LIST OF PUBLICATIONS. 
Crust. 11 
100. T Jones. T. R.] Fossil Ostracoda from Colorado. Gcol. Mag (3) iii, 
pp. 145-148, 1 pi. 
4 Dew and 2 former spp. from fresh-water “ Atlantosaurus’ 1 Jurassic 
beds. 
101. . On Palaeozoic Phyllopoda. T. c. pp. 456-462. 
Additional remarks to Brit. Ass. Rep. [ Vide Jones, Woodward, & 
Etheridge (99).] 
102. & Kirkby, J. W. Carboniferous Ostracoda Ijrom the Gayton 
Boring, Northamptonshire. Geol. Mag. (3) iii, pp. 248-253, 1 pi.; 
also J. Northampt. Soc. iv, p. 98. 
5 former and 1 new spp., Kirkbya variabilis. 
103. & . Fringed and Other Ostracoda from the Carboniferous 
Series. T. c. pp. 433-439, 2 pis. 
New genera, Beyrichiopsis , Beyrichiella ; 8 new spp. 
104. & . Distribution of the Ostracoda of the Carboniferous 
Formations of the British Isles. Q. J. Geol. Soc. xlii, pp. 496-514. 
Beyrichiop8is , Phreatura , Youngia, n. gg. 
105. & . List of Bivalved Entomostraca in the Carboniferous 
Formations of Great Britain and Ireland. P. Geol. Ass. ix, pp. 
495-515. 
106. — — , & Holl, H. B. Notes on the Palaeozoic Bivalved Eniomo- 
straca. XX. On the Genus Beyrichia and some New Species. Ann. 
N. H. (5) xvii, pp. 337-363, 1 pi. 
Revision of the genus, with several new spp. 
107. & . Notes on the Palaeozoic Bivalved Entomostraca. 
xxi. On some Silurian Genera and Species. T. c. pp. 403-414, 1 pi. 
108. Kafka, J. Kritisches Yerzeichniss der Ostrakoden der Bohmi- 
schen Kreideformation. SB. bohm. Ges. 1885, pp. 51-57, 1 pi. 
109. . Prispevek ku poznani cirripedu ceskeho utvaru kridoveho. 
T. c ... pp. 554-575, 3 pis. ; abstr., pp. 575-577. 
With several new species of Cirrhipeds, quoted in the Systematic 
Part. 
110. Kaufmann, A. Beitriige zur Kenntniss der Cytheriden. Rec. Z. 
Suisse, pp. 131-207, pis. vi-xi ; abstr. in J. R. Micr. Soc. (2) vi, p. 440. 
Synopsis of genera, p. 206. 
111. Kingsley, J. S. The Arthropod Eye. Am. Nat. xx, p. 862. 
Review of recent literature, and original observations on development 
of eye in Crangon. 
112. . The Development of the Compound Eye of Crangon. Zool. 
Anz. ix, pp. 597-600. 
Author states that there is nothing in its development to bear out 
the view that eye or eyestalk are homodynamous with appendages ; and 
that its development from a single invagination shows it is not to bo 
regarded as a coalescence of ocelli. 
