244 
GEOLOGY OF THE FOURTH DISTRICT. 
2. Ungulina suborbicularis, n. s. — Shell suborbicular; surface marked with fine concentric 
striae, and a few stronger folds; beak rather prominent. 
This fossil is not uncommon, but imperfect specimens are usually found. 
Locality —Cashaqua creek ; shore of Lake Erie. 
3. Bellerophon expansus? — The spire is wanting, and this imperfect specimen, presenting 
the expanded bilobate lip, is all that has been seen in the rock. It closely resembles the 
figure of Murchison, pi. 5, fig. 37. 
4. Orthoceras aciculum, n. s. — This very delicate and beautiful species is usually re¬ 
placed by iron pyrites, and so much destroyed as to be unfit for a figure. 
Locality —Cashaqua creek. 
5. Clymenia? complanata, n. s. — Flattened involute; whorls numerous, crossed by nu¬ 
merous slightly raised striae, which often appear undulated. 
This fossil always occurs replaced by iron pyrites, and more or less decomposed. It is 
provisionally referred to the genus Clymenia, its structure not having been satisfactorily 
ascertained. 
6. Goniatites sinuosus, n. s. — Discoidal, usually somewhat flattened, rapidly expanding 
from the first whorl; volutions crossed by unequal undulating stride ; septa sinuous. 
The specimen figured is a fragment; there is a perfect one in the State Collection, mea¬ 
suring four inches in diameter. 
Locality —Cashaqua creek, with the two last; also Lake Erie shore. 
7. Pinnopsis* acutirostra, n. s. — Sub-cuneiform ; surface marked by about twenty-six 
diverging ribs, which are crossed by numerous faint undulating lines, and a few stronger 
wrinkles of growth ; beak extended, acute and slightly incurved. 
This is one of the peculiar forms of this group, and apparently referable to no established 
genus. 
Locality —Cashaqua creek. 
8. Pinnopsis ornatus , n. s. — Obtusely cuneiform; surface marked by more than forty 
diverging ribs, which are crossed by beautifully arched strise. 
The specimen is slightly imperfect on one side. 
This and the preceding species occur together, and from their similarity, are not often dis¬ 
tinguished ; the number of ribs and the form of the shell are, however, sufficiently distinctive 
marks. 
Locality —Cashaqua creek. 
* This generic name is proposed for the two fossils here figured, from their resemblance to the Pinna. 
