Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T22:24:34.467Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

V.—Sedgwick Museum Notes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

F. R. Cowper Reed
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

We have now finished the survey of the characters of the head-shield of Trinucleus sufficiently to enable us to discuss the vexed questions of the affinities, systematic position, and evolution of the genus; and from the foregoing details of the various species we can perceive that there are many difficult problems presented when we attempt to correlate its structure with that of other trilobites. Whether the peculiar characters of the genus are the result of degeneration or of the persistent retention of early phylogenetic stages or of a reversion to such stages is a matter of dispute.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Geological Magazine , Volume 3 , Issue 4 , April 1916 , pp. 169 - 176
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1916

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 170 note 1 Lake, Cambrian Trilobites (Palæont. Soc.), 1907, p. 45.

page 170 note 2 Swinnerton, , Geol. Mag., Dec. VI, Vol. II, p. 489, 1915.Google Scholar

page 170 note 3 Beecher, , Amer. Journ. Sci., ser. IV, vol. iii, pp. 89–106, 181–207, 1897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 170 note 4 Reed, Geol. Mag., Dec. IV, Vol. V, pp. 439–47, 552–9, 1898.Google Scholar

page 170 note 5 Dollo, , Bull. Soc. Géol. Belgique, xxiii, p. 417, 1909.Google Scholar

page 170 note 6 Woods, , article on Trilobita in The Cambridge Natural History, vol. iv, Crustacea, pp. 226, 230–1, 244–5, 1909.Google Scholar

page 170 note 7 McCoy, Syn. Brit. Pal. Foss. Woodw. Mus., p. 146.

page 171 note 1 Grönwall, Bornholms Paradoxideslag (Danmarks geol. Undersog., ii, No. 13), 1902, p. 102, t. 2, fig. 2.

page 171 note 2 Reed, , Q.J.G.S., vol. lii, pp. 414–16, pl. xx, figs. 1–3, 1896.Google Scholar

page 171 note 3 Gurich, Verh. Kais. min. Ges. St. Petersb., ser. ii, Bd. xxxii, p. 359, t. xv, figs. 7a, b, 1896.

page 171 note 4 Reed, , Geol. Mag., Dec. V, Vol. V, p. 433, pl. xiv, figs. 1–3, 1908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 171 note 5 Gurich, op. cit., p. 362, t. xv, figs. 4a, b.

page 171 note 6 Bernard, , Q.J.G.S., vol. 1, p. 411, 1894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 172 note 1 Walcott, , Smithsonian Misc. Coll., vol. liii, No. 6, p. 238, 1910.Google Scholar

page 173 note 1 Reed, , Geol. Mag., Dec. V, Vol. IX, p. 200, Pl. XI, Figs. 3–6, 1912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

page 173 note 2 Brögger, , Die Silur. Etagen 2 und 3 (1882), p. 98; Reed, Geol. Mag., Dec. IV, Vol. VII (1900), pp. 251, 255.Google Scholar

page 173 note 3 Grönwall, , Bornholms Paradoxideslag, pp. 82–104, 1902.Google Scholar