JTeiv Coccosteaii — Coeeoxteus Cxyahoya'. — Clay pole. 109 
doubt can exist concerning their nature, thougli of the latter only 
the inner face is exposed. 
If as Dr. Newberry has suggested (See Pal. of Ohio, p. 306, 
vol. 1) the jaw there described as Llognathus spathuhdiis really 
belongs to C. occidcnfalis (a suspicion not yet proved) we shall 
be in a position to compare it with the jaw of (\ decipiens with 
which in size it exactly corresponds, though differing widely in 
the dentition. In this character it more nearly approaches the 
dinichthyid pattern. Possibly, however, this connection if proved 
may have the effect of removing C. occidental is from its present 
generic position rather than that of introducing Liognathus. 
Coccosteus thus ranges through the Devonian in both 
continents, C.hcrcyniiis and C. occidenf(dis coming from 
the lower and all the other species from the upper 
strata. 
It is therefore of not a little interest to record the 
occurrence of Coccostena at another and a higher horizon 
in Ohio. The specimen is remarkable also for its large 
size, far exceeding any of those already known. It 
was found by the veteran collector. Dr. W. Clark, of 
Berea, 0. , in the Cleveland shale near that town and 
close to the horizon which has yielded Diniddhys and the 
other armor-clad fishes with which pah^ontologists are now fa- 
miliar. 
The fossil is the left ramus of the lower jaw and measures five 
and a half inches in length. Some part of the spatulate end is 
missing and at least another half inch must be added to complete 
it. Obviously therefore it belonged to a coccostean far surpass- 
ing in size any of the rest. If we assume that the jaw was only 
six inches long it was then at least three times as large as that of 
C. decipiens or nearly four feet from nose to tail, and was a very 
giant among its fellows. 
At the same time, as may be seen at once by consulting the 
figures, no doubt regarding its affinity can be entertained. There 
are the mandibular teeth, eight in number, on the upper edge of 
the mandible just in front of the middle, less sharp and regular 
than represented by Hugh Miller but not less characteristic. In 
front are the symphysial teeth (or rather their bases for the teeth 
themselves have been broken off) projecting inward toward those 
on the opposite ramus. These are three in number. H. Miller 
