118 
MEMOIRS OF THE QUEENSLAND MUSEUM. 
Without further elaboration, which must wait upon the publication of 
the other faunal evidence, the Dorypyge beds may be stated to occur near the 
top of the fossiliferous beds of this region. How far they are removed from 
the true top of the Middle Cambrian will not be discussed here. 
Recently Resser (1939) has reviewed the Cambrian faunas of the Pacific 
region and, in my opinion, has overstated the relationships between Australia 
and Asia, He predicted the appearance, in the Middle Cambrian of Australia, 
of the curious genera that in present collections are endemic to the Chinese 
province. It may be stated that recent collecting still has not discovered these 
in Australia. Rather (as with the genus Dorypyge ) the new faunas have 
intensified the common nature of this Province, with its commingling of Asiatic, 
Cordilleran and Atlantic types that, I suggested (1939, p. 269), was normal 
for the southerly position of Australia in the Cambrian — a suggestion that 
Resser seems to have overlooked. 
The descriptions that follow were written early in 1941, since when I 
have been away from all palaeontological literature. Any foreign species of 
Dorypyge that may have been recorded since that date will therefore not be 
noticed in this paper. 
DESCRIPTIONS. 
Order Polymera Jaekel, 1909. 
Suborder Corynexochida Kobayashi, 1935. 
Family DORYPYGIDAE Kobayashi, 1935. 
Genus DORYPYGE Dames, 1883. 
Genotype: Dorypyge richtJiofeni Dames 1 . 
It is still difficult to decide the generic limits of Dorypyge. No complete 
test of any species of the genus has been figured, so that the number of segments 
in the thorax is unknown. For most species, too, the free cheeks and the 
hypostome have not been recorded. The genotype has a granulate test, six 
pairs of lateral, pygidial spines, but no spines on the axis of the pygidium. 
Most of the species that have been placed in Dorypyge in recent years have 
similar characters; but some forms so placed (e.g. D. danic-a Gf*onwall, 1902, 
p. 134, pi. 3, figs. 7-12) have a non-granulate surface while others (e.g. D. orient 
Gronwall, 1902, p. 135, pi. 3, figs. 13-15) have axial pygidial spines as well as 
a smooth surface. There are more curious species with intermediate characters. 
D. lakei Cobbold 2 , for instance, has axial spines, a finely granulate pygidium, 
granules on the fixed cheeks but, curiously enough, not on the glabella. Some 
of the smooth forms without axial spines on the pygidium, e.g. Proetus 
slatkowskii Schmidt which von Toll (1896, p. 33, pi. 2, figs. 1-10) referred to 
Dorypyge , are more likely members of the rather earlier genera Kootenia or 
Notasaphus. 
1 Dames, although not stating specifically that D, richthofeni was the genotype, 
described only this one species. He did, however, refer two American species to the genus — 
Dicellocephalus quadriceps Hall and D. ( ?) gothicus Hall. Clearly from his description he 
intended richtJiofeni as the type. This generally has been so regarded by all later workers; 
and formally it may be nominated as genotype. 
2 Cobbold, 1911, p. 287, pi. xxv, figs. 1-8. See also Lake, 1938, p. 255, pi. xxxvi, figs. 2-12. 
