- 
pieces), of which six are present pretty perfect, in their natural con- 
nexion, have much resemblance to the lamellar branchial feet of a 
Branchipus. Their anterior margin is somewhat incurved ; the hinder 
margin, which is parallel to the anterior, bends at about two thirds 
of its course at an obtuse angle towards the apex of the anterior 
margin. In the middle of this oblique inferior margin oval thicken- 
ings make their appearance, which I regard as remains of vesicular 
branchiee, which were seated here at the base of the lobe, unjointed 
swimming- (or fin-) feet. The substance of these swimming-feet 
* Paleocypris Edwardsii, from the Coal-measures, Saint-Etienne, France, 
discovered by M. Ch. Brongniart (see Ann. des Sci. Géolog. 1876, art. no, 8, pl.7). 
