CRINOID GENUS SCYPHOCRINUS 3 



Later, in 1913, Mr. Reed 1 described and figured from the same locality 

 another specimen of the same species with the base of the stem and its branch- 

 ing roots attached, but he still treated the stem-bearing side of the fossil as 

 the " lower surface " and the opposite rounded side as the " upper surface " ; 

 although noting the opinions of Sardeson and others that these bodies are the 

 specialized roots of crinoids, a question which he says " can hardly be regarded 

 as finally settled." See also La Touche, 2 1913, who definitely proves the 

 association of Camarocrinus with Scyphocrinus in the rocks of Burma. 



Upon the facts as known at the date of Schuchert's paper I concurred in 

 his conclusion. But important information since obtained, culminating in a 

 very remarkable recent discovery, throws new light on the question — com- 

 pelling the abandonment of the above statements 3, 5, and 6, and a reconsidera- 

 tion of the conclusion based upon them. The newly discovered evidence shows 

 instead : 



1. That the genus Scyphocrinus occurs abundantly in America. 



2. That the Camarocrinus bulbs are directly connected at the distal end of the stem 

 with crinoids belonging to that genus. 



3. That these bulbs when in their original position occur with the stalked end upward, 

 and not downward as before supposed. 



HISTORY OF DISCOVERY 



The facts in support of these statements are briefly as follows : 

 I have had for a long time, among collections made by Wachsmuth from 

 Helderbergian strata in Perry County, Tennessee, now designated as the 

 Linden formation, several fragments of a large crinoid belonging to the 

 Melocrinidae, of whose generic position we were uncertain. A few years ago, 

 thanks to the kindness of the late Professor Whitfield, I came into possession 

 of a cast of the type specimen of the form described by McChesney ' as 

 Forbesiocrinus (Melocrinus in second edition 4 ) pratteni, said to be from the 

 Carboniferous limestone of Alabama but the actual position and locality 

 unknown, the original of which was lost in the Chicago fire. On assembling 

 this and the above mentioned fragments it was apparent that they all belonged 

 to the genus Scyphocrinus, and I have no doubt that McChesney's specimen 

 came from the same horizon somewhere near the Tennessee-Alabama line. 

 Later on, among other collections made in the Linden beds of Perry and 

 Hardin counties, Tennessee, was found an excellent large calyx, in all respects 

 like McChesney's type, with two others probably of a different species. Some 

 other crinoids were found in the same exposures, and a number of Camaro- 

 crinus bulbs, but not in situ or in any definite association. 



l Rec. Geol. Surv. India, vol. 43, pt. 4, PP- 335-338. 



2 Mem. Geol. Surv. India, vol. 39, pt. 2, pp. 1 19-123. 



3 Trans. Chicago Academy of Sciences, vol. 1, p. 29, i860. 



4 Ibid., Republication, 1808, p. 22, pi. 5, fig. 4. 



2 



