Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T08:37:01.186Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

I.—Contributions to the Palæontology of the Yorkshire Oolites

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

Wilfrid H. Hudleston
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Bibliography, etc.—The type specimen of Turbo lævigatus, Phil., has not been seen by me; but since there are some grounds for regarding the fossil, usually so described, as a Neritopsis, the identification becomes important. We must therefore fall back upon Phillips's figure, and upon such collateral evidence as, in the absence of description, may be available. Phillips in the early editions of the G.Y. considered Bean's specimen from the Dogger as identical with Nerita lævigata, Sow. (M. C. t. 217, fig. 1), which he regarded as a Turbo rather than a Nerita. This identification of Phillips has not been endorsed by subsequent writers. D'Orbigny believed that he recognized in Turbo lævigatus, Phil., Delphinula gibbosa, Thorent (Mém. S. G. Fr. 3, p. 260, pl. 22, fig. 10). D'Orbigny's figure, making due allowance for enlargement, is very similar to the one by Phillips.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Geological Magazine , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , February 1885 , pp. 49 - 59
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1885

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 52 note 1 Kindly lent to me by the Council of the Bristol Museum at the instance of Edward Wilson, Esq., F.G.S., the Curator.

page 54 note 1 In both figures, but especially in Figure 8, the granulations are made too small and too circular. There are indications that these nodes were more imbricated.