100 
AUG. F. FOERSTE 
well illustrated by Meek^^ and Ulrich. the Waynesville 
member of the Richmond the forms are relatively broader. 
In the Arnheim, and in the lower part of the Waynesville mem- 
bers, there is a form known as Cyclonema fluctuatum James^^ 
which is not only broad, but which tends to be wrinkled trans- 
versely and to be depressed along the upper third of the lower 
volutions. 
None of these Richmond forms resembles the figure of Cy- 
clonema hilix published by Conrad. The latter is not a strongly 
erect, conical form, but, on the contrary is low and apparently 
with a strongly oblique axis. Shells of this type are relatively 
common in the Brassfield limestone, 3 miles southeast of Rich- 
mond, while not known in the Elkhorn, Whitewater, or Liberty 
members of the Richmond at any locality near Richmond, 
Indiana. 
The locality and formation assigned by Conrad to his Cyclo- 
nema hilix was Richmond, Indiana, in limestones of the age of 
the Salmon river series of New York. Conrad included in his 
Salmon river series not only strata now known as Lorraine but 
also the unfossiliferous sandstone which caps the Lorraine at 
the Falls of the Salmon River. This accounts for his use of the 
term Salmon River sandstone in his various reports, although 
some of the underlying beds contain relatively . thin sandstone 
layers also. It is possible that the falls of the Elkhorn were 
included in the Salmon River series by Conrad, and that the 
type of his Cyclonema hilix was not a Richmond, but a Brassfield 
form. 
No good purpose, however, would be served by ressurrecting 
the name Cyclonema hilix for the Brassfield, instead of the Rich- 
mond species. The mere fact that no element of certainty 
attaches to its stratigraphic origin suggests that either this name 
Meek, F. B., Fossils of the Cincinnati Group: Paleontology of Ohio, vol. I, 
1873, pi. 13, fig. 5 g. 
32 Ulrich, E. O., and Scofield, W. H., The Lower Silurian Gastropoda of Minne- 
sota: Minn. Geol. and Nat. Hist. Surv., vol. 3, 1897, pi. 78, figs. 38-39. 
33 Idem: pi. 78, figs. 35, 36, 37. 
3“* Idem: pi. 78, figs. 40, 41, 42. 
