10 
DEVOiNIAN FAUNA. 
valve, seems larger and blunter, tliough its point is hidden in the matrix, and its 
constriction is hardly at all apparent. 
The shells figured by Barrois^ as probably Cypricardia crenicostata, F. A. 
Romer, so nearly resemble ours that I am very much incHned to regard them as 
the same species. They only differ in having the ribbing rather coarser, the 
anterior wing of the left valve somewhat larger, and the constriction across the 
valves more posterior and more clearly marked, Barrois notes a dissimilarity 
between the valves, similar to that seen in our examples, and with each valve he 
identifies species described by former authors. Of these, G. crenicostata, Kayser,^ 
C. lameUosa, Kayser^ (not HalP), C. crenicostata, Maurer,^ and G. elongata, 
Maurer,® are much more definitely distinguished from the present form by several 
particulars, while they probably agree with Romer's species. F. A. Romer's'^ 
original shell is, however, so unlike ours that, although his figure shows some 
signs of inaccuracy, I do not think it can be the same. It diflTers in being much 
less transverse, and in having much coarser ridges, a more defined and rearward 
constriction, and a more concave anterior border. 
Sanguinolaria lamellosa, Goldfuss,^ is another shell that is so similar that I 
am doubtful whether it may be identical. It chiefly differs from our left valve in 
being rather more transverse, and in having no constriction and coarser strige. 
I hardly think there are sufficient grounds for regarding it as the same. 
Again, one or two of the numerous figures of C. nitidula, Barrande,^ are so 
exceedingly like our shells that if they represented the species they might be 
well identified ; but the great majority are distinctly diff'erent, and I think prove 
Barrande's species to be identical with G. crenistria, Sandberger.^" 
On the whole, our present form may be considered as differentiated by the 
smallness and number of its ribs, and by its very anterior and slight constriction. 
Affinities. — Barrois regards as very kindred species C. lamellosa, Sandberger,^^ 
which has a much less defined wing, more equal valves, and much coarser stria- 
tions ; G. crenistria, Sandberger,^ which has much coarser striations, a much 
1 1889, Barrois, ' Faune Calc. d'Erbray,' p. 167, pi. xi, figs. 9 a — 
2 1878, Kayser, ' Abhandl. Geol. Speciallr. Preuss,' Band ii, pt. 4, p. 129, pi. xx, figs. 2, 2 a. 
3 Ibid., p. 128, pi. XX, fig. 3. 
* 1861, Hall, ' Pal. N. Y.,' vol. iii, p. 266, pi. xlixA, fig. la-c. 
5 1885, Maurer, ' Faune Ka\k. Waldgirmes,' p. 232, pi. ix, fig. 34. 
6 Ibid., p. 230, pi. ix, figs. 27—29. 
7 1850, F. A. Eomer, ' Beitr.,' pt. 1, p. 60, pi. ix, figs. 20 «, b. 
8 1834-40, Goldfuss, ' Petref. Germ.,' vol. ii, p. 279, pi. clix, fig. 12. 
8 1881, Barrande, ' Syst. Sil. Boheme,' vol. v, pt. 1, p. 71, pi. cciv, figs. 6, 5—8; pi. cclvii, 
figs. 4, ^-24, Et. F. 
1853, Sandberger, ' Verst. Rbeiu. Nassau,' p. 263, pi. xxviii, fig. 5. 
" Ibid., p. 262, pi. xxvii, fig. 13. 
