186 
THE VOYAGE OF H.M.S. CHALLENGER. 
Mai'ine Deposits. 
1. Deep-Sea Deposits, beyond 100 
fathoms. 
Shallow-Water Deposits, 
tween low-water mark 
100 fathoms. 
3. Littoral Deposits, between high 
and low water marks. 
Red Clay. 
Radiolarian Ooze. 
Diatom Ooze. 
Globigerina Ooze. 
Pteropod Ooze. 
Blue Mud. 
Red Mud. 
Green Mud. 
Volcanic Mud. 
Coral Mud. 
Sands, gravels, muds, &c. 
I Sands, gravels, muds, &c. 
Pelagic Deposits, formed 
in deep water removed 
from land. 
II. Terrigenous Deposits, 
formed in deep and 
r shallow water close to 
land masses. 
In the above classification of Marine Deposits it will be observed that those forming 
in the shallow-water and littoral zones surrounding the land masses are not included in 
the term Deep-Sea Deposits, and in consequence the deposits of these zones do not fall 
to be considered in detail in this Report. Shallow-water and littoral formations had 
rounded, siliceous, calcareous, &c. The same terms have been applied also to Deep-Sea Deposits, with the addition of 
further modif}dng expressions. Murray in his preliminary report adopted various new names for the deep-sea deposits 
collected by the Challenger Expedition, and these were more fully defined in a subsequent paper by Murray and 
Renanl. Schmelck applies the following terms to the deeper dejjosits of the Norwegian Sea — Biloculina Clay, 
Transition Clay, and Grey Clay ; and to the shallower deposits — Rhabdammina Clay and Volcanic Clay. Delesse 
used the terms — Calcaire tendre ou crayeux. Vase, Vase sableuse. Vase calcaire. Sable vaseux. Vase gi’aveleuse, Argile, 
Gravier, &c. Agassiz makes use of the terms — Volcanic Shore Deposit, Siliceous Shore Deposit, Coral Ooze, Clay, Modi- 
fied Globigerina Ooze, Modified Pteropod Ooze, Fine Telluric Silt. (See Murray, Proc. Roy. Soc., vol. xxiv. pp. 471-532, 
187fi ; Murray and Renard, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edin., vol. xii. pp. 495-529, 1884; Schmelck, Norwegian North Atlantic 
Expe*lition, Chemistry, part ix., Christiania, 1882 ; Delesse, Lithologie du Fond des Mers, 2 vols. and atlas, Paris, 1871 ; 
Agassiz, Tliree Cruises of the “ Blake,” 2 vols., Boston and New York, 1888 ; Issel, Note geologiche sugli alti fondi 
marini, Pull. Soc. beige de Geologic, etc., 1888, p. 19; Tlioulet, Oceanographic (Statique), Paris, 1890; Giimbel, Die 
mineralogisch-geologische Beschaffenheit derauf der Forschungsreise S.M.S. “ Gazelle ” gesammelt Meeresgrund-Abla- 
gerungen, Forschungsreise S.M.S. Gazelle, Theil ii., Physik und Chemie, Berlin, 1890.) Nearly all the above terms 
are more or less indefinite and uncertain in their application, and, with the exception of our own nomenclature, no 
systematic attempt has l>een made to define the sense in which they should be used ; the same is the case with other terms 
not here referred to. The classification which we have adopted was suggested some years ago in our joint paper, and 
generally accepted in the principal text-books of geology (Geikie, de Lapparent, Credner, etc.) ; this nomenclature is by 
no means all that could lx: desired as to the choice of the terms employed, for sometimes these indicate the composition 
of the depfsiit, sometimes only the colour. We believe, however, that it is better, in the present state of our know- 
le<lge, to retain terms now in use than to intrfxluce new ones, to which it would be difficult to attach more definite 
meanings. With the help of the definitions given in this work future olwervers should have no difficulty in recognising 
any specimen frrjm the deep sea as Ixilonging to one or other of the types named in the above classification and 
described in detail in this cliapter. 
