Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-23T23:25:25.186Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Note on the Genera Staurocephalus and Sphaerocoryphe, with the Description of a New Species of Sphaerocoryphe

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

J. L. Begg
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

There has been some confusion between the trilobite genera Staurocephalus and Sphaerocoryphe. This is probably due to a similarity in the bulbous character of the anterior glabellar lobe common to both genera as well as to the genus Deiphon and the Australian form Onycopyge. King (1920, pp. 532–4), in view of the character of a hypostome of Staurocephalus preserved in the British Museum and figured by Salter, was of opinion that this genus should be removed from the Cheiruridae, but hesitated to place it in the Encrinuridae. Raymond, in Eastman's Zittel (1913, p. 725), includes Staurocephalus and Sphaerocoryphe in his subfamily Deiphoninae, which he defines as Cheiruridae with a bulbous anterior lobe. His diagnosis of Staurocephalus is “Glabella with two pairs of lobes behind the bulbous portion. Cephalon with a denticulate border, and pygidium similar to that of Pliomera”. Sphaerocoryphe has only one pair of lobes behind the bulbous anterior lobe. It is necessary to consider the characteristic features of the genotypes of the two genera.

Type
Articles
Information
Geological Magazine , Volume 77 , Issue 4 , August 1940 , pp. 295 - 304
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1940

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

REFERENCES

Angelin, N. P., 1854. Palaeontologia Scandinavica, Crustacea, Ed. I, fasc. 2.Google Scholar
Armstrong, and Young, , 1876. Cat. West. Scot. Foss.Google Scholar
Barrande, J., 1846. Notice Préliminaire sur le Système Silurien et les Trilobites de la Bohême. Leipsic.Google Scholar
Barrande, J. 1852. Systéme Silurien du Centre de la Bohêeme, vol. i. Prague.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beyrich, E., 1845. Ueber einige böhmischen Trilobiten. Berlin.Google Scholar
Beyrich, E. 1846. Untersuchungen über Trilobiten, Stuck II. Berlin.Google Scholar
Billings, E., 1866. Catalogue of the Silurian Fossils of the Island of Anticosti, Geol. Surv. of Canada.Google Scholar
Corda, A. J. C. and Hawle, J., 1847. Prodrom einer Monographie der böhmischen Trilobiten. Prague.Google Scholar
King, W. B. R., 1920. Notes on the Genus Sphaerocoryphe. Geol. Mag., lvii, 532–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCoy, F., 1850. On a specimen of Slaurocephalus of Llandeilo age from the Rhiwlas Limestone of Wales. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., 2, iv, 401.Google Scholar
Miller, S. A., 1889. North American Geology and Palaeontology, p. 567. Cincinnati.Google Scholar
Nicholson, and Etheridge, , 1878. Man. Silur. Foss. Girvan., fasc. i.Google Scholar
Portlock, J. E., 1843. Geol. Rep. Londonderry. Dublin.Google Scholar
Raymond, P. E., 1913. In Eastman's Edition of Zittel's Invertebrate Palaeontology. New York.Google Scholar
Reed, F. R. C., 1906. The Lower Palaeozoic Trilobites of the Girvan District, pt. 3. Palaeontographical Society, London.Google Scholar
Reed, F. R. C. 1931. The Lower Palaeozoic Trilobites of the Girvan District. Supplement No. 2. Palaeontographical Society, London.Google Scholar
Salter, J. W., 1865. Mem. Geol. Surv., dec. xi, pl. v, fig. 6.Google Scholar
Salter, J. W. 1865A. A Mon. Brit. Trilob. of the Camb. Silur. and Devon. Formations, pt. 2. Palaeontographical Society, London.Google Scholar
Schmidt, F., 1881. Rev. Ostbalt. Silur. Trilobiten. Mém. Acad. Imp. Sci., St. Petersbourgh.Google Scholar
Vogdes, A. W., 1890. A Bibliography of Palaeozoic Crustacea. Bull. U. S. Geol. Surv., No. 63, pt. 2, p. 147.Google Scholar