360 University Geological Survey of Kansas. 
zon it is represented by the shaft of the cross with both arms removed. 
As has been already explained, there are some horizons in which spe- 
cies which are very abundant in the northern region are wanting in the 
southern, and the reverse; both are necessarily represented, no designa- 
tion being used to indicate that peculiarity in distribution. 
The object of this sort of an arrangement is to bring out the pecu- 
liarities of the faunule of each horizon so that in the chart they will 
appeal to the eye. Further work will tend to modify, to some extent, the 
upper part of the chart, but we feel that it is fairly characteristic and 
representative. 
In using the chart it should be remembered that the abundance of 
specimens of the various species as represented in any formation refers 
only to that horizon, and has no relation to its abundance in any other 
formation. For example, a species [as Rhipidomella pecosi (Marc.) | 
may be present in larger numbers in a formation (Oread limestone) but 
be masked by much more abundant specimens of several other species and 
be represented merely by a cross, while it may form a larger percentage 
of a faunule with fewer individuals in another horizon (Chanute shales) 
and be represented by a half-blackened space, etc. Such cases are prob- 
ably the exceptions and to a large extent the true life-history of the spe- 
cies in these rocks is shown in the upper part of the chart. 
The chart includes all known data bearing on the rocks under con- 
sideration which can be referred to definite horizons. Specimens iden- 
tified very doubtfully are omitted unless they are likely to be valuable for 
the purposes of the chart. Some identifications are provisional and sub- 
ject to change upon further study. 
Where the work of others is incorporated in the chart it is given a 
special designation. ‘Thus species reported from some horizon in which 
it does not happen to be found in our collections is given by the initial of 
the name of the person reporting it. The letter G refers to Doctor Girty’s 
lists, B to Doctor Bennett’s, P to Professor Prosser’s, and S:to Mr. Erich 
Spandel’s. 
Addenda. 
To this list the following species should be added: 
Cladochonus bennetti Beede. Cherokee shales, B. 
Chonetes levis Keys. Cherokee shales. 
Trachydomia austini Worth. Coffeyville limestone, B. 
Mastodonosaurus? sp. Probably from the basal Elmdale. 
Pleuracanthus sp. From the Neosho formation. 
Clepsydrops sp. From the Neosho formation. 
Cricotus sp. From the Neosho formation. 
Bakewellia parva. From the Willard shales, G. 
CORRECTIONS. 
The following corrections should be made on the appended chart: 
Prismopora serrata 178. Fort Scott limestone, G. 
Pleurophorus occidentalis 364. Drum limestone, B. 
Squamularia perplexa 2. Howard limestone. 
Bulimorpha nitidula 355. Drum limestone, B. 
Macrodon carbonarius 865. Drum limestone, B. 
Cardiomorpha missouriensis 331. Scranton shales. 
Remove Cyclus pyramidalis 171. There is no such species. 
For further additions see the preceding list, which was completed some 
months after this chart left our hands. That list is more complete for 
this reason. The insects from the “Lawrence shales” were found, as this 
paper goes to press, to be from the Le Roy shales. The change is made 
in be foregoing list, but cannot be made on the engraved chart which 
ollows. 
