Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-lvwk9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-17T23:57:56.699Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

V.—On some supposed Fossil Remains of Arachnida (?) and Myriopoda from the, English Coal-Measures

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

Henry Woodward
Henry Woodward
Affiliation:
British Museum
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In the fourth part of my Monograph on the Merostomata, published in last year’s volume of the Palæontographical Society’s annual issue, I drew attention to two very singular fossil remains which had been somewhat doubtfully referred by Mr. J. W. Salter to the genus Eurypterus. A portion, at least, of the remains referred by him to Eurypterus? mammatus are really plant-remains (as shown by Mr. Carruthers, op. cit., p. 168), whilst the remainder must, for the present, be classed with M. Jordan’s Arthropleura armatu, from the Coal-measures of Saarbruck, Rhenish Prussia, a very anomalous Crustacean (if it be a Crustacean at all, which I greatly doubt), but which is certainly not a Eurypterus.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Geological Magazine , Volume 10 , Issue 105 , March 1873 , pp. 104 - 112
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1873

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 104 note 2 p.163.

page 106 note 1 It is quite apparent, however, from Mr. Salter’s description, that he was under the impression that two specimens existed in reality as well as in his figure. I have therefore specially noticed this, lest hereafter it should be supposed that one of these curious fragments had really been lost.

page 106 note 2 If by the Scotch Eurypterus Mr. Salter refers to E. Scouleri, a comparison between the fragment of E. mammatus and the. entire head of E. Scouleri will satisfy any palæontologist that such a hinder angle could not possibly be fitted to the carapace of the latter; the curvature and ornamentation being both incongruous. No other form with which we are acquainted could have required so large an epimeral piece save the great Devonian Stylonurus Scoticus.

page 108 note 1 See Pal. Soc. Mon. Merostomata, part iv., and pl. xxii. and xxiii.

page 108 note 2 Trans. Woolhope Naturalists’ Field Club, 1870, p. 266. ‘Fossil Sketches’, No. 9, figs. 1 and 2, and No. 10.

page 108 note 3 This account, together with some further observations, which Mr. Carruthers has kindly promised to furnish, will appear in the April Number of the Geological Magazine.—Edit. Geol. Mag.

page 109 note 1 Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc., vol. xix. p. 86, and woodcut fig. 8, p. 84. Reproduced in this Article at p. 105.

page 110 note 1 The Founder of the Hope Professorship of Zoology in the University of Oxford, so ably filled by Prof. J. O. Westwood, M.A., F.L.S., the eminent Entomologist and Carcinologist.

page 112 note 1 Op. cit. p. 558.

page 112 note 2 The author desires to record his thanks to the Council of the Palæontographical Society for granting him permission to use the woodcuts which illustrate this paper; which is, to a large extent, reprinted from his Memoir on the Merostomata in the 1872 volume of that Society’s publications.