190 THE AMERICAN NATURALIST [Vol. XL VII 



to the already rich collections of the American Museum. It is to 

 be hoped that the skeleton will be shortly described. 



"A Revision of the Amphibia and Pisces of the Permian of 

 North America with a Description of Permian Insects" is the 

 work of B. C. Case, Louis Hussakof and E. H. Sellards, issued 

 as Publication No. 146 of the Carnegie Institution of Washing- 

 ton, on December 20, 1911. The larger part of the work, 148 

 pages, 51 text-figures and 25 plates, is given to the discussion of 

 the Amphibia which constitutes Dr. Case's contribution to the 

 volume. Ten families of Amphibia are discussed in an historical, 

 systematic and morphological manner, the last two being given 

 approximately equal space. The ''historical" portion of the 

 discussion consists of the history of discovery and the taxonomy 

 of the Permian forms as viewed by various writers from Cope 

 (1875) to Broom (1910). The chief taxonomic schemes are 

 given, with lists of species. 



The systematic section opens with a table of ''Classification" 

 which adopts the opinions of Zittel published many years ago 

 and which, in the main, seems to represent the facts as we now 

 know them. Dissent has already been made as to the inclusion 

 of the Diplocaulidae in the order Microsauria to which group of 

 vertebrates they have not the slightest relationship. The anat- 

 omy and relationships of the group have been discussed else- 

 where 10 and it will only be necessary to state here that the struc- 

 ture, as we now know it, seems to point to a relationship of the 

 Diplocaulidffi with the true Amphibia, i. e., the Branchiosauria 

 and the Caudata. A new order, Diplocaulia, has been erected 

 for the reception of the species of the family. It is only proper 

 to say that Dr. Case includes the Diplocaulida? with the Micro- 

 sauria provisionally. In the morphological section Dr. Case says 

 (P. 90) : 



Jaekel's suggestion of the derivation of Diplocaulus from forms " 

 Ceraterpeton and DicrrotosanrKs is very probably correct. 



He gives not the slightest reason for the assumption of the 

 rectness of this view, which, in the light of the facts, can not be 

 regarded as other than preposterous. The derivation of Diplo- 

 caulus from such differently organized animals as Ceraterpeton 

 and Diceratosaurus is fully as fanciful as Jaekel's suggestion to 

 Dr. Traquair of the probable descent of Hunsriickia "jene 

 altesten Fische von terrestrischen Tetrapoden abstammen." 

 10 Journal of Morphology, XXIII, No. 1. March. 1912 



