American 

Upper Cretaceous 

Echinoidea 

By C. WYTHE COOKE 

A SHORTER CONTRIBUTION TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 254-A 

Descriptions and illustrations of. 

Upper Cretaceous echinoids from the 

Coastal Plain and western interior 

of the Un!·ted States and from Guatemala 

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1953 
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Douglas McKay, Secretary 

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

W. E. Wrather, Director 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office 

Washington 25, D. C. -Price $1.00 (paper cover) 
CONTENTS 

Abstract __________________________________________ _ Introduction ______________________________________ _ 

Key to the genera of American Upper Cretaceous Echinoida _______________________________________ _ 

Page 

1 

1 

4 

Systematic descriptions _______ ---- ____________ ------_ 

References-----------------------------------------

IndeX---------------------------------------------

ILLUSTRATIONS 

[Plates 1-16 follow index] 

PLATE 1. Cidaris, Salenia, Porosoma, Codiopsis, and Rachiosoma. 

2. Pedinopsis. 

3. Lanieria, Rachiosoma, Phymosoma, and Conulus. 

4. Globator, Nucleopygns, Lefortia, Faujasia, and Pygurostoma. 

5. Catopygus, Phyllobrissus, Clarkiella, and H ardouinia. 

6-8. H ardouinia. 

9. H olaster and Pseudananchys. 

10. Echinocorys, Cardiaster, and H olaster. 

11. Cardiaster, I somicraster, and Echinocorys. 

12, 13. Hemiaster. 

14. Cardiaster, H emiaster, and Linthia. 

15. Proraster and Micraster. 

16. Hemiaster, Barnumia, and Pygurostoma. 

-FIGURE 1. Stratigraphic location of some echinoid-bearing formations of the Coastal Plain_-------------------------------

IJ',[ 

Page 

4 

38 

41 

Page 

2 

AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 

By C. WYTHE COOKE 

ABSTRACT 

Most of the 58 species (in 8 genera) of known Upper 

Cretaceous echinoids are found in the Gulf series in the 

States from Texas to North Carolina. Of six species 

that came from the western interior United States only 

Hemiaster humphreysanus occurs also in the Gulf series. 

Ten species from New Jersey, Delaware, or Maryland 

have not been recognized elsewhere. Three species 

from Guatemala are included. 

Descriptions of the genera herein given Include references to the type species and mention .their characteristic features. One new genus, Barnumia, is described. 

Also included are a dichotomous key to the genera, 

keys to the species of Hardouinia and Hemiaster, and a 

correlation table of echinoid-bearing formations. 

The following species are described as new: Salenia 

hondoensis, Porosoma reesidei, Codiopsis stephensoni, 

Rachiosoma hondoensis, Lanieria uvaldana, Conulus 

stephensoni, Globator vaughani, Faujasia chelonium, 

Catopygus mississippiensis, Lejortia trojana, Hardouinia 

mcglameryae, Pseudananchys stephensoni, Holaster feralis, Cardiaster deciper, Isomicraster rossi, Isomicraster 

danei, Barnumia browni, Hemi.aster arcolensis, Hemiaster 

sabinal, Hemiaster amelianus, and Micraster uddeni. 

Transfers of species to a different genus include 

Cyphosoma mortoni De Loriol to Rachiosoma; Pseudodiadema hilli Clark to Phymosoma; Echinobrissus 

texanus Clark to Nucleopygus; Clypeaster geomet1·icus 

Morton to Pygurostoma; Echinobrissus cubensis W eisbord 

to Phyllobrissus; Cassidulus hemisphericus Slocom to 

Clarkiella; and Cassidulus emmonsi Stephenson, Cassidulus keltumi Stephenson, Cassidulus micrococcus Gabb, 

Cassidulus aequoreus Morton, Clypeaster florealis Morton, Cassidulus stantoni Clark, and Cassidulus taylori 

Warren to Hardouinia. 

INTRODUCTION 

This report is based chiefly on collections in the 

United States National Museum. Besides these, which 

include most of the material studied by William Bullock 

Clark (1891, 1893, 1915) and Lloyd W. Stephenson 

(1927, 1941), some specimens, including types, were 

loaned by the Academy of National Sciences of Philadelphia, the New Jersey State Museum at Trenton, the 

Alabama Museum of Natural History at Tuscaloosa, 

the Paleontological Research Laboratories at States-. 

ville, North Carolina, and the University of Alberta at 

Edmonton. For this additional material I am indebted 

to Dr. Horace G. Richards, Miss Winnie McGlamery, 

Dr. Richard L. Casanova, and Prof. P. S. Warren. 

Especial thanks are due to L. W. Stephenson, John 

B. Reeside, Jr., and William A. Cobban, all of the 

United States Geological Survey, who contributed 

important data on the stratigraphic ranges of several 

species. 

The scope of this report is less inclusive than might 

be inferred from the title, which was selected for brevity. 

The word American as used here applies primarily to 

the United States, though a few of the species described 

occur also in Mexico, Brazil, Guatemal~, or in Canada. 

Only the post-Cenomanian Upper Cretaceous echinoids 

are described. This excludes the species from the 

Upper Cretaceous Buda limestone of Texas, which, 

though of early Cenomanian age, is classified as part 

of t.he Comanche series, most of which is of early 

Cretaceous age. The echinoid fauna of the Buda has 

been described by Whitney (1916), and its species 

were included in my paper on the Comanche echinoids 

(Cooke, 1946). 

Also excluded from the report are the Cretaceous 

echinoids of the Pacific coastal States. These were 

described by Kew (1920), who lists the following 

Cretaceous species: Cidaris tehemaensis Clark, Oatopygus californicus Kew, Hemiaster cholamensis Kew, 

Hemiaster californicus Clark, Hemiaster alamedensis 

Kew, Hemiaster oregonensis Kew, and Epiaster depressus 

Kew. 

The greater number of species described herein were 

derived from the Gulf series in the states from Texas 

to North Carolina. Also all the known species from 

the western interior are included. These are Porosoma. 

reesidei Cooke, n. sp.; Hardouinia stantoni (Clark); 

Hardouinia taylori (Warren); Hemiaster beecheri Clark; 

Hemiaster humphreysanus Meek and Hayden; Gardiaster curtus Clark; and Holaster feralis Cooke, n. sp. 

The type of Scutellaster cretaceus Cragin, found at 

Colorado Springs, Colorado, and heretofore supposed 

to be Cretaceous, is probably a curio from the west 

1 
2 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

Coast discarded by some tourist. It is certainly not 

Cretaceous. It has been identified by J. Wyatt Durham 

{1953, pp. 147-148) as the common Pliocene species 

Anorthoscutum interlineatum (Stimpson). 

Eight species from New Jersey and Delaware are 

represented for the most part by casts of the interior. 

They are Pygurostoma geometricum (Morton), Catopygus 

pusillus Clark, Catopygus ( Oolopygus) williamsi Clark, 

Hardouinia florealis (Morton), "Hemiaster" kummeli 

Clark, Hemiaster welleri Clark, Hemiaster delawarensis 

Clark, and Cardiaster smocki Clark. These species 

have not been recognized elsewhere, and the state of 

preservation of most of them is such as to make recognition uncertain. One species, Cardiaster marylandicus 

Clark, comes from the Monmouth formation of Maryland. 

The stratigraphic location of most of the geologic 

formations from which the American Upper Cretaceous 

echinoids have been derived is indicated in the correlation table, Figure 1, in which the formations are referred 

to the standard Upper Cretaceous time scale of Europe. 

Only the echinoid-bearing formations are listed in that 

table. For the complete sequence in the Coastal Plain 

the reader is referred to tables by Stephenson, King, 

Monroe, and Imlay (1942) and by Monroe (1946); 

for the western interior of the United States to tables 

by Cobban and Reeside (1952). The division of the 

Maestrichtian into three parts is arbitrary. It signifies 

merely relative position. 

The distribution of species according to their geologic 

horizon is shown -in the accompanying table. It will 

be noted that the geologic range of most species is 

limited to one stage. For that reason, most echinoids 

are excellent horizon markers. 

The initials U.S.G.S. followed by a serial number 

indicates an entry in the register of Mesozoic localities 

of the Paleontology and Stratigraphy Branch of the 

United States Geological Survey. The initials U.S.N.M. 

stand for the United States National Museum. 

TEXAS ARKANSAS MISSISSIPPI, ALABAMA NORTH CAROLINA, 

SOUTH CAROLINA NEW JERSEY 

c 

ro 

·a 

0 

c 

Q) 

Kemp clay Q) 

~ @ ,..:) §' Corsicana marl 

~ ~ 2~--------------------~ 

.~ :0 ~ >.. "0 >.. 

Escondido formation 

Nacatoch sand 

Providence sand 

Prairie Bluff chalk 

Ripley formation Peedee formation Navesink marl 

ti :E ~ ~-- > ~----------------------r-----------+-----------------~------------~r----------------1 ~ ~ ro >.. Z ro 

[:4 

Neylandville marl 

Anacacho limestone and 

Taylor marl 

Saratoga chalk 

Annona chalk 

Mount Laurel sand 

Marshalltown formation 

Woodbury clay 

~r---~------------------------~----------~----------------~ c 

ro 

·a 

.£ 

@ 

~ 

- Austin chalk :::: 

.~ (.) 

C1j 

·a 

0 

u 

Eagle Ford shale 

Buda limestone 

Arcola sandstone member 

of the Mooreville chalk 

~-------?--------~ 

Tombigbee sand member 

of the Eutaw formation 

FIGURE I.-Stratigraphic location of some echinoid-bearing formations of the Coastal Plain. 

Merchantville clay 
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 3 

Stratigraphic range of American Upper Cretaceous echinoids 

Maestrichtian 

Turonian 

Coniacian 

Santonian Campa- l----------------~-----­ nian 

Lower Middle Upper 

Cidaris wahalakensis De LorioL _____________________________________________________________ - _----- -------- X 

C. texanus Clark__________________________________________________________________ X -------- -------- -------- Salenia hondoensis Cooke, n. sp_____________________________ ________ ________ ________ X -------- -------- --------

~~d~~~~~;~~~~~i 2~~~~~~~-s~--~~=========================== ======== >i' ____ f ___ ======== ======== ======== ======== 

~~~~:;~~:f:t:~ir~~~~~~~~~~========================= Phymosoma hilli (Clark) __________________________________ _ :::::::: ======== :::::::: ::::=:=: =::=:=:: ===~=== _} __ _ Lanieria uvaldana Cooke, n. SP-------'---------------------- ________________ -------- X -------- -------- -------- Conulus stephensoni Cooke, n. sp____________________________ ________ ________ X -------- -------- -------- -------- Globator vaughani Cooke, n. sp______________________________ ________ ________ ________ X -------- -------- --------

Nucleopygus texanus (Clark)________________________________________ X ________ -------- -------- -------- -------- Pygurostoma geometricum (Morton) _________________________________________ -------- X ------------------------ P. pasionensis Cooke______________________________________________________________ ? -------- -------- --------

i~~~lf?EJS~1f~i;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=~~=~~~~~~~~=~~ Lefortia trojana Cooke, n. sp _______________________________________________________ ~=~~~~~~ ~~~~~·~~~ ;;;~;;; ~~~~~~~~ -------- ~~~~~~~~ -------- :::~::: X --------~~~~~~~ Phyllobrissus cubensis (Weisbord) ___________________________________ -------- X X -------- -------- -------- Clarkiella hemispherica (Slocom) ____________________________________________________ - _- _-- __ -------- -------- X 

Hardouinia mortonis (Michelin)----------------------------- ________ -------- ________ ---------------- X X 

H. ~: ~~zr~:fscs~;~:~!o~)t~:~~~~~~~ micrococcus (Gabb) _____________________________________________________ = = = = = = = == = = = = = = == = = = = = = == = = == == = == = = = == = = = --------

=== == = = = = 

-------- = = ==== = --------

= = = = = = = = 9 X X ---~ --- H. bassleri (Twitchell) _____________________________________ ---------------- X -------------------------------- H. aequorea (Morton) _____________________________________________ -------- ________ ------------------------ X 

~: H. ~to;::;~i ~~~~t)~~====================================== ----x--- ======== ======== ____ ? ____ ======== ======== ======== taylori (Warren) ________________ -----_-_-_---_--------- ------- _ -- ___ - ______ - _ -- X -------- -------- ----f ---

~~h7~g~~~~'le~~~~s Pseudananchys fdr:gi~= === == == == == == == = = = = == === = ==== = == = = === = = == == == = = == == == = ---X--- = == ===== = == == === -------- stephensoni Cooke, n. SP---------------------- -------- ________ ? -------- -------- -------- --------

~;i~~f~~~lf~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~ ~: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~: ~ ~ ~ ~:: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~:: ~: ~ ~ ::: ~::: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ::: ~::: ; ; ; ~;;; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ::: ~ ::: 

C. smocki Clark __________________________________________ --------________ X -------- -------- -------- -------- C. marylandicus Clark _____________________________________________________________ -------- -------- -------- X 

Isomicraster rossi Cooke, n. SP------------------------------ X -------- -------- -------- -------- -------- --------

1a~~~~i?0b~~~n~·cE~k~; Hemiaster ~~-sP--~=== == == ====== = = == = = == = = = = == = = == == == = = == == == = ___ ~ _______ ?_- __ = = = == == = === ===== = = === === humphreysanus Meek and Hayden _________________ ---------------------------------------- X -------- H. beecheri Clark _________________________________________ ------------------------ X ------------------------ H. wetherbyi De LorioL ___________________________________ -------- -------- -------- -------- X X ·X 

H. arcolensis Cooke, n. sp __________________________________ -------- -------- X -------- -------- -------- -------- H. jacksoni Maury ___________________________________ --___ X ________________ -------- -------- -------- --------

H. texanus Roemer _______________________________________ ---------------- X X -------- -------- --------

H. sabinal Cooke, n. sp ? ? -------- -------- -------- --------

~: H. delawarensis k~~~~z~rcr:~~---~====================================== Clark _____________________________________ ======== ======== ====·==== ~ ======== ======== ======== -------- ________ ---------------- ? ---------------- H. welleri Clark __________________________________________ ---------------- X -------- -------- -------- --------· 

H. amelianus Cooke, n. SP--------------------------------- ---------------- -------- ? ---------------- -------- Linthia variabilis Slocom ___________________________________________________ -------- -------- -------- X X 

Proraster dalli (Clark) _____________________________________ ------------------------ X -------- -------- X 

Micraster uddeni Cooke, n. sp ______________________________ ---------------- X -------------------------------- M. americanus Stephenson _________________________________ -------------------------------- X X X 
4 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

KEY TO THE GENERA OF AMERICAN UPPER 

CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDS 

Symmetry dominantly radial; peristome generally central 

Periproct within the apical system 

Ambulacra narrow throughout 

Tubercles perforate; apical system without suranal plates________________ Cidaris 

Tubercles imperforate; central suranal 

plate present ____________________ Salenia 

Ambulacra widening to the ambitus 

Tubercles perforate 

Poriferous zones uniseriaL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Porosoma 

Poriferous zones biserial above the 

ambitus_--- __ ---------------- Pedinopsis 

Tubercles imperforate 

Primary tubercles only on oral surface 

Primary tubercles in a star-shaped 

cluster- - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Codiopsis 

Primary tubercles not in a starshaped cluster_______________ Boletechinus 1 

Primary tubercles not only on oral 

surface 

Poriferous zones generally uniserial 

throughout_____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Rachiosoma 

Poriferous zones plainly biserial 

above the ambitus___________ Phymosoma 

Periproct outside the apical system 

Peristome without floscelle; ambulacra 

continuous or subpetaloid; periproct 

pyriform 

Five genital plates; globular ___________ Lanieria 

Four genital plates 

Poriferous zones continuous; peristome 

oblique, flush 

Periproct terminal, erect_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Globator 

Periproct submarginal, inclined____ Conulus 

Poriferous zones subpetaliferous; peristome sunken; periproct supramarginal, opening into a depres- sion __________________________ Nucleopygus 

Peristome with fl.oscelle ; ambulacra petaloid, petals flush or swollen; periproct 

not pyriform 

Periproct marginal or inframarginal 

Periproct marginal, erect, elongate ___ Lefortia 

Periproct inframarginal, rostrate, 

turned down obliquely 

Periproct transverse ______________ Faujasia 

Periproct elongate________________ Pygu,rostoma 

· Periproct supramarginal 

Posterior end truncate; periproct terminaL--------- ______________ Catopygus 

Posterior end not truncate 

Periproct flush; peristome anteriorly eccentric________________ Clarkiella 

Periproct opening into a sulcus 

Phyllodes high, pointed; peristome centraL _____________ Hardouinia 

Phyllodes low, rounded; peristome 

anteriorly eccentric_________ Phyllobrissus 

1 N~w genus. Type species Boletechinus mcglamervae Cooke manuscript. .An undescribed genus discovered too late to be inclndf'd in this report. 

Symmetry plainly bilateral; peristome generally 

far forward 

Apical system elongated; paired ambulacra 

subpetaloid, flush 

Anterior poriferous zones like the others; 

not sulcate in front 

Pores circular or oval; periproct sub~ marginaL __________________ ----- Echinocorys 

Outer pores elongated; periproct supramarginaL _______________________ Pseudananchys 

Anterior poriferous zones unlike the 

others; sulcate in front 

No fascioles. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ H olaster 

Marginal fasciole_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Cardiaster 

Apical system not elongated; paired ambulacra petaloid 

Anterior petallike the paired petals 

Petals sunken; peristome lipped; lower 

surface flattish; no complete fascioles_ I somicraster 

Petals flush; peristome not lipped; lower 

surface convex; marginal fasciole_ _ _ Barnumia 

Anterior petal unlike the paired petals; 

petals sunken 

Sub anal fasciole; no peripetalous fasciole ________ ------------ _______ Micraster 

No subanal fasciole; peripetalous fasciole 

Lateral fascioles_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Linthia 

No lateral fascioles 

Anterior petals straight___________ Hemiaster 

Anterior petals flexuous___________ Proraster 

SYSTEMATIC DESCRIPTIONS 

Genus CIDARIS Leske 

Cidaris Leske, 1778, Klein's Naturalis dispositio Echinodermatum, p. XVII. 

Cidarites (part) Lamarck, 1816, Histoire naturelle des animaux 

sans vertebres, tome 3, p. 52. 

Cidaris Leske. A. Agassiz, 1872, Harvard College, Mus. Comp. 

Zoology, Mem., vol. 3, p. 252. 

Cidaris (Eucidaris) Pomel, 1883, Classification methodique et 

genera des echinides, p. 109. 

Cidaris Leske. H. L. Clark, 1907, Harvard College, Mus. Comp. 

Zoology, Bull., vol. 51, p. 183. 

Cidaris Leske. Mortensen, 1928, Monograph of the Echinoidea, 

vol. 1, p. 286. 

Cidaris Leske. Cooke, 1941, Jour. Paleontology, vol. 15, no. 1, 

p. 5. 

Cidaris Leske. Cooke, 1946, Jour. Paleontology, vol. 20, no. 3, 

p. 199. 

Type species, Cidaris papillata Leske (1778, p. 125) ~ 

Echinus cidaris Linneus (1758, Systema naturae, 

edition 10, p. 664), by tautonomy. This species is 

identified by Mortensen (1928, p. 289) as the common 

species inhabiting the eastern part of the Atlantic 

Ocean. This designation may as well be accepted, 

though Linnaeus' original references include several to 

a Pacific species. 

Cidari8 cidaris as figured by Mortensen (1928, pl. 30, 

figs. 3, 4; pl. 31, figs. 1-10; pl. 67, fig. 5; pl. 72, figs. 
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 5 

20-22) is fairly large, oblate spheroidal, with slightly 

sinuous, narrow ambulacra, which do not vary much in 

width. Its apical system, which is nearly circular, is 

somewhat larger than its peristome, which is pentagonal 

and without notches. It has two rows of plates in 

each ambulacrum and interambulacrum, and about 

six or seven tiers of coronal plates in each interambulacral row. Its ambulacral pores are conjugate, and each 

zygopore is slightly tilted. Its primary spines are 

long, slender, and decorated with longitudinal serrate 

ridges. According to Mortensen (1928, p. 296) it has 

both large and small globiferous pedicellariae as well 

as tridentate. 

Mortensen (1928, p. 50) regards the pedicellariae as 

having" very high classificatory value, partly of specific, 

partly of generic and of sub-family value". He appears 

to have attributed more importance to them than they 

deserve, because his classification based on them puts 

in different genera species that otherwise seem very 

similar. Many of his generic names will doubtless 

fall into the synonymy of Cidaris. No attempt at 

rectification is made here. 

Cidaris wahalakensis De Lorio! 

Plate 1, figures 1, 2 

Cidaris nahalakensis De Lorio!, 1887, Reoueil zool. Suisse, vol. 4, 

p. 388, pl. 17, figs. 3, 3a, 4-4b. (Error of transcription for 

wahalakensis.) 

Cidaris nahalakensis De Lorio!. Clark, 1893, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Bull. 97, p. 93. 

Cidaris nahalakensis De Lorio!. Clark, 1915, U.S. Geol. Survey 

Mon. 54, p. 48. 

Spines long and slender; shaft decorated with about 

9 longitudinal rows of nearly confluent granules, intermediate areas very finely striated; neck very finely 

striated, merging into the shaft. 

Occurrence.- Mississippi: Wahalak, Kemper County (type). 

Alabama: U.S.G.S. 18143, NW %, SW %, T 19 N, R 2 W, 

Sumter County (U.S.G.S. 18142, W. H. Monroe). 

Geologic horizon.-Prairie Bluff chalk. 

Remarks.-This species, known only from spines, has been 

identified with considerable assurance because the specimens 

from Alabama here figured (U.S.N.M. 108365) not only resemble 

De Loriol's figures but are supposed to have occupied the same 

stratigraphic horizon. They were collected not very far from 

the type locality, which is in the adjoining county in Mississippi. 

Cidaris texanus .Clark 

Plate 1, figure 14 

Cidaris texanus Clark, 1891, Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ., vol. 10, 

no. 87, p. 75. 

Cidaris texanus Clark. Clark, 1893, Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ., 

vol. 12, no. 103, p. 61. 

Cidaris texanus Clark. Clark, 1893, U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 97, 

p. 36, pl. 7, figs. 1a-e. 

'ICidaris dixiensis Cragin, 1893, Texas Geol. Survey Ann. 

Rept. 4, pt. 9, p. 146, figs. 15, 16. 

23615~53-2 

Cidaris texanus Clark. Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey Mon. 

54, p. 45, pl. 9, figs. 2a-f. 

'ICidaris dixiensis Cragin. Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Mon. 54, p. 45, pl. 9, figs. 7a-b. 

Dorocidaris texanus (Clark). Lambert, 1926, Soc. geol. France 

Bull., tomi, 26, p. 265. 

Dorocidaris texanus (Clark). Adkins, 1928, Texas Univ. Bull., 

no. 2838, p. 271. 

'ICidaris dixiensis Cragin. Adkins, 1928, Texas Univ. Bull., 

no. 2838, p. 271. 

Test large. Apical scar proportionately small. 

Ambulacra narrow, slightly undulating; pores oval, 

separated by a granule; zygopores slightly inclined. 

Interambulacra having probably about seven plates 

in each tier; sutures conspicuous. Primary tubercles 

smooth, perforated, widely separated; miliary granules 

tall. 

Occurrence.-Texas: Bexar County (type); Hill's no. 354, 

northwest corner of Cline Mountain, near Cline, Uvalde County~ 

R. T. Hill, (upper layer of Austin chalk); U.S.G.S. 7708, "Chalk 

Bluff" on Sabinal Creek, right bank, 2.5 to 3 miles north of 

Sabi~al, Uvalde County, 'L. W. Stephenson, (Anacacho limestone); U.S.G.S. 18587, 150 feet south of new highway 85 at east 

bank of Tequesquite Creek, Maverick County, R. R. Bennett, 

(upper part of Austin chalk). 

Geologic horizon.-The original catalogue entry att:ributes the 

type (then labeled Hemicidaris sp.) to the Cretaceous. W. B. 

Clark thought it came from the Washita group (Lower Cretaceous). Nothing like it has been found in the Washita, but several 

specimens that apparently represent this species came from the 

Austin chalk and the Anacacho limestone. Cidaris dixiensis, 

known only from unidentifiable plates, is attributed to the 

Taylor marl. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 8381. 

Remarks.-Cidaris texanus was tentatively placed in the 

synonymy of Cidaris hemigranosus Shumard in my paper on 

the Comanche echinoids (Cooke, 1946, p. 199), but the receipt 

of better-preserved specimens of that species shows that the 

two represent different subgenera. Cidaris hemigranosus apparently belongs to the subgenus Stereocidaris Pomel (1883, p. 

110), type species Cidaris cretosa Mantell, whereas C. texan us 

seems to be a typical Cidaris. ' 

Genus SALENIA Gray 

Salenia Gray, 1835, Zool. Soc. London Proc., vol. 3, p. 58. 

Salenia Gray. Mortensen, 1935, Monograph of the Echinoidea, 

vol. 2, p. 367. Gives additional synonymy. 

Salenia Gray. Cooke, 1941, Jour. Paleontology, vol. 15, no. 1, 

p. 7. 

Salenia Gray. Cooke, 1946, Jour. Paleontology, vol. 20, no. 

3, p. 202. 

Type species Cidarites scutiger M iinster (in Goldfuss, 

1826, pl. 49, figs. 4a-b), by monotypy, from the Cenomanian of Germany. The known range of the genus 

is from Lower Cretaceous to Recent. It is most 

abundant in the Upper Cretaceous. 

Specific distinctions between the Salenias are based 

mainly on the shape and ornamentation of the apical 

disc. This ranges in shape from circular, as in the type 

species, to pentagonal. There is much variation in the 
6 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

shape of the individual apical plates. In some species 

they are consistently though variably lobed; in others 

they are straight-sided. The sutures between the 

apical plates may be open, grooved, or fused. Many 

species have circular or slot-shaped perforations along 

the sutures. 

Besides the five ocular and five genital plates, the 

salenids have a central suranal plate, which displaces 

the periproct from its normal central location. In 

Salenia the periproct lies to the right and behind the 

center, contrasting with Hyposalenia Desor 1856 

(Peltastes Agassiz 1838, not Illiger 1807) and Goniophorus Agassiz 1838, in both of which the periproct lies 

directly behind the suranal plate. 

Salenia hondoensis Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 1, figures 3, 4 

Test moderately inflated. Apical system raised, 

smooth, plainly pentagonal, nearly straight-sided, sides 

indented at the suture lines; ocular plates sagittate; 

genital plates dumbbell-shaped, being constricted laterally by the ocular plates, having the genital pores near 

the center, madreporite rather large, confined to the 

right anterior plate; central plate straight-sided except 

where truncated by the periproct, protruding at the 

periproct; sutures fused, with circular perforations at 

the corners and midway between them. Ambulacral 

areas narrow, widening toward the peristome, containing two rows of small imperforate tubercles separated 

by granules; poriferous zones straight, uniserial. Interambulacral areas much wider, with two rows of about 

5 large primary, imperforate, crenulate tubercles, each 

primary tubercle ringed by small tubercles, and the 

intermediate areas granulated. Peristome large, circular, strongly notched. Periproct excentrically within 

the apical system, adjoining the central plate and the 

posterior and right-posterior genital plates. 

Horizontal diameter 18.7 mm; height 11.6 mm; 

diameter of apical system 11.7 mm; diameter of peritome 8.2 mm. 

Occurrence.-Texas: King's Water Hole, 3 miles north of 

Hondo, Medina County (U.S.G.S. 12902, L. W. Stephenson). 

Geologic horizon.-Anacacho limestone. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 108366. 

Comparisons.-'Ihis species, which is represented by only one 

specimen, is rather like Salenia sergipensis White (1887, p. 252, 

pl. 27, figs. 11, 12) from the Cretaceous of Brazil, but its apical 

system is larger, more sharply pent9gonal, and apparently with 

less distinct sutures. The smoothness, simplicity of ornamentation, and the shape of the apical plates distinguish Salenia 

hondoensis from other Upper Cretaceous species. 

Genus POROSOMA Cotteau 

Coptosoma Desor, 1855, Synopsis des echinides fossiles, fasc. 2, 

p. 91. Not Laporte, 1833. 

Porosoma Cotteau, 1856, Soc. geol. France Bull., ser. 2, tome 

13, p. 648. 

Phymosoma (Coptosoma) Desor. Pomel, 1883, Classification 

methodique et genera des echinides, p. 91. 

Coptosoma Desor. Duncan, 1889, Linnean Soc. London Jour., 

Zoology, vol. 23, p. 87. 

Coptosoma Desor. Cotteau, Paleontologie fran9aise, Terrain 

tertiaire, ser. 1, tome 2, p. 486. 

Coptosoma Desor. Lambert and Thiery. 1910, Nomenclature 

raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 3, p. 219. 

Porosoma Cotteau. Lambert and Thiery, 1914, Nomenclature 

raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 4, p. 274; 1925, fasc. 8, p. 568. 

Porosoma Cotteau. Lambert, 1927, Mus. Ciencias Naturales 

de Barcelona, Mem., serie geol6gica, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 64. 

Porosoma Cotteau. Mortensen, 1935, Monograph of the Echinoidea, vol. 2, p. 473. 

Type species Gyphosoma cribrum Agassiz, an Eocene 

species, designated by Lambert, 1927. As figured by 

Desor (1855, p. 91, pl. 15, figs. 8-10) this species is 

characterized by uniserial, polyporous poriferous zones, 

the zygopores arranged in connected arcs, about seven 

to each compound plate, not multiplied around the 

peristome; two rows of large primary, weakly crenate 

tubercles in each area, the areolas incised by the sutures 

between the partial plates and surrounded by a circle of 

coarse granules. Its apical system seems to be circular 

and rather small; its peristome much larger, about half 

the total diameter. 

Porosoma reesidei Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 1, figures 5-8 

Test inflated, margin rounded, slightly concave 

around the peristome. Apical system not preserved, 

scar small, pentagonal. Ambulacra more than half as 

wide as interambulacra; poriferous zones uniserial, 

sinuous, forming connected arcs around the tubercles, 

about six pore-pairs to each compound plate, sutures 

between each platelet conspicuous and indenting the 

areole. Tubercles imperforate, crenate, forming two 

rows in each area and a short row on the outer edges of 

the interambulacra in the peripheral region. Miliary 

spaces filled with coarse granules. Peristome rather 

small, one-third as wide as the total diameter. Spines 

long, thick, cylindrical, very faintly striated, with a 

thick collar. 

Diameter 39 mm; height 18 mm; diameter of apical 

system about 10 mm; diameter of peristome 14 mm. 

Occurrence.-Wyoming: NE 1/4 NW 1/4 sec. 1, T. 42 N., 

R. 107 W., Fremont County (U.S.G.S. 19537, 23423, R. M. 

Thompson). 

Geologic hmizon.-Top of Frontier formation, of Coniacian age. 

Types.-Holotype U.S.N.M. 108367; paratype U.S.N.M. 

108368. . 

Remar ks.-This species is represented by the type and one 

paratype. It agrees well with the gen'eric features of Porosoma 

cribrum but has a much smaller peristome. Its apical system, 

though not preserved, evidently is much smaller than that of 
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 7 

Rachiosoma hondoensis, which also differs in the greater complexity of its poriferous zones. 

Genus PEDINOPSIS Cotteau 

Pedinopsis Cotteau, 1863, Congres sci. France Mem., session 28, 

tome 3, p. 176. 

Pedinopsis Cotteau. Cotteau, 1864, Paleontolgie franQaise, Terrain cretace, ser. 1, tome 7, p. 527; 1867, idem, p. 826. 

Pedtnopsis Cotteau. Wright, 1868. British fossil Echinodermata 

from the Cretaceous formations, p. 113. 

Pedinopsis Cotteau. Pomel, 1883, Classification methodique et 

genera des echinides, p. 103. 

Pedinopsis Cotteau. Duncan, 1889, Linnean Soc. London Jour., 

Zoology, vol. 23, p. 68. 

Dumblea Cragin, 1893, Texas Geol. Survey Ann. Rept. 4, pt. 2, 

p. 149. 

Pedinopsis Cotteau. Lambert and Thiery, 1910, Nomenclature 

raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 3, p. 190. 

Dumblea Cragin. Lambert and Thiery, 1910, Nomenclature 

raisomiee des echinides, fasc. 3, p. 207; 1925, idem, fasc. 8, 

p. 566. 

Pedinopsis Cotteau. Mortensen, 1935, Monograph of the Echinoidea, vol. 2, p. 451. 

Dumblea Cragin. Mortensen, 1940, Monograph of the Echinoidea, vol. 3, pt. 1, p. 134. 

Pedinopsis Cotteau. Cooke, 1946, Jour. Paleontology, vol. 20, 

no. 3, p. 211. 

Type species Pedinopsis meridanensis Cotteau (1863, 

p. 177; 1864, p. 528, pls. 1125, 1126), by monotypy. 

This Lower Cretaceous (N eocomian) species is distinguished by its biserial poriferous zones and its 

horizontal rows of small perforated, crenate tubercles. 

Mortensen (1940, p. 134) maintains Dumblea as a 

separate genus in a different family (Pedinidae) from 

Pedinopsis (Pseudodiadematidae) because Dumblea was 

reported to have smooth tubercles rather than crenate. 

This distinction seems invalid because tubercles of 

some echinoids show all gradations from smooth to 

plainly crenate. Moreover, the tubercles of Dumblea 

symmetrica Cragin appear to be definitely crenate, 

though the tubercles are small and the crenulations 

very minute. 

Pedinopsis pondi Clark 

Plate 2, figures 1-5 

Pedwopsis pondi Clark, 1893, Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ., vol. 12, 

no. 103, p. 51 (nomen nudum). 

Pedinopsis pondi Clark. Clark, 1893, U. S. Geol. Survey Bull. 

97, p. 57, pl. 21, figs. la-b; pl. 22, figs. la-c. 

Pedinopsis pondi Clark. Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey Mon. 

54, p. 65, pl. 24, figs. la-d. 

Test large, highly inflated, margin broadly rounded, 

flattened on the lower surface, horizontal outline nearly 

circular. Apical system unknown; not very large. 

Ambulacra narrow; si.x pairs of pores to each compound 

plate above the ainbitus, four below it; poriferous zones 

plainly biserial above the ambitus, series compressed 

and overlapping below the ambitus and showing a 

tendency to arrangement in diagonal groups of four 

pairs; biserial near the peristome and pores slightly 

multiplied at it. Coronal plates short and very wide. 

Tubercles small, perforate, crenate; inconspicuous or 

eroded on upper part; arranged in even, horizontal rows 

on and below ambitus, as many as ten on each interambulacral plate at ambitus and four on each ambulacral plate. Peristome small, nearly circular, weakly 

notched. 

Horizontal diameter 88 mm; height 58 mm; diameter of peristome 23 n1m; diameter of apical svstem 

not more than 11 mm. 

Occurrence.-Texas: South bank of Onion Creek about onefourth mile southwest of the crossing of the Austin a.nd San 

Antonio wagon road, Travis County. (Fide Clark; the label 

states only 1ravis County.) 

Geologic horizon.-Austin chalk. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 103707 (Johns Hopkins Univ. T 3008). 

Remarks.-This large, handsome species is known only from 

the type. 

Genus CODIOPSIS Agassiz 

Codiopsis Agassiz, 1838, Mon. d'echinodermes, livr. 1, p. 4. 

Name only. 

Codiopsis Agassiz, 1840, Catalogus systematicus ectyporum 

Echinodermatum, pp. 13, 19. 

Codiopsis Agassiz. Agassiz and Desor, 1847, Catalogue raisonnee 

des echinodermes, p. 53. 

Codiopsis Agassiz. Desor, 1858, Synopsis des echinides fossiles, 

p. 112. 

Codiopsis Agassiz. Cotteau, 1866, Paleontologie franQaise, 

Terrain c1etace, tome 7, p. 744. 

Codiopsis Agassiz. Cotteau and Triger, 1869, Echinides du 

Departement de la Sarthe, p. 404. 

Codiopsis Agassiz. De Loriol, 1873, Echinologie helvetique, 

pt. 2, p. 150. 

Codwpsis Agassiz. Cotteau, 1883, Paleontologie franQa.ise, 

Terrain jurassique, tome 10, p. 571. 

Codiopsis Agassiz. Pomel, 1883, Classification methodique et 

genera des echinides, p. 82. 

Codiopsis (Hemicodiopsis) Pomel, 1883, idem, p. 82. 

Codiopsis (Piliscus) Pomel, 1883, idem, p. 82. 

Codiopsis Agassiz. Duncan, 1891, Linnean. Soc. London Jour., 

Zoology, voL 23, p. 65. 

Codiopsis Agassiz. Lambert and Thiery, 1914, Nomenclature 

raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 4, p. 263. 

Codiopsis Agassiz. Sanchez Roig, 1926, Cuba, Bol. Minas, no. 

10, p. 41. 

Codiopsis Agassiz. Mortensen, 1935, Monograph of the Echinoidea, vol. 2, p. 602. 

Codiopsis Agassiz. Cooke, 1946, Jour. Paleontology, vol. 20, 

no. 3, p. 215. 

Type species Echinus doma Desmarest, from the 

Cenomanian of France, Belgium, and Germany, by 

monotypy. This species has been figured by Desor 

(1858, pl. 19, figs. 15-17), Cotteau (1866, p. 781, pls. 

1191, 1192), Cotteau and Triger (1869, p. 162, -pl. 29, 

figs. 1-8), Mortensen (1935, p. 603, fig. 356, after 

Cotteau, 1866), and by Smiser (1935, p. 34, pl. 2, 

figs. 9a-c). Smiser's photographs show it to be glob-
8 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

ular, subpentangular, with narrow ambulacra widenin!)' 

near the peristome as in Arbacia, with rows of imper: 

iorate tubercles radiating from the peristome but confined to the base. The apical system is dicyclic, with 

large ocular plates and five perforated genital plates. 

The periproct is central. 

Codiopsis stephensoni Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 1, figures 9-11 

Test semiglobose, with flattened base; horizontal 

outline subpentagonal. Apical system dicyclic, pentagonal, with a large genital pore near each point; 

ocular plates having one large central tubercle; periproct 

central. Ambulacra narrow, widening near the peristome; poriferous zones trigeminate, uniserial to the 

ambitus, zy¥opores multiplied around the peristome; 

decorated w1th two parallel rows of large, imperforate 

tubercles, which extend from the peristome to the 

ambitus, above which they are succeeded by very 

small tubercles, about two to each plate, set in large 

shallow areoles. Interambulacra very wide, narrowing 

below the ambitus, decorated below the ambitus with 

a V -shaped marginal row of la-rge, imperforate tubercles· 

median part above the ambitus rugose, bare of tubercles: 

remainder covered with very small tubercles in large, 

shallow areoles. Peristome subpentagonal, large, half 

as wide as the horizontal diameter; notches shallow, 

close together, with callous extensions on the test ' separated by a narrow prong. 

Horizon.tal diameter 37.4 mm; height 23 mm; diameter of per1stome 19.7 mm; diameter of apical system 

Smm. 

OccU1tence.-Texas: Nueces River 1.7 miles below the UvaldeEagle Pass road crossing, Uvalde County, (U.S.G.S. 11347, 

L: W. Stephenson). 

Geologic horizon.-Lower part of the Escondido formation 

of Maestrichtian age. ' 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 108369. 

Remarks.-This species is known only from the type. It differs 

from Codiopsis doma (Desmarest) in its smaller peristome, in the 

smaller number of its interambulacral primary tubercles and in 

the parallelism of its rows of ambulacral primary tubercles. The 

presence of small secondary tubercles set in shallow areoles probably is distinctive. These features distinguish it also from Codiopsis texana Whitney (1916, p. 91, pl. 17, figs. 1-4) from the Buda 

limestone (Cenomanian). Codiopsis stephensoni is much larger 

than the type of the Cuban C. ciai Lambert (C. arnaudi Cotteau, 

Egozcue y Cia, 1897, p. 14, pl. 1, figs. 10-15), and its rows of 

interambulacral primary tubercles are V-shaped rather than 

U-shaped. 

Genus RACHIOSOMA Pomel 

Cyphosoma (part) of early authors. 

Rachiosoma Pomel, 1883, Classification methodique et genera des 

echinides, p. 91. 

· Rachiosoma Pomel. Lambert, 1897, Soc. geol. France Bull., ser. 

3, tome 25, p. 498. 

Rachiosoma Pomel. Lambert and Thiery, 1910, Essai de nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 3, p. 221. 

Rachiosoma Pomel. Mortensen, 1935, Monograph of the 

Echinoidea, vol. 2, p. 4 76. 

Pomelechinus Checchia-Rispoli, 1946, Italy, R. ufficio geol. 

Boll., vol. 59, p. 115. 

Type species, Cyphosoma delamarrei Deshayes, first 

species, designated by Lambert and Thiery (1910, p. 

221). This species has been figured by Desor (1855-

1858, p. 90, pl. 15, figs. 5-7, as Phymosoma) and by 

Cotteau (1861-1867, p. 588, pl. 1140, 1141, figs. 1-3). 

These figures show it to have a rather small pentagonal, 

monocylic apical system. The poriferous zones are 

uniserial throughout, the rows of zygopores curving 

slightly around each tubercle. Each area has two staggered rows of primary tubercles, which are imperforate 

and crenate. The perisome is rather large and plainly 

notched. 

· Rachiosoma differs from Phymosoma chiefly in that 

its poriferous zones are not plainly biserial on the upper 

surface, though some species are described as showing a 

tendency to become biserial near the apical system. 

The apical system of Rachiosoma delamarrei is much 

smaller than the apical scar of Phymosoma konigii (Mantell), the type species of Phymosoma, the arrangement of 

whose apical plates is unknown. Rachiosoma has a 

relatively smaller peristome than Porosoma Cotteau 

1856. 

The name Pomelechinus was proposed to replace 

Rachiosoma on the supposition that it is a homonym of 

Rhachiosoma Woodward, 1871, but both names are 

acceptable under Article 35 of the International Rules. 

Rachiosoma hondoensis Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 3, figures 4, 5 

Test low hemispherical. Apical system large, probably pentagonal. Ambulacra wide; poriferous zones 

polyporous, zygopores arranged in slightly curved or 

broken arcs, apparently about five to each plate; decorated with two rows of rather large primary, smooth, 

imperforate tubercles, whose areoles are tangent below 

the ambitus but separated above it; partial rings of 

small tubercles encircling the primaries separate the 

rows but are absent elsewhere below the ambitus. 

Interambulacra having two rows of primary tubercles 

bordered on each side by a row of smaller tubercles and 

separated by large granules. Peristome round, strongly 

notched, less than half as wide as the the horizontal 

diameter. 

Horizontal diameter 39 mm; height more than 18 mm; 

diameter of peristome 15.7 mm. 

Occurrence.-Texas: Blue Water Hole, Hondo Creek, 0.5 to 

0.75 mile above the Elstone-Biry road crossing, Medina County, 

(U.S.G.S. 7686, L. W. Stephenson). 

Geologic horizon.-Escondido formation. 
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 9 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 108371. 

Remarks.-Only one specimen is known, and it has lost most 

of the upper side. It is referred to Rachiosoma rather than to 

Porosoma because of the greater size of its apical scar. Rachiosoma hondoensis appears to be a taller, less disc-shaped species 

than R. mortoni (de Loriol) and grew much larger than the few 

known specimens of that species. 

Rachiosoma mortoni (de Loriol) 

Plate 1, figures 12, 13 

Cyphosoma mortoni De Lorio!, 1887, Recueil zool. suisse, tome 4, 

no. 3, p. 389, pl. 17, figs. 2a-c. 

Coptosoma mortoni (De Lorio!). Clark, 1893, U.S. Geol. Survey 

Bull. 97, p. 51, p. 17a-e. 

Coptosoma mortoni (De Lorio!). Clark, 1915, U.S. Geol. Survey 

Mon. 54, p. 62, pl. 22, figs. la-e. 

Test wheel-shaped, slightly depressed around the 

peristome. Apical system unknown, scar pentagonal. 

Peristome more than one-third the total width; notches 

sharp but not very deep. Ambulacra two-thirds as 

wide as the inter-ambulacra; poriferous zones undulating, especially near the ambitus, uniserial throughout. 

Tubercles imperforate, decreasing in size regularly 

away from the ambitus, one to each plate, thus forming two rows in each area, strongly mammillated. Intermediate areas covered with coarse granules except 

the median parts of the interambulacral areas near the 

apical scar, which are nearly bare. 

Diameter of figured specimen 23.3 mm; height 9.8 

mm; width of peristome 8.5 mm. 

Occurrence.-Mississippi: Wahalak (misspelled Nahalak) Kemper County (type, Professor Wetherby, fide de Lorio!). 

Alabama: Chattahoochee River between the mouth of Cowikee 

Creek and Eufaula (U.S.G.S. 850, T. W. Stanton, figured specimen). 

Geologic horizon.-Probably Ripley formation. 

Type.-DeLoriol collection. Figured specimen U.S.N.M. 

108370. 

Comparisons.-This species appears to be very similar to 

Rachiosoma delamarrei (Deshayes) as figured by Cotteau (1861-

1867, p. 588, pl. 1140) though its granulation may be denser. It 

is lower and smaller than R. hondoensis Cooke, n. sp., and its 

poriferous zones, though undulating, are not broken into separate 

arcs. It is assigned to Rachiosoma rather than to Porosoma because its peristome is smaller than that of Porosoma cribrum, the 

type of Porosoma (Mortensen, 1935, p. 474, fig. 275). 

Genus PHYMOSOMA D'Archiac and Haime 

Cyphosoma Agassiz, 1838, Monographies d'echinodermes, Mon. 1, 

p. 4. Not Cyphosoma Mannerheim, 1837. 

Cyphosoma Agassiz. Agassiz, 1840, Catalogus systematicus 

ectyporum echinodermatum, pp. 11, 19. 

Phymosoma D' Archiac and Haime, 1853, Description des animaux fossiles de l'Inde, p. 197. For Cyphosoma Agassiz. 

Phymosoma Haime. Mortensen, 1935, Monograph of the 

Echinoidea, vol. 2, p. 486. (Gives additional synonmy.) 

Phymosoma D' Archiac and Haime. Cooke, 1941, Jour. Paleontology, vol. 15, no. 1, p. 17. 

Phymosoma D' Archiac and Haime. Cooke, 1946, Jour. Paleontology, vol. 20, no. 3, p. 209. 

Type species Echinus milleri Desmarest 1825= 

Oidaris konigii Mantell 1822, from the Chalk of Kent, 

England, first species, designated by Savin (1903, p. 

169). This species has been figured by Cotteau (1861-

1867, p. 678, pl. 1167, 1168) and by Wright (1870, p. 

131, pis. 23-26). It has a large pentagonal apical scar 

and a comparatively small circular peristome with 

rather weak notches. Its poriferous zones are biserial 

above the ambitus and uniserial in arcs below it. Its 

tubercles are imperforate. 

Dixieus Cooke (1948, p. 607) has these features, but 

its apical system is much smaller, its peristome much 

larger, and it has twice as many pores. 

Phymosoma hilli (Clark) 

Plate 3, figures 6, 7 

Pseudodiadema hilli Clark, 1891, Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ. vol. 

10, no. 87, p. 76. 

Diplopodia hilli (Clark). Clark, 1893, Johns Hopkins Univ. 

Circ., vol. 12 no. 103 p. 51. 

Diplopodia hilli (Clark). Clark, 1893, U. S. Geol. Survey Bull. 

97, p. 50. Not pl. 16, figs. 2a-g. 

Diplopodia hilli (Clark). Cragin, 1893, Texas Geol. Survey 4th 

Ann. Rept. p. 147. 

Cyphosoma hilli (Clark). Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey Mon. 

54 p. 59. Not pl. 19 figs. 2a-g. 

Tetragramma? hilli (Clark). Adkins, 1928, Texas Univ. Bull. 

2838 p. 275. 

Test subpentagonal, disc-shaped, with rounded 

margin. Apical scar large, pentagonal, longer than 

wide, the posterior point leading into a depressed area. 

Ambulacra more than half as wide as interambulacra: 

poriferous zones biserial on upper surface nearly to 

margin, uniserial below margin. Peristome nearly half 

as wide as the diameter of the test; conspicuously 

notched. Tubercles imperforate, crenate; increasing 

regularly in size toward the margin; two rows at 

margin in ambulacra, four rows in interambulacra; 

spaces between primary tubercles covered with much 

smaller tubercles except median interambulacral bare 

spaces near the points of the apex. 

Diameter of largest type 32 mm; height 12.7 mm; 

length of apical scar 12 mm; width of apical scar 9.7 

mm; diameter of peristome about 14.2 mm. 

Occurrence.-Texas: Bell County. 

Geologic horizon.-Unknown; formations exposed in Bell 

County range in age from the Trinity group of the Comanche 

series to the upper part of the Taylor marl of the Gulf series. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 8311. 

Remarks.-The preceding description is based on the largest of 

three type specimens in the United States National Museum 

numbered 8311 and labeled Bell County, Tex. A later label 

specifies Austin chalk. The record book states that they were 

collected by D. H. Walker in 1880 in Bell County, and other 

fossils in the same collection represent several horizons, none of 

which are named. Clark's original description states the locality 

and horizon as Austin limestone Tex. His later (1915) mono-
10 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

graph specifies Austin, Tex., Austin chalk. His drawings 

evidently do not represent this species, for they are intermediate 

in size and show perforate tubercles whereas the tubercles of the 

type specimens are plainly imperforate. 

Genus LANIERIA Duncan 

Lanieria Duncan 1891, Linnean Soc. London Jour., Zoology, 

vol. 23, p. 168. 

Lanieria Duncan. Lambert, 1911, Mus. royal Histoire nat. 

Belgique Mem., tome 4, Annee 1910, p. 28. 

Lanieria Duncan. Hawkins, 1912, Zool. Soc. London Proc. 1912, 

pt. 2, p. 450. 

Lanieria Duncan. Hawkins, 1913, Geol. Mag., dec. 5, vol. 10, 

p. 199. 

Lanieria Duncan. Lambert and Thiery, 1914, Essai de nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 4, p. 285. 

Lanieria Duncan. Hawkins, 1920, Royal Soc. London Philos. 

Trans. (B), vol. 209, p. 441. 

Lanieria Duncan. Jackson, 1922, Carnegie Inst. Washington 

Pub. 306, p. 28. 

Lanieria Duncan. Sanchez Roig, 1926, Cuba, Bol. Minas, 

no. 10, p. 44. 

Hawkensia Lambert, 1928, Soc. geol. France Bull., ser. 4, tome 

28, p. 20. 

Hawkensia Lambert. Lambert, 1931, Soc. geol. France Bull., 

ser. 5, tome 1, p. 302. 

Lanieria Duncan. Jeannet, 1936, Eclogae geol. Helvetiae, vol. 

29,no. 2,p. 581. 

Lanieria Duncan. Mortensen, 1948, Monograph of the 

Echinoidea, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 54. 

Test subglobose, depressed around the peristome. 

Apical system containing five perforated genital plates, 

with central madreporite. Ambulacral areas straight, 

continuous, uniserial, with many long, narrow plates. 

Peristome central, circular, plainly notched, less than 

one-third as wide as the horizontal diameter, having 

vestigial internal ridges radiating from the auricles. 

Periproct large, pyriform, basal. 

Type species Echinoconus lanieri Cotteau (1881), by 

monotypy, from the Upper Cretaceous of Cuba. 

Lanieria appears to be intermediate between Holectypus (Ocenholectypus) and Discoidea, both of which it 

resembles in external features, though its ambulacra 

tend to be more complicated. It differs from Holectyp'/!;S 

by having incipient internal ridges radiating from the 

peristome. These ridges are much less conspicuous 

than those of Discoidea, which are longer. A further 

difference is the greater inflation of the oral side, which 

contrasts with the nearly flat base of most species of 

Discoidea and to a less degree of Holectypus. 

Lanieria uvaldana Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 3, figures 1-3 

Test subglobular, slightly depressed around the 

peristome; horizontal outline circular to subpentagonal. 

Apical system containing five perforated genital plates 

with central madreporite; ocular plates insert, that is, 

touching the madreporite. Ambulacra about half as 

wide as interambulacra, consisting of many straight, 

very narrow plates each with only one zygopore; 

poriferous zones straight, continuous from apical 

system to peristome. Interambulacral areas composed 

of straight plates about five times as wide as those of 

the ambulacra. Base closely covered with rather large 

perforated scrobiculate tubercles, which form transverse 

rows. Peristome one-third as wide as the horizontal 

diameter, circular, having rather deep notches. Periproct large pyriform, flush, extending nearly from the 

peristome to the ambitus, not visible from above. 

Height 17 mm; length 27.7 mm; width 27 mm; 

diameter of peristome 9 mm. 

The peristome and periproct of Lanieria uvaldana 

are more than twice as large as those of L. lanieri, and 

its ambulacral areas show no tendency to have compound plates. Whether it has internal partitions is 

unknown. The peristome and periproct are similar to 

those of Holectypus (Ooenholectypus) planatus Roemer, 

but the base is much more rounded. The species is 

referred to Lanieria rather than to Holectypus, which 

it otherwise closely resembles, primarily because of 

its subglobular shape. 

Occurrence.-Texas: Bluff on Turkey Creek at Lithocarbon 

(Carbonville, 6 miles southeast of Cline), Uvalde County, 

(U.S.G.S. 1771, T. W. Vaughan; Hill's No. 358, T. Corbur 

Asphalt Company mine 17 miles west of Uvalde, Tex., R. T. 

Hill). 

Geologic horizon.-Probably Anacacho limestone. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 108372. 

Paratypes.-Fifteen topotypes, all more or less fragmentary, 

and one from Hill's locality 358. 

Genus CONULUS Leske 

Conulus Leske, 1778, Klein's Naturalis dispositio Echinodermatum, p. 161. 

Galerites (part) Lamarck, 1816, Histoire naturelle des animaux 

sans vertebres, tome 3, p. 19; ed. 2, 1840, tome 3, p. 305. 

Pyrina (part) Desmoulins, 1935, Etudes sur les echinides, p. 26. 

Galerites Lamarck. Desor, 1842, Mon. d'echinodermes, Mon. 

3, Des galerites, p. 7. 

Pyrina Desmoulins. Desor, 1842, Mon. d'echinodermes, Mon. 3, 

Des galerites, p. 25. 

Galerites Lamarck. Agassiz and Desor, 1847, Catalogue raisonne 

des echinodermes, p. 90. 

Galerites Lamarck. Desor, 1857, Synopsis des echinides fossiles, 

p. 181. 

Echinoconus Breynius. D'Orbigny, 1860, Paleontologie fran9aise, 

Terrain cretace, ser. 1, tome 6, p. 496. 

Echinoconus Breynius. De Loriol, 1873, ~chinologie helvetique, 

pt. 2, Periode cretace, p. 190. , 

Echinoconus Breynius. Wright, 1873, British fossil Echinodermata from the Cretaceous formations, vol. 1, p. 213. 

Echinoconus (Ga~erites) Lamarck. Pomel, 1883, Classification 

methodique et genera des echinides, p. 74. 

Echinoconus Breynius. Duncan, 1889, Linnean Soc. London 

Jour. (Zoology), vol. 23, p. 167. 

Conulus Leske. Hawkins, 1911, Geol. Magazine, new ser., 

dec. 5, vol. 8, no. 2, p. 70. 
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 11 

Conulus Leske. Jackson in Zittel (Eastman),"'1913, Textbook of 

paleontology, vol. 1, p. 284. 

Conulus Klein. Lambert and Thiery, 1914, Nomenclature 

raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 4, p. 283. 

Conulus Leske. Hawkins, 1917, Geol. Magazine, new ser., dec. 6, 

vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 196, 433. 

Conulus Leske. Hawkins, 1919, Geol. Magazine, new ser., dec. 

6, vol. 6, no. 10, p. 442. 

Conulus Leske. Jackson, 1922, Carnegie Inst. Washington 

Pub. 306, p. 27. 

Conulus Klein. Sanchez Roig, 1926, Equinodermos f6siles de 

Cuba, p. 44. 

Conulus Klein. Smiser, 1935, Mus. royal d'histoire nat. de 

Belgique, Mem. 68, p. 38. 

Gonulus Klein. Mortensen, 1948, Monograph of the Echinoidea, 

vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 42. (Misprint for Comtlus.) 

Type species Oonulus albogalerus Leske, by monotypy, from the Senonian of Europe and the Lower 

Chalk of England. This well-known species, which has 

been figured under the name Echinoconus conicus by 

D'Orbigny (1854-1860, p. 513, pis. 996, 997, figs. 1-7) 

and Wright (1864-1882, p. 221, pl. 49, figs. 2-4; pl. 50, 

figs. 1-6), is tall, subconical, flattened underneath. Its 

posterior ocular plates are in contact, and it has only 

four genital plates. Its ambulacra are narrow; its 

poriferous zones are continuous but are arranged in 

markedly oblique triads on the lower surfaee. Its 

peristome is central, rather small, nearly circular but 

according to Hawkins (1919, p. 444) always to some 

degree oblique. Its periproct is pyriform, submarginal, 

and tilted at an angle of nearly 45°. Its tubercles, 

which are set in deep pits, are widely separated near 

the apex but much closer together on the lower surface. 

Oonulus and Globator seem to be closely related. 

The most conspicuous differences are the location and 

position of the periproct, which is terminal and erect 

in Globator, submarginal and inclined in Oonulus. A 

more obscure difference, which may not be constant, 

is the arrangement of the genital plates. In Oonulus 

the posterior genital plates are usually in contact, 

whereas in Globator they are separated by the madreporite, which is more nearly central. The ambulacra 

of Oonulus are commonly narrower than those of 

Globator, and the triads of pore pairs are more oblique 

and extend farther from the peristome. 

Conulus stephensoni Cooke, n. sp. · 

Plate 3, figures 8-13 

Test large; horizontal outline subpentagonal to ovate, 

broadest at the anterior paired ambulaera; upper 

surface moderately inflated; lower surface nearly flat; 

margin rounded. Apical system central; oeular plates 

large, the posterior pair in contact; only four genital 

plates, the posterior pair in contact, confining the 

madreporite to the anterior part of the system. Ambulacra narrow, one-third as wide as the interambulacra; 

poriferous zones continuous, divided into oblique 

triads on the under surface. Peristome nearly symmetrical, but longer axis turned clockwise with respect 

to the longitudinal axis of the test. Periproct large, 

lenticular, inframarginal, extending halfway to the 

peristome, not visible from above. Tubercles large, 

in deep pits, not very close together on the under side. 

still farther apart on the upper. 

Length of type 46 mm; width 41.4 mm; height 24.4 

mm. Length of paratype 51.8 mm; width 45.9 mm, 

height 26 mm. 

Occurrence.-Texas: Crest of north-facing slope of Medio 

Creek Valley on a second-class road on the Burrell ranch, about 

1 mile northeast of Padrone Hill, 13 miles west of San Antonio, 

Bexar County (U.S.G.S. 15626, type, L. W. Stephenson and 

A. N. Sayre; U.S.G.S. 16880, paratype, L. W. Stephenson). 

Sabinal-Utopia road 5~ miles north of Sabinal, Uvalde County 

(U.S.G.S. 7711, L. W. Stephenson). Connor's ranch on Rio 

Frio 0.5 mile above Engleman's ranch, Uvalde County (U.S.G.S. 

10881, L. W. Stephenson). Road leading from Engleman's 

old ranch house to the new (U.S.G.S. 13778, J. T. Lonsdale). 

Geologic horizon.-Austin chalk, upper part, of early Senonian 

(Santonian) age. 

Type.- U.S.N.M. 108373; paratype 108374. 

Comparisons.- Conulus stephensoni differs from Globatar 

vaughani Cooke in its greater size, in its less rotund shape, in 

details of the arrangement of its apical plates, in the location 

of its periproct, in the wider spacing of its tubercles, and in 

the narrowness of its ambulacra. 

Genus GLOBATOR Agassiz 

Globator Agassiz, 1840, Catalogus systematicus ectyporum 

Echinodermatum, pp. 7, 16. 

Pyrina Desmoulins. Agassiz, 1840, Catalogus systematicus 

ectyporum Echinodermatum, pp. 7, 16. 

Globator Agassiz. Desor, 1842, Mon. d'echinodermes, Mon. 3, 

Des galerites, p. 30. 

Globator Agassiz. Agassiz and Desor, 1847, Catalogue raisonnee 

des echinodermes, p. 92. . 

Globator Agassiz. Desor, 1858, Synopsis des echinides fossiles, 

p. 186. 

Pyrina Desmoulins. Desor, 1858, Synopsis des echinides 

fossiles, p. 190. 

Pyrina Desmoulins. D'Orbigny, 1860, Paleontologie fran9aise, 

Terrain cretace, tome 6, p. 462. 

Pyrina Desmoulins. De Loriol, 1873, Echinologie helvetique, 

pt. 2, Echinides de la periode cretacee, p. 200. 

Pyrina Desmoulins. Wright, 1875, British fossil Echinodermata 

from the Cretaceous formations, vol. 1, pt. 7, p. 235. 

Pyrina Desmoulins. Pomel, 1883, Classification methodique et 

genera des echinides, p. 53. 

Pyrina (Nucleopyrina) Pomel, 1883, Classification methodique 

et genera des echinides, p. 53. 

Pyrina (Globator) Agassiz. Pomel, 1883, Classification methodique et genera des echinides, p. 53. 

Pyrina Desmoulins. Cotteau, 1887, Paleontologie fran(}aise, 

Terrain tertiaire, tome 1, p. 455. 

Pyrina Desmoulins. Duncan, 1889, Linnean Soc. London 

Jour., Zoology, vol. 23, p. 172. 

Pseudopyrina Lambert, 1908, Assoc. fran9aise avanc. sci. Compte 

rendu 36me ses. (Rheims, 1907), p. 286. 
12 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

Pyrina Desmoulins. Lambert and Thiery, 1914, Nomenclature 

raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 4, p. 284. 

Pyrina Desmoulins. Hawkins, 1919, Geol. Mag., ser. 6, vol. 6, 

p.442. 

Globator Agassiz. Lambert and Thiery, 1921, Nomenclature 

raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 328. 

Globator (Pseudopyrina) Lambert. Lambert and Thiery, 1921, 

Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 329. 

Pseudopyrina Lambert. Adkins, 1928, Texas Univ. Bull. 2838, 

p.283. 

Globator (Pseudopyrina) Lambert. Smiser, 1935, Mus. royal 

d'histoire nat. Mem. 68, p. 41. 

Globator (Pseudopyrina) Lambert. Smiser, 1936, Jour. Paleontology, vol. 10, no. 6, p. 463. 

Globator Agassiz. Cooke, 1946, Jour. Paleontology, vol. 20, 

no. 3, p. 220. 

Pyrina Desmoulins. Mortensen, 1948, Monograph of the 

Echinoides, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 85. 

Type species Globator nucleus Agassiz, by monotypy. 

Many authors have regarded Globator as a synonym 

of Pyrina Desmoulins 1835 on the erroneous assumption 

that the type of Pyrina is P. petricoriensis Desmoulins= Globator petricoriensis Agassiz (Agassiz and Desor, 

1847, p. 92). However, Pyrina petricoriensi..~ was a 

nomen nudum when first listed by Desmoulins in 1835. 

As was pointed out by Desor (1842, p. 25) and by Cooke 

(1946, p. 220), of the seven species or nominal species 

originally referred to Pyrina by Desmoulins, only 

Galerites rotula Brongniart, Nucleolites depressa Brongniart, and Nucleolites castanea Brongniart were known 

by descriptions and figures. Desor (1842, p. 25) 

definitely fixed the type of Pyrina as Nucleolites depressa by the words "* * * il n'y aurait que 

l' espece figuree par Brongniart so us Ie nom de Nucleolites depressa qui put rester dans le genre P'!Jrina." 

Cooke (1946, p. 220), overlooking this previous designation, designated Nucleolites castanea as the type 

species of Pyrina. Both of these species were referred 

by Cotteau (D'Orbigny, 1854-1860, pp. 472-474, 

footnotes), who examined the types, to the genus 

Echinoconus Breynius now called Oonulus. Pyrina 

Desmoulins 1835, therefore, becomes a synonym of 

Oonulus Leske 1778. 

As figured by Desor (1842, p. 30, pl. 3, figs. 1-4) and 

by D'Orbigny (1854-1860, p. 489, pl. 987, figs. 1-5) 

Globator nucleus is rather small (18 mm long), nearly 

globular, slightly flattened or concave around the peristome, which is angular and oblique; the periproct is 

terminal, longitudinally elongated, and rather large. 

Desor describes the apical system as having only four 

genital plates, which are plainly perforated. The five 

ocular plates are as large as the genitals, but their perforations are very minute. Desor knew of only one 

specimen, the type, in the Deshayes collection. Its 

source was unknown, but he was sure that it is a Cretaceous fossil. The specimen figured by D'Orbigny, 

which closely resembles Desor's figures, is reported 

from the Senonian of Ciply, Belgium. Globator nucleus 

should not be confused with Oonulus nucula (Albin 

Gras) (D'Orbigny, 1854-1860, p. 508, pl. 992, figs. 1-5; 

Smiser, 1935, p. 39, pl. 3, figs. 6a-d). According to 

the figures, G. nucleus differs in the elongation and 

obliquity of its peristome and in the terminal location 

of its periproct, though the general appearance of the 

two species is similar. 

Apparently Globator differs from Oonulus.in that its 

posterior genital plates are separated by the madreporite, whereas the plates are in contact in Oonulus. 

A further, more conspicuous difference is that its periproct is terminal and vertical, not inframarginal and 

nearly horizontal as in Oonulus. Globator commonly 

has wider ambulacra. 

Globator vaughani Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 4, figures 1-4 

Test medium-sized, inflated, longer than wide, widest 

in front of the center, lower surface flattened, slightly 

concave around the peristome. Apical system central; 

ocular plates relatively large, the two posterior plates 

in contact; only four genital plates, the madreporite 

central. Ambulacra about half as wide as the interambulacra; poriferous zones straight, narrow, continuous, broken Into slightly inclined triads near the peristome. Peristome assymmetrical, longest dimension 

turned clockwise from the longitudinal axis. Periproct large, pyriform, terminal. Tubercles widely 

scattered on upper surface, larger and closer on the 

lower surface, in deep pits. 

Length 27.5 mm; width 24 mm; height 15 mm. 

Occurrence.-Texas: Turkey Creek bluff, Lithocarbon (Carbonville), Uvalde County, 6 miles southeast of Cline station 

(type, U.S.G.S. 1771, T. W. Vaughan); T. Corbur Asphalt Company's mine, 17 miles west of Uvalde (Hill's no. 358, R. T. Hill). 

Geologic horizon.- Anacacho limestone. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 108375. 

Comparisons.- This species, which is represented by 39 individuals, has little variation in shape. It is less globose than 

Globator nucleus and is narrower behind than G. cylindrica (Albin 

Gras) and G. ataciana (Cotteau) as figured by D'Orbigny (1854-

1860, p. 979; 988, figs. 1-5). It is more inflated and less symmetrical than Globator desmoulinsii (D' Archiac) as figured by 

Smiser (1935, pl. 4, figs. 2a-g). All these species are represented 

as having terminal periprocts similar in location, size and shape. 

Genus NUCLEOPYGUS L. Agassiz 

Nucleopygus L. Agassiz, 1840, Catalogus systematicus ectyporum 

echinodermatum, p. 7, 16. 

Nucleopygus (Agassiz). Desor, 1842, Monographies d'echinodermes, Mon. 3, Galerites, p. 32. 

Nucleopygus (Agassiz). Desor, 1856, Synopsis des echinides fossiles, p. 188. 

Pyrina (Nucleopygus) Agassiz. Pomel, 1883, Classification 

methodique et genera des echinides, p. 54. 
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 13 

Pyrina (Nucleopygus) Agassiz. Duncan, 1889, Linn. Soc. London Jour. (Zoology), vol. 23, p. 173. 

Nucleopygus Agassiz. Savin, 1903, Soc. hist. nat. Savoie Bull., 

ser. 2, tome 8, p. 121. 

Porobrissus Lambert, 1916, Rev. crit. de paleozoologie, tome 20, 

p. 169, type Echinobrissus angustatu.s Clark. 

Nucleopygus Agassiz. Lambert and Thiery, 1921, Nomenclature 

raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 347. 

Nucleopygus Agassiz. Smiser, 1935, Mus. royal d'historie nat. 

de Belgique Mem No. 68, p. 51. 

Nucleopygus Agassiz. Mortensen, 1948, Monograph of the 

Echinoidea, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 185. 

Type species Nucleopygus minor L. Agassiz, designated by Lambert and Thiery (1909-1925) and by implication by Desor (1842). The only other species 

mentioned by Agassiz is N. incisus, which Desor supposed probably represented a different genus. As described and figured by Desor (1842, p. 33, pl. 5, figs. 

20-22) Nucleopygus minor is a small, oval form with 

rounded contours and truncated behind. Its ambulacra are very narrow and probably subpetaloid. Its 

peristome is deeply sunken and without fioscelle. Its 

periproct is large, pyriform, and opens at the bottom of 

a wide furrow near the apex. D'Orbigny (1854-1860, 

p. 492, pl. 988, figs. 6-10) transferred it to Pyrina, but 

it differs from other species referred by him to Pyrina 

in the narrowness of its petals. 

To Nucleopygus probably should be referred Echinobrissus angustatus Clark (1915, p. 69, pl. 27, figs. 2a-c), 

which became the type of Porobrissus but was later 

transferred to Clypeopygus by Lambert and Thiery 

(1909-1925, p. 348; Cooke, 1946, p. 222, pl. 31, figs. 

10-12). 

Nucleopygus texanus (Clark) 

Plate 4, figures 5-7 

Echinobnssus texanus Clark, 1891, Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ., 

vol. 10, no. 87, p. 76. 

Echinob1issus texanus Clark. Clark, 1893, Johns Hopkins Univ. 

Circ., vol. 12, no. 103, p. 52. 

Echinobrissus texanus Clark. Clark, 1893, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Bull. 97, p. 62, pl. 26, figs. 2a-f. 

Echinobrissus texanus Clark. Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Mon. 54, p. 70, pl. 28, figs. 2a-f. 

Horizontal outline ovate, wider behind; upper surface 

moderately swollen; lower surface deeply concave 

around the peristome; margin broadly rounded. Apical system in front of the center; four genital pores and 

a central madreporite. Ambulacra narrow, straight, 

subpetaloid, petals apparently extending halfway to 

the margin. Peristome slightly in front of the center; 

deeply sunken; without fioscelle. Periproct large, oval, 

about midway between the apex and the margin, sunken 

in a shallow depression, which extends to the margin 

but does not indent it. Tubercles scrobiculated, large 

and sparse on upper surface, smaller and closer underneath. 

Length of type 19 mm; width 16.6 mm; height 9 mm. 

Occurrence.-Texas: South side of the Colorado River at 

Austin (type, U.S.G.S. 768~ T. W. Stanton). Shoal Creek, 

Travis County (U.S.N.M. 12241). 

Geologic horizon.-Austin chalk, probably lower part, of Coniacian age. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 20266. 

Remarks.-This species is known only from the type and one 

other specimen, which is partly embedded in hard matrix. 

Clark's drawings show the type with too small a peristome and 

periproct because those features were partly embedded in chalky 

limestone, which has since been removed. The peristome is 

partly broken, but it seems to have bad rounded contours and 

to have been somewhat wider than long. 

The type of Nucleopygus texanus is about twice as large as that 

of N. minor; it is not so conspicuously truncated behind, its 

periproct is mere symmetrical, and apparently its sulcus is 

deeper. It is somewhat larger than N. angustatus (Clark), its 

peristome is deeper, its periproct is much larger, and its greatest 

width is farther forward. 

It is much smaller than the types of Echinobrissus expansus 

Clark (1915, p. 69, pl. 28, figs. la-g), its periproct is smaller, 

and its sulcus does not indent the margin. The types of that 

species, from an unknown locality, appear to be Nuculites scutata 

(Lamarck), a European Jurassic species. 

Genus FAUJASIA D'Orbigny 

Faujasia D'Orbigny, 1856, Paleontologie fran~aise, Terrain 

cretace, ser. 1, tome 6, pp. 290, 314. 

Faujasia D'Orbigny. Desor, 1858, Synopsis des echinides 

fossiles, p. 316. 

Faujasia D'Orbigny. Cotteau and Triger, 1869, Echinides du 

departement de la Sarthe, p. 426. 

Faujasia D'Orbigny. Pomel, 1883, Classification methodique 

et genera des echinides, p. 66. 

Faujasia D'Orbigny. Duncan, 1889, Linnean Soc. London Jour., 

Zoology, vol. 23, p. 189. 

Faujasia D'Orbigny. Lambert and Thiery, 1921, Essai de 

nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 373. 

Faujasia D'Orbigny. Smi&er, 1935, Mus. royal d'histoire nat. 

Belgique Mem., no. 68, p. 64. 

Faujasia D'Orbigny. Mortensen, 1948, Monograph of the 

Echinoidea, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 163. 

Type species, Pygurus apicalis Desor (Agassiz and 

Desor, 1847, p. 104), from the Maestrichtian, designated 

by Lambert and Thiery (1909-1925, p. 373). This 

species has been figured by Desor (1855-1858, p. 317, pl. 

33, figs. 1-4), D'Orbigny (1854-1860, p. 315, pl. 922), 

Smiser (1935, p. 65, pl. 6, figs. 8a-d), and Mortensen 

(1948, p. 164, fig. 136). It is subquadrate in horizontal 

outline, swollen and commonly pointed on top, fiat 

belqw, with sharply rounded margin. It has four 

genital pores, short lanceolate petals, with poriferous 

zones nearly closed at each end and with elongated 

outer pores and round inner pores. Its peristome is 

central and is surrounded by a conspicuous fioscelle with 

rounded bourrelets. Its periproct is transversely 

elongated, on the oral side, nearly terminal, but not 

visible from above. 
14 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

Echinolampas faujasii Desmoulins might better have 

been selected as the type by virtual tautonomy rather 

than Pygurus apicalis, the first species. However, it 

makes little practical difference, for these species are 

very similar. 

Faujasia chelonium Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 4, figures 11-14 

Test medium-sized; upper surface tumid, lower 

surface slightly concave, expanded and turned down at 

the margin; horizontal outline semicircular in front, 

sides straight, V-shaped behind; margin sharp. Apical 

system central, mono basal (plates fused), with four 

genital pores. Petals lanceolate, nearly equal in 

length, extending little more than halfway to the margin; poriferous zones nearly closed at the outer ends, 

somewhat wider open at the inner ends; pores conjugate, 

those of outer row slightly elongate, inner row circular, 

zygopores oblique with respect to the median suture of 

the petal. Peristome central; bourrelets long and 

pointed like those of Hardouinia; phyllodes longer than 

wide. Periproct transversely elongated, small, terminal, 

indenting the margin as viewed from above but turned 

slightly downward. 

Length 30.5 mm; width 28 mm; height 16 mm. 

Occurrence.- Texas: Indio Ranch half a mile from the Rio 

Grande, in Maverick County (U.S.G.S. 10854, L. W. Stephenson). 

Geologic horizon.-Escondido formation of Maestrichtian age. 

Type.- U.S.N.M. 108377. 

Remarks.-The specific na'ine is a Latin noun meaning, 

literally, a tortoise shell. 

The unique type of Faujasia chelonium is only about half a& 

large as that of Pygurostoma geometriwm. Its outer pores are less 

elongated, its posterolateral sides a1e straighter, its margin is 

more expanded, its periproct is more nearly terminal, and its 

bourrelets appear to be flatter. Its petals are longer and broader, 

its margin more expanded, its periproct is more nearly terminal, 

and its bourrelets are more pointed than the corresponding 

features of Faujasia apicalis. 

Genus PYGUROSTOMA Cotteau and Gauthier 

Pygurostoma Cotteau and Gauthier, 1895, De Morgan's Mission 

sci. en Perse, tome 3, pt. 2, p. 51. 

Pygurostoma Cotteau and Gauthier. Lambert and Thiery, 1921, 

Nomenclature raisonee des echinides, fa$C. 5, p. 357. 

Pygw ostoma Cotteau and Gauthier. Mortensen, 1948, Monograph of the Echinoidea, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 244. 

Type species Pygurostoma morgani Cotteau and 

Gauthier (1895, p. 52, pl. 8, figs. 1-5) from the Senonian 

at Aftab, Louristan, Persia, by monotypy. Four of the 

five original figures of this species are copied by Mortensen (1948, p. 245, figs. 228, 229). P. morgani has 

an oval outline, a gently convex upper surface, a rounded 

margin, and a somewhat concave lower surface. It has 

a large central madreporite with four genital pores. Its 

petals are rather long and are open at the ends. It has 

a large floscelle with rounded bourrelets. Its periproct 

is submarginal, sloping; longitudinally oval. Its tubercles appear to be deeply sunken, much larger on the 

lower surface. 

Pygurostoma geometricum (Morton) 

Plate 4, figures 15-20 

Clypeaste1 geomef1icus Morton, 1833, Am. Jour. Sci., ser. 1, vol. 

24, p. 131, pl. 10, fig. 9. 

Clypeaster geometricus Morton. Morton, 1834, Synopsis of the 

organic rema.ins of the Cretaceous group, p. 76, pl. 10, fig. 9. 

Pygurus geometricus (Morton). D'Orbigny, 1856, Paleontologie 

fran9aise, Terrain, cretace, tome 6, p. 313, pl. 920, fig. 4. 

Copies Morton's figure. 

Pygurus geometricus (Morton). Desor, 1858, Synopsis des echinides fossiles, p. 313. 

Pygurus geometricus (Morton). Clark, 1915, U. ·s. Geol. Survey 

Mon. 54, p. 72. 

Cassidulidae, new genus (?),new species. Carter, 1937, Maryland Geol. Survey, vol. 13, p. 273. 

Test large; upper surface inflated; lower surface somewhat concave; margin acutely rounded; somewhat produced behind. Apical system in front of the center, 

probably monobasal, with four genital pores. Petals 

lanceolate, equal, extending more than halfway to the 

margin; poriferous zones nearly closed at each end, 

pores strongly conjugate, outer pores elongated, inner 

pores round. Peristome central; bourrelets rounded at 

the base, hollow, probably rounded at the tips; phyllodes 

short and broad. Periproct small, apparently transversely oval, inframarginal, nearly terminal but not 

visible from above, slanting upward toward the rear. 

Length of type 56.4 mm; width 54 mm; height 25 

mm. Length of figured specimen 55.5 mm; width 49 

mm; height 25 mm. 

Occurrence.-Delaware: Delaware and Chesapeake Canal 

(type); north side of Chesapeake and Delaware Cana1 2,000 feet 

east of the railroad bridge (U.S.G.S. 17753, Charles W. Carter). 

Geologic horizon.-Marshalltown formation, of Campanian 

age. 

Type.-Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia no. 1496. 

Figured specimen U.S.N.M. 108378. 

Remarks.-Carter's field ]abel states that he found the specimen here figured in place in the Crosswicks clay, the basal formation of the Matawan group, but his published report places 

it in the Marshalltown formation, the upper formation of that 

group. This discrepancy doubtless records a change in correlation as the result of later stud~es. 

Pygurostoma pasionense Cooke 

Plate 16, figures 6-11 

Pygurostoma pasionensis Cooke, 1949, Am. Mus. Novitates no. 

1422, p. 1. 

Horizontal outline oval, upper surface elevated, 

highest at the apical center, lower surface gently concave, margin rounded. Apical system slightly in front 

of the apical center, having a large central madreporite 
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 15 

and four genital pores. Petals extending more than 

halfway to the margin; poriferous zones open at the tips, 

one-third as wide as the interporiferous zones, inner 

pores oval, outer pores longer, pores conjugate; interporiferous zones tumid; anterior petal straighter-sided 

than the others. Peristome pentagonal, slightly in 

front of the apex, surrounded by a floscelle with round 

bourrelets and conspicuous phyllodes. Peristome 

submarginal, longer than wide. Upper surface covered 

with small sunken tubercles; tubercles on lower surface 

much larger. 

Length 61 mm, width 53 mm; height 30 mm. 

Occurrence.- Guatemala: Airstrip near Rio de la Pasion at 

Santa Amelia, Peten (U.S.N.M. accession 195206, Barnum 

Brown). 

Geologic horizon.- Probably Campanian. 

Type.-Am. Mus. Nat. History 26901. Replicas, U.S.N.M. 

104914 and geological department of the Sohio Petroleum 

Company at Houston, Tex. 

Figured specimen.- U.S.N.M. 108406. 

Comparison.- Pygurostoma pasionense is very similar to 

P. morgani. The tubercles on its lower surface are smaller than 

they are represented on the figures of the Persian species, which 

I have not seen. 

Genus CATOPYGUS L. Agassiz 

Catopygus L. Agassiz, 1836, Soc. nat. Nettchdtel, Mem., tome 1, 

pp. 136, 185. 

Catopygus L. Agassiz. Agassiz, 1840, Catalogus systematicus 

ectyporum echinodermatum, pp. 4, 17. 

Catopygus Agassiz. Agassiz and Desor, 1847, Catalogue raisonne 

des echinides, p. 99. 

Catopygus Agassiz. Desor, 1858, Synopsis des echinides fossiles, 

p. 282. 

Catopygus Agassiz. D'Orbigny, 1860, Paleontologie francaise, 

Terrain cretace, ser. 1, tome 6, p. 432. 

Catopygus Agassiz. Cotteau and Triger, 1869, Echinides du 

departement de la Sarthe, p. 423. 

Catopygus Agassiz. De Loriol, 1873, Echinologie helvetique, 

Oursins fossiles de la Suisse, pt. 2, p. 273. 

Catopygus Agassiz. Wright, 1875, British fossil Echinodermata 

from the Cretaceous formations, vol. 1, pt. 7, p. 240. 

Catopygus Agassiz. Pomel, 1883, Classifi.('ation methodique et 

genera des echinides, p. 64. 

Catopygus Agassiz. Duncan, 1889, Linnean Soc. Jour., Zoology, 

vol. 23, p. 185. 

Catopygus Agassiz. Lambert and Thiery, 1921, Nomenclature 

raisonne des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 353. 

Catopygus Agassiz. Sanchez Roig, 1926, Equinodermos f6siles 

de Cuba, p. 70. 

Catopygus Agassiz. Smiser, 1935, Mus. royal d'histoire nat. de 

Belgique Mem. no. 68, p. 53. 

Catopygus Agassiz. Grant and Hertlein, 1938, California U ni v. 

Los Angeles Pub. Math. and Phys. Sci., vol. 2, p. 110. 

Catopygus Agassiz. Mortensen, 1948, Monograph of the Echinoidea, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 158. 

Type species Nucleolites carinatus Goldfuss 1826, 

designated by Lan1bert and Thiery, 1921. According 

to D'Orbigny (1854-1860, p. 436) and Wright (1864-

1882, p. 241) this is a synonym of Nucleolites columbaria 

Lamark 1816, though Cotteau (D'Orbigny, 1854-1860, 

p. 439, footnote), Desor, and others distinguish between 

them. As figured by Goldfuss (1829, pl. 4, figs. 11a-c) 

this species is oval in outline, high-arched above, flat 

below, rostrate above the terminal periproct, and 

truncated behind. Its apical system and peristome are 

in front of the center. Its petals appear to be long, 

wide, and open at the distal ends. The bourrelets are 

swollen, and the phyllodes longer than wide. The 

periproct is high up on the terminal truncation. As 

figured by Cotteau and Triger (1855-1869, p. 424, pl. 

32, figs. 1-4) the periproct is barely visible from above. 

Catopygus pusillus Clark 

Plate 5, figures 1, 2 

Catopygus pusillus Clarf, 1891, Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ., vol. 

10, no. 87, p. 76. 

Catopygus pusillus Clark. Clark, 1893, Johns Hopkins Univ. 

Circ., vol 12, no. 103, p. 52. 

Catopygus pusillus Cla1k. Clark, 1893, U. S. Geol. Survey Bull. 

97, p. 65, pl. 27, figs. 3a-d. 

Catopygus pusillus Clark. Weller, 1907, New Jersey Geol. 

Survey, Paleontology ser., vol. 4, p. 292, pl. 11, figs. 16-19. 

Catopygus pusillus Clark. Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey Mon. 

54, p. 73, pl. 29, figs. 3a-d. 

Phyllobrissus pusillus (Clark). Lambert and Thiery, 1921, 

Nomenclature raisoniiee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 351. 

Outline nearly circular; upper surface moderately 

inflated, rostrate behind; lower surface nearly flat; 

margin evenly rounded. Apical system nearly central. 

Petals straight, extending about halfway to the margin, 

open distally. Peristome not preserved. Periproct 

circular (?), terminal, well up on the posterior end, 

vertical. 

Length of larger syntype 14 mm; width 13.3 mm; 

height 8.1 mm. 

Occurrence.- New Jersey: Wordills, Monmouth County. 

Geologic horizon.- Merchantville clay, of Santonian age. 

Types.- U.S.N.M. 2210. 

Comparisons.-This species, represented by two cotypes and 

one other, all casts of the interior, is proportionally shorter than 

Catopygus carinatus (Goldfuss). 

Catopygus mississippiensis Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 5, figures 3-6 

Outline regularly oval, strongly arched above, flattened below, margjn rounded. Apical system slightly 

anterior; four genital pores; plates not fused. Ambulacra petaloid, petals extending more than halfway to 

the margin; poriferous zones nearly straight, open 

distally; inner pores round, outer pores oval, pores 

apparently conjugate. Peristome slightly anterior, 

pentagonal, longitudinally elongated. Phyllodes longer 

than wide, outlined by a curved row of very small 

zygopores, divided into three equal parts by two rows 
16 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOG"'f 

of wider-spaced pores or zygopores. Bourrelets squarish, rather prominent, inner lips granulated. Periproct 

distorted, apparently transversely elongated; located at 

mid-height, at the top of a shallow depression; slightly 

rostrate. Tubercles on margin very small; somewhat 

larger underneath; separated by granules. 

Length 17.5 mm; width 15.6 mm; height 11.1 mm. 

Occurence.-Mississippi: Bed of a branch stream near Mobile 

and Ohio Railroad tracks about 5 miles northeast of Houston 

(U.S.G.S. 6851, L. W. Stephenson). Clay County (Paleontological Research Laboratories, Statesville, N. C.). 

Geologic horizon.-Prairie Bluff chalk, of later Maestrichtian 

age. 

Type.- U.S.N.M. 108379. 

Comparisons.-This species, known only from the type and 

two smaller individuals from Clay County, is more regularly 

oval than the European species Catopygus carinatus or C. fenestratus, and its tubercles are smaller. It is more elongated than 

Catopygus williamsi and more regularly oval than C. pusillus 

from New Jersey. 

Subgenus OOLOPYGUS D'Orbigny 

Oolopygus D'Orbigny, 1856, Paleontologie fran9aise, Terrain 

metace, ser. 1, tome 6, atlas, pls. 976, 977. 

Oolopygus D'Orbigny. Desor, 1857, Synopsis des echinides 

fossiles, fasc. 5, p. 286. 

Oolopygus D'Orbigny. Cotteau in D'Orbigny, 1860, Paleontologie fran9aise, Terrain cretace, ser. 1, tome 6, p. 454. 

Oolopygus D'Orbigny. Pomel, 1883, Classification methodique 

et genera des echinides, p. 64. 

Oolopygus (section Penesticta) Pomel, 1883, Classification 

methodique et genera des echinides, p. 64. 

Oolopygus D'Orbigny. Lambert, 1910, Soc. linneenne Normandie Bull., ser. 6, tome 2, p. 16. 

Oolopygus D'Orbigny. Lambert and Thiery, 1921, Nomenclature 

raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 354. 

Ooiopygus D'Orbigny. Smiser, 1935, Mus. royal d'histoire nat. 

Belgique Mem. no. 68, p. 57. 

Catopygus (Oolopygus) D'Orbigny. Mortensen, 1948, Monograph of the Echinoidea, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 160. 

Type species Nucleolites pyriformis (Leske) Goldfuss 

(not Echinites pyriformis Leske 1778 = Catopygus pyriformis (Leske) Agassiz 1836), from the white Chalk 

near Aachen, Germany, and Maestricht, Netherlands. 

According to Cotteau (D'Orbigny, 1854-1860, pp. 457, 

458) Goldfuss' species is the same as Catopygus tenuiporus Agassiz (Agassiz and Desor, 1847, p. 100). 

Lambert (1910, p. 20) disagrees and proposes the name 

Oolopygus gracilis for the species figured by Goldfuss 

(1829, pl. 43, figs. 7a-c). Goldfuss' figures indicate a 

test about 25 mm long, rounded in front, bluntly 

pointed behind, moderately inflated above, fiat below, 

rostrate above the periproct, which is terminal but not 

visible from above. The petals appear to be rather 

short, open at the distal ends, nearly equal in length. 

The peristome is pentagonal, in front of the center; 

the bourrelets swollen; and the phyllodes conspicuous, 

slightly longer than wide. 

Oolopygus is more protracted behind than typical 

Catopygus, which is short and stubby. 

Catopygus (Oolopygus) williamsi Clark 

Plate 5, figures 7-10 

Catopygus williamsi Clark in Weller, 1907, New Jersey Geol. 

Survey, Paleontology Ser., vol. 4, p. 292, pl. 12, figs. 1-4. 

Catopygus williamsi Clark. Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Mon. 54, p. 73, pl. 29, figs. 4a-d. 

Colopygus williamsi (Clark). Lambert and Thiery, 1921, Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 355. 

Outline rounded in front, produced and laterally 

truncate behind; upper surface low-convex, highest 

behind the center; lower surface nearly fiat; margin 

evenly rounded. Apical system nearly central; petals 

narrow, extending more than halfway to the margin; 

poriferous zones straight, open distally, about as wide as 

interporiferous zones. Peristome in front of the center. 

Bourrelets probably high, narrow, hollow. Periproct 

terminal, rostrate, longitudinally elongated, visible 

from below. 

Length 16.2 mm; width 21 mm; height 14 mm. 

Occurrence.-New Jersey: Bluff east of Atlantic Highlands. 

Geologic horizon.-Navesink marl of middle Maestrichtian age. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 103698 (deposited by the Johns Hopkins 

University, T 3010). ' 

Comparison.-Catopygus williamsi, represented only by the 

type: a cast of the interior, appears to be very similar to the 

species figured by D'Orbigny (1854-1860, p. 457, pl. 977) under 

the name Oolopygus pyriformis. 

Genus LEFORTIA Cossmann 

Pomelia De Lorio!, 1900, Rev. suisse Zoologie, tome 8, p. 66. 

Not Pomelia Zittel, 1875. 

Lefortia Cossmann, 1901, Rev. crit. Paleozoologie. tome 5, p."58. 

New name for Pomelia De Lorio!. Published January 1901. 

Pomeliopsis De Lorio!, 1901, Notes pour servir A !'etude des 

echinodermes, ser. 1, fasc. 9, p. 45. New name for Pomelia 

De Lorio!. Published May 1901. 

Lefortia Cossmann-Lambert and Thiery, 1921, Nomenclature 

raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 363. 

Lefortia Cossmann. Mortensen, 1948, Monograph of the 

Echinoidea, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 251. 

Type species, Pomelia delgadoi De Loriol, from the 

Senonian of Portugal, by monotypy. This species was 

figured by De Loriol (1900, p. 67, pl. 6, figs. 6-8), some 

of whose figures were copied by Mortensen (1948, p. 251, 

figs. 237a-d). These show it to be rather small, circular 

in outline, somewhat tumid above, fiat or concave below, 

with equal, open petals, equilateral peristome, prominent bourrelets, and a terminal, longitudinally elongated 

periproct. 

Lambert and Thiery reduce Lejortia to a subgenus 

under Procassidulus ( typ~ species Echinites lapis cancri 

Leske), which, however, has a deeply sunken, supramarginal periproct. The most conspicuous difference 

between Lejortia and Faujasia is the direction of elonga-
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 17 

tion of tb:e periproct-longitudinal in the first, transverse 

in the second. Though this might seem to be a very 

minor characteristic, it appears to have some importance 

in classification. Moreover, the periproct is commonly 

tilted downward in Faujasia, as in Echinolampas, 

whereas in Lejortia it is probably always vertical. 

Lejortia is somewhat similar to Ecanthus Cooke (1942, 

p. 37) ( =Echinanthus Desor 1858, not Leske 1778), but 

that genus has a transversely elongated peristome with 

rather small bourrelets, like Gassidulus, whereas Lejortia 

has an· equilateral peristome and prominent bourrelets, 

somewhat resembling Hardouinia. 

Lefortia trojana Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 4, figures 8-10 

Test small; upper surface inflated, highest point well 

forward, sloping steeply forward and more gradually 

backward; lower surface flat or slightly concave; horizontal outline nearly circular. Apical system in front 

of the center but behind the highest point, monobasal 

(plates fused), with four genital pores; petals narrowly 

lanceolate, fairly long, poriferous zones open at both 

ends, pores conjugate, outer pores elongated, inner 

pores round. Peristome and surrounding region un- · 

known. Periproct terminal, depressed, longitudinally 

elongated. Upper surface covered with small tubercles; tubercles near margin of lower surface much larger. 

Length 20.5 mm; width 19.8 mm; height 13 mm. 

Occurrence.-Mississippi: SW 1/4 sec. 15, T 11 S., R 4 E., 0.4 

mile east of Troy, Pontotoc County, (U.S.G.S. 17259, Watson H. 

Monroe). 

Geologic horizon.-Ripley formation, of middle Maestrichtian 

age. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 108376. 

Remarks.-This species is represented by only one individual, 

which is somewhat crushed, and which has lost most of the lower 

side. It is the first of its genus known from the Americas. It 

resembles the figures of Lej01 tia delgadoi (De Loriol), but its 

profile is less symmetrical and its apex is higher. It can be distinguished from species of FauJasia by the direction of elongation 

of ite periproct; moreover its petals are straighter and more 

widely open. 

Genus PRYLLOBRISSUS Cotteau 

Phyllobrissus Cotteau, 1860, Soc. des Sciences hist. et nat. de 

l'Yonne Bull., tome 13, p. 434. 

Phyllobrissus Cotteau. De Loriol, 1873, Echinologie helvetique, 

pt. 2, Echinides de Ia periode cretacee, p. 233. 

Phyllobriss~ts Cotteau. Cotteau, 1873, Paleontologie franQaise, 

Terrain jurassique, ser. 1, tome 9, p. 320. 

Phyllobrissus Cotteau. Pomel, 1883, Classification methodique 

et genera des echinides, p. 60. 

Phyllobrissus (Anthobrissus) Pomel, 1883, Classification methodique et genera des echinides, p. 60. Type species Nucleolites 

cerceleti Desor, 1847, here designated. 

Phyllobrissus (Trochalia) Pomel, 1883, Classification methodique 

et genera des echinides, p. 60. Type species EchinobTi88U8 

requienii d'Orbigny=Nucleolites requienii Desor 1847. Not 

Trochalia Sharpe, 1850. 

Asterobrissus De Lorio!, 1888, Archiv Sci. phys. nat., ser. 3, tome 

19, p. 71 (for Trochalia Pomel1883 not Sharpe 1850). 

Asterobrissus De Loriol. De Lorio!, 1888, Soc. de physique et 

d'histoire nat. de Geneve Mem., tome 30, no. 2, p. 104. 

Phyllobrissus Cotteau. Duncan, 1889, Linnean Soc. London 

Jour., Zoology, vol. 23, p. 187. 

Phyllobrissus Cotteau. Savin, 1903, Soc. hist. nat. Savoie Bull., 

ser. 2, tome 8, p. 130. 

Phyllobrissus Cotteau. Lambert and Thiery, 1921, Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 350. 

Asterobrissus De Loriol. Lambert and Thiery, 1921, Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 351. 

Phyllobrissus Cotteau. Smiser, 1935, Mus. royal d'histoire nat. 

Mem., No. 68, p. 52. 

Phyllobrissus Cotteau. Mortensen, 1948, Monograph of the 

Echinoidea, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 165. 

Asterobrissus De Loriol. Mortensen, 1948, Monograph of the 

Echinoidea, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 167. 

Type species Gatopygus gresslyi L. Agassiz (1839) 

designated by Savin (1903). As figured by D'Orbigny 

(1854-1860, p. 425, pl. 966, figs. 1-6) this species has 

fairly long open petals, a pentagonal peristome surrounded by a distinct floscelle, and a supramarginal 

periproct sunken in a steep-walled sulcus, which slightly 

indents the margin. Its floscelle and nearly flush periproct distinguish Phyllobrissus from Nucleopygus. 

These features and its shorter sulcus distinguish it 

from Nucleolites. It differs from Glypeopygus in its 

smaller size and proportionally mueh greater height. 

Phyllobrissus cubensis (Weisbord) 

Plate 5, figures 11-14 

Echinobrissus cubensis Weisbord, 1934, Bull. Am. Paleontology, 

vol. 20, no. 700, p. 191, pl. 21, figs. 1-3. 

?Petalobrissus burckhardti Lambert, 1936, Soc. geol. France Bull., 

ser. 5, tome 6, p. 5, pl. 1, figs. 7, 8. 

Nucleolites wilderae Ikins, 1940, Bull. Am. Paleontology, vol. 25, 

no. 90, p. 76, pl. 6, figs. 5a-c. 

Echinobrissus cubensis Weisbord. Sanchez Roig, 1949, Equinodermos f6siles de Cuba, p. 127. 

Horizontal outline ovate, slightly wider behind; upp.er 

surface moderately inflated, somewhat flattened behind; 

lower surface concave around the peristome; margin 

broadly rounded. Apical system in front of the center; 

four genital pores; large central madreporite. Ambulacra petaloid, petals rather short, extending halfway 

to the margin, poriferous zones narrower than the 

interporiferous zones, slightly open distally. Peristome 

excentric in front, pentagonal, surrounded by a weak 

floscelle. Periproct longer than wide, nearly midway 

between the margin and the apex, at the end of a 

furrow, which extends to the margin but does not 

indent it. Tubercles close together, in pits, larger on 

the lower surface, covering all the surface, very fine on 

the sternal band. 

Length of figured specimen 29.4 mm; width 25 mm; 

height 14 mm. 
18 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

Occurrence.-Cuba: Esperanza, Havana Province (type, fide 

Weisbord). Finca El Alambique Abreus, Santa Clara (fide 

Sanchez Roig). 

Texas: Northeast of Castroville (U.S.G.S. 22407, William T. 

Watkins). Left bank Sabinal Creek about 4 miles north of 

Sabinal, Uvalde County (U.S.G.S. 7705, L. W. Stephenson). 

Sabinal Creek a few hundred yards below the G. H. & S. A. Ry. 

bridge about 1 mile west of Sabinal (U.S.G.S. 7709, 7710, 

L. W. Stephenson). Nueces River, left bank, 0.3 mile above the 

Southern Pacific Railway bridge, Uvalde County (U.S.G.S. 

15340, 16152, L. W. Stephenson, S. F. Turner, and A. N. Sayre). 

Turkey Creek Bluff, Lithocarbon (Carbonville), (U.S.G.S. 1771, 

T. W. Vaughan). T. Corbur Asphalt Company mine 17 miles 

west of Uvalde (358, R. T. Hill). Southeast-facing slope of 

Anacacho Mountain overlooking Frypan Valley in Kinney 

County, about 5 miles southwest of Cline Station (U.S.G.S. 

7719, L. W. Stephenson). Rio Seco, Medina County. Travis 

Heights, Austin (type of Nucleolites wilderae, F. L. Whitney). 

Mexico: Ocozocoantla, Chiapas (fide Lambert, Frederico 

Mullerried, collector). 

Geologic horizon.-Anacacho limestone and Austin chalk (type 

of N. wilderae) in Texas, lower Senonian in Mexico. 

Type.-Paleontological Research Institution, Ithaca, N. Y. 

Figured specimens.-U.S.N.M. 108380. 

Remarks.-The type of Nucleolites wilderae Ikins, which was 

kindly loaned by Prof. F. L. Whitney, agrees in all recognizable 

characters with specimens in the National Museum from the 

Anacacho limestone. Though it is deeply corroded, it retains 

the petals. Its horizon, the Austin chalk, is lower than that of 

the Anacacho limestone. 

Genus CLARKIELLA Lambert 

Clarkiella Lambert, 1916, Revue critique de paleozoologie, tome 

20, p. 169. 

Cossmannaster Lambert, 1920, Revue critique de paleozoologie, 

tome 24, p. 138. 

Cossmannaster Lambert. Lambert and Thiery, 1921, Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 369. 

Cossmannaster Lambert. Mortensen, 1948, Monograph of the 

Echinoidea, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 188. 

Type species Cassidulus conoideus Clark= Clarkiella 

hemispher,ica (Slocom), by monotypy. 

Lambert in 1920, overlooking the i, supposed that 

Clarkiella Lambert 1916 was preoccupied by Clarkella 

Walcott 1908; he proposed Cossmannaster as a 

substitute. 

The only known species of this genus is represented 

by very tall, dome-shaped forms resembling Conulus 

in shape but differing from it in other features. The 

apical system and petals are like those of Hardouinia, 

though the petals are wider open than customary. The 

peristome is farther forward than that of Hardouinia 

mortonis, which is central. The floscelle appears to be 

similar, though the prominent bourrelets are so badly 

broken that one can only surmise their original shape. 

The periproct, which is taller than wide, is less deeply 

sunken than that of known species of Hardouinia. 

The shape and arrangement of the ambulacral and 

interambulacral plates resemble Hardouinia. Clarkiella 

may prove to be either a synonym or a subgenus of 

Hardouinia. 

Clarkiella hemispherica (Slocom) 

Plate 5, figures 15-18 

Cassidulus hemisphericus Slocom, 1909, Field Mus. Nat. History, 

Geol. Ser., vol. 4, p. 7, pl. 1, figs. 7-9. 

Cassidulus hemisphericus (Slocom). Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. 

Survey Mon. 54, p. 80, pl. 34, figs. 2a-c. 

Cassidulus conoideus Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey Mon. 54 

p. 80, pl. 27, figs. 3a-d. 

Clarkiella conoidea (Clark). Lambert, 1916, Revue cri~ique de 

paleozoologie, tome 20, p. 169. 

Cossmannaster conoideus (Clark). Lambert and Thiery 1921, 

Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 369. 

Cossmannaster hemisphaericus (Slocom). Lambert and Thiery, 

1921, Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 369. 

Cossmannaster hemisphaericus (Slocom). Sanchez Roig, 1926, 

Equinodermos f6siles de Cuba, p. 73. 

Cossmannaster conoideus (Clark). Mortensen, 1948, Monograph 

of the Echinoidea, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 188, figs. 169 (after Clark). 

Cossmannaster hemisphericus (Slocom). Mortensen, 1948, Monograph of the Echinoidea, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 188. 

Cossmannaster hemisphaericus (Slocom). Sanchez Roig, 1949, 

Equinodermos f6siles de Cuba, p. 144. 

Horizontal outline circular; upper surface highly 

inflated; lower surface nearly flat. Apical system 

central; containing four genital plates with a large 

central madreporite; genital pores between the petals. 

Ambulacra plainly petaloidal; petals extending halfway to the margin; poriferous zones closed at the apex, 

open distally; outer pores elongated, inner pores circular; 

phyllodes equilateral, connected by a groove with the 

peristome. Peristome in front of the center. Bourrelets 

broken, evidently large and probably pointed, projecting diagonally outward. Entire surface covered with 

very fine tubercles or granules, which are larger on the 

lower surface. Periproct above the margin; higher 

than wide; sunken in a very shallow groove. 

Length of the type of Cassidulus conoideus 31 mm; 

width 31.4 mm; height 28 mm. 

Occurrence.-Mississippi: White gullies on the Patterson farm 

about 3 miles south of Pontotoc (type, fide Slocom). 

Alabama: Near Youngblood, Pike County (Ala. Geol. Survey, 

C. A. Burke). 

Georgia: The Narrows, Pataula Creek 2 miles above its mouth, 

Clay County (U.S.G.S. 5376, Otto Veatch, type of Cassidulus 

conoideus). 

Cuba: Ciego de Avila (fide Sanchez Roig). 

Geologic horizon.-Probably Prairie Bluff chalk in Mississippi, 

marine facies of Providence sand in Georgia, of late Maestrichtian 

age. 

Types.-Chicago Museum of Natural History, P. 10347, 

replicas in the U. S. National Museum. Type of Cassidulus 

conoideus U.S.N.M. 31199. 

Remarks.-The preceding description is based on the type of 

Cassidulus conoideus which is much better preserved than that of 

C. hemisphericus. Clark was mistaken in supposing that it is a 

cast. Cleaning the specimen uncovered the test, which retains 

even the tubercles. 
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 19 

Genus HARDOUINIA Haime 

Hardouinia Haime, in D' Archiac and Haime, 1853, Description 

des animaux fossiles de l'Inde, p. 214. 

Gonioclypeus Emmons, 1858, North Carolina Geol. Survey Rept., 

Agriculture of the eastern counties, p. 309. Type species 

G. subangulatus Emmons= H. morton is (Michelin). 

Echinanthus Breynius (part). Desor, 1858, Synopsis des 

echinides fossiles, p. 295, note. 

Harduinia Haime, Pomel, 1883, Classification methodique et 

genera des echinides, p. 65. (Typographical error for 

Hardouinia.) 

Echinanthus (Hardouinia) Haime. Duncan, 1889, Linnean Soc. 

London Jour., Zoology, p. 183. 

AU'stralanthus Bittner, 1892, K. Akad. Wiss. Wien, vol. 101, pt. 1, 

p. 20. Type species Cassidulus longianus Gregory. 

Cassidulus (Hardouinia) Haime. Gregory, 1892, Geol. Mag., 

decade 3, vol. 9, p. 436. 

Procassidulus (Hardouinia) Haime. Lambert and Thiery, 1921, 

Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 362. 

· Hardouinia Haime. Cooke, 1942, Jour. Paleontology, vol. 16, 

no. 1, p. 6. 

Australanthus Bittner. H. L. Clark, 1946, Carnegie Inst. 

Washington Pub. 566, p. 357. 

Hardouinia Haime. Mortensen, 1948, Monograph of the 

Echinoidea, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 137. 

Australanthus Bittner. Mortensen, 1948, Monograph of the 

Echinoidea, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 222. 

Type species, Pygorhynchus mortonis Michelin, by 

monotypy. Distinguishing features of this species, 

which is more fully described and figured herein, are 

its central, equilateral tubular peristome, its long, 

narrow, pointed, hollow toothlike bourrelets separated 

by deep pits, and its circular periproct, which is sunken 

in a tube that opens into a sulcus. Its four genital 

pores lie between the petals, and its central madreporite 

extends between the posterior oculars. Its conspicuous 

phyllodes and toothlike bourrelets contrast sharply 

with the inconspicuous, unpitted phy1lodes and weak, 

rounded bourrelets of Cassidulus caribaearum Lamarck, 

the type species of Cassidulus, whose peristome is 

transversely elongated and whose periproct, moreover, 

though roofed over by the test, is not tubular. 

Cassidulus longianus Gregory (1890, p. 482, pl. 13, 

figs. 1-3), from Australia, the type species of Australanthus, resembles Hardouinia mortonis in many 

features, but its phyllodes are narrower and have fewer 

pores. Its apical system is smaller, and its genital 

pores are closer together. Its periproct is longitudinally elongated, like that of several American species 

of Hardouinia. 

Haime compares Hardouinia with Pygurus, but 

P. montmollini (Agassiz), the type species according 

to Mortensen, has longer, more open petals, and its 

periproct is submarginal. 

Lambert and Thiery (1909-1925, p. 362) classify 

Ha.rdouinia as a subgenus under Procassidulus in spite 

of the fact that Hardouinia is the older name. Procassidulus, typified by Echinites lapis cancri Leske, is 

elongated, and its peristome is excentric. Its apical 

system is similar to that of H. mortonis, and its peristomial region and periproct differ only in minor features. 

P. lapis cancri is much smaller than H. mortonis. ~ 

Key to the American species of Hardouinia 

Periproct circular, bourrelets narrow Test high __________________________ Hardouinia mortonis 

Test low ___________________________ Hardouinia mortonis 

Periproct oval or elongate 

Periproct plainly elongate, bourrelets 

wide 

emmonsi 

Petals broad _____________________ Hardouinia kellumi 

Petals narrow 

Test generally low, rounded ______ Hardouinia micrococcus 

Test high, conical (Mexico) ______ Hardouinia potosiensis 

Periproct oval 

Periproct not terminal, petals nearly 

closed 

Upper surface inflated 

Test not very small 

Margin broadly rounded, 

petals wide _______________ Hardouinia bassleri 

Margin acutely rounded, 

petals narrow 

Petals shorter ____________ Hardouinia aequorea 

Petals longer_____________ H ardouinia florealis 

Test small (Western Interior 

province) _________________ Hardouinia stantoni 

Upper surface very low (Western 

Interior province) ___________ Hardouinia taylori 

Periproct nearly terminal, posterior 

slope nearly vertical, petals 

plainly open ___________________ Herdouinia mcglameryae 

Hardouinia mortonis (Michelin) 

Plate 5, figures 19-21 

Pygorhynchus mortonis Michelin, 1850, Rev. et mag. zoologie, 

tome 2, p. 240. 

Hardouinia mortoni (Michelin). Haime in D' Archiac and Haime, 

1853, Description des animaux fossiles du groupe nummulitique de l'Inde, p. 214. 

Echinanthus mortonis (Michelin). Desor, 1858, Synopsis des 

echinides fossiles, p. 295. 

Gonioclypeus subangulatus Emmons, 1858, North Carolina Geol. 

Survey Report; Agriculture of the eastern counties, p. 309, 

figs. 242, 243. 

Cassidulus subquadratus Conrad, 1860, Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia Jour., ser. 2, vol. 4, p. 291, pl. 47, fig. 19. 

Cassidulus subconicus Clark, 1891, Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ., 

vol. 10, no. 87, p. 76. 

Cassidulus subquadratus Conrad. Clark, 1893, U. S. Geol. 

Survey Bull. 97, p. 70, pl. 31, figs. 1a-h. 

Cassidulus subconicus Clark. Clark, 1893, Johns Hopkins Univ. 

Circ., vol. 12, no. 103, p. 52. 

Cassidulus subconicus Clark. Clark, 1893, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Bull. 97, p. 71, pl. 32, figs. 1a-k. 

Cassidulus subquadratus Conrad. Slocom, 1909, Field Mus. Nat. 

History Pub. 134, geol. ser., vol. 4, no. 1, p. 5. 

Cassidulus subquadratus Conrad. Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. 

Survey Mon. 54, p. 77, pl. 31, figs. 2a-g. 
20 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

Cassidulus subconicus Clark. Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Mon. 54, p. 77, pl. 32, figs. 1a-k. 

Echinanthus mortonis (Michelin). Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. 

Survey Mon. 54, p. 67. 

Cassidulus1 subangulatus (Emmons). Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. 

Survey Mon. 54, p. 81. 

Procassidulus (Hardouinia) mortoni (Michelin). Lambert and 

Thiery, 1921, Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 

5, p. 362. 

Procassidulus (Hardouinia) subconica (Clark). Lambert and 

Thiery, 1921, Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 

5, p. 362. 

Hardouinia subquadrata (Conrad). Stephenson and Monroe, 

1940, Mississippi Geol. Survey Bull. 40, p. 278, pl. 9, figs. 

1-3. 

Hardouinia mo1'toni (Michelin). Mortensen, 1948, Monograph 

of the Echinoidea, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 137, figs. 105, 107, 108 

(after Clark, as Cassidulus subquadratus). 

Test medium-sized to large, upper surface variably 

inflated, lower surface slightly concave, margin angular 

to acutely rounded, horizontal outline semi-circular in 

front, nearly straight posterolaterally, produced downward behind. Apical system having four genital pores 

located beyond the inner ends of the petals and outside 

of the large central madreporite, which extends between 

the posterior oculars. Petals lanceolate, extending 

more than halfway to the ambitus; poriferous zones 

closed at inner end, nearly closed and much wider at 

outer end; zygopores consisting of a circular inner pore 

conjugated with a slot-shaped outer pore of variable 

length. Peristome central, circular, tubular, surrounded 

by five strong, pointed hollow bourrelets covered with 

scalelike small tubercles and separated by deep pits. 

Phyllodes short, broad, depressed, very conspicuous. 

Periproct small, circular, located between the ends of 

the posterior petals, sunken in a conical tube that 

widens into a straight-sided sulcus, which extends to 

and slightly indents the ambitus. Upper surface covered withsmall sunken tubercles. Lower surface having 

a bare calluslike area extending backward from the 

floscelle; remainder covered with larger tubercles set at 

the outer edge of large semilunate scrobiculi. 

Occurrence.-Mississippi: Near Pontotoc, Pontotoc County 

(type, fide Michelin); Tippah County (type of Cassidulus subquadratus, fide Conrad); Dumas, Tippah County (type of 

Cassidulus subconicus); Naber's farm at Dumas, sec. 23, T 5 S, 

R 4 E (U.S.G.S. 710, T. W. Stanton); NW ~ NW ~ sec. 16, 

T 10 S, R 3 E, 450 feet southeast of State Highway 15 at Chiwapa 

Creek, 2.1 miles south of Pontotoc courthouse (U.S.G.S. 17256, 

W. H. Monroe); Lander's mill on Cane Creek 9 miles south of 

Ripley, Tippah County (U.S.G.S. 714, T. W. Stanton). SE }~sec. 

16, T 3 S, R 4 E, south-facing slope of Walnut Creek valley north 

of house of L. T. Braddock, Tippah County, (U.S.G.S. 17799, 

L. W. Stephenson and W. H. Monroe). 

Alabama: Bluff on right bank of Chattahoochee River near old 

Alexander Landing, NWX sec. 9, T 9 N, R 29 E, Barbour 

County (U.S.G.S. 858, 17959, 19068, 21166, T. W. Stanton, 

L. W. Stephenson, C. W. Cooke, J. Fred Hunter, W. H. Monroe, 

D. H. Eargle). 

Georgia: Chattahoochee River 1 mile below the mouth of 

Pataula Creek, (U.S.G.S. 859, T. W. Stanton); Well at Bainbridge (U.S.N.M. 31904). 

South Carolina: Myrtle Beach, cast up by the waves (U.S.G.S. 

16435, W. F. Prouty, D. F. Hewett). 

North Carolina: Wadsworth marl pit, Craven County (type of 

Gonioclypeus subangulatus, fide Emmons). 

Atlantic Ocean: Georges Bank (type of H. stetsoni, fide 

Stephenson). 

Geologic horizon.-Lower part of Exogyra costata zone; Ripley 

formation (Mississippi, Alabama), Peedee formation (South 

Carolina), of middle Maestrichtian age. 

Type.-45, Verneuil collection (fide Desor). The type of 

Gonioclypeus subangulatus is U.S.N.M. 108381, deposited by 

Williams College. The type of Cassidulus subquadratus · is 

Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 1492; there is a replica in the 

U. S. National Museum. The type of Cassidulus subconicus 

is U.S.N.M. 20264. The type of Cassidulus emmonsi is U.S.N.M. 

73423. The type of Hardouinia stetsoni is Museum Comparative 

Zoology 3516. 

Remarks.-Like most cassiduloids, there is a considerable 

range of variation in the shape of the upper surface of Hardouinia 

mortonis. Most individuals are rather high ~nd evenly'infl.ated. 

Extreme forms are the conical variety called Cassidulus subconicus by Clark and the much lower variety called Cassidulus 

emmonsi by Stephenson. The horizontal outline is ·rather 

uniform, and there is little variation in the oral side. The type 

of Hardouinia stetsoni, which I have not seen, is said to have 

fewer tubercles than that of C. emmonsi. 

Hardouinia mortonis emmonsi (Stephenson) 

Plate 5, figures 22-24 

?Cassidulus berryi Twitchell, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey Mon 54, 

p. 220, pl. 101, figs .. 3a-d. 

?Hardouinia berryi (Twitchell). Lambert and Thiery, 1921, 

Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 363. 

Cassidulus emmonsi Stephenson, 1927, U. S. Natl. Mus. Proc., 

vol. 47, art. 10 (no. 2706), p. 7, pl. 3, figs. 3-8; pl. 4, figs. 1-5. 

Hardouinia? stetsoni Stephenson, 1936, Geol. Soc. America Bull., 

vol. 47, no. 3, p. 371, pl. 1, figs. 2-4. 

Differs from typical Hardouinia mortonis in its smaller 

size and lower, more conical form. According to 

Stephenson H. stetsoni differs from H. emmonsi only in 

its coarser, sparser tuberculation. 

Length of holotype of H. emmonsi 40 mm; width 

38.5 mm; height 19.7 mm. 

Occurrence.-North Carolina: Niells Eddy Landing, Cape 

Fear River 28 miles above Wilmington (U.S.N.M. 103700, type 

of Cassidulus berryi, E. W. Berry). New Rocky Point quarry, 

1 mile northeast of Rocky Point station, Pender County 

(U.S.G.S. 12262, type of H. emmonsi, L. B. Kellum; U.S.G.S. 

13585, paratypes, L. W. Stephenson). Cape Fear River 15.5 

miles above Wilmington (U.S.G.S. 4151, L. W. Stephenson). 

Well at waterworks, Wilmington (U.S.N.M. 28930, paratype, 

J. A. Holmes). Quarry 1 mile west of Castle Hayne (U.S.G.S. 

14524, W. C. Mansfield). 

Georgia: Well at Bainbridge (U.S.N.M. 31904). 

Texas: Indio Ranch, about 18 miles by road (15 miles airline) 

below Indio Ranch headquarters and about 0.5 mile from the 

Rio Grande, Maverick County (U.S.G.S. 10854, L. W. Stephenson). Uvalde County 1.4 miles southeast of old Widow Cook 

Ranch, 0.8 mile due east of Nueces River (U.S.G.S. 15350, 
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 21 

L. W. Stephenson). Uvalde County, west slope of a mesa 1 mile 

north of Pulliam Ranch House (U.S.G.S. 15378, Julia Gardner). 

Atlantic Ocean: Georges Bank (type of H. stetsoni). 

Geologic horizon.-Upper part of the Exogyra costata zone; 

upper part of Peedee formation in North Carolina, top of 

Escondido formation in Texas. 

Types.-Type of C. emmonsi, U.S.N.M. 73423; paratypes, 

73424, 28930. Type of H. stetsoni, Museum of Comparative 

Zoology 3516, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mt:~ss. 

Remarks.-The specimens from Texas are uniformly smaller 

than the types of H. emmonsi from North Carolina. An averagesized specimen from the Indio Ratich measures 26 by 24 by 

10.6 mm. The type of Cassidulus berryi is small, corroded, too 

badly preserved to be certainly recognizable. It was found in 

the Pliocene Waccamaw formation, evidently reworked from the 

underlying Peedee formation. 

Hardouinia kellumi (Stephenson) 

Plate 7, figures 1-5 

Cassidulus kellumi Stephenson, 1927, U. S. Natl. Mus. Proc. 

no. 2706, vol. 72, art. 10 (no. 2706), p. 5, pl. 1, figs. 1-6; 

pl. 2, figs. 1-4; pl. 3, figs. 1, 2. 

Horizontal outline nearly circular, slightly protracted 

behind; upper surface hemispherical; lower surface 

nearly flat; margin acutely rounded. Apical system 

central, having four genital pores located between the 

ends of the petals; madreporite central and protruding 

between the posterior oculars. Petals broadly lanceolate, closed at the inner ends, slightly open at the 

out~r ends, extending more than halfway to the margin. 

Per1s~ome central, surrounded by five strong, pointed 

deltoid phyllodes, which, when unworn, nearly close 

the opening. Floscelles conspicuous, fan-shaped, not 

deeply pitted. Periproct longitudinally elongated 

supramarginal, sunken in a deep, narrow sulcus, which 

broadens and becomes shallow near the ambitus. 

Length of holotype 57.3 mm; width 53.3 mm; height 

31.3 mm. 

Occurrence:-North Carolina: Rock Point quarries 

1 mile northeast of Rocky Point station, Pender County 

(U.S.G.S. 12262, type, L. B. Kellum; U.S.G.S. 13585, 

L. W. Stephenson). 

Geologic horizon.-Upper part of Peedee formation 

upper part of Exogyra costata zone, of middle Maestrich~ tian age. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 73420; paratypes, 73421. 

Comparisons. -Hardouinia kellumi seems to be closely 

related to H. micrococcus (Gabb), but that species is 

proportionately narrower, much flatter, and has narrower petals, which are wider open. 

Hardouinia potosiensis Lambert (1936, p. 5, pl. 1, 

figs. 2-4) from the Santonian of San Luis Potosi Mex- . . ' 1co, 1s more elongated and has narrower peta]s. 

Hardouinia micrococcus (Gabb) 

Plate 6, figures 1-10; plate 7, figure 12 

Cassidulus micrococcus Gabb, 1860, A cad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 

Proc., vol. 12, p. 519. 

?Cassidulus abruptus Conrad, 1860, Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 

Jour., ser. 2, vol. 4, p. 291. 

Cassidulus micrococcus Gabb. Clark, 1891, Johns Hopkins 

Univ. Circ., vol. 10, no. 87, p. 76. 

Cassidulus porrectus Clark, 1891, Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ., 

vol. 10, no. 87, p. 76. 

Cassidulus micrococcus Gabb. Clark, 1893, Johns Hopkins 

Univ. Circ., vol. 12, no. 103, p. 52. 

Cassidulus porrectus Clark. Clark, 1893, Johns Hopkins Univ. 

Cir:c., vol. 12, no. 103, p. 52. 

Cassidulus micrococcus Gabb. Clark, 1893, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Bull. 97, p. 69, pl. 30, figs. la-i. 

Cassidulus porrectus Clark. Clark, 1893, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Bull. 97, p. 72, pl. 33, figs. la-b; pl. 35, figs. la-d. 

?Cassidulus abruptus Conrad. Clark, 1893, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Bull. 97, p. 92. 

Cassidulus micrococcus Gabb. Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Mon. 54, p. 76, pl. 31, figs. la-i. 

Cassidulus porrectus Clark. Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Mon. 54, p. 78, pl. 32, figs. 2a-b; pl. 33, figs. la-f. 

?Cassidulus abruptus Conrad. Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Mon. 54, p. 81. 

Hardouinia porrecta (Clark). Lambert and Thiery, 1921, 

Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 362. 

Hardouinia porrecta (Clark). Stephenson and Monroe, 1940, 

Mississippi Geol. Survey Bull. 40, table facing p. 248, pl. 

8 (p. 277)' figs. 1, 2. 

Hardouinia porrecta (Clark). Mortensen, 1948, Monograph of 

the Echinoidea, vol. 4, pt. 1, p. 138, fig. 106 (after Clark). 

Test large, ranging in length from 40 mm to 125 mm; 

horizontal outline ovate, slightly produced behind, 

wider behind the midline; upper surface convex, height 

less than half the length; oral surface nearly fiat. 

Apical system slightly in front of the center; four 

genital pores between the ends of the petals; madreporite 

large, central and extending between the posterior 

ocular plates. Ambulacra plainly petaloid; petals all 

alike, of equal length, extending about three-fourths 

of the distance to the margin, subspatulate; poriferous 

zones open at each end, inner pores circular, outer 

pores elongate, pores conjugate; interporiferous zones 

twice as wide as the poriferous. Peristome small, 

pentagonal, central, surrounded by five strong, pointed, 

deltoid, toothlike bourrelets separated by narrow deep 

grooves; phyllodes fanlike, wider than long, limited by 

lateral arcs of 10 pores each and a median arc of about 

six pores. Periproct elongate oval, at the bottom of 

a deep groove, which widens and becomes shallower 

toward the margin. Tubercles on oral surface having 

a scalelike appearance. 
22 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

Length of figured type 44.2 mm; width 39 mm; height 

19.5 mm. Length of type of 0. porrectus 109 mm; 

width 104 mm; height 45 mm. 

Occurrence.-Alabama: Eufaula (type, W. M. Gabb). Barbour County (figured, Geol. Survey Ala., Michael Tuomey). 

Bluff, Chattahoochee River (Geol. Survey Ala., E. A. Smith). 

Bluff on right bank of Chattahoochee River near old Alexander 

Landing, NW X sec. 9, T 9 N., R 29 E, 8% miles below Eufaula 

(U.S.G.S. 858, type of C. porrectus, T. W. Stanton; U.S.G.S. 

17859, C. W. Cooke and J. F. Hunter; U.S.G.S. 19068, L. W. 

Stephenson, C. W. Cooke, and W. H. Monroe). Chewalla 

Creek near Eufaula (U.S.G.S. 279, Frank Burns). 

Georgia: Chattahoochee River 1 mile below the mouth of 

Pataula Creek (U.S.G.S. 859, T. W. Stanton). Two miles 

north of Pataula Creek, Clay County. 

Geologic horizon.-Ripley formation, of middle Maestrichtian 

age. 

Types.-Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia no. 

1480. Type of C. porrectus U.S.N.M. 21890. 

Comparisons.-This species attained a much larger size than 

Hardouinia morton is. It is proportionately lower; its bourrelets 

are much wider, and the spaces between them are correspondingly 

narrower; its periproct is longer, and the furrow into which it 

opens is more expanding. It appears to be more closely related 

to Hardouinia kellumi, which has similar bourrelets though its 

anal groove is wider, its pet~ls are much narrower, and its height 

is proportionately less. 

Gabb's two types are small and decorticated, but there is 

little reason to doubt that they represent the same species as 

the big, overgrown lot from which Clark selected the type of 

Cassidulus porrectus. All came from the same region and probably from the same horizon. 

Hardouinia micrococcus is generally lower and more evenly 

rounded than the figures of Hardouinia potosiensis Lambert 

(1936, p. 5, pl. 1, figs. 2-4) from the Santonian of Mexico, though 

some large individuals (H. porrectus) are asymmetrically conical 

like it. 

Hardouinia bassleri (Twitchell) 

Plate 7, figures 6-11 

Cassidulus bassleri T"'itchell, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey Mon. 54, 

p. 211, pl. 95, figs. 5a-d. 

Procassidulus (H ardouinia) bassleri (Twitchell). Lambert and 

Thiery, 1921, Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, 

p. 363. 

Test rather small; horizontal outline rounded in 

front and sides, somewhat flattened posterolaterally; 

upper surface low convex, arched above the periproct; 

lower surface gently concave; margin broadly rounded. 

Apical system central or slightly in front of the center; 

four genital pores; madreporite central. Ambulacra 

petaloid; petals lanceolate, extending about threefourths the way to the margin; poriferous zones closed 

at the apex, nearly closed distally; pores oval, conjugate. Peristome commonly a little behind the center. 

Phyllodes limited on each side by a curved line of about 

11 close-set small pores, and there are two inner nearly 

straight widely separated lines of about 6 pores; not 

distinctly pitted; sloping steeply near the peristome. 

Bourrelets conspicuous, blunt, hollow. Periproct oval, 

erect, in a shallow tube that opens into a rounded sui .. 

cus, located between the tips of the posterior petals. 

Length of an average specimen 30 mm; width 28 

mm; height 16 mm. 

Occurrence.-Alabama: Cunninghams Bluff, Alabama River, 

Dallas County, frac. sec. 3 and 4, T 16 N, R 12 E (U.S.G.S. 175, 

L. C. Johnson). Morgan Landing, J. 'f. Wood's place, sees. 11 

and 12, T 17 N, R 12 E, Autauga County (U.S.G.S. 307, L. C. 

Johnson). Bluff on Valley Creek 100 yards above the crossing 

of U. S. Highway 80, Dallas County (U.S.G.S. 16997, L. W. 

Stephenson and A. C. Munyan). Batte Smith Bluff on Alabama River, Dallas County (D. H. Eargle). Catoma Creek, 

Montgomery County, 0.9 mile northeast of the Mount Moriah 

Church, 0.15 mile northwest of the old Haynesville road, in 

NW X sec. 32, T 16 N, R 17 E (U.S.G.S. 17010, L. W. Stephenson, C. W. Cooke, and A. C. Munyan; W. H. Monroe and D. H. 

Eargle. 

Geologic horizon.-Tombigbee sand member of the Eutaw formation, of Santonian (?) age. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 9476. 

Figured specimens.-U.S.N.M. 108382. 

Cornparisons.-Of American species Hardouinia bassleri most 

closely resembles Hardouinia aequorea (Morton), which commonly has a sharper margin, is more concave underneath, and 

has closer inner rows of pores on its phyllodes. 

This species was referred to Procassidulus by Lambert and 

Thiery, but Procassidulus lapis cancri (Leske), the type species, 

has a perfectly flat oral face, its margin is sharp, and its peristome 

is farther forward. 

The original label of the type lot of Cassidulus bassleri Twitchell 

was lost. The lot was relabelled by Angelo Heilprin as from the 

Miocene of North Carolina, evidently a mistake. The state of 

preservation and the matrix resemble specimens collected in 

1883 by L. C. Johnson at Cunningham Bluff, Alabama River 

(U.S.G.S. 175). 

Hardouinia aequorea (Morton) 

Plate 8, figures 15-22 

Cassidulus aequoreus Morton, 1834, Synopsis of the organic remains of the Cretaceous, p. 76, pl. 3, fig. 14. 

Cassidulus aequoreus Morton. D'Orbigny, 1856, Paleontologie 

frangaise, Terrain cretace, ser. 1, tome 6, p. 329, pl. 926, 

figs. 6-12. 

Cassidulus aequoreus Morton. Desor, 1858, Synopsis des echinides fossiles, p. 290. 

Cassidulus aeguoreus Morton. Clark, 1891, Johns Hopkins Univ. 

Circ., vol. 10, no. 87, p. 76. 

Cassidulus aequoreus Morton. Clark, 1893, Johns Hopkins Univ. 

Circ., vol. 12, no. 103, p. 52. 

Cassidulus aequore1is Morton. Clark, 1893, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Bull. 97, p. 68, pl. 29, figs. 1a-i. 

Cassidulus aequoreu,s Morton. Weller, 1907, New Jersey Geol. 

Survey, Paleontology ser., vol. 4, p. 293, pl. 12, figs. 5-12 

(after Clark, 1893). 

Cassidulus intermedius Slocom, 1909, Field [Chicago] Mus. Nat. 

History, geol. serv. vol. 4, p. 6, pl. 1, figs. 1-6. 

Cassidulus aequoreus Morton. Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Mon. 54, p. 75, pl. 30, figs. 2a-i. 

Cassidulus intermedius Slocom. Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Mon. 54, p. 79, pl. 34, figs. 1a-f. 

Test small; horizontal outline ovate, wider behind 

the middle, slightly produced posteriorly; upper surface 
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 23 

dome-shaped; lower surface concave; margin acutely 

rounded. Apical system in front of the center; four 

genital pores, the right posterior farther out than the 

others. Ambulacra petaloid, petals lanceolate, extending about three-fourths of the way to the margin; poriferous zones closed at the apex, somewhat open distally; 

inner pores circular, outer pores oval or elongate, pores 

conjugate; phyllodes outlined by arcs of six to eight 

large pores, arcs separated distally by four or five large 

pores and a median staggered row of very small pores; 

phyllodes separated from the peristome by a wide, deep 

granulated furrow. Bourrelets strong, bluntly pointed, 

not projecting across the peristome. Peristome pentagonal, somewhat sunken. Periproct longer than wide, 

sunken in a groove, which extends to the margin but 

does not indent it; lying between the ends of the posterior petals. Sternal area and basal part of anterior 

ambulacrum decorated with very small tubercles; remainder of lower surface covered with much larger 

tubercles in sunken scrobiculi; tubercles on upper surface medium-sized. 

Length of type 28 mm; width 25 mm; height 11.5 mm. 

Length of figured specimen 32 mm; width 28 mm; 

height 15.5 mm. 

Occurrence.-Alabama: Prairie Bluff, Alabama River, Wilcox 

County (type, S. G. Morton; U.S.G.S. 6793, L. W. Stephenson). 

Old Canton Landing, Alabama River about 14 miles below the 

mouth of Pine Barren Creek, Wilcox County (U.S.G.S. 64~9, 

I •. W. Stephenson). Shell Bluff, Prairie Creek (U.S.G.S. 6794, 

I •. W. Stephenson). 

Mississippi: Gully on campus east of buildings of A. & M. 

College near Starkville, Oktibbeh9 County (U.S.G.S. 6843, 

W. N. Logan). 

Geologic horizon.-Prairie Bluff chalk, of late Maestrichtian 

age. 

Type.-Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 1475. Type of Cassidulus intermedius Chicago Nat. History Mus. no. P10346; 

replicas in U. S. National Museum. 

Figured specimen.-U.S.N.M. 108383, from U.S.G.S. 6794. 

Comparisons.-Hardouinia aequorea appears to have somewhat shorter petals than H. jlorealis. It has shorter petals than 

H. bassleri, its apical system and peristome are farther forward, 

its periproct is more elongated, and its margin is more acute. 

It shows some similarity to Procassidulus lapis cancri (Leske), 

but that species has a perfectly flat oral face, and its peristome 

is farther forward. 

Hardouinia :florealis (Morton) 

Plate 8, figures 11-14 

Clypeaster jlorealis Morton, 1833, Am. Jour. Sci., ser. 1, vol. 23, 

p. 294. 

Clypea.~ter jlorealis Morton. Morton, 1834, Synopsis of the 

organic remains of the Cretaceous group, p. 76, pl. 3, fig. 12; 

pl. 10, fig. 12. 

Pygurus florealis (Morton). Agassiz and Desor, 184 7, Catalogue 

raisonne des echinodermes, p. 141. 

Faujasw jlorealis (Morton). D'Orbigny, 1856, Paleontologie 

francaise, Terrain cretace, ser. 1, tome 6, p. 319, pl. 920, 

figs. 5, 6 (after Morton). 

Faujasia jlorealis (Morton). Desor, 1858, Synopsis des echinides 

fossiles, p. 318. 

Cat;sidulus florealis (Morton). Meek, 1864, Smithsonian Misc. 

Coli., vol. 7, (177), p. 2. 

Cassidulus jlorealis (Morton). Clark, 1891, Johns Hopkins 

Univ. Circ., vol. 10, no. 87, p. 76. 

Cassidulus jlorealis (Morton). Clark 1893, Johns Hopkins 

Univ. Circ., vol. 12, no. 103, p. 52. 

Caseidulus jlorealis (Morton). Clark, 1893, U. S; Geol. Survey 

Bull. 97, p. 66, pl. 28, figs. 1a-l. 

Cassidulus florealis (Morton). Clark, 1915, D. S. Geol. Survey 

Mon. 54, p. 74, pl. 30, figs. 1a-l. 

Procassidulus florealis (Morton). Lambert and Thiery, 1921, 

Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, 361. 

Faujasiajlorealis (Morton). Lambert and Thiery, 1921, Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 374. 

Horizontal outline sub circular; upper surface strongly 

inflated; highest point behind the apical system; lower 

surface flat or slightly concave; margin acute. Petals 

extending more than halfway to the margin; poriferous 

zones about as wide as the interporiferous. Peristome 

central; surrounded by five strong, pointed, hollow 

bourrelets; phyllodes longer than wide. Periproct oval, 

twice as high as wide, sunken, well up above the margin, 

opening into a shallow depression, which extends to 

the margin. 

Length 38.1 mm; width 34.1 mm; height 21.2 mm. 

Occurrence.-Delaware and Chesapeake Canal, Delaware. 

Geological horizon.-Upper Cretaceous; formation unknown, 

probably the Marshalltown formation. 

Type.-Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 1495. 

Comparisons.-Hardouinia ftorealis, known only from internal 

molds, differs from Hardouinia mortonis (Michelin), type of the 

genus, in the shape of its periproct, which is longitudinally 

elongated, not circular, and in the narrowness of its interporiferqus zones. Its recognizable features closely resemble a tall 

variety of Hardouinia aequorea (Morton), though the type of 

that species is much lower, its phyllodes are shorter, and its 

petals are somewhat shorter. The shape of its periproct allies 

Hardouinia jlorealis with H. micrococcus (Gabb), but that species 

is very much flatter, and its tloscelle is smaller. 

Hardouinia stantoni (Clark) 

Plate 8, figures 7-10 

Cassidulus stantoni Clark, 1891, Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ., vol. 

10, no. 87, p. 76. 

Cassidulus stantoni Clark. Clark, 1893, Johns Hopkins Univ. 

Circ., vol. 12, no. 103, p. 52. 

Cassidulus stantoni Clark. Clark, 1893, U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 

97, p. 73, pl. 35, figs. 2a-d. 

Cassidulus stantoni Clark. Clark 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey Mon. 

54, p. 79, pl. 33, figs. 2a-d. 

Procassidulus stantoni (Clark). Lambert and Thiery, 1921, 

NomenClature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 5, p. 361. 

Test small. Horizontal outline oval; upper surface 

dome-shaped; lower surface concave; margin acutely 

rounded; slightly produced behind. Apical system 

wanting. Ambulacra plainly petaloidal; petals extending about halfway to the margin; poriferous zones 

somewhat wider than the interporiferous, open distaHy; 
24 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

inner pores circular, outer pores elongated; pores. conjugate. Phyllodes longer than wide; bordered by open 

arcs of many small, closely spaced pores; inner pores 

small, close together, arranged in two lines that divide 

the phyllode into three equal areas. Peristome central, 

pentagonal. Bourrelets fairly strong, rounded, not 

projecting far across the peristome. Periproct nearly 

midway between the margin and the apex; higher than 

wide; sunken in a tube that opens into a sulcus. Tubercles small; larger on the lower surface; scrobiculated. 

Length 15 mm; width 13.7 mm; height 8.7 mm. 

Occurrence.-Colorado: One mile east of Quillian's ranch on 

Williams Creek, Huerfano County, (type, U.S.G.S. 743, T. W. 

Stanton). Muddy Creek, Huerfano County, (U.S.N.M. 20267, 

T. W. Stanton). 

Geologic horizon.-Codell sandstone member of the Carlile 

shale, same age as uppermost part of the Eagle Ford shale 

(Turonian). 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 20268. 

Comparisons.-This species resembles in shape Hardouinia 

aequorea (Morton), but the type is much smaller and has much 

shorter petals. It is higher than Hardouinia taylori (Warren), 

and its periproct is smaller. 

Hardouinia taylori (Warren) 

Plate 8, figures 1-6 

Cassidulus taylori Warren, 1926, Royal Soc. Canada Trans., ser. 3, 

vol. 20, sec. 4, p. 11, pl. 1, figs. lQ-13. 

Test smaH; horizontal outline shield-shaped, with 

posterolateral truncations, produced behind; upper surface low-arched; oral surface concave. Apical system 

central, with four genital pores, the right posterior pore 

farther out than the others. Ambulacra petaloid; 

petals short, extending only halfway to the margin; 

narrow, open distally; pores round. Perjstome central; 

bourrelets strong, protruding; phyllodes large, about as 

wide as long. Periproct large, round (?), about midway between the apex and the margin, opening into a 

shallow sulcus. 

Length of cotype 301 18 mm; width 17.2 mm; height 

6.1 mm. 

Occurrence.-Canada: North end of the northeast arm of Birch 

Lake, Alberta, near lnnisfree in sec. 1, T 51, R 12, west 4th Principal Meridian (type, P. S. Warren). 

Colorado: Road from Meeker to Craig, 6 miles northeast of 

Meeker (U.S.G.S. 14699, I. A. Keyte). 

Geologic horizon.-Birch Lake sandstone, Belly River series in 

Canada; in sandstone 200 feet below top of Mancos shale in 

Colorado; both of Campanian age. 

Types.-University of Alberta 301-303, Edmonton. 

Comparisons.-Hardouinia taylori is flatter than any other 

described species. Its margin is sharper than that of H. stantoni, 

which has a narrower periproct. 

Hardouinia mcglameryae Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 8, figures 23-26 

Horizontal outline ovate, somewhat wider behind 

than in front; upper surface strongly arched, oral surface nearly flat; margin acutely rounded. Apical system in front of the center, with a tumid central madreporite which separates the posterior oculars; four genital 

pores. Petals spatulate, long, wide; poriferous zones 

open distally; inner pores oval, outer pores elongated, 

conjugate, plates diagonal; interporiferous zones twice 

as wide as poriferous. Peristome slightly anterior, 

sunken in a tube, surrounded by a conspicuous floscelle 

with strong, pointed, toothlike bourrelets. Periproct 

ovate, higher than wide, slightly sunken, high above 

the margin, opening into a shallow, nearly vertical 

groove, which extends to the margin. Tubercles scrobiculate, very small on upper surface, much larger on 

oral surface. 

Length 36.8 mm; width 36.4 mm; height 24.7 mm. 

Occurrence.-Alabama: Near Youngblood, Pike County (Alabama Geol. Survey, C. A. Burke). 

Geologic horizon.-Probably Providence sand (the label says 

Ripley). 

Type.-Geological Survey of Alabama; replica, U.S.N.M. 

108384. 

Comparisons.-The petals of Hardouinia rncglarneryae closely 

resemble those of Clarkiella hemispherica (Slocom), but the 

periproct is much higher. The petals are wider open at the outer 

tips than those of Hardouinia mortonis (Michelin), and the 

posterior slope is much steeper, nearly vertical. The spaces 

between the bourrelets in H. mcglametyae slope steeply toward 

the peristome; the corresponding spaces in H. mortonis are 

separated from the peristome by thick walls. 

Genus ECHINOCORYS Leske 

Echinocorys Leske, 1778, Klein's Naturalis dispositio echinoder· 

matum, p. 175. 

Echinocorytes Leske, 1778, Klein's N aturalis dispositio echinodermatum, p. 176. 

Ananchites Lamarck, 1801, Systeme des animaux sans vertebres:-

p. 347. 

Ananchytes (Lamark). Lamarck, 1816, Histoire naturelle deE' 

animaux sans vertebres, tome 3, p. 23. 

Ananchytes Lamarck. Goldfuss, 1833, Petrefacta germanii, p. 

144; 2d ed., 1862, p. 134. 

Ananchytes Lamarck. Forbes, 1852, United Kingdom Geol. 

Survey Mem. British organic remains, decade 4, plate 6, p. 1. 

Echinocorys Breynius. D'Orbigny, 1854, Paleontologie franQaise, Terrain cretace, ser. 1, tome 6, p. 58. 

Ananchytes Lamarck. Desor, 1858, Synopsis des ecbinides fossiles, p. 329. 

Echinocorys Breynius. Cotteau and Triger, 1869, ~chinides dn 

departement de la Sarthe, p. 430. 

Echinocorys Breynius. De Loriol, 1873, Echinologie helvetique, 

ser. 6, pt. 2, p. 307. 

Echinocorys Breynius. Wright, 1882, Monograph of the British 

fossil Echinodermata from the Cretaceous formations, vol. 

1, pt. 10, p. 327. 

Ananchytes Lamarck. Pomel, 1883, Classification methodiquQ, 

et genera des echinides, p. 4 7. 

Echinocorys Breynius. Duncan, 1889, Linnean Soc. Londov:o. 

Jour., Zoology, vol. 23, p. 206. 

Echinocorys Breynius. Lambert, 1903, Mus. royal d'histoire 

nat. de Belgique Mem., tome 2, art. 4, p. 34. 
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 25 

Echinocorys Breynius. Savin, 1903, Soc. d'histoire naturelle de 

Savoie Bull., tome 8, p. 97. 

Echinocorys Breynius. Lambert and Thiery, 1924, Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 6, p. 417. 

Echinocorys Breynius. Smiser, 1935, Mus. royal d'histoire nat. 

de Belgique Mem., no. 67, p. 9. 

Echinocorys Breynius. Mortensen, 1950, Monograph of the 

Echinoidea, vol. 5, pt. 1, p. 64. 

Type species Echinocorys scutatus Leske, by monotypy. This species, which is identified by Leske as 

Breyn's plate 3, figures 1, 2, was called Echinocorys 

vulgaris by D'Orbigny (1854-1860, p. 62, pis. 804-808), 

who attributed the name to Breyn, a pre-Linnaean 

author. D'Orbigny classed as synonyms Lamarck's 

Ananchytes ovata, A. striata, A. gibba, and A. pustulosa. 

He considered it the most characteristic species of the 

White Chalk (Senonian) of Europe. Smiser (1935, 

p. 50) restricts typical E. "vulgaris" to the lowermost 

Senonian (Coniacian) but recognized a variety, striata, 

in the basal Campanian and a great profusion of related 

species in the upper Senonian. According to Wright 

(1864-1882, p. 333) Ananchytes striata Lamarck and 

Echinocorys scutat1.ts Leske are the same variety of 

E~hinocorys vulgaris, a very variable species. 

Echinocorys texanus (Cragin) 

Plate 10, figures 1, 2; plate 11, figure 17 

Ananchytes texana Cragin, 1893, Texas Geol. Survey Fourth Ann. 

Rept., p. 145, pl. 25, fig. 12; pl. 26, figs. 1, 2. 

Ananchytes texana Cragin. Clark, 1915, U.S. Geol. Survey M.on. 

54, p. 82, pl. 35, figs. 2a-c; pl. 36, figs. la-b. 

Echinocorys texanus (Cragin). Adkins, 1928, Texas Univ. Bull. 

2838, p. 286, pl. 37, figs. 5, 6. 

Echinocorys cf. E. texana (Cragin). Dane, 1929, Arkansas Geol. 

Survey Bull. 1, p. 86, pl. 15, figs. 1, 2. 

Test large; horizontal outline ovate; upper surface 

very much inflated, dome-shaped; oral surface nearly 

fiat, concave around the peristome; margin acutely 

rounded. Apical system central, elongated; plates 

arranged in two parallel rows headed by the anterior 

ocular, which is much smaller than the other plates. 

Ambulacra. narrow, subpetaloid; petals extending to 

margin, all alike, poriferous zones straight, pores oval, 

conjugate, pairs close together, one pair to each plate; 

pore pairs on oral surface very small and far a part, 

except around the peristome, where they form a fioscelle; 

pores of each pair in fioscelle separated by a large 

tubercle. Peristome transversely oval, at the anterior 

sixth. Periproct longitudinally oval, submarginal. 

Length of figured specimen 122 mm; width 106 mm; 

height 93 mm. 

Occurrence.-Texas: Seco Creek, 2~ miles northwest of 

D'Hanis, Medina County (type). Seco Creek southwest of old 

Rothe ranch house, about 3 miles north by west of D'Hanis 

(U.S.G.S. 12909, figured specimens, L. W. Stephenson). Seco 

Creek 1~ miles northwest of D'Hanis (U.S.G.S. 14707, N. H. 

Darton). Seco Creek about 2 miles above the Galveston, 

Harrisburg, & San Antonio Railway bridge, Medina County 

(U.S.G.S. 7694, L. W. Stephenson). Eastern branch of Hendricks Creek, 1.1 miles southwest of Rogers, Bell County 

(U.S.G.S.14611, L. W. Stephenson). Big Creek at road bridge 

just south of the McLennan-Falls County line, 4 miles north by 

west of Otto, Falls County (H. R. Blank). Kaufman County 2 

miles from Forney (U.S.N.M. 22960, M. A. George). Southward-flowing creek 5.4 miles east of Clarksville, 200 yards 

below the Clarksville-Texarkana road, Red River County 

(U.S.G.S. 12888, L. W. Stephenson). Branch of Kickapoo 

Creek 6.5 miles east of Clarksville, 1 mile south of the Texarkana 

road (U.S.G.S. 13557, L. W. Stephenson and C. H. Dane). 

Same creek as preceding 1% miles south of the Texarkana road 

(U.S.G.S. 13558, L. W. Stephenson and C. H. Dane). Same, 

1.5milessouthofTexarkanaroad (U.S.G.S.13559, L. W. Stephenson and C. H. Dane). Branch of Kickapoo Creek, about 0.45 

mile above iron bridge, 2.25 miles northwest of Annona, Red 

River County (U.S.G.S. 14077, L. W. Stephenson). Jakes 

Creek, 5 miles east of Clarksville, 0.2 mile below the ClarksvilleTexarkana highway, Red River County (U.S.G.S.l4060, L. W. 

Stephenson). Jakes Creek, 3 miles south of Texarkana highway, 

5 miles east of Clarksville ((U.S.G.S. 14539, L. W. Stephenson, 

T. W. Stanton, and J. B. Reeside, Jr.). Creek near railroad, 4 

miles east of Clarksville (U.S.G.S. 5437, C. H. Gordon). Youngs 

Creek, 0.8 mile south of Texarkana road, 4 miles east of Clarksville (U.S.G.S. 13085). Youngs Creek less than 1 mile north of 

T. & P. Railroad, 4 miles east of Clarksville (U.S.G.S. 13086). 

'White Rock, Red River County (U.S.G.S. 13560, L. W.Stephenson). 

Arkansas: White Cliffs, Sevier County (U.S.G.S. 7488, T. W. 

Stanton and L. W. Stephenson; U.S.G.S. 13092, L. W. Stephenson and W. C. Spooner; F. K. Bostwick). Rocky Comfort, 17 

miles southwest of Foreman, Little River County (U.S.O.S. 

13506, C. H. Dane); White Hill, 2.9 miles south of Rocky Comfort (U.S.G.S. 13507, C. H. Dane). 

Geologic horizon.-Anacacho limestone in Medina County, 

Texas; Taylor mad, Pecan Gap chalk member in Bell County, 

Texas, Pecan Gap chalk member in Falls and Milam Counties, 

Texas; Annona chalk in Red River County, Texas and in 

Arkansas. All of Campanian (middle Senonian) age. 

Type.-Texas Geological Survey (fide Clark); figured specimen, 

U.S.N.M. 108388. 

Remarks.-Echinocorys texanus attained a much larger size 

than most specimens of E. scutatus Leske, the type of the genus. 

It differs from it further in that the petaliferous parts of the 

ambulacra extend about to the margin, whereas they commonly 

reach less than halfway to the margin in the European species. 

Genus PSEUDAN ANCHYS Po mel 

Pseudananchys Pomel, 1883, Classification methodique et genera 

des echinides, p. 45. 

Pseudananchys Pomel. Cotteau and Gauthier, in De Morgan, 

1895, Mission scientifique en Perse, tome 3, pt. 2, p. 5. 

Pseudananchis Pomel. Lambert, 1903, Mus. royal d'histoire 

nat. de Belgique Mem., tome 2, art. 4, p. 33. 

Craginaster Lambert, 1903, Rev. crit. paleozoologie, tome 7, no. 4, 

p. 219. Type species Holaster completus Cragin, by monotypy. 

Pseudamanchys Pomel. Lambert and Thiery, 1924, Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 6, p. 417. Typographical error. 

Pseudananchys Pomel. Adkins, 1928, Texas Univ. Bull. 2838, 

p. 285. 
26 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

Pseudananchys Pomel. Smiser, 1931, Jour. Paleontology, vol. 7, 

no. 2, p. 153. 

Pseudananchys Pomel. Cooke, 1946, Jour. Paleontology, vol. 20, 

no. 3, p. 233. 

Pseudananchys Pomel. Mortensen, 1950, Monograph of the 

Echinoidea, vol. 5, pt. 1, p. 71. 

Type species Ananchytes algira Coquand (1862, p. 240, 

pl. 26, figs. 1, 2), by monotypy. Coquand's figures, as 

copied by Mortensen (1950, p. 72), show a tall, domed, 

fiat-bottomed test with ovate horizontal outline. The 

straight, wide-open petals extend to or beyond the margin, the poriferous zones are all alike; the inner pores are 

circular or oval, and the outer pores are conspicuously 

elongated. The location of the periproct is not shown in 

these figures, but in Holaster sylvaticus Gauthier (Cotteau, Peron, and Gauthier, 1876, p. 66, pl. 5, fig. 2), 

which Cotteau, Peron, and Gauthier (1878, p. 84) 

regard as a synonym of Pseudananchys algira, it is below 

the ambitus but above the fiat part of the lower surface. 

The periproct occupies this same location in Pseudananchys completa (Cragin) from the Grayson marl 

(Cenomanian) of Texas and in P. stephensoni Cooke, n. · 

sp. 

Pseudananchys differs from Echinocorys in the elongation of its ambulacral pores. Its buccal rosette appears 

to be less conspicuous, and its peristome is more strongly 

labiate. There may also be a consistent difference in 

the location of the periproct. In Echinocorys the periproct lies in a flattened area at the posterior end ·of the 

base. In Pseudananchys completa and apparently also 

in P. stephensoni, it lies well above the margin of the 

base though below the ambitus and hence not visible 

from above. 

Pseudananchys stephensoni Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 9, figures 6-9 

Test hemispherical, strongly arched above, fiat below, 

faintly sulcate in front. Apical system central or behind the center, elongate, with four perforated genital 

plates, the anterior pair of pores widely separated from 

the posterior pair. Ambulacra narrow, subpetaloid; all 

petals nearly alike, extending nearly to the margin; 

pores elongated, the outer pores longer than the inner; 

anterior poriferous zones of paired petals straight; posterior zones gently curved, concave forward. Peristome 

far forward, transversely oval, labiate behind. Periproct terminal, not visible from above. Tubercles 

small, widely scattered on the upper surface, larger and 

closer together underneath; there is also a much finer 

tuberculation or granulation. Spines acicular. 

Length of holotype, a crushed individual, 48.5 mm; 

width 49 mm; height 27 mm. 

Occurrence.-Texas: From a creek on Waco and Gholson road 

between Aquilla and Whiterock Creeks, McClennon County; 

supposed to have come from the Exogyraponderosa marl (U.S.G.S. 

3197, John K. Prather). 

Geologic horizon.-Probably Austin chalk. 

Types.-U.S.N. M. 108387. 

Comparisons.-This species, known only from the type and two 

paratypes, all badly crushed, differs from Pseudananchys completa (Cragin) (Cooke, 1946, p. 233, pl. 34, figs. 7, 8) in the 

presence of an anterior depression. Its posterior genital pores 

are much closer together. In P. stephensoni the madreporic 

pores seem to be confined to the right anterior genital plate, 

whereas there are several separate areas of pores in the apical 

system of P. completa. 

Genus Holaster Agassiz 

Holaster Agassiz, 1836, Soc. sci. nat. Neuchdtel Mem., tome 1, 

p. 183. 

Holaster Agassiz. Cooke, 1946, Jour. Paleontology, vol. 20, 

no. 3, p. 233. 

Holaster Agassiz. Mortensen, 1950, Monograph of the Echinoidea, vol. 5, pt. 1, p. 47. Includes full synonymy. 

Type species Spatangus nodulosus Goldfuss 1829, 

(1862, pt. 1, p. 139, pl. 45, figs. 6a-c) from the Cenomanian of Europe, designated by Savin (1905, fide 

Mortensen). This species has been identified by Wright 

(1864-1882, p. 310, pl. 72, figs. 1a-f) as Holaster laevis 

(Brongniart) (1822, pp. 97, 399). Cooke (1946, p. 234), 

following Lambert (1927, p. 269)) identified the A:Qlerican Comanche species Holaster simplex Shumard as 

Holaster laevis, but H. simplex is proportionally longer, 

and its name is probably valid. 

Holaster laevis has a cordate outline, with a weak 

anterior sulcus and a small posterior truncation. Its 

upper surface is strongly arched, its lower surface nearly 

fiat. Its apical plates are arranged in two longitudinal 

rows headed by the anterior ocular. Its ambulacra are 

subpetaloid and flush; the anterior pair are curved 

slightly forward, the posterior pair are straight. The 

pores are oval, and the anterior poriferous zone of each 

paired ambulacrum is narrower than the posterior zone. 

The pores of the anterior ambulacrum are very small, 

circular, and arranged in diagonal pairs. There are no 

fascioles. The peristome is transversely oval and is set 

far forward. The periproct, which is at the top of a 

posterior truncation, is not visible from above. 

The absence of a marginal fasciole distinguishes 

Holaster from Cardiaster. 

Holaster feralis Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 9, figures 1-5; plate 10, figure 7 

Test large, thin; horizontal outline ovate, widest in 

front; upper surface strongly inflated, highest in front 

with a very weak anterior flattening. Apical system 

central, not preserved. Ambulacra flush, anterior 

ambulacrum not petaloid, composed of plates ranging 

in length from about twice the w--idth near the apex to 

nearly four times the width near the ambitus, pores 
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 27 

round or oval, pairs diagonal; paired ambulacra subpetaloid, composed of much longer, narrower plates, 

about eight times as long as wide, of uniform proportions, pore pairs occupying the center, pores slightly 

elongated and slightly incli.Jed; anterior poriferous 

zones slightly the narrower. Interambulacral plates 

about t#ice as long as wide. Peristome anterior. 

Periproct nmrginal, rather small, nearly circular, flush. 

Tubercles perforated, widely scattered in all areas. 

Surfa.ce covered with faint granulation. 

Length 78 mm; width 75 mm; height about 44 mm. 

Occurrence.-Colorado: Wild Horse Park, 14 miles northwest 

of Pueblo (type, Colorado School of Mines, J. Harlan Johnson). 

Deadman Canyon, 14 miles south of Colorado Springs (U.S.G.S. 

15402, J. S. Williams). Model Dome, Las Animas County, 

NE X NW% sec. 13, T 30 S, R 60 W (paratype, U.S.G.S. 22899, 

J. B. Reeside, Jr., and W. A. Cobban). 

Geologic horizon.-Near bottom of type Greenhorn limestone, 

of basal Turonian age. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 108385, deposited by Colorado School of 

Mines; paratype U.S.N.M. 108386. 

Remarks.-This species is proportionally wider and lower than 

Holaster laevis (Brongniart), its anterior depression is shallower, 

its posterior slope is more gradual, and its periproct is not above 

the margin. The generic assignment is tentative; though the 

ambulacra are like Holaster, the marginal location of the periproct 

is not typical. 

Genus CARDIASTER Forbes 

Cardiaster (part) Forbes, 1850, Annals and Magazine Nat. 

History, ser. 2, vol. 6, p. 442. 

Cardiaster Forbes. Forbes, 1852, United Kingdom Geol. Survey 

Mem., British Organic Remains, decade 4, plate 9, p. 1. 

Cardiaster Forbes. D'Orbigny, 1854, Paleontologie franQaise, 

Terrain cretace, ser. 1, tome 6, p. 123. 

Cardiaster Forbes. Desor, 1858, Synopsis des echinides fossiles, 

p. 344. 

Cardiaster Forbes. Cotteau and Triger, 1869, Echinides du 

departement de la Sarthe, p. 431. 

Cardiaster Forbes. De Loriol, 1873, li:chinologie helvetique, pt. 

2, Periode cretace, p. 335. 

Cardiaster Forbes. Stoliczka, 1873, Palaeontologia Indica, ser. 8, 

vol. 4, pt. 3, p. 21. 

Cardiaster Forbes. Wright, 1878, Monograph on the British 

fossil Echinodermata from the Cretaceous formations, p. 293. 

Cardiaster Forbes. Pomel, 1883, Classification methodique et 

genera des echinides, p. 46. 

Cardiaster Forbes. Duncan, 1889, Linnean Soc. London Jour., 

Zoology, vol. 23, p. 209. 

Cardiaster Forbes. Savin, 1903, Soc. histoire nat. de Savoie 

Bull., ser. 2, tome 8, p. 96. 

Cardiaster Forbes. Jackson, 1922, Carnegie Inst. Washington 

Pub. 306, p. 69. 

Cardiaster Forbes. Lambert and Thiery, 1924, Nomenclature 

raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 6, p. 405. 

Cardiaster Forbes. Smiser, 1935, Mus. royal d'histoire nat. 

Mem. no. 68, p. 67. 

Cardiaster Forbes. Clark, 1946, Carnegie Inst. Washington 

Pub. 566, p. 360. 

Cardiaster Forbes. Mortensen, 1950, Monograph of the Echinoidea, vol. 5, pt. 1, p. 51. 

Type species Spatangus cordiform is Woodward 

1833 =Spatangus granulosus Goldfuss 1826, from the 

Upper Chalk of England and the Senonian of Europe, 

designated by Savin, 1903. D'Orbigny (1854-1860, 

p. 131, pl. 826) identified this species as Spatangus 

ananchytis Leske (1778, p. 243, pl. 53, figs. 1, 2), but 

Leske's figure looks unrecognizable. The species has 

been figured by Goldfuss (1826, pl. 45, fig. 3), Woodward 

(1833, pl. 5, fig. 6), Forbes (1852, pl. 9), Desor (1855-

1858, pl. 39, figs. 7-9), Wright (1864-1882, pl. 69, 

figs. 2, 3), and Mortensen (1950, p. 52, fig. 43). 

The most obvious difference between Cardiaster and 

Holaster is the presence of a marginal fasciole in Cardiaster, which passes under the periproct but is wanting 

or incomplete at the anterior end. The anterior depression is commonly deeper in Cardiaster, and the anterior 

end is wider, causing the horizontal outline to be 

strongly cordate rather than nearly oval, as in the type 

species of Holaster. 

Cardiaster deciper Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 10, figures 3-6 

Horizontal outline cordate, wider in front, tapering 

behind; upper surface moderately inflated; anterior 

sulcus subangular, extending from the apical system 

to the peristome, deeply indenting the margin; lower 

surface nearly flat; posterior end steeply truncated, 

slightly overhanging margin acutely rounded. Apical 

system very long and narrow, with four genital pores, 

the anterior and posterior pairs far apart. Paired 

ambulacra petaliferous; petals flush, radiating from 

two centers, anterior pair curving forward, poste:.ior 

pair nearly straight; anterior poriferous zones of both 

pairs much narrower than the posterior; pores elongated, 

posterior pores of each zone longer than the anterior; 

pores near the tip of each zone slightly oblique. Peristome transversely oval, with a strong posterior lip. 

Periproct nearly circular; at the top of the posterior 

truncation, not visible from above. Two rows of large, 

:vearly flush tubercles lie on each side of the anterior 

sulcus, one tubercle on each plate; two rows extend 

along the middle of the posterior interambulacral area; 

three tubercles adjoin the apical system in each of the 

posterior paired interambulacral areas; remainder of 

the upper surface covered with scattered small tubercles 

and . fine granulation. A marginal fasciole extends 

along the sides and under the periproct. 

Length 39 mm; width 36 mm; height 18.2 mm. 

Occurrence.-Arkansas: Big Deciper Creek 5.4 miles southwest 

of Arkadelphia, Clark County (type, U.S.G.S. 13539, L. W. 

Stephenson). West of road to Nacatoch Bluff, 2.8 miles southwest of Okolona, Clark County (U.S.G.S. 13550, L. W. Stephenson). 
28 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

Geologic horizon.-Saratoga chalk, of early Maestrichtian age. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 108389. 

Comparisons.-This species, known only from the type and 

one fragment, appears to be closely related to Cardiaster granulosus ( Goldfuss), but its petals are longer, and its ambu1acral 

pores show only a slight tendency to deviate from a straight line, 

wherease those of C. granulosus are represented as conspicuously 

circumflex. 

The specific name is a barbarous word; it should not be 

declined. 

Cardiaster leonensis Stephenson 

Plate 11, figures 1-7 

Cardiaster leonensis Stephenson, 1941, Texas Univ. Bull. 4101, 

p. 62, pl. 5, figs. 4-7; pl. 6, figs. 5, 6. 

Test small for the genus, cordate, with a shallow, 

rounded frontal notch; upper surface rounded, slightly 

higher in front than behind; oral surface concave; 

truncated behind. Apical system in front of the center, 

elongated, with four genital plates; paired plates 

arranged in two parallel lines headed by the odd ocular 

plate. Paired petals extending more than halfway to 

to the margin; anterior poriferous zones straight, 

narrow, pores small and circular; posterior poriferous 

zones slightly curved forward, much wider, inner pores 

oval, outer pores elongated. Peristome large, transversely oval, at the anterior third. Peiproct nearly 

circular, slightly higher than wide, terminal, well up on 

a concave posterior truncation. Granulation fine; 

tubercles scattered. Marginal fasciole present. 

Length of type 16 mm; width 16 mm; height 9 mm. 

Length of figured specimen from Cline Mountain 24 

mm; width 23 mm; height 13.2 mm. 

(1ccur1 ence.-Texas: Castroville road 1.2 miles west of Leon 

Creek, Bexar County (type, U.S.G.S. 15522, L. W. Stephenson). 

Cline Mountain, 2 miles south of Cline station, Uvalde County, 

beds immediately succeeding the Austin chalk (figured, U.S.G.S. 

Hill's no. 357, R. T. Hill). East end of Cline Mountain, Brackett 

quadrangle (U.S.G.S. 1774, T. W. Vaughan). Summit of hill 

north of Anacacho Mountain, 3 or 4 miles north of Cline (U.S. G.S. 

1613b. R. T. Hill and T. W. Stanton). Quarry of Elm Creek, 

Kinney County (U.S.G.S. 16760, J. A. Udden). Agua de Fuera 

Creek, 1. 7 to 2 miles northeast of Spofford, Kinney County 

(U.S.G.S. 18412, R. R. Bennett and A. N. Sayre). King's water 

hole 3 miles north of Hondo, Medina County (U.S.G.S. 12902, 

L. W. Stephenson). 

Remarks.-Cardiaster leonensis is proportionately shorter than 

C. deciper, its posterior truncation is larger, its anterior sulcus is 

rounder and shallower, and the type is less than half as long. 

Geologic horizon.-Corsicana marl, of late Maestrichtian age 

(type) ; Anacacho limestone and lower part of Taylor marl, of 

Campanian age. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 76279. Figured specimen U.S.N.M. 108390. 

Cardiaster curtus Clark 

Plate 11, figure 14 

Cardiaster curtus Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey Mon. 54, p. 84, 

pl. 37, figs. 1a-h. 

Test small, cordate, the anterior furrow•extending 

from the apex to the peristome; widest about the midpoint. Apical system central, large, elongated, with 

four large genital pores. Anterior paired petals curved 

slightly forward; posterior petals straight; anterior poriferous zones of all paired petals narrow~r than the 

others. Surface covered with fine granules and scattered tubercles. Marginal fasciole present. 

Length 20.5 mm; width 19.3 mm; height about 12 

mm. 

Occurrence.-Montana: 25 miles southwest of Mingusville 

(now Wibaux). 

Geologic horizon.-Upper part of Pierre shale, of latest Campanian age (fide W. A. Cobban). 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 31201. 

Cardiaster smocki Clark 

Plate 11, figure 8-10 

Cardiaster smocki Clark, 1907, New Jersey Geol. Survey, Paleontology series, vol. 4, p. 298, pl. 13, figs. 9-11. 

Cardiaster smocki Clark. Clark; 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey Mon. 

54, p. 84, pl. 36, figs. 3a-c. 

This species, described from an imperfect cast of the 

interior, is unrecognizable without better preserved 

topotypes. Its shape resembles that of Oardiaster hilli 

Cooke, from the Anacacho limestone of Texas, which 

may eventually prove to be the same species. 

Occurrence.-New Jersey: Two and one-half miles northwest 

of Matawan. 

Geologic horizon.-Merchantville clay, of Santonian age. 

Type.-New Jersey State Museum, Trenton. 

Cardiaster marylandicus Clark 

Plate 14, figures 1-5 

Cardiaster marylandica Clark, 1916, Maryland Geol. Survey, 

Upper Cretaceous, p. 750, pl. 47, figs. 6-10. 

Clark describes this species as follows: Test small, 

cordate, with pronounced anterior grooves; upper surface slightly convex, lower surface flat. Ambulacra 

wide. Apical system moderately elongated. Peristome very near anterior margin. Periproct oval and 

situated rather high on truncated posterior margin. 

Length 18 mm; width 18 mm; height 11.5 mm. 

Occurrence.-Maryland: Brightseat, Prince George County. 

Geologic horizon.-Monmouth formation, of late Maestrichtian age. · 

Type.-Maryland Geological Survey. 

Comparison.-Clark compares this species with Cardiaster 

smocki, but :finds it to be more sharply contracted posteriorly and 

to have "a more pronounced anterior surface." 

Genus ISOMICRASTER Lambert 

Micraster (Isomicraster) Lambert, 1901, Carte geol. det. France, 

Mem., Recherches sur la craie superieure, pt. 1, fasc. 2, 

chap. 4, p. 969. 
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 29 

Micraster (Isomicraster) Lambert. Lambert, 1903, Soc. geol. 

France Bull., ser. 4, tome 3, p. 78. 

Micraster (Isomicraster) Lambert. Lambert and Thiery, 1924, 

Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 6, p. 483. 

lsomicraster Lambert. Mortensen, 1950, Monograph of the 

Echinoidea, vol. 5, pt. 1, p. 352; 1951, pt. 2, p. 565. 

Type species Isomicraster stolleyi Lambert, originally 

identified as Epiaster gibbus (Lamarck) by Schluter, 

from the Cretaceous of Liineburg, Prussia. Schluter's 

figures are copied by Mortensen (1950, p. 353, figs. 

249). They show a subconical test with rather short, 

straight, moderately sunken petals, all alike. The 

anterior ambulacrum is sunken all the way to the 

peristome, which is far forward and strongly labiate. 

The periproct lies on the posterior truncation, above the 

base. The species is said to have four genital pores. 

Isomicraster was described as a subgenus or section 

under Micraster. Its apical system (in the American 

species) is like that of Micraster coranguinum, but its 

anterior petal is quite different, being just like the 

paired petals, with elongated, conjugate pores, whereas 

Micraster has small pores separated by a bead. Isomicraster also lacks complete fascioles, though one American species shows traces of an incomplete peripetalous 

fasciole. Epiaster, also, lacks fascioles, but the pores 

of the anterior petal of its type species, Epiaster 

crassissimus (Defrance),1 are different. 

The subconical shape seems to be characteristic of 

Isomicraster; likewise the decoration with scattered 

small, sunken tubercles and fine, close granules. 

Isomicraster rossi Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 11, figures 15, 16 

Test subconical or dome-shaped with a slight emargination in front. Apical system apparently nearly central, with four genital pores, ethmophractic, the posterior ocular plates in contact. Ambulacra petaloid; 

petals all alike, slightly sunken, rather long, reaching 

nearly to the margin; inner pores circular or oval, outer 

pores elongate, pores conjugate; interporiferous zones 

about equal to the poriferous. Peristome at the anterior quarter, strongly lipped. Periproct not preserved, apparently supramarginal, on a posterior 

truncation. Surface coarsely granular; tubercles scattered, small, sunken. Faint traces of a partial fasciole 

in anterior interambulacra. 

Length of larger cotype 51 mm; width about 49 mm; 

height (distorted) 29 mm. 

Occurrence.- Texas: Terlingua region near Rio Grande a short 

distance east of 'Valker Prospect and south of the highway, 

loose on surface (U.S.G.S. 16855, C. P. Ross). 

Geologic horizon.- Eagle Ford shale, of Turonian age. 

Types.- U.S.N.M. 103892. 

1 Lambert's (1895, p. 156) designation of E. crassissimus as the type appears to be 

valid though Lambert and Thi~ry (1909-1925, p. 477) later designate E. trigonalis 

(Desor). 

236158-53--3 

Comparisons.-Isomicraster rossi is represented by seven individuals, all of which are crushed and fragmentary. It appears 

to have longer petals than I somicraster mexican us Lambert 

(1936, p. 371, fig. 2), from the lower Senonian of Chiapas. Its 

granulation is somewhat coarser than that of I somicraster danei 

Cooke from the Annona chalk of Arkansas, which lacks the 

partial fasciole and has a deeper anterior emargination. 

Isomicraster danei Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 11, figures 11-l 3 

Test subconical or dome-shaped, steeply sloping forward into a sulcus, rostrate behind. Apical system 

central. Petals long, depressed, not expanding, extending almost to the margin; anterior pair straight, 

widely spreading; posterior pair slightly curved backward; anterior petal like the ·others; poriferous zones 

equalling the interporiferous zone in width; pores conjugate, outer pores slightly longer than the inner pores~ 

Peristome not preserved. Periproct circular, at the 

top of a slightly overhanging V -shaped truncation, not 

visible· from above. Tubercles small, evenly spaced. 

Surface finely granulated. No fascioles. 

Length 57 mm; width as preserved 53 mm; height 

about 30 mm. 

Occurrence.-Arkansas: Rocky Comfort, Little River County 

(U.S. G. S. 13506, Carle H. Dane). 

Texas: Cut of St. Louis Southwestern Railroad 1/3 mile 

southeastof Bailey, Fannin County, internal mold (U. S. G. S. 

10553, L. W. Stephenson). 

Geologic horizon.-Top of Gober tongue of the Austin chalk, of 

Santonian age. 

Type.- U.S.N.M. 108391. 

Comparisons.-! somicraster danei has deeper petals, a deeper 

anterior sulcus, and finer granulation than I. rossi Cooke, which 

occupies an older bed. It is known only from the type, 

which lacks most of the lower surface, and one internal mold, 

from Texas, which is not surely identified. 

Genus BARNUMIA Cooke, n. _gen. 

Test weakly cordate, strongly inflated. Apical system ethmophractic, the posterior ocular plates in contact; four genital pores. Five petals, all alike, the 

anterior pair the longest, open distally, flush; pores 

conjugate, outer pores elongated, inner pores oval. 

Peristome nearly round, not lipped. Periproct probably on lower surface, longitudinally elongated. Tubercles perforated, crenulate, areoles conspicuous. Marginal fasciole continous. 

Type species Barnumia browni Cooke. 

The taxonomic position of Barnumia is tmcertain. 

Its ethmophractic apical system allies it with the 

Hemiasteridae, but its anterior petal is like the others, 

and its petals are flush, not sunken as in most members 

of that family. Its fasciole, which may not be quite 

marginal, suggests that of Holopneustes Cotteau. Its 

inflated -shape, without definite margin, is unusual 

among the spatangoids. Its petals are much like those 
30 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

of Pseudananchys Pomel, but their poriferous zones do 

not diverge. 

Barnumia browni Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 16, figures 2-5 

Test moderately large, weakly cordate; upper surface 

strongly inflated, somewhat pointed at the apex; lower 

surface apparently strongly convex; margin broadly 

rounded. Apical system central(?), ethmophractic, 

the two posterior ocular plates and the two posterior 

genital plates touching each other; all four genital 

plates perforated. Anterior petal like the others, 

anterior paired petals the longest; poriferous zones 

straight; not diverging, open at the outer ends; pores 

conjugate, the inner pores oval, the outer pores elong_ated, pores set at a slight angle to each other, but the 

conjugations are transverse. Petals surrounded at a 

distance by a fasciole, which is not indented. Peristome 

nearly circular, apparently without lips. Periproct 

longitudinally elongated, probably inframarginal. Tubercles crenate, perforated, on large areoles, larger on 

the lower surface. 

Diameter about 40 to 50 mm. 

Occurrence.-Guatemala.: East end of the airstrip near Rio de 

la Pasion at Santa Amelia, Peten (U.S.N.M. accession 195206, 

Barnum Brown). 

Geologic horizon.-Campanian? 

Types.-Three cotypes, U.S.N.M. 108407. 

Remarks.-All three cotypes are so badly crushed that it is 

difficult to visualize the original shape. They appear to have 

been almost spherical, though the apex probably was slightly 

pointed and there was a shallow anterior depression. The 

peristome probably was not very far forward, and the periproct 

below the indefinite periphery. 

The species and genus are named in honor of the collector, 

Dr. Barnum Brown. 

Genus HEMIASTER Desor 

Hemiaster Desor in Agassiz and Desor, 1847, Annales sci. nat. 

(zoologie), tome 8, p. 16; Catalogue raisonne des echinodermes (reprint), p. 122. 

Hemiaster Desor. D'Orbigny, 1855, Paleontologie fran~aise, 

Terrain cretace, ser. 1, tome 6, p. 220. 

Hemiaster Desor. Cooke, 1946, Jour. Paleontology, vol. 20, 

no. 3, p. 222. 

Hemiaster Desor. Mortensen, 1950, Monograph of the Echinoidea, vol. 5, pt. 1, p. 378. Gives full synonymy. 

Type species Spatangus bufo Brongniart, from the 

Cenomanian of France, designated by Savin (1903, 

p. 76). This species has been figured by Agassiz and 

Desor (1847, pl. 16, fig. 7), by D'Orbigny (1854-1860, 

pl. 873), and by Mortensen (1950, p. 380, fig. 272), 

who copies three of D'Orbigny's figures. Specimens 

in the United States National Museum from Les Vaches 

Noires, near Dives, Dept. du Calvados, France, which 

appear to be correctly identified, are nearly equidimensional, much higher behind than in front, with 

a very shallow anterior depression. The apical system 

is slightly behind the center, definitely ethmophract, 

with the posterior ocular plates in contact. It has 

four genital pores, the lateral pair is as far apart as 

the anterior pair. The paired petals are straight, 

short, extending little more than halfway to the margin, 

which is broadly rounded; they are not deeply depressed; the anterior pair is nearly twice as long as 

the posterior pair. The poriferous zones of the paired 

petals are about equal in width to the interporiferous 

zones; the pores are slightly elongated and are parallel. 

The plates of the anterior ambulacrum are about twice 

as broad as those of the petals, and the zygopores are 

consequently farther apart; the pores of each pair are 

very slightly elongated, and they are set at an angle 

to each other, as in a chevron; the pores are separated 

by a small bead. The peristome lies at the anterior 

third; it is semilunate, rather large, bordered by a thin 

rim, and weakly labiate behind. The periproct is 

circular or oval, higher than wide; it stands near the 

top of a posterior nearly vertical truncation and is 

barely visible from above. The peripetalous fasciole, 

the only one detected, is very slightly inden.ted between 

the lateral petals. 

Key to the American species of Hemiaster 2 

Posterior petals short, anterior depression 

shallow, apex posterior 

Posterior petals widely spreading_- __ -_ H. humphreysanus 

Posterior petals not widely spreading 

Lateral genital pores close together, 

tuberculation coarse _______ -_---_ H. wetherbyi 

Lateral genital pores far apart, 

tuberculation finer______________ H. arcolensis 

Posterior petals long, anterior depression 

deeper, apex central or anterior 

Apex central, posterior slope steep 

Posterior ocular plates in contact, 

fasciole deeply in curved__________ H. jacksoni 

Posterior ocular plates not in contact, 

fasciole not deeply incurved _______ H. texanus 

Apex anterior, posterior slope not steep_ H. sabinal 

Hemiaster humphreysanus Meek and Hayden 

Plate 12, figures 1-4 

Hemiaster? humphreysanus Meek and Hayden, 1856, Acad. 

Nat. Sci. Philadelphia Proc., vol. 9, p. 147. 

Hemiaster humphreysanus Meek and Hayden. Meek, 1876, 

U. S. Geol. and Geog. Survey Terr. Final Rept., vol. 9, 

p. 5, pl. 10, figs. la-g. 

Hemiaster humphreysanus Meek and Hayden. Clark, 1891, 

Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ., vol. 10, no. 87, p. 77. 

Hemiaster humphreysanus Meek and Hayden. Clark, 1893, 

Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ., vol. 12, no. 103, p. 52. 

Hemiaster humphreysanus Meek and Hayden. Clark, 1893, 

U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 97, p. 88, pl. 48, figs. la-f. 

2 Species not keyed: Hemiaster ungula Morton, H. welleri Clark, H. ktlmmeli 

Clark, H. beecheri Clark, H. delawarensis Clark, H. amelianus Cooke. 
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 31 

Hemiaster humphreysanus Meek and Hayden. Clark, 1915, 

U.S. Geol. Survey Mon. 54, p. 95, pl. 49, figs. 2a-f. 

Hemiaster humphreysanus Meek and Hayden. Dowling, 1917, 

Canada Dept. Mines Mem. 93, p. 47, pl. 35, figs. 1-lc. 

After Meek, 1876. 

'I Hemiaster humphreysanus Meek and Hayden. Ravn, 1918, 

Medelelser om Gr~nland, vol. 56, p. 334, pl. 7, figs. 1, 2. 

Toxaster (Pliotoxaster) humphreysi (Meek and Hayden). Lambert and Thiery, 1924, Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, 

fasc. 6, p. 437. 

Horizontal outline ovate, greatest width in front of 

the center, slightly indented in front; upper surface 

inflated, somewhat higher behind than.in front; lower 

surface gently convex. Apical system at the posterior 

quarter; posterior ocular plates in contact; lateral genital plates in contact, madreporite central, swollen; four 

genital pores. Petals moderately sunken, slightly sinuous; anterior pair much longer than posterior pair, 

diverging at an angle approximating 85 °; posterior 

petals short, diverging at an angle approximating 115°; 

poriferous zones about as wide as interporiferous zones; 

pores oval to moderately elongated, pores of each pair 

separated by a raised thread. Anterior ambulacrum 

subpetaloid; pores circular, pores of each pair separated 

by a small bead. Petals surrounded by a slightly 

indented, wide fasciole. Peristome far forward; sunken; 

strongly labiate behind. Periproct near the top of an 

inconspicuous, nearly vertical depression; slightly 

higher than wide. Tubercles on scaly scrobiculi; lal'gest 

on plastron; tubercles within the fasciole small and 

crowded. Basal part of posterior ambulacra bare. 

Length of type 31 mm; width 30.6 mm; height 20.2 

mm. 

Occurrence.-Wyoming: Upper Yellowstone 150 miles from 

mouth (type). Sec. 18, T. 12 N., R 57 E., Terry Field (U.S.G.S. 

6641-, F. Herald). 

Utah: Westwater Canyon just below the junction of Middle 

and ·west (main) Westwater Creek a short distance above 

Robinson Ranch (U.S.G.S. 13268, E. Spieker and J. B. Reeside, 

Jr.). 

Arkansas: Ouachita River 1.5 miles above Arkadelphia 

(U.S.G.S. 13541, L. W. Stephenson and C. H. Dane). Nacatoch 

Bluff, Little Missouri River (U.S.G.S. 7462~ L. W. Stephenson). 

Mississippi: Bullock's old mill2 miles south of Dumas, Tippah 

County (casts). 

Greenland: Patoot (fide Ravn). 

Geologic horizon.-Upper part of Pierre shale, equivalent to 

Mobridge member in Wyoming; Sego sandstone member of 

Mesaverde formation in Utah; Nacatoch sand in Arkansas; 

Ripley formation in Mississippi; all of late Senonian (Maestrichtian) age. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 331; figured specimens U.S.~.M. 108393, 

108394. 

Remarks.-The type is badly decorticated, but details of the 

sculpture are shown by specimens from U.S.G.S. 6641 and 

U.S.G.S. 13541. 

Hemiaster beecheri Clark 

Hemiaster beecheri Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey Mon. 54, 

p. 96, pl. 50, figs. 2a-c. 

Clark describes this species as follows: 

Test large, cordiform, elevated; upper surface inflated, depressed posteriorly; ambulacra broadly depressed on dorsal 

surface, anterior ambulacrum in broad sulcus. 

Length 70 mm (?);width 59 mm; height 41 mm. 

Occurrence.-South Dakota: Sage Creek. 

Geologic horizon.-Virgin Creek member of Pierre shale, of late 

Campanian age. 

Type.-Peabody Museum, Yale University, 1863. 

Remarks.-Clark says that this species is based on only one 

specimen. His figures show it as a broken cast of the interior 

to which some pieces of shell are attached. 

Hemiaster wetherbyi De Lorio! 

Plate 12, figures 17, 18 

Hemiaster wetherbyi De Loriol, 1887, Recueil zool. Suisse, tome 

4, p. 391, pl. 17, figs. 5, 6. 

Hemiaster lacunosus Slocom, 1909, Field Mus. Nat. History Pub. 

134, Geol. Ser. vol. 4, no. 1, p. 10, pl. 2, figs. 1-7. Not 

Hemiaster lacunosus (Goldfuss) D'Orbigny 1847. 

Hemiaster lacunosus Slocom. Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Mon. 54, p. 97, pl. 50, figs. 3a-d; pl. 51, figs. la-i. 

Hemiaster bexari Clark, 1915, U.S. Geol. Survey Mon. 54, p. 89; 

pl. 46, figs. la-e. 

Hemiaster (Leymeriaster) bexari Clark. Lambert and Thiery, 

1924, Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 6, p. 500. 

Hemiaster (lntergraster) slocumi Lambert in Lambert and Thiery, 

1924, Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 6, p. 504. 

For H. lacunosus Slocom. 

Hemiaster (Leymeriaster) bexari Clark. Adkins, 1928, Texas 

Univ. Bull. 2838, p. 298. 

Hemiaster wetherbyi De Loriol. Lambert, 1935, Soc. geol. 

France Bull., ser. 5, t. 5, p. 372. 

Hemiaster bexari Clark. Stephenson, 1941, Texas Univ. Bull. 

4101, p. 65, pl. 6, figs. 7, 8; pl. 7, figs. 5-7. 

Hemiaster benhurensis Stephenson, 1941, Texas Univ. Bull. 4101, 

p. 67, pl. 7, figs. 8-10. 

Test small, plump, subovate; upper surface somewhat 

higher behind; lower surface inflated; margin rounded, 

truncated behind. Apical system behind the center; 

genital pores inconspicuous; madreporite large and 

tumid. Paired petals wide, straight, closed; moderately 

sunken; anterior pair twice as long as posterior pair; 

poriferous zones wider than interporiferous; pores elongate-oval to drop-shaped; pores of each zygopore connected by a raised thread. Anterior petal straight, 

open, moderately sunken, the depression barely indenting the margin; pores small, zygopores short, pores 

separated by a conspicuous bead. Peripetalous fasciole 

broad, conspicuous, barely indented between the petals. 

Peristome anterior, one-third the total length from the 

margin, strongly labiate behind. Periproct small, 

slightly elongated longitudinally; well up on the vertical 
32 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

posterior truncation. Tubercles large, close together, 

scrobiculate; larger and more deeply scrobiculate on 

lower surface. Sternum bordered by broad, straight 

rugose bands. 

Length of figured specimen 24 mm; width 23 mm; 

height 18 mm. 

Occurrence.-Alabama: Prairie Bluff chalk.-Prairie Bluff, Wilcox County (U.S.G.S. 6793, 11650, L. W. Stephenson). Moscow 

Bluff, Tombigbee River (U.S.G.S. 5643, S. W. McCallie; U.S.G.S. 

6438, L. W. Stephenson). Old Canton Landing, Alabama River, 

14 miles below Pine Barren Creek (U.S.G.S. 6439, L. W. Stephenson). The Larry Johnson Bluff on Alabama River just above 

the mouth of Tearup Creek (U.S.G.S. 310, L. C. Johnson). 

North side of 300-foot knob in NE %. sec. 33, T 20 N, R 2 W, 

Sumter County (U.S.G.S. 18145, W. H. Monroe). Ripley formation.-Demopolis road 3.9 miles northeast of Coatopa (U.S.G.S. 

11663, L. W. Stephenson). 

Mississippi: Prairie Bluff chalk.-About 3 miles south of New 

Albany, Union County, at foot of north-facing slope of Kings 

Creek valley (U.S.G.S. 6872, L. W. Stephenson). Wallerville, 

Union County (U.S.G.S. 9604, L. W. Stephenson and Bruce 

Wade). Pontotoc (U.S.G.S. 6470, 6852, 6853, 17206, L. W. 

Stephenson). 1%_ miles south of Pontotoc (U.S.G.S. 11652, L. 

W. Stephenson and C. W. Cooke). 2 miles south of Pontotoc 

(U.S.G.S. 6856, L. W. Stephenson). Houlka Creek 1 mile east 

of Houston, Chickasaw County (U.S.G.S. 612, T. W. Stanton). 

North-facing slope of Chookatonkchie Creek 3 miles eastnortheast of Houlka Station, SE %. sec. 10, T 12 S, R 3 E, Chickasaw County (U.S.G.S. 17227, W. H. Monroe). East-facing 

bank of Soctahoma Creek, SE corner sec. 4, T. 13 S, R 3 E, 

Chickasaw County (U.S.G.S. 17258, W. H. Monroe). Road cut, 

NE% sec. 14, T 13 S, R 3 E, Chickasaw County (U.S.G.S. 19085, 

W. H. Monroe). SE corner sec. 3, T 13 S, R 3 E, 5.5 miles 

southeast by south of Houlka (U.S.G.S. 17215, W. H. Monroe). 

Gullies on campus of A. & M. College near Starkville, Oktibbeha 

County (U.S.G.S. 6843, W. N. Logan). Ripley formation.-Old 

Tupelo road 5 miles east of Pontotoc (U.S.G.S. 6857, L. W. 

Stephenson). Pontotoc County 4 miles southwest of Troy 

(U.S.G.S. 17261, L. W. Stephenson). SW %. sec. 15, T 11 S, 

R 4 E, 0.4 mile east of Troy (U.S.G.S. 17259, W. H. Monroe). 

Shannon Road %. mile east of Troy (U.S.G.S. 6471, L. W. 

Stephenson). Stream bed near Mobile & Ohio Railroad about 

5 miles northeast of Houston, Chickasaw County (U.S.G.S. 

6851, L. W. Stephenson). 

Arkansas: Saratoga chalk.-Clark County 1.6 miles southwest 

of Okolona (U.S.G.S. 13403, L. W. Stephenson and Carle H. 

Dane). 2.3 miles southwest of Okolona (U.S.G.S. 13405, 

13407, L. W. Stephenson and Carle H. Dane). 2.8 miles southwest 

of Okalona, west ofroad to Nacatoch Bluff (U.S.G.S. 13550, L. W. 

Stephenson). Arkadelphia road 3.3 miles east of Okolona 

(U.S.G.S. 13549, L. W. Stephenson). Big Deciper Creek 5.4 

miles southwest of Arkadelphia (U.S.G.S. 13539, L. W. Stephenson). 7.4 miles southwest of Arkadelphia (U.S.G.S. 13537, L. 

W. Stephenson and Carle H. Dane). Okolona Road about 7.5 

miles southwest of Arkadelphia (U.S.G.S. 13406, L. W. Stephenson and Carle H. Dane). Ozan road 3.1 miles north of Washington, Hempstead County (U.S.G.S. 13408, L. W. Stephenson). 

Ozan road 3.2 miles north of Washington (U.S.G.S. 13410, L. W. 

Stephenson). Road cut at north edge of Saratoga, Howard 

County (U.S.G.S. 13404, L. W. Stephenson). Marlbrook marl.-

Big Deciper Creek 5 miles southwest of Arkadelphia on the lower 

road to Okolona (U.S.G.S. 7460, L. W. Stephenson). Nacatoch 

sand.-Old Marlbrook plantation 6 or 7 miles northeast of 

Washington (U.S.G.S. 7476, L. W. Stephenson). 2 miles north· 

east of Washington (U.S.G.S. 7469, L. W. Stephenson). 2.1 

miles northeast of Washington (U.S.G.S. 7471, L. W. Stephenson). 

Texas: Corsicana marl.-San Antonio road, Bexar County, 

6 miles east of Castroville road (U.S.G.S. 15502, 16156, 16667, 

L. W. Stephenson). Earth tank just north of Castroville road 

1 mile west of crossing of Leon Creek, Bexar County (U.S.G.S. 

15522, L. W. Stephenson). Standard fuller's earth mine 1.25 

mile south by east of Padrone Hill, 14 miles west of San Antonio, 

Bexar County (U.S.G.S. 15520, L. W. Stephenson). Road 

leading south from Castroville road just east of abandoned fuller's 

earth pits 0.8 mile south of Castroville road, about 14 miles west 

by south of San Antonio (U.S.G.S. 15623, L. W. Stephenson). 

Hill south of the Seguin-San Antonio highway 2.5 miles west of 

McQueeney, Guadalupe County (U.S.G.S. 15523, L. W. Stephenson). Neylandville marl.-2.5 miles air line south of Ben Hur, 

Limestone Comity (U.S.G.S. 15543, L. W. Stephenson). 

Geologic horizon.-Navarro group and equivalents (Maestrictian). 

Type.-Unknown; from Wahalak, Kemper County, Mississippi, 

probably from Prairie Bluff chalk. Type of H. lacunosus 

Slocom, from Pontotoc, Miss., Chicago Natural History 

Museum 10342, probably from Prairie Bluff chalk. H. bexari 

Clark, from Bexar County, Texas, U.S.N.M. 8330. Type of 

H. benhurensis Stephenson, from U.S.G.S. 15543, 2.5 miles south 

of Ben Hur, Limestone County, from Neylandville marl, 

U.S.N.M. 76282. 

Figured specimen.-U.S.N.M. 108398, from U.S.G.S. 6856. 

Comparisons.-This species appears to have been mistaken for 

Hemiaster stella (Morton), an Eocene species from New Jersey, 

by Morton (1834, p. 78), D'Orbigny (1854-1860, p. 246), and 

Clark (1915, p. 93), but it is not closely related to that species, 

differing in shape, in the arrangement of its apical plates, and in 

other features. It is higher in front and lower behind than 

Hemiaster bufo as figured by D'Orbigny (1854-1860, pl. 873). 

It is easily distinguishable from Hemiaster arcolensis Cooke, which 

occurs in a lower zone, by its sunken tubercles. 

Hemiaster arcolensis Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 12, figures 12-16 

Horizontal outline suboval; strongly convex above, 

weakly convex below; slightly higher behind than in 

front. Apical system slightly behind the center; four 

genital pores far apart; madreporite small, central, 

tumid. Paired petals straight, wide, evenly concave; 

anterior pair longer than the posterior pair; pores 

plainly elongated; poriferous zones about as wide as the 

interporiferous zones. Anterior ambulacrum wide, 

evenly concave; zygopores very narrow, pores separated 

by an erect, flattened bead; very slightly dep1 essed on 

the margin. Peristome at the anterior third, bordered 

by a continuous raised rim, strongly labiate behind. 

Periproct small, slightly taller than wide, set high up 

on the weakly truncated posterior end. Peripetalous 

fasciole wide, conspicuous, very slightly incurved 

between the petals. Tubercles small, perforated, set on 

small flakelike socles, which are not at all depressed. 

Sternum bordered by smooth ambulacral areas. 

Length 28 mm; width 26.2 mm; height 20.8 mm. 
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 33 

Occurrence.-Alabama: 3 miles northeast of Haynesville, 

Lowndes County, in T 14 N, R 15 E. (D. H. Eargle) 

Geologic horizon.-Arcola limestone member of the Mooreville 

chalk, of Santonian age. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 108397. 

Comparisons.-This species, which is represented only by the 

figured type and two crushed individuals from the same locality, 

resembles to some extent Hemiaster wetherbyi de Lorio! but it is 

wider behind, its apical system is more nearly central, the beads 

on its anterior zygopores are smaller and flattened, its lateral 

genital pores are farther apart, and its tubercles are smaller and 

not at all sunken. It is very similar to Hemiaster minimus 

(Agassiz) as figured by D'Orbigny (1854-1860, p. 225, pl. 872), 

no specimens of which are available for direct comparison. That 

species seems to be somewhat wider behind and somewhat taller. 

Hemiaster jacksoni Maury 

Plate 12, figures 5-11 

Hemiaster cristata Stoliczka? White, 1887, Mus. Nac. Rio 

Janeiro Archivos, vol. 7, p. 261, pl. 27, figs. 4-6. 

?Hemiaster sp. Bose, 1918, Texas Univ. Bull., no. 1856, p. 232, 

pl. 20, figs. 6-10. 

Hemiaster jacksoni Maury, 1925, Serv. geol. e min. do Brazil, 

Mon. 4, p. 519. 

Hemiaster jacksoni Maury. Maury, 1930, Serv. geol. e min. do 

Brazil, Mon. 8, p. 119, pl. 5, figs. 2, 7. 

Hemiaster jacksoni Maury. Maury, 1936, Serv. geol. e min. do 

Brazil, Mon. 11, p. 279, pl. 3, figs. 1, 2, 8-10. 

Leiotomaster bOsei Smiser, 1936, Jour. Paleontology, vol. 10, no. 6, 

p. 476, pl. 64, figs. 4-8. (Error for Leiostomaster.) 

Hemiaster calvini Clark. Jones, 1938, Geol. Soc. America Bull., 

vol. 49, no. 1, p. 135, pl. 13, figs. 17-20. 

Horizontal outline suboval; upper surface inflated; 

lower surface flattish, slightly convex in the sternal 

region; margin rounded; posterior truncation steep. 

Apical system central; four genital plates, lateral perforations closer together than front or back pairs; madreporite extending between the posterior lateral genital 

plates but not separating the posterior ocular plates, 

which are in contact. Petals straight, sunken, rather 

long, the anterior pair the longer; pores elongated, not 

conjugate; poriferous zones somewhat wider than the 

interporiferous. Anterior petal sunken in a broad 

depression, which extends to the peristome, slightly 

indenting the margin; pores small, close together, pairs 

diagonal, the inclination increasing away from the apex. 

Peristome reniform or subpentagonal, with a weak 

posterior lip. Periproct high up on the posterior truncation, plainly visible from above. Peripetalous fasciole 

broad and rather ill defined; strongly indented on each 

side. Tubercles rather widely scattered; larger on the 

anterior end. 

Length of figured specimen from Brazil 26.7 mm; 

width 25.0 mm; height 18 mm. Length of figured 

specimen from Texas 26.6 mm; width 26.1 mm; height 

17mm. 

Occurrence.-Brazil: Sergipe province, probably from Born 

Jesus, near Laranjeiras (U.S.G.S. 16952). 

Mexico: Sierra de Santa Ana, Coahuila (Univ. Michigan 

16669, 16670, T. S. Jones, figured by Jones). 

Texas: Bluff on Sycamore Creek, Kinney County, 1 mile 

above Ross and 12.4 miles southeast of Del Rio (U.S.G.S. 10839, 

10840, L. W. Stephenson). Hill north of highway crossing of 

Lozier Canyon, 21 miles west of Langtry (T. W. Stanton and 

W. P. Popenoe). Highway 90, Rose Ranch, Kinney County 

% mile east of Arenosa Creek, 8% miles east of Brackettville, 

lat. 29°15'55", long. 100°14'50" (U.S.G.S. 18414, R. R. Bennett). 1 mile southwest of Whitehead-Wordlaw ranch house, 

3.5 miles southwest of Standart (U.S.G.S. 23091, R. R. Bennett). 

Geologic horizon.-Eagle Ford shale in Texas, member 2 of 

Indidura formation in Mexico, early Turonian of Brazil. 

Types.-Presumably at the Museu Nacional, Rio de Janeiro. 

Figured specimens U.S.N.M. 108395, 108396. Type of Hemiaster bOsei at Princeton University (fide Smiser). 

Remarks.-The preceding description is based on the figured 

specimen from Brazil (pl. 12, figs. 5-11), one of a mixed collection 

numbered U.S.G.S. 16952. The original label, in C. A. White's 

handwriting, reads "Hemiaster cristatus Stoliczka, Lastro 

Maroim, and Bom Jesus, Province of Sergipe." The matrix 

of the Hemiasters is yellowish earthy limestone like that described (White, 1887, p. 13) at Bom Jesus, near Laranjeiras, 

differing conspicuously from the white oolitic limestone at Lastro, 

just below the town of Maroim. White (1887, p. 268) records 

the species from Lastro, apparently an error caused by the 

mixed collection. Maury (1936, p. 279) repeats this locality 

and attributes the species there to the middle Albian. She 

(Maury, 1936, tables facing p. 34) correlates the limestone at 

Bom Jesus with the lower Turonian of Europe and the Eagle 

Ford shale of Texas, which is the horizon of all the specimens 

from the United States. 

Hemiaster texanus Roemer 

Plate 13, figures 1-4 

Hemiaster texanus Roemer, 1849, Texas, p. 393. 

Hemiaster texanus Roemer. Roemer, 1852, Kreidebildungen von 

Texas, p. 85, pl. 10, fig. 4a-c. 

Hemiaster americanus Giebel, 1853, Naturwiss. Verein fUr 

Sachsen und Thtiringen in Halle Jahresber., Band 5, p. 372. 

Hemiaster texanus Roemer. Clark, 1893, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Bull. 97, p. 86, pl. 47, figs. la-i. 

Hemiaster texanus Roemer. Hill and Vaughan, 1898, U. S. 

Geol. Survey Eighteenth Ann. Rept., pt. 2, pl. 61, figs. 1a, 

lb. (After Clark, 1893, figs. la, lb.) 

Hemiaster texanus Roemer. Hill, 1902, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Twenty-first Ann. Rept., pt. 7, pl. 45, fig. 5. (After Clark, 

1893, fig. la.) 

Hemiaster texanus Roemer. Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Mon. 54, p. 94, pl. 49, figs. la-j. 

Hemiaster texanus Roemer. Adkins, 1928, Texas Univ. Bull. 

No. 2838, p. 299, pl. 34, figs. 4, 5. 

Hemiaster americanus Giebel. Adkins, 1928, Texas Univ. Bull. 

No. 2838, p. 299. 

Horizontal outline cordate-subquadrate, indented in 

front, truncated behind; upper surface rather high; 

lower surface slightly inflated. Apical system nearly 

central, ethmolytic, the madreporite separating the 

posterior oculars, with four perforated genital plates, 

the lateral perforations much closer together than the 

front or back. Paired petals long, straight, deeply 

indent-ed, the anterior pair the longer; poriferous and 
34 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

interporiferous zones equal in width; pores elongated, 

conjugated; open distally. Anterior ambulacrum subpetaloid; plates long and narrow; pores of each zygopore 

round, close together, separated by a small fia.ttened 

bead; deep, rounded ambulacral furrow extending to 

the peristome. Peristome reniform, sunken, strongly 

labiate behind; surrounded by four paired ambulacral 

furrows with small beaded zygopores. Periproct well 

up on a sloping, slightly concave posterior truncation; 

vi~ible from above. Peripetalous fascjole slightly indented between the lateral petals. Tubercles at anterior end surrounded by fine granulation; tubercles on 

plastron resting on scaly socles. Posterior paired 

ambulacra bare underneath. 

Length of figured specimen from the Anacacho 

limestone 38.3 mm; width 36.5 ... nm, height 22.8 mm. 

Occurrence.-Texas: Austin chalk.-Waterfall of Guadalupe 

below New Braunfels (type, fide Roemer). Hondo Creek 5% 

miles west-northwest of Hondo (U.S.G.S. 14711, N.H. Darton). 

Tequesquite Creek 28.8 miles northwest of Eagle Pass, ~ to ~ 

mile below the crossing of the Del Rio road, in Maverick County 

(U.S.G.S. 8229, 10856, L. W. Stephenson). 

Anacacho limestone.-Sabinal River, Uvalde County, 2% 

to 3% miles above Sabinal (U.S.G.S. 1878, T. W. Vaughan; 

U.S.G.S. 7706, 7708, L. W. Stephenson; U.S.G.S. 14708, N. H. 

Darton). Sabinal-Utopia road 5.5 miles north of Sabinal 

(U.S.G.S. 7711). 2 miles north of Sabinal (U.S.G.S. 22407, 

Wm. T. Watkins). Cline Mountain, 2 miles east of Cline 

Station, beds immediately above the Austin chalk (U.S. G .S. 

357, R. T. Hili). Patranca road, 2 miles west of Culebra road 

forks, West San Antonio quadrangle, Bexar County (U.S.G.S. 

16462, A. N. Sayre). Hondo (or Kiner) Creek about i.6 

miles above Kings Water Hole, Medina County (U.S.G.S. 

12908, L. W. Stephenson). 

Taylor marl.-2% miles east by north of Rockwell (U.S.G.S. 

9724, L. W. Stephenson). 

Geologic horizon.-Austin chalk (type), Anacacho limestone, 

and Taylor marl, of Senonian age. 

Figured specimen.-U.S.N.M., 108399, from U.S.G.S. 1878. 

Remarks.-This species has been identified as Hemiaster 

texanus solely on the basis of Roemer's description and figures, 

which appear to be very accurate. None of the specimens 

from the Austin chalk are well enough preserved to make the 

identification certain, but those from the Anacacho limestone, 

which are plentiful and in good condition, agree well with 

Roemer's figures. The type locality is reported as the waterfall 

of the Guadalupe at New Braunfels, where the Austin chalk is 

exposed; but the Taylor marl (equal in age to the Anacacho 

limestone), is mapped not far away. The locality given by 

Roemer may be regional rather than specific, and the type may 

have come from the Taylor marl rather than from the Austin 

cha.lk. 

Hemiaster sabinal Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 13, figures 7-10 

Test large; upper surface high, highest point on the 

posterior keel, and a broad, gently sloping posterior 

truncation; lower surface rounded, with a transverse 

furrow passing across the peristome and a deep, rounded 

furrow extending from the peristome through the 

anterior ambulacrum to the apical system and indenting the margin; anterior end geniculated, the geniculation increased by crushing. Apical system probably 

in front of the center. Paired petals deeply sunken; 

anterior pair straight, widely spreading, long; posterior 

pair somewhat shorter, curved backward, not w~dely 

spreading; pores elongated, conjugate. Pores of anterior ambulacrum small, round, separated by a bead. 

Peristome not far forward, transversely elongated, 

with anterior sides nearly straight, with a high, narrow 

lip behind. Periproct longitudinally elongated, high 

up on the posterior slope, plainly visible from above. 

Peripetalous fasciole strongly indented between the 

lateral petals. 

Length of type (a crushed specimen) 70 mm; width 

67 mm; height 37 mm. 

Occurrence.-Texas: Sabinal River at Dillard's ranch house, 

Uvalde quadrangle (U.S.G.S. 1873, T. W. Vaughan). 

Geolog1'c horizon.-Austin chalk, of Coniacian or Santonian 

age. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 108400. 

Comparison.-Hemiaster sabinal is much larger than H. 

texanus Roemer, which has a central apical system, straight 

posterior petals, a steeper posterior slope, and a fasciole without 

indentations. 

Hemiaster ungula (Morton) 

Plate 14, figures 10-14 

Spatangus ungula Morton, 1833, Am. Jour. Sci., ser. 1, vol. 24, 

p. 131, pl. 10, fig. 6. 

Spatangus ungula Morton. Morton, 1834, Synopsis of the organic remains of the Cretaceous group, p. 78, pl. 10, fig. 6. 

Micraster ungula (Morton). Agassiz in Agassiz and Desor, 1847, 

Catalogue raisonn~ des ~chinodermes (reprint), p. 141. 

Holaster ungula (Morton). Gabb, 1859, Cat. invert. foss. 

Cretaceous, p. 19. 

Not Hemiaster ungula (Morton). Clark, 1891, Johns Hopkins 

Univ. Circ., vol. 10, no. 87, p. 77. 

Not Hemiaster ungula (Morton). Clark, 1893, U.S. Geol. Survey 

Bull. 97, p. 88, pl. 46, figs. 2a-g. 

Not Hemiaster ungula (Morton). Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey, Mon. 54, p. 93, pl. 48, figs. 3a-g. 

Not Hemiaster (Gregoryaster) ungula (Morton). Lambert and 

Thi~ry, 1924, Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 

7, p. 503. 

Horizontal outline cordate, with a weak frontal furrow vertically truncated behind. Petals sunken. Anterior paired petals extending more than halfway to the 

margin, diverging at an angle of nearly 90°. Posterior 

petals shorter, less diverging. Peristome transversely 

oval, apparently strongly lipped. Periproct oval, well 

up on the posterior truncation. 

Occurrence.-Delaware: Delaware and Chesapeake Canal. 

Geologic horizon.-Upper Cretaceous, formation unknown. 

Type.-Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 1503. 

Remarks.-This species is based on a cast of the interior, which 

is somewhat crushed and partly broken. Clark's drawings (1893, 

pl. 46, figs. 2a-g; 1915, pl. 48, figs. 3a-g), which ostensibly repre-
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 35 

sent the type, probably were made from specimens of an Eocene 

species from Vincentown, N. J., in the Philadelphia Academy 

(no. 1502). 

"Hem.iaster" kU.mmeli Clark 

Plate 13, figures 5, 6 

Hemiaster kummeli Clark, 1907, New Jersey Geol. Survey, 

Paleontology ser., vol. 4, p. 303, pl. 17, figs. 1-3. 

Hemiaster kummeli Clark. Clark, 1915, U.S. Geol. Survey Mon. 

54, p. 97, pl. 52, figs. 1-3. 

This species is based on a badly crushed cast of the 

interior with rather long posterior petals much like 

those of Hemiaster texanus Roemer. It is unrecognizable without better-preserved topotypes. 

Occurrence.-New Jersey: Lorillard clay pits near Keyport. 

Geologic horizon.-Woodbury clay, of Campanian age. 

Type.-New Jersey State Museum. 

Hem.iaster delawarensis Clark 

Plate 14, figures 6-9 

Hemiaster delawarensis Clark, 1916, Maryland Geol. Survey, 

Upper Cretaceous, p. 751, pl. 47, figs. 11-14. 

This species, known only from the type, is described 

by Clark as follows: 

Test small, nearly circular, slightly cordiform, truncated 

posteriorly; upper surface slightly convex, elevated posteriorly; 

lower surface nearly flat; sides inflated; apex nearly central, 

slightly posterior of the center; ambulacra slightly depressed, 

posterior pair short, anterior surface broad. Peristome slightly 

depressed. Periproct small, high above posterior margin. Peripetalous fasciole narrow, distinct. 

Length 22 mm.; width 22 mm.; height 17 mm. 

Occurrence.-Delaware: Marl pit south side of Delaware and 

Chesapeake Canal, 1 mile east of St. Georges. 

Geologic horizon.-Probably from the Mount Laurel sand 

(Clark says Matawan formation). 

Type.-Johns Hopkins University (fide Clark). 

Hemiaster welleri Clark 

Plate 14, figures 15-17 

Hemiaster welleri Clark, 1907, New Jersey Geol. Survey, Paleontology series, v-ol. 4, p. 302, pl. 17, figs. 4-6. 

Hemiaster welleri Clark. Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey Mon. 

54, p. 98, pl. 52, figs. 2a-c. 

Hemiaster (lntegraster) welleri Clark. Lambert and Thiery, 

1924, Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 6, p. 504. 

This species is based on a broken cast of the interior, 

which lacks the apical system and the posterior petals. 

It is unrecognizable without better-preserved topotypes. 

In general appearance it resembles Hemiaster wetherbyi 

de Loriol and H. arcolensis Cooke, both of which occupy 

higher horizons in Alabama. 

Occurrence.-New Jersey: Railroad cut 1 mile south of Lower 

Jamesburg. 

Geologic horizon.-Merchantville clay, of Santonian age. 

Type.-New Jersey State Museum. 

Hem.iaster amelianus Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 16, figure 1 

Horizontal outline subovate, with a shallow frontal 

depression; upper surface rather flat, with a conspicuous 

posterior keel; margin rounded. Apical system behind 

the center. Petals depressed; anterior petal unlike the 

others, pores close together, separated by a raised bead; 

anterior paired petals long, slightly flexuous at; the ends, 

not widely spreading; posterior paired petals much 

shorter, nearly in line with the anterior pair, the two 

forming an X; pores of paired petalg moderately 

elongated, separated by their own length. Peripetalous 

fasciole not at all indented. Peristo~e and periproct 

unknown. 

Length 30 mm; width 28.5 mm. 

Occurrence.-Guatemala: Airstrip near the Rio de la Pasion at 

Santa Amelia, Peten (U.S.N.M. accession 195206, Barnum 

Brown). 

Geologic horizon.-Campanian? 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 108408. 

Comparison.-Hemiaster amelianus is suggestive of H. 

humphreysanus Meek and Hayden, but its posterior petals are 

much less widely spreading. 

Genus LINTHIA Desor 

Linthia Desor, 1853, Soc. helvetique sci. nat. Actes (Porrentruy) 

(Schweizer. naturf. Gesell. Verh.), p. 278. 

Linthia Merian. Desor, 1858, Synopsis des echinides fossiles, 

p. 395. 

Linthia Merian. Cotteau, 1886, Paleontologie fran~aise, Terrain 

tertiaire, ser. 1, tome 1, p. 206. 

Linthia Desor. Gardner, 1935, Texas Univ. Bull. 3301, p. 109. 

Schizaster (Linthia) Desor. Cooke, 1942, Jour. Paleontology, 

vol. 16, no. 1, p. 41. 

Linthia Desor. Mortensen, 1951, Monograph of the Echinoidea, 

vol. 5, pt. 2, p. 233. (Gives additional synonymy.) 

Type species Escheria insignis Merian, designated by 

Desor (1855-1858, p. 395). This Eocene species has 

been figured by Desor (1855-1858, p. 395, pl. 43, fig. 9), 

Cotteau (1885-1889, p. 232, pl. 70), and by Mortensen 

(1951, p. 235, fig. 116), who copies Desor's figure. 

Linthia insignis is a large species, with central apical 

system, which is broken in the type; long, straight 

sunken petals, the anterior pair longer and more widely 

spreading than the posterior pair; mod~rately sunken 

anterior ambulacrum; a peripetalous ·fasciole, which is 

deeply indented in all interambulacral areas; and lateral 

fascioles. 

Linthia differs from Schizaster, to which it was 

referred as a subgenus by Cooke (1942, p. 41) in its 

central apical system, its straight petals, and its longer 

posterior petals. It resembles Schizaster in its complement of fascioles and in its api~al system, which is 

plainly ethmolytic in all the species known to me. It 
36 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

resembles Hemiaster in many features but differs from 

than genus in the presence of lateral fascioles. Moreover, the apical system of many species of Hemiaster 

is ethmophratic. 

Linthia variabilis Slocom 

Plate 14, figures 18-25 

Linthia variabilis Slocom, 1909, Field Mus. Nat. History, Geol. 

Ser., vol. 4, no. 1, p. 12, text fig. la-c; pl. 3, figs. 1-11. 

Linthia variabilis Slocom. Clark, 1915, U. S. Geol. Survey 

Mon. 54, p. 99, pl. 54, figs. la-1. 

Linthia variabilis Slocom. Stephenson, 1927, U. S. Natl. Mus. 

Proc., vol. 72, no. 2706, p. 10, pl. 5, figs. 1-7. 

Linthia variabilis Slocom. Stephenson and Monroe, 1940, 

Mississippi G~ol. Survey Bull. 40, p. 280, pl. 10, figs. 1-5. 

Linthia variabilis Slocom? Stephenson, 1941, Texas Univ. Bull. 

4101, p. 68, pl. 8, figs. 1-5. 

Linthia variabilis Slocom. Sanchez Roig, 1949, Paleontologia 

Cubana I, p. 268. 

Test. cordate, vertically truncated behind; vertical 

profile highest behind the apical system. .Apical system 

behind the center, having only four genital plates, all 

perforated, the lateral plates in contact; posterior 

ocular plates separated by the madreporite, which 

extends beyond them. Anterior ambulacrum sunken, 

subpetaloid, the pores small, round, pores of each pair 

within the peripetalous fasciole separated by a small 

bead. Paired petals straight, deeply sunken; pores oval 

or slightly elongated, conjugate; poriferous zones wider 

than interporiferous zones; anterior petals about twice 

as long as posterior pair, less widely spreading. Peristome far forward, sunken, strongly labiate behind. 

Periproct large, higher than wide, at the top of the 

posterior truncation, scarcely visible from above. 

Peripetalous fasciole deeply indented between the 

lateral petals; lateral fascioles meeting below the periproct. Basal part of posterior ambulacra having a 

shagreened surface; remainder of base covered with 

large tubercles on scaly socles; tubercles on upper 

surface much smaller and crowded. 

Length of figured specimen 24.2 mm; width 24.4 mm; 

height 18.5 mm. 

Occurrence.-Mississippi: One Mile Run, south edge of Pontotoc, on the Houston road (type, A. W. Slocom; U.S.G.S. 6470, 

6852, L. W. Stephenson; U.S.G.S. 11652, L. W. Stephenson and 

C. W. Cooke; 17206, L. W. Stephenson and W. H. Monroe). 

Southwest edge of Pontotoc (U.S.G.S. 6853, L. W. Stephenson). 

One mile east of Pontotoc (U.S.G.S. 6855, L. W. Stephenson). 

Owl Creek, 2% miles northeast of Ripley (U.S.G.S. 8309, E. N. 

Lowe). Wallerville, Union County (U.S.G.S. 9604, L. W. Stephenson and Bruce Wade). Route 15, sec. 16, T 6 S, R 3 E, 

Union County (U.S.G.S. 18077, W. H. Monroe). 

North Carolina: West side of Hilton Park, Northeast Cape 

Fear River (U.S.G.S. 4143, L. W. Stephenson). 

Arkansas: High bluff on Ouachita River 1.5 miles above Arkadelphia (U.S.G.S. 13541, L. W. Stephenson and C. H. Dane). 

Texas: Six miles east of Castroville (U.S.G.S. 16156, L. W. 

Stephenson); Hill south of Seguin-San Antonio highway 2.5 

miles west of McQueeney, Guadalupe County (U.S.G.S. 15523, 

L. W. Stephenson). 

Geologic horizon.-Prairie Bluff chalk in Mississippi, Peedee 

formation in North Carolina, N acatoch sand in Arkansas, Corsicana marl in Texas; all of late Senonian (Maestrichtian) age. 

Types.-Chicago Natural History Museum, type of L. variabilis. Figured specimens: U.S.N.M. 76251 (Stephenson and 

Monroe, 1940); U.S.N.M. 76283, 76284 (Stephenson, 1941); 

U.S.N.M. 73448 (pl. 14, figs. 18-21); U.S.N.M. 108401 (pl. 14, 

figs. 22-25). 

Genus PRORASTER Lambert 

Proraster Lambert, 1895, Carte geol. det. de la France Mem., 

Recherches sur la craie superieure, pt. 1, chap. 4, p. 256. 

Proraster Lambert. Lambert, 1907, Soc. geol. France Mem., 

tome 14, p. 103. 

Hemiaster (Proraster) Lambert. Lambert and Thiery, 1924, 

Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 6, p. 506. 

Hemiaster (Proraster) Lambert. Lambert, 1927, Museo Ciencias 

Nat. Barcelona Mem., ser. geol., vol. 1, no. 1, p. 51. 

Proraster Lambert. Adkins, 1928, Texas Univ. Bull. 2838, p. 299. 

Proraster Lambert. Mortensen, 1951, Monograph of the 

Echinoidea, vol. 5, pt. 2, p. 228. 

Type species Schizaster atavu.~ .Arnaud, by eliminat.ion. .As originally described, Proraster included two 

other species, Spatanguslacunosus Goldfuss (not Leske) 

and Schizaster antiguus Cotteau, but these two have 

lateral fa~cioles, which fact excludes them from Proraster (Lambert and Thiery, 1909-1925, p. 506). 

Proraster atavus (.Arnaud) was originally described in 

Cotteau (1883, p. 179, pl. 12, figs. 5-10), whose figures 

show short sunken posterior petals, long flexuous anterior paired petals, a deeply sunken anterior ambulacrum, 

which strongly indents the margin, four equally spaced 

genital pores. The madreporite extends backward and 

barely separates the posterior oculars. The peristome is 

far forward, strongly labiate behind. .A peripetalous 

fasciole is barely indented. The periproct is well up on 

a posterior vertical truncation. The flexuous petals and 

the deep anterior depression resemble Schizaster, but 

the species lacks lateral fascioles. Mortensen (1951, p. 

229, fig. 110) copied three of .Arnaud's figures, and 

Lambert (1927, p. 50, pl. 3, fig. 23) figures a specimen 

from Spain. 

Proraster dalli (Clark) 

Plate 15, figures 1-5 

Hemiaster dalli Clark, 1891, Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ., vol. 10 

no. 87, p. 77. 

Hemiaster dalli Clark. Clark, 1893, Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ. 

vol. 12, no. 103, p. 52. 

Hemiaster dalli Clark. Clark, 1893, U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 97, 

p. 89, pl. 48, figs. 2a-e. 

Hemiaster dalli Clark. Clark, 1915, U.S. Geol. Survey Mon. 54, 

p. 90, pl. 47, figs. 1a-f. 

Hemiaster (Proraster) dalli Clark. Lambert and Thiery, 1924, 

Nomenclature raisonnee des echinides, fasc. 6, p. 506. 

Proraster dalli (Clark). Lambert, 1926, Soc. geol. France Bull., 

ser. 4, t. 26, p. 273. 
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 37 

Proraster dalli (Clark). Adkins, 1928, Texas Univ. Bull. 2838, 

p. 300. 

Hemiaster dalli Clark. Stephenson, 1941, Texas Univ. Bull. 

4101, p. 63, pl. 6, figs. 1-4. 

Horizontal outline cordiform, deeply indented in 

front, truncated behind; longitudinal profile highest behind the apical center, thence sloping steeply backward 

to the vertical truncation, and more gently forward. 

Lower surface moderately tumid. Apical system well 

back of the center; four genital pores, the side two very 

close together and very far away from the other pair; 

ethmolytic, the madreporite extending between and far 

beyond the posterior oculars. Anterior ambulacrum 

deeply excavated, the depression extending to the 

peristome; zygopores short, the pores round or oval, 

separated by a small bead. Paired petals deeply excavated, the forward pair about twice as long as the 

rear pair; anterior petals bent forward near the apex, 

flaring slightly outward near the distal ends; posterior 

petals straight, diverging at an angle of about 70°. 

Peristome sunken, covered by a strongly arched posterior lip. Periproct longitudinally oval; high up on the 

posterior truncation. 

Length of figured specimen from U.S.G.S. 17990 

33.1 mm; width 31.1 mm; height 21.5 mm. 

Occurrence.-Texas: Anacacho limestone.-Bexar County 

(type). Grosebacher road 1 mile south of the Patranca road, 

Bexar County (U.S.G.S. 16465, A. N. Sayre). Grosebacher 

road, Bexar County, 1.2 miles southeast of Patranca School 

(U.S.G.S. 17990, A. N. Sayre). Anacacho (U.S.G.S. 16765, J. A. 

U dden). Rio Medina at Siphon No. 2, 4 miles north-northwest 

of Rio Medina, Medina County (U.S.G.S. 12904, L. W. Stephenson). Left bank Nueces River 0.3 mile above the Southern 

Pacific Railway bridge, Uvalde County (U.S.G.S. 15340, L. W. 

Stephenson and party). 

Corsicana marl.-Cut on San Antonio road 6 miles east of 

Castroville (U.S.G.S. 15502, L. W. Stephenson). Earth tank 

just north of Castroville road 1.2 miles west of crossing of Leon 

Creek, Bexar County (U.S.G.S. 15522, L. W. Stephenson). 

&eologic horizon.-Anacacho limestone (of Campanian age) 

and Corsicana marl (Maestrichtian). 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 19114; specimen figured by Stephenson 

U.S.N.M. 76280, from U.S.G.S. 15502; specimens figured herein 

U.S.N.M. 108402, 108403, from U.S.G.S. 17990, 12904. 

Remarks.-The specimens from the Corsicana marl are smaller 

than those from the Anacacho limestone, and their posterior 

petals seem to be a trifle more diverging. 

Genus MICRASTER Agassiz 

Micraster Agassiz, 1836, Soc. sci. nat. Neuch~tel Mem., t." 1, p.184. 

Micraster Agassiz. Agassiz 1839, Allg. schweizerischen Gesell. 

gasammten Naturw. neue Denkschr., Band 3, (art. 3) p. 25. 

Micraster Agassiz, 1840, Catalogus ectyporum Echinodermaturn 

fossilium, p. 15. 

Micraster Agassiz. Agassiz and Desor, 1847, Catalogue raisonne des echinodermes, p. 129. 

Micraster Agassiz. D'Orbigny, 1855, Paleontologie fran~aise, 

Terrain cretace, ser. 1, tome 6, p. 201. 

Micraster Agassiz. Desor, 1858, Synopsis des echinides fossiles 

p. 360. 

Micraster Agassiz. Cotteau and Triger, 1869, :e:chinides du 

departement de la Sarthe, p. 432. 

Micraster D'Orbigny. De Loriol, 1873, tchinologie helvetique, 

pt. 2, p. 368. 

Micraster Agassiz. Wright, 1878, British fossil Echinodermata 

from the Cretaceous formations, p. 270. 

Micraster Agassiz. Pomel, 1883, Classification methodique et 

genera des echinides, p. 42. 

Micraster Agassiz. Duncan, 1889, Linnean Soc. London Jour., 

Zoology, vol. 23, p. 240. 

Micraster Agassiz. Lambert, 1895, in Grossouvre, Recherches 

sur la craie superieure, p. 150. 

Micraster Agassiz. Savin, 1903, Soc. d'histoire nat. de Savoie 

Bull., tome 8, p. 79. 

Micraster Agassiz. Mortensen, 1950, Monograph of the Echinoidea, vol. 5, pt. 1, p. 364. Gives additional synonymy. 

Type species Spatangus coranguinum Leske (1778, 

p. 221, pl. 23, figs. C, D), designated by Pomel, from 

the White Chalk of England. This well-known species 

has been figured by Wright (1864-1882, p. 271, pl. 62). 

Characteristics are its central, plainly ethmophract 

apical system; its short anterior petal with small round 

pores separated by a bead; its straight paired petals 

with oval or slightly elongated pores; its anterior, 

strongly lipped peristome; its periproct high on a 

posterior vertical truncation; and its subanal fasciole. 

Some species admitted to the genus show "a trace of a 

pseudo-semi-peripetalous fasciole" (Smiser, 1935, p. 

80). 

Two American species have heretofore been referred 

to Micraster. One of these, though not typical, is 

retained in the genus; the other, "Micraster" elevatus 

Sanchez Roig (1949, p. 218, pl. 47, figs. 4, 5), cannot 

represent Micraster because it has well-defined peripetalous and marginal fasciolas but apparently no 

subanal fasciole. 

Micraster uddeni Cooke, n. sp. 

Plate 15, figures 6-9 

Test cordate, with a deep, narrow sulcus extending 

from the apex to the peristome. Apical system slightly 

posterior, ethmophract, with four genital pores, posterior ocular plates large, in contact. Petals sunken, 

straight, the anterior pair twice as long as and slightly 

more widely spreading than the posterior pair; pores of 

paired petals elongate, poriferous zpnes equalling the 

interporiferous; pores of anterior ambulacrum in echelon, 

separated by a small bead, zones much narrower. than 

the interporiferous. Peristome far forward. Periproct 

terminal, about halfway up the posterior truncation. 

Subanal fasciole partly preserved. 

Length 59 mm; width 60 mm; height about 32 mm. 

Occurrence.-Texas: Tequesquite Creek, Maverick County, 

(U.S.G.S. 16768, J. A. Udden). 

Geologic horizon.-Austin chalk, of Santonian age. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 108404. 

Comparisons.-This species is flatter and has longer petals 
38 S~ORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

than Micrasler coranguinum (Leske). It is proportionately 

shorter and wider than M. americanus Stephenson, and its 

posterior petals are shorter. 

:Micraster americanus Stephenson 

Plate 15, figures 10-13 

Micraster (Plesiaster) americanus Stephenson, 1941, Texas Univ. 

Bull. 4101, p. 69, pl. 7, figs. 1-4. 

Test subcordate, higher behind than in front, with 

rounded lateral and anterior margins, truncated behind. 

Apical system slightly behind the center, ethmophract, 

with four genital pores. Anterior ambulacrum broadly 

depressed, the depression extending to the peristome 

and indenting the margin; petaliferous part extending 

about halfway to the .margin, zygopores inclined, 

divided by a bead; pores small, round. Paired petals 

depressed, extending more than halfway to the margin; 

anterior pair the longer, nearly straight, widely diverging; posterior pair slightly curved backward; pores 

elongate-oval, similar in all zones; poriferous zones 

somewhat narrower than interporiferous zones. Peristome at the anterior third, surrounded by a rim; 

strongly lipped behind. Periproct vertica1ly elongated, 

small, well up on a vertical posterior truncation, barely 

visible from above. Subanal fasciole complete: peripetalous fasciole extending around the paired petals 

but indistinct or wanting at the anterior end. Tubercles crenulated, perforated. 

Length of holotype 30 mm; width 26.5 mm; height 

19.5 mm. 

Occurrence.-Texas: 6 miles east of Castroville, cut in San 

Antonio road in Bexar County (U.S.G.S. 15502, type, L. W. 

Stephenson). San Geronimo Creek about 2 miles below Cliff, 

10 miles northeast of Castroville, Medina County (U.S.G.S. 

10870, L. W. Stephenson). 

Arkansas: Ozan road 3.1 miles north of Washington, Hemp-

·stead County (U.S.G.S.13408, L. W. Stephenson). Okolona road 

about 7.5 miles southwest of Arkadelphia, Clark County (U.S.G.S. 

13406, L. W. Stephenson and C. H. Dane). Gullies north of 

Okolona road 7.4 miles southwest of Arkadelphia (U.S.G.S. 13537, 

L. W. Stephenson). Road cut at north edge of Saratoga (U.S.G.S. 

13404, L. W. Stephenson). Columbus road % mile east of 

Saratoga (U.S.G.S. 9732, L. W. Stephenson). Big Deciper Creek 

5 miles southwest of Arkadelphia on the road to Okolona (U.S.G.S. 

7460, L. W. Stephenson). Big Deciper Creek below the lower 

Okolona road where road to Curtis and Gurdon forks to left, 

5.4miles southwest of Arkadelphia (U.S.G.S. 13539, L. W. Stephen- son). 

Mississippi: Wallerville, Union County (U.S.G.S. 9604, L. W. 

Stephenson and Bruce Wade). Southwest edge of Pontotoc 

near the embankment of M. J. & K. C. Ry. (U.S.G.S. 6853, L. W. 

Stephenson). Troy-Shannon road 0.25 mile east of Troy, Pontotoc County (U.S.G.S. 6471, L. W. Stephenson). 

Geologic horizon.-Corsicana marl (Texas); Saratoga chalk 

(Arkansas); P,airie Bluff chalk (Mississippi); Ripley formation 

(Mississippi, U.S. G.S. 6471); all of Maestrichtian age. 

Type.-U.S.N.M. 76285. Figured specimen U.S.N.M. 108405, 

from U.S.G.S. 13404. 

Remarks.-The specimens from Arkansas are nearly twice as 

large as the type but resemble it in other features. Those from 

Mississippi are intermediate in size. 

Micraster americanus differs from the type species, Micraster 

coranguinum, in having a fairly distinct partial peripetalous 

fasciole, but in other generic features they seem closely related. 

This difference can scarcely be of greater than subgeneric rank. 

Micraster americanus was referred to Plesiaster as a 

subgenus by Stephenson, but the type of Plesiaster 

peini (Coquand) as figured by Gauthier (Mortensen, 

1951, p. 368, fig. 174) has pores in its odd ambulacrum 

like those of the paired petals. The American species 

may be more like Diplodetus, which, however, has a 

complete peripetalous fasciole. Both Plesiaster and 

Diplodetus are treated as genera in the Brissidae by 

Mortensen (1951, pp. 368, 370). Both, however, are 

said (Mortensen, 1951, p. 355) to have ethmophractic 

apical systems in contrast to the ethmolytic system of 

Brissus, in which the madreporite extends between 

the posterior ocular plates. This seems ample reason 

for excluding them from the Brissidae. 

REFERENCES 

Agassiz, Louis, 1836, Prodrome d'un monographie des radiaires 

ou echinodermes: Soc. sci. nat. NeuchAtel Mem., tome 1, pp. 

168-199. 

--- 1839, Description des echinodermes fossiles de la Suisse; 

Premiere parte, Spatangoides et clypeastroides: Allg. 

schweizer Gesell. gesammten Naturwiss. Neue Denkschriften, Band 3, pp. viii+ 101, 14 pls. 

---and Desor, E, 1847, Catalogue raisonne des families, des 

genres et ~des especes de Ia classe des echinodermes. 167 

pp., pls. 15, 16. Paris. Reprinted from Annales des 

Science naturelles, ser. 3, tomes 6-8. 

Brongniart, Alexander, 1822, Description geologique des environs 

de Paris. 

Clark, W. B., 1891, A revision of the Cretaceous Echinoidea of 

North America: Johns Hopkins Univ. Circ., vol. 10, no. 87, 

pp. 75-77. 

--- 1893, The Mesozoic Echinodermata of the United States: 

U.S. Geol. Survey Bull. 97, 207pp., 50 pis. 

---1907, Class Echinoidea; unsigned section in Weller, Stuart, 

1907, New Jersey Geol. Survey, Paleontology ser., vol. 4, 

pt. 2, chap. 3, pp. 275-305, pis. 6-18. 

---1915, The Mesozoic Echinodermata of the United States: 

U.S. Geol. Survey Mon. 54, pt. 1, pp. 9-100, pis. 1-54. 

Cobban, W. A., and Reeside, J. B., Jr., 1952, Correlation of the 

Cretaceous formations of the western interior of the United 

States: Geol. Soc. America Bull., vol. 63, pp. 1011-1044, 

2 figs., 1 p .. 

Cooke, C. W., 1941, Cenozoic regular echinoids of eastern United 

States: Jour. Paleontology, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1-20, pls. 1-4. 

--- 1942, Cenozoic irregular echinoids of eastern United 

States: Jour. Paleontology, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 1-62, pls. 1-8. 

--- 1946, Comanche echinoids: Jour. Paleontology, vol. 20, 

no. 3, pp. 193-237, pis. 31-34. 

--- 1948, Arbia and Dixieus, two new genera of echinoids: 

Jour. Paleontology, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 606-607. 

---, 1949 Pygurostoma pasionensis, a Cretaceous echinoid 

from Guatemala: Am. Mus. Novitates, no. 1422, 3 pp. 

Coquand, H., 1862, Geologie et paleontologie de la regio'l 

sud de la Province de Constantine: Soc. emulation de la 

Provence Mem., tome 2, pp. 5-342. 
AMERICAN UPPER CRETACEOUS ECHINOIDEA 39 

Cotteau, G., 1861-1867, Echinides: Paleontologie franQaise, 

Terrain Cretace ser. 1, tome 7, 892 pp., pis. 1007-1204. 

--- and Triger, Jules, 1855-1869, Echinides du Department 

de Ia Sarthe condsieres au point de vue zoologique et stratigraphique, 455 pp., 65 pls. Paris. 

---Peron, P. A., and Gauthier, V., 1876-1884, Echinides 

fossiles de 1' Algerie, vol. 1, Paris. Fasc. 1, 1883, Terrain 

jurassique, 79 pp., 8 pls.; fasc. 2, 1884, etages tithonique & 

neocomien, 99 pp., 9 pis.; fasc. 3, 1876, etages urgo-aptien 

et albien, 90 pp., 8 pls.; fasc. 4, 1878, etage cenomanien, 

pp. 1-144, pls. 1-8; fasc. 5, 1879, etage cenomanien (concluded), pp. 145-234, pls. 9-16. 

--- 1881, Description des echindes fossiles de l'ile de Cuba: 

Soc. geol. Belgique Annales, tome 9 (Mem.), pp. 3-49, 

pis. 1-4. 

---- 1883, Echinides jurassiques, cretaces et tertiaires du 

sud-ouest de la France: 198 pp., 12 pls. La Rochelle. 

--- 1885-1889, Echinides eocenes: Paleontologie franQaise, 

Terrain tertiaire, ser. 1, tome 1, 672 pp., pis. 1-200. 

Desor, Edouard, 1842, Des galerites: Monographies d'echinodermes vivans et fossiles, par Louis Agassiz, Mon. 3, iv+94 

pp., 13 pis. 

---1855-1858, Synopsis des echinides fossiles, 490 pp., 44 pls. 

Durham, J. W., 1953, Scutellaster and Anorthoscutum: Jour. 

Paleontology, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 147-149. 

Egozcue y Cia, Justo, 1897, Description de los equinoides f6siles 

de la isla de Cuba por M. G. Cotteau adicionada por D. 

Justo Egozcue y Cia: Comision del Mapa Geol6gico de 

Espana Bol., vol. 21, 98 pp., 29 pls. 

Goldfuss, G. A., 1826, Petrefacta Germaniae. 2d ed., pt. 1, 1862, 

234 pp.; pt. 2, 1863, 298 pp.; pt. 3, 1863, 120 pp., 201 pis. 

Gregory, J. W., 1890, Some additions to the Australian Tertiary 

Echinodermata: Geol. Mag., n. ser., dec. 3, vol. 7, pp. 

481-492, pis. 13, 14. 

Hawkins, H. L., 1911, Teeth and buccal structures in Conulus: 

Geol. Mag., new ser., dec. 5, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 7Q-74. 

--- 1917, Morphological studies on the Echinoidea Holectypoida and their allies, II, The sunken tubercles of Discoides and Conulus: Geol. Mag., n. ser., dec. 6, vol. 4, no. 

5, pp. 196-205. 

--- 1917, Morphological studies on the Echinoidea Holectypoida and their allies, VI, The buccal armature of Conulus 

albogalerus, Leske: Geol. Mag., new ser., dec. 6, vol. 4, no 

10, pp. 433-441, pl. 28. 

--- 1919, Morphological studies on the Echinoidea Holectypoida and their allies, IX, Pyrina, Conulus, and Echinoneus. Geol. Mag., new ser., dec. 6, vol. 6 (vol. 56), no. 10, pp. 

442-452. 

Kew, W. S. W., 1920, Cretaceous and Cenozoic Echinoidea of the 

Pacific Coast of North America: Univ. California Pub. in 

Geology, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 23-236, pis. 3-42, 5 text figs. 

Lambert, Jules, 1895, Essai d'une monographie du genre Micraster et notes sur quelques echinides: in Grossouvre, A. de, 

Recherches sur la craie superieure, pt. 1, fasc. 1, chap. 4, pp. 

149-267. 

--- and Thiery, P., 1909-1925, Essai de nomenclature raisonnee des echinides. 605 pp., 15 pls. Chaumont. 

--- 1910, Liste critique des echinides du calcaire a Baculites 

du Co ten tin ( etage aturien): Soc. linneenne de N ormandie 

Bull., ser. 6, tome 2, pp. 3-30, pl. 1. 

--- 1927, Revision des echinides fossiles de la Catalogue: 

Museo de Ciencias Naturales de Barcelona, Mem6rias, ser. 

geol., vol. 1, no. 1, 102 pp., 4 pls. 

--- 1936, Quelques nouveaux echinides fossiles de cretace du 

Mexique: Soc. geol. France Bull., ser. 5, tome 6, pp. 3-6, pl.l. 

Leske, N. G., 1778, Jacobi Theodori Klein Naturalis dispositio 

Echinodermatum, 278 pp., 54 pls. 

Linnaeus, Carolus, 1758, Systema naturae, ed. 10, 823 pp. 

Lorio I, P. de, 1900, Notes pour servir a 1' etude des echinodermes 

VIII: Revue suisse de zoologie, tome 8, fasc. 1, pp. 55-96, 

pls. 6-9. 

Maury, C. J., 1936, 0 Cretaceo de Sergipe: Brazil, ServiQo geol. 

min. Mon. 11, 283 pp., 28 pls. 

Monroe, W. H., 1946, Correlation of the outcropping Upper 

Cretaceous formations in Alabama and Texas: U. S. Geol. 

Survey Oil and Gas Investigations, Prelim. Chart 23. 

Mortensen, Theodor, 1928-1951, A monograph of the Echinoidea. 

Copenhagen. Vol. 1, 1928, 551 pp., 88 pls.; vol. 2, 1935, 647 

pp., 89 pis.; vol. 3, pt. 1, 1940, 370 pp., 77 pis.; vol. 3, pt. 2, 

1943, 553 pp., 56 pis.; vol. 3, pt. 3, 1943, 446 pp., 66 pls.; 

vol. 4, pt. 1, 1948, 371 pp., 14 pis.; vol. 4, pt. 2, 1948, 471 pp., 

72 pis.; vol. 5, pt. 1, 1950, 432 pp., 25 pls.; vol. 5, pt. 2, 1951, 

593 pp., 64 pls.; index, 1951, 63 pp. 

Morton, S. G., 1834, Synopsis of the organic remains of the Cretaceous group of the United States, 88 pp., 19 pls. Philadelphia. Reprinted from Am. Jour. Sci., vols. 17, 18, 1830. 

Orbigny, Alcide d', 1854-1860, Echinoidea irreguliers: Paleontologie franQaise, Terrain cretace, ser. 1, tome 6, 596 pp., 

pls. 801-1006. (Completed by G. Cotteau.) 

Pomel, N. A., 1883, Classification methodique et genera des 

echinides vivants et fossiles, 131 pp., 1 pl. Alger. 

Sanchez Roig, Mario, 1949, Los equinodermos f6siles de Cuba: 

Paleontologia Cubana I, pp. 3-302, 50 pls. La•Habana. 

Savin, L., 1903, Catalogue raisonne des echinides fossiles de la 

Savoie: Soc. d'Histoire naturelle de Savoie Bull., ser. 2, 

tome 8, pp. 59-249, 3 pls. 

Slocom, A. W., 1909, New echinoids from the Ripley group of 

Mississippi: Field [Chicago] Mus. Nat. History Pub. 134 

(geol. ser., vol. 4, no. 1), 16 pp., 3 pls. 

· Smiser, J. S., 1935a, A revision of the echinoid genus Echinocorys 

in the Senomian of Belgium: Mus. royal d'Histoire naturelle 

de Belgique Mem. no. 67, 51 pp., 2 pls. 

---1935b, A monograph of the Belgian Cretaceous echinoids: 

Mus. royal d'Histoire naturelle de Belgique Mem. no. 68, 

98 pp., 9 pis. 

Stephenson, L. W., 1927, Additions to the Upper Cretaceous 

invertebrate faunas of the Carolinas: U. S. Natl. Museum 

Proc., vol. 72, art. 10 (no. 2706), 25 pp., 9 pls. 

--- 1941, The larger invertebrate fossils of the Navarro group 

of Texas: Texas Univ. Bull. 4101, 641 pp., 95 pls. 

--- King, P. B., Monroe, W. H., and Imlay, R. W., 1942, 

Correlation of the outcrop;::>ing Cretaceous formations of the 

Atlantic and Gulf Coastal Plain and Trans-Pecos Texas: 

Geol. Soc. America Bull., vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 435-448, 1 pl. 

Warren, P. S., 1926, A marine fauna in the Birch Lake sandstone, 

Alberta: Royal Soc. Canada Trans., ser. 3, vol. 20, sec. 4, 

pp. 9-14, 1 pl. 

Weller, Stuart, 1907, A report on the Cretaceous paleontology of 

New Jersey:. New Jersey Geol. Survey Paleontology Ser., 

vol. 4, pt. 2. 

White, C. A., 1887, Contributions to the paleo~tology of Brazil: 

Mus. Nac. do Rio de Janeiro Archivos, vol. 7, pp. 1-273, 

pls. 1-28. 

Whitney, F. L., 1916, The Echinoidea of the Buda limestone: 

Bull. Am. Paleontology, vol. 5, no. 26, pp. 87-120, pis. 15-23. 

Woodward, S., 1833, Outline of the geology of Norfolk. 

Wright, Thomas, 1864-1882, Monograph of the British fossil 

Echinodermata from the Cretaceous formations, 371 pp., 

80 pis. Palaeontographical Soc. Mon. 

INDEX 

[Italic numbers indicate descriptions] 

A 

abruptus, Cassid·ulus. ________________________________________________________ _ 

Abstract_ ____________ ------------------------ _________ ---------- _____________ _ 

Page 

21 

1 

aequorea, Hardouinia ______________________________________________ 3, 19, !S, 24, pl. 8 

aequoreus, Cassidulus. ____________________________________ ------------- _ _ ___ _ _ 22 

alamedensis, Hemiaster _______ ---------- ______ _____________ _ ______ ____ __ _ _ __ ___ 1 

albogalerus, Conulus. __________________ -------- ___ ___ _ _ __ _ ____ __ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ ___ 11 

algira, Ananchytes. ___ ------------------------------------------------ ________ 26 Pseudananchys_______ _ ___ ___ _ __ ____ __ __ _ ___ _ __ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ ___ ___ ___ _ __ _ _ ___ _ _ 26 

amelianus, Hemiaster ________________________________________________ 3, 30, 35, pl. 16 

americanus, Hemiaster __ ---------------------------------· -------------------- 33 

Micraster ___________________________ --------------------------------- 3, 38, pl. 15 

Micraster (Plesiaster) _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ __ __ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ ____ __ _ ____ _ __ _ __ _ _ ___ 38 

Ananchytes _ __ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ __ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ ___ _ ___ _ __ _______ _ _ __ __ ___ 24 

algira. __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ ___ _ __ __ __ _ __ _ _ _ ___ 26 

gibba____ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ ___ _ ___ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ ___ _ _ __ ___ _ ___ _ ______ __ _ 25 

ovata____ __ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ ____ __ _ __ _ ____ ___ 25 

pustulosa. ___ ____ ____ _ _ ____ __ ____ ____ _______ ____ ___ _ _______ _______________ 25 

striata. ______________ -____________________________________________________ 25 

texana. _ _ _ _ __ ____ _ __ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ ___ ___ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ 25 

Anorthoscutum interlineatum__ _ ____ __ _ _ _ __ ____ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ ____ ___ _ __ ___ _ _ __ _____ 2 

Anthobrissus__ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ ___ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ ___ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ ___ _ _ _ 17 

antiguus, Schizaster _ __ ___ ___ ____ ___ ____ _ ___ ___ ____ ___ _____________ __ __________ 36 

apicalis, Faujasia. _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ ___ _ __ ___ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ ____ _ __ _ __ _ ___ _ __ __ _ __ 14 

Pygurus ________________________________ -__________________________________ 13, 14 

arcolensis, Hemiaster ____ ---------------------- _____________________ 3, 30, 32, 35pl. 12 

arnaudi, Codiopsis _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ ___ ___ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ ___ ___ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ 8 

Asterobrissus____ _ _ ___ __ _ _ ___ _ ___ _ _ _ ____ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ ___ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ __ 17 

ataciana, Globator ___________________________ --------------------------------- _ 12 

atavus, Proraster __ _ __ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ ___ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ S6 

Schizaster______ ____ _________ ______ ____ __ ____ __ ____ ___ ___ ______________ ________ 36 

Australanthus__ ___ __ _ ___ ___ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ 19 

B 

Barnumia_ _ __ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ ___ ___ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ ___ _ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ 29 

browni. __ ------------------------------------------ ______________ 3, 29,30, pl.16 bassleri, Cassidulus________________ _ __ _ ___ ___ ____ ______ ____________ ____ ___ _ ___ 22 

Hardouinia ____ _______ - _________________________________________ 3, 19, 22, 23, pl. 7 

Procassidulus (Hardouinia) _ _ _ __ _ ____ _______ _________ __ _________ __________ 22 

beecheri, Hemiaster ________________________________________________________ 1, 3, 30,31 

benhurensis, Hemiaster __ _ _ _ ___ ___ ____ _ ___ _____ ____ ___ ________ ___________ _ ___ _ _ 31 

berryi, Cassidulus __ ___________________________________________________________ 20, 21 

Hardouinia. _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ ___ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ 20 

bexari, Hemtaster ________ ___ ____ _ __ ___ ___ _ ____ ___ _________________ _____________ 31 

Hemiaster (Leymeriaster) ____ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ __ :n bOsei, Leiotomaster _ _ _ _ ____ ___ ___ ___ ________ __ _ ___ _________ _____ _______ ___ _____ 33 

browni, Barnumia __ __________________________________________________ 3, 29, 30, pl. 16 

bufo, Hemiaster ___________________________ ----·-------- ____ ___ __________ ______ 32 

Spatangus_ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ _ _ 30 

burckhardti, Petalobrissus____ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ __ __ _ __ ____ _ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ ___ _ _ ___ 17 

c 

californicus, Catopygus _______________________________________________________ _ 

Hemiaster ________________________________________________________________ _ 

calvini, Hemiaster _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ 33 

cancri, Echiniteslapis _________________________________________________________ 16, 19 

Procassiduluslapis ____ ____________________________________________________ 22, 23 

Cardiaster _____________________________________________________________________ 26,27 

curtus ___________________________________________________________ 1, 3, 28, pl. 11 

deciper ___________________________ , ______________________________ 3, S'l, 28, pl. 10 

granulosus .. _ __ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ ___ __ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ 28 

hilli_ _____ ----------------------------------------------------------------- 28 leonensis ____________________________________________________________ 3, 28, pl. 11 

marytandicus ________________________________ --------------------- 2, 3, 28, pl. 14 smocki. ______________ _____________________________________________ 2, 3, 28, pl. 11 

Page 

caribaearum, Cassidulus ___ __ --------- _ --------------------------------------- _ 19 

carinatus, Catopygus ___ ___________ -------------------------------------------- 16 

Nucleolztes. ___________ ------------ _ --- ______ -------------------------- __ -_ 15 

Cassidulldae. _______ -------------------------- _ --------------------- _ -- _ --- _ _ 14 

Cassidulus __ ______________ ---------- _ ---- __ ----------------------------------- 17, 19 

abruptus __ _____ ------------ ___ -- _- ---------------------------------------- 21 

aequoreus ___________________________ -__ ------------------------ __ --- ____ -- 22 

bassleri. ___________________________ --------------------------------- __ -_ -- 22 

berryi. _________________________ ----------- ----------------------------- ___ 20, 21 

caribaearum ____ ________ ---- ___ --- __ -- __ ------------------------------ _-- -- 19 

conoideus ________________ - ___ --------------------------------------------- 18 

emmonsi. .. ____________________ -__ --------------------------------------- _ 20, 21 

hemisphericus ____________ -- _______ ---------------------------------------- 18 

intermedius ________________ ---_---_--_-----------------------------------_ 22 

kellumz. __________________ -_______ ---------------------------------------- 21 

longianus. _______________ ------- _ ---------------------------------------- _ 19 

micrococcus _________________________ --_---_------------------------- ___ --_ 21 

porrectus ____ ________________________ -____ ------ __ ------------------- ______ 21, 22 

stantoni. .. ________________ --- _ -- __ --- __ ---------------------------------- _ 23 

subangulatus _____ ________ --- ___ -_ ------------------------------------· ---- 20 

subconicus ______________ --- _______ --- _ ---- _ ------------------------- __ --- _ 19, 20 

subquadratus ___ _____________________ -____ -__ ------------- _-- --- _ ------ __ -_ 19, 20 

taylori. ___________________ --- _ -- _______ -- -- __ :----------------------- _ --- _ 24 

castanea, Nucleolites _____ __________ -------------------------------------------- 12 

Catopygus _ ------------------------------------------------------------------ _ 15 

californicus ____ ------------------------------------------------------------ carinatus ___________________________ -- __ -----------------------------_----_ 16 

fenestratus _______________ -- __ --- __ --- _-- ---------------------------------- 16 

gresslyi. _________________________________ -__ -------- _ ---------------- _ ____ 17 

mississippiensis. ___________________ -- __ --- _ ------------------------- 3, 15, pl. 5 

pusillus ______ ______________________ --------------- _________ ---- ___ 2, 3, 15, pl. 5 

pyriformis ________ -------------------------------------------------- o .• --- 16 

tenuiporus __ ___________________ -- ____ ----- __ ------------------------ _- --- _ 16 

williamsi_ _____ _________ --------------------------------------------------- 16 

Catopygus (Oolopygus) williamsL------------- 7 ----------------------- 2, 3, 16, pl. 5 

cerceleti, Nucleolites _____________________ -____ ----------------------------- ---- 17 

cholamensis, Hemiaster ___________ --- _ ----------------------------------------- chelonium, Faujasia _____________________________________________________ 3, 14, pl.~ 

ciai, Codiopsis _____ ___________ -__ ---------------------------------------------- 8 

Cidaris ________ --------------------------------------------------------------- 4 

cidaris ___________________________________ -___ --- _ --- __________________ ;- __ 

cretosa ___________________________________________________________________ _ 4 

5 

dixiensis ___________________________ --------------------------------------- 5 

hemigranosus ____________________________ --------------------------------- 5 

koenigii _____________________________ -- __ ------- ___ ------------------------ 9 

nahalakensis _________________ -- ___ --------------------------- ------------- 5 

papillata ____ ________________________ -____ ------ _- ------------------------- 4 

tehemaensis _________________________ -------------------------------------- texanus ____________________________________ --------------------- _______ 3, 5, pl.1 

wahalakensis .. _____________________________________ -- ___ -___ --- _--- ---- 3, 6, pl1 

cidaris, Cidaris ________________________ --- _-- ---------------------------------- 4 

Echinus ____________________________ -___ -- __ --- _ -------------------------- 4 

Cidantes scutiger _____________________________ -____ ---------------------------- 5 

Clarkella ____ ____________________________ -------------------------------------- 18 

Clarkiella ________________________________________ ---- --- ___ -- ___ --------- ~ ---- 18 

conoidea. ______________________________ ---- _ ------------------------------ 18 

hemispherica _________________________________ --- ________ ----------- 3, 18, 24, pl. 5 

Clypeaster jlorealis _____________________________ ------------------------------- 23 

geometricus ______________________ ----------------· ------------------------ 14 

Codiopsis _________________________________________ -____ --------------------- -- 1 

arnaudi.. ______________________________________ --------------------------- 8 

ciai. ____________________________________ -- _------------------------------- 8 

doma _____________________________________ -------------------------------- 8 

stephensoni. ________________________________________________ --- _- --- ___ 3, 8, pl. 1 

41 
42 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

Page Page 

( Coenholectypus) planatus, Holectypus_______ _ ______ __ _ _ ___ _ ____ __ _ ___ ___ ___ ___ 10 Echinus cidari8 ______ ___________________________________ -- ______ --- ______ --- __ _ 4 

columbaria, Nucleolites ___ ---------- __ _ __ _ ________ ___ ___ ___ _ _ __ ____ ___ ___ _ ___ __ 15 doma. ________ ----- __________________________ -_ -- ___ ---------- _____ ----- _ _ 7 

completa, Pseudananchys________ ____ _ __ __ __ _ __ ____ ____ _ _ _ __ __ ___ _ ___ _ __ ___ ____ 26 milleri. __________ ------- _______ -- ___ -- ______ ---- _ -- _--- --- __ ------ __ ----- _ 9 

conicus, Echinoconus______ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _____ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ ______ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ __ 11 elevatus, Micraster. __ -------------------------- _________ ------ _________ ------ _ 37 

conoidea, Clarkiella________ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ _ ___ _ _ __ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ _______ __ _ ___ 18 emmonsi, Cassidulw ____ __________________________________ -______ -- ____ -_ ----- 20, 21 

conoideus, Cassidulus ___ ----------------------------------------------- _______ 18 Hardouinia mortoni8. __ ---------------------- ______________________ 3, 19, 20, pl. 5 Cossmannaster __ ____ __ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ ____ _____ __ ___ _ ___ ___ _ __ 18 Epiaster ________ -------- _________________________ -_____ --- _____ ----- ___ --- _- _ _ 29 

Conulus __ ----------------------------------- _______ -------------------------- 10, 12 crassissimus. __ ----------- ____ -- _____________ ---- _ -- _-- _ --- ___ -__ "- _------- 29 

albogalerus ______ ------- _ __ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ ___ __ _ _ ___ _ __ ___ _ _ ___ 11 depressus. ___ ------------- ___ --- _______ -- ___ -- _- _- __ -- _- _- _-- ----- _------- 1 

nucula ___ --------------------------------- ______ ------------------- ____ ___ 12 gibbus _____ ------------------------------_--------- ___ ------------- ___ ----- 29 

stephensoni ___ ----------------------- ________ ------------------------- 3, 11, pl. 3 Escheria insignia __ ---------- ______ ------------ ____ ---------------------------- 35 Coptosoma __ _ -- _ ___ _ ____ ___ ____ __ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ __ _ ____ ___ _ __ __ _ __ __ _ __ _ _ ___ _ __ _ __ __ 6 Exogyra costata ___________ ---- ____________ --------- _______ -- _________ ---------- 20,21 

corangiunum, Micraster _______________________________________________________ 29, 38 ponderosa ____________________ -______ --_- ____ ----_- __ ----_- __ -------------- 26 Spatangus- ______________________ -- __ __ __ __ _ ___ _ __ _ __ __ __ __ __ _ __ _ ___ _ __ ___ 37 expansus, Echinobri8sus ____________ --------- ____ -------------- ____ ------------ 13 

cordiformis, Spatangus ____ ---------------------------------------------------- 21 Cossmannaster __ _____ _ ___ _ __ _ __ ___ _ __ _ _ ___ ___ ____ ___ ___ _ _____ __ _ ____ __ _ __ ___ _ _ 18 F 

conoideus _ _ _ _ ____ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _____ _ _ __ _ ___ _ ______ ___ _ __ _ _ ___ _ ___ _ ___ __ _ ___ _ ___ 18 Faujasia __ ______________________________ -- ______ -______________ -- ______ ---- 13, 16, 17 

hemi8phericus ____ ---------- _ ___ ___ ____ _ ___ _ ____ __ ____ _ ___ ____ ____ __ _ _ __ _ __ 18 apical is ________________ --- ___ --- _______ --- __ ----_-_---_-_-------_-_------- 14 

costata, Exogyra ________________________________________ _______ ---------------- 20,21 

Craginaster __ ------------------------------------ ___ ------------------- _______ 25 

chelonium _____ ------------ ___ ----------------------------------------- 3, 14, pl. 4 

jlorealis _________ -- _____ --- ___ --- ____ -- _____ -_--- _- __ -- _ --- _--- ___ --------- 23 

crassissimus, Epiaster _ _ _ _ __ __ _____ _ __ __ __ __ __ _ ___ _ ___ ___ _ _ __ _ __ ____ _ ______ _ ___ 29 faujasii, Echinolampas _____ --- ___ --- ___ ----- _- _----- _____ ----- _- -------------- 14 

Cretaceous formations, Upper, table__________________________________________ 2 fenestratus, Catopygus ___ _ ----- _- _--- ------------------ _-- --------------------- 16 

cretaceus, Scutellaster _______________________________________________ _ feralis, Holaster __________ --- _____________ ------------- __ ------------ 1, 3, B6, pis. 9, 10 

cretosa, Cidari8 ____ ____ ------ _ ____ __ _ ___ ____ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ __ ____ _ __ _ ____ __ _ ___ __ _ 5 jlorealis, Clypeaster _____ --------------------------------.----------------------- 23 

cribrum, Cyphosoma ____ ---------------- ________ ---------------- ____________ _ _ 6 Faujasia __ ____________ ---------- ______ -------------------- __ ---- ___ ------- 23 

Porosoma___ _ ___ __ ___ __ ____ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ _____ _ _ ___ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ _ 6 Hardouinia _____________ --------- _____________ -------------- _ -- _ 2, 3, 19, 29, pl. 8 

cristatus, Hemiaster ___ ------------- __________________________ ----------------- 33 Procassidulus_ ------ _ ------- __ ------ _------------------------------------- 23 

cubensis, Echinobrissus ___ _________________________ ---------------------------- 17 Pygurus _____________ -_______________ --- ______ --- ___ -- _______ -_- ___ --- _- _- 23 

Phyllobrissus ______ ____________________________ • ______________________ 3, 17, pl. 5 Formations, Cretaceous __ -- _____________________________________ _-____________ 2 

curtus, Cardiaster _____________________________________________________ 1, 3, BB, pl. 11 

cylindrica, Globator ______________________ . __ _ __ _ __ __ ___ ___ _ ___ _______ _ _ _ _ ______ 12 

Cyphosoma_ _ _ _ __ _ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ __ __ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ _____ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ __ _ 8, 9 

cribrum __________________________ -- __ _ __ _ ____ __ _ _ __ _ _ ____ _ _ _ __ _ ____ __ ___ _ _ 6 

delamarrei. _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ __ ___ _ __ _ _ ___ ___ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _____ ___ __ ___ _ _ 8 

hilli_ _____ -------------------------------------------- ------------------- -- 9 mortonL _ _ _ __ ____ ___ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ ____ _ __ _ __ _ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ __ ___ _ ___ _ _____ 9 

G 

Galerites ___________ -- ____ ------- __ ---- _- _--- _ ------- _- __ ---- _- __ -- _-- -------- _ 10 

rotula ___ ______________ ------------ _______ --------- ___ --- _ ----- _ --- ___ ----- 12 

Genera, key to ________ --------- ___ ---------_---------------_--------- ___ ---__ 4 

geometricum, Pygurostoma ___________________________________ ___________ 2, 3,14, pl. 4 

geometricus, Clypeaster _____ -_____ -- ______ -_- _____ -- ______ -_ __ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ ___ 14 

Pygurus _____________________ -- ______ -_______ -_ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 14 

D 

dalli, Hemias~er _ ----- _________________________________________________________ 36, 37 

Hemiaster (Proraster) _ _ ____ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ ___ ___ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ ______ 36 

Proraster ___ --------------------------------- _______________________ 3, 96, pl. 15 

danei, Isomicra~er ___________________ ---------- _________________________ 3, 29, pl. 11 

deciper, Cardiaster _ ------------------------------ ___ ----------------- 3, 27, 28, pl. 10 delawarensis, Hemiaster ___________________________________________ 2, 3, 30, 95, pl. 14 

delamarrei, Cyphosoma__ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ ____ ___ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ ___ _____ 8 

Hachiosoma_ _ _ ___ ____ _ __ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ __ ___ _ ___ ___ _ ___ ___ 8 

delgadot, Lefortia_ _ ___ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ ____ _ __ _ _ __ _ ____ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ ____ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ 17 

Pomelia ___ ----------- _________________________ ---------------------- ___ __ 16 

depressa, Nucleolites_____ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ ___ _ __ _ ____ __ __ __ ___ _ __ __ ___ _ ___ _ __ _ 12 

depressus, Epiaster ____________________________ -~- _ _ _____ _ _ ___ _ __ ____ _ ___ ___ ___ 1 

desmoulinsii, Globator _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ ___ _ _ 12 

.Diplopodia hilli. ----- __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ ___ __ _ _ _ _ _ ___ __ _ _ ___ _ __ ____ _ __ _ __ _ 9 

dixiensis, Cidaris___ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ ___ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ ___ __ __ __ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ _ _ _ __ 5 

.Dixieus _________ -- ____ -- __ _ __ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _______ ___ __ _ ___ _ _ ___ _ _____ _ ____ 9 

gibba, Ananchytes. ------------ ______ -------------------------- __ -------------- 25 

gibbus, Epiaster ____________ ------------- _ ----- _ ------------------- _ -------- ___ 29 

Globator _____________ -----------------.--------- _ ------.-------------------- __ 11 

ataciana ... _ ... --- _ ------------------------.. -------.. ------------------ _- 12 

cylindrica __________ ----------------- _- _- _- ____ -------- _ ------- ___ -- ___ . __ . 12 

desmoulinsii. _____________ . __________________________ --. __ _ __ _ ___ _ __ ___ ___ 12 

nucleus. ____ . ___ . __________________ ---_---- _________ -----_________________ 12 

petricoriensis __ _____ . __ . --- __ . ------ ___ ---------- __ . __ -_. _______ --- __ _ _____ 12 

vaughani_ ____ _________ ---------------------- ___ . -------- ___________ 3, 11, 12, pl.4 

Gonioclypeus ______________ ---- ___ ---.----------- _ -----.-----.-- _ ------ ___ ----- 19 

subangulatus ___ _____ . ___ ---- ___ --------- _______ --- __ -- _- ______ --- _________ 19, 20 

Goniphorus. _______ -__ --- ___ ---- ___ --- ___ ----- _- ___ ----------- ____ ---- __ ---- __ 6 

granulosus, Cardiaster --- _ ----- ________ ---------------------------------------- 28 

Spatangus. ____________________ ----- __________ ------------ ____ __ ___ ___ ___ _ 27 

gracilis, Oolopygus. _______ ------ _ --------------- ___ --------------------------- 16 

gresslyi, Oatopygus .. ---- _ -------------------------.----- ---------------------- 17 

(Gregory aster) ungula, Hemiaster _________________ --- _________ --------- ________ 34 

doma, Codiopsis ___ _________________________ ----"-- __ _ __ _ _ _______ ____ ______ ___ _ 8 H 

Echinfts_ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ __ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ ___ ____ ___ _ _ _ _ ___ _ ____ ____ __ _ __ _ ___ 7 Hardouinia. ________ ---------------------------------------------------- 14, 17, 18,19 .Dorocidaris texanus_____ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ __ _ __ __ __ _ __ 5 aequorea. ___________ -------------------------- _________ ---- 3, 19, 22, 23, 24, pl. 8 Dumblea____ _ ___ __ ____ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ ___ ____ _ __ _ ____ _ ___ __ __ __ ___ _ _ 7 bassleri. _ -------------------------------------------------- _ -- 3, 19, 22, 23, pl. 7 

symmetrica ______ ___________ ---------- _____ ------------------------- _______ 7 berryL ___________ ----.------------ _ --------- _ --- ___ ----- _ ----------------- 20 jlorealis ________ -~- _____________________________________________ 2, 3, 19, 23, pl. 8 

E kellumi. ______________________________________________________ 3, 19, 21, 22, pl. 7 

Echinanthus __________________________________________________________________ 17, 19 mcglameryae _____________________________________________________ 3, 19, 24, pl. 8 

mortonis __________________________________________________________________ 19, 20 micrococros __________ : __________________________________ 3, 19, 21, 22, 23, pls. 6, 7 

Ech~~~~;o~:::_ ~~~~~i:~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~ 16, ~: mortoni_ __ ___________________________ . ____________________________________ 19, 20 

mortonis ___________________________________________________ 3, 19, 22, 23, 24, pl. 5 

Echinobrissus cubensis _____ _________ -------------------------- ____ _______ ______ 17 mortonis emmonsi_ ____________________ --------------------- _____ 3, 19, 20, pl. 5 

expansus ____ -____________________________ ~---- _____ -------- _ _ _ _ _ ___ ___ ___ _ _ 13 porrecta ______________________________ -_______ -_______ - _____________ ._---__ 21 

requienii_ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ ___ ___ _ _______ ___ _ _____ _ _ ___ _ ___ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ ____ 17 potosiensis ___________________________ ---- __________ ------ _________________ 19,22 

texan us___________________________________________________________________ 13 stantonL. --------------------- _____________ ---------------- 1, 3, 19, 23, 24, pl. 8 Echinoconus __________________________________________________________________ 10, 11 stetsoni. ___ -___ ------------- _ --------------- _ ------------- -------------- 20, 21 conicus _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ ____ __ _ _____ ______ ___ _ ______ _ __ _ _ 11 subquadrata __ ______ -- __ ----- _ ----- _ ------- ___ -_- _ --------- ___ --- _______ --- 20 

Echinocorys ___ ---- ____________________ --- ________ ----------- ___ __ __ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ 24 taylori. _______ -- _- ______ --- ___ ------ _ ------- _ ----- _- _ ------ __ -- 1, 3, 19, 24, pl. 8 scutatus____ _ _ _ _ __ _ ___ _ ___ __ __ __ _ ___ _ ___ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ __ ____ _ ____ __ __ _____ 25 (Hardouinia) bassleri, Procassidulus __ ---------- ____ -______ -------------------- 22 

texan us ____ ---------------------------------------------- _______ 3, 25, pis. 10, 11 Hemiast(ff _______________ ------------- ________ _. ___________ ---------- __________ 30,36 

vulgaris ______________________________________ ---------- ________ ----------- 25 alamedensis ____________________ -_____ -_ --- ______ • ____ -------- __________ -__ 1 

striata__________________________________________________________________ 25 amelianus ________ -------------------------------------- ________ 3, 30, 35, pl. 16 Echinolampas faujasiL. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ _ _ _ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ ___ _ _____ __ 14 american us ____ -_________ -_____ -.-.------- ___ -------.--- _____ ------------- 33 
INDEX 43 

HemiaBter-Continued Page 

arcolensis---------------------------------------------------- 3, 30, 32, 35, pl. 12 

beecherL __ -------------------------------------------- _____ ----------- 1, 3, 30, 31 

benhuremis ___ ------------------------------------------------------- ___ __ 31 bexari__ ----- ____ ---- ___ --- _ _ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 31 

bufo- __ --- ___ ---- __ --- _ --------- ____ -- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 32 

californicus __ ------------------------------------------------- __ ______ ____ 1 calvinL _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ ___ _ _ _ ___ _ _ __ ___ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 33 

cholamensis_ -------- ____ ----------------------------------------- ___ __ __ __ 1 cristatus ___ ------ __ --- _ --- __ --- ______ -- _ ___ _ __ _ __ ___ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ 33 

dallL _____ ---------------------------------------------------------------- 36, 37 delawm:ensis ___________________________________________ 2, 3, 30, 35, p1.14 

humphreysanus----------------------------------------------- 1, 3, 30, 35, pl. 12 jacksonL _______________________________________________________ 3, 30, 33, pl. 12 

kiLmmelL----------------------------------------------------- 2, 3, 30, 35, pl. 13 lacunosus __________ -_- ___ --- ___ ---- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ ___ _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ __ _ ___ __ 31 

ungula----------------------------------------------------- _____ 3, 30, 34, pl. 14 

minimus __ ______ ------------------------------------ __________ ------------ 33 

ore,gonensis ____ ________ ----------- _____ -------- _____ ----------------------- 1 

3abinaL ________________________________________________________ 3, 30, 34, pl. 13 

tea:anus_ -------------------------------------------------- 3, 30, 33, 34, 35, pl. 13 welleri_ __________________________________________________________ 2, 3, 35, pl. 14 

wetherbyi_ ________________________________________________ 3, 30, 51, 32, 35, pl. 12 

Hemiaster (Gregoryaster) ungula _________ ------------------____________________ 34 

Hemiaster (Integraster) Blocumi_ __ -------------------------------------------- 31 welleri ___ --- _______ --- ___ -- _ -- _______ -_ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 35 

Hemiaster (Leymeriaster) bexari. __ -------------- _____ -------- ________ _ ______ __ 31 

Hemia3ter (Proraster) _ ---------------------------------- ____ -------------- __ __ 36 

dallL ______ -- __ -___ --- __ ------ _- _ ------------- ___ -___ --- _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 36 

Hemicidaris sp __ ----------------------------------------------- ______ --- __ _ ___ 5 Hemicodiopsis _____ _____ - _________ ------- __ ----------------- _______ ________ _ _ __ 7 

hemtgranosus, Cidaris ____ --------------------------------- ________ ------------

hemisph&rica, Clarkiella--------------------------·--------------------- 3, 18, 24, pl. 5 

hemisphericus, Cassidulus_ ------------------------------------- _________ _ ___ __ 18 

Cossmannaster ______ -------------------------- ____ _______ _ _ _____ ___ __ _ __ _ _ 18 

hilli, Cardiaster ___________ ------------------ ______ ----------- __ ____ ___ _ __ _ __ _ _ 28 

Cyphosoma ______________ -------------------------------- _ _ __ ___ __ _ _____ _ _ 9 

Diplopodia ____ _____ --------- _____ ------ __ --- __ ------------- _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ 9 

Phymosoma _____ ________________ ---------------- _______ ___ _ _ _ ___ __ _ ___ __ _ _ 3 

Pseudodialkma ____ ____________________________ ------------- ______ _ ___ _ __ _ _ 9 

Tetragramma _______ ---- _ -------- _____ ---------------- ___ __ ____ ___ _ ___ __ _ _ 9 

Hola.~ter __ -------------------------------------------------------------------- 26,27 

ferali3----------------------------------------------------------- 1, 3, 26, pis. 9,10 laeois ______________ -___ -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 26 

sylvaticus _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 26 

ungula ____ -------------------------_______________________________________ 34 

Holectypua (Caenholectypus) planatus ___ -------------------------------------- 10 Holopneustes_ _ __ _ __ _ ___ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 29 

hondoensis, Sttlenia. ___ ---------- _____ ------- ______________________________ 3, 6, pl. 1 

Rachiosoma ____ _____ ------- __________________ ------------- ___________ 3, 7, 8, pl. 3 

humphre.gsanus, Hemiaster ____ -------------------------------------- 1, 3, 30, 35, pl. 12 humphregsi, Toxaster (Pliotoxaster) ___ _ _ ___ ________ ____ _____ ____ ____ ___ _ __ _ __ _ _ 31 

Hyposalenia ____________ ------------------------------------------------- ____ _ 6 

Identification, key, echinoid genera___________________________________________ 4 

insignia, Escheria _____ ----------------------------------------- _________ ------ 35 

Linthia ___ -------------------------- ____ ------------------------ __ ___ _____ 35 

(lntegrastf4') slocumi, Hemiaster __ --------- _______ ---------------------------- 31 

(lntegraster) welleri, Hemiaster __ -------------------------------- __ _ ___ _______ _ 35 

interlineatum, Anorthoscutum ___ ---------------------------------------- _ _ __ __ 2 Introduction ___________ ---____________________________________________________ 1-2 

intermedius, Cassidulus ___ ------------------------------------ ____________ ____ 22 

Isomicraster ______ ------------------- __ ------------------------------ ______ _ ___ 29 

danei_ ________________ ----------------------------------------------- 3, 29, pl. 11 

merricanu8---- ------------------------------------------------------------ 29 

roasL--- ------------------------------------------ __ ------------- ___ 3, 29, pl. 11 stolleyi__ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ 29 

(Isomicraster), MicrastM" ____ ------------------------------- ___________________ 28, 29 

J 

jacksoni, Hemiaster __________ ---------- _______________________________ 3, 30, 33, pl. 12 

K 

kellumi, Cassidulus ______ -------------------------------------------- ____ _____ 21 

Hardouinia----------------------------------------------------- 3, 19, 21, 22, pl. 7 

koenigii, Cidaris ___ ---------------------------------------------- _ ______ __ _ ____ 9 Phymosoma____ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ___ ___ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 8 

kiLmmeli, Hemiaster ____ -------------------------------------------- 2, 3, 30, 35, pl. 13 

L· 

lacunosus, Hemiaster __________ ------ __________ -- _ ------------------------- ___ _ Spat angus _______________________________________________________________ _ 

laevis, Holaster _____ ------------------- _____ ------- _ ------------- __________ -- __ 

lanieri, Lanieria _____ ______________ ---------------------- __ ---------- _____ --- __ 

Lanieria _____ _______________ --- _ ----- _ -- ____ -------------------- __ ---------- __ 

Page 

31 

36 

26 

10 

10 

laneri_ ________________ - ---- ___ -______ ------------------------ _- _____ -_ _ _ _ 10 

uvaldana ______________________________ _____ ----------------- __________ 3, 10, pl. 3 

lapis cancri, Echinites _______________________ -------------------- _____________ 16, 19 

Procassidulus __ ____________________________ ----- __________________________ 22, 23 

Lefortia ___ _______________________________________________ -- _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ __ 16 

delgadoi____ __ _ __ _ ___ _ __ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ ____ _ _ __ ___ _ __ _ __ ___ _ ___ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ 17 

trojana __ ______________________________________________________________ 3, 17, pl. 4 

Leiostomaster _ _ _ _ _ __ _ ___ _ ___ ___ _ __ _ __ _ ______ _ _ __ _ ___ __ _ _ _ _____ _ __ _ __ __ _ _ ___ __ _ 33 

boseL _ _ _ __ _ ___ ___ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ ___ ______ _ ___ __ _ _ __ __ __ ___ __ _ __ _ __ 33 

leonensis, Cardiaster ------------------------------------------------------ 3, 28, pl. 11 Linthia __________________________________________________ ---- _ __ ____ __ _ ___ _ __ _ 35 

insignis ________________________________ ----------- ___ ------------- _ _ __ _ __ _ 35 

variabilis ________________________________________ ----- _ --- ____________ 3, 36, pl. 14 

(Linthia), &hizaster _____________________________ ------ ___ -------- __ _ __ _ __ _ ___ _ 35 

(Leymeriaster) bexari, Hemiaster ___ -------------------------------------------- 31 

longianus, Cassidulus _______ --------------- _ ---------- ___ -------------------- _ 19 

M 

mcglameryae, Ilardouinia _____ __________________________________________ 3, 19, 24, pl. 8 

marylandicus, Cardiaster _ ----------------------"----------- ----------- _ 2, 3, 28, pl.19 

meridanensis, Pedinopsis ___ ________________ ----------------- _ ---- _ __ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ 7 

mexican us, lsomicraster _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ ______ _ _ __ _ ___ ___ _ _ _ ___ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ ____ _ 29 

Jl,ficraster ________________________________________ --··----- ---- __ ----- _____ ---- _ 29, 37 

american us __________________________________________ -----. __________ 3, 38, pl. 15 

coranguinum ____ __________________________________________________________ 29, 38 

elevatus ____ --------- ____________________ . ____________ -_ -- __ __ _____ __ _ _ _ _ __ 37 

uddeni_ ______ ------ __________________________________________________ 3, 37, pl. 15 

ungula _____ . __________ ------_----- ____ --------------_----------- __ -------_ 34 

Jl,.ficraster (lsomicraster) ___________ ----- _______________________________________ 28, 29 

Micraster (Plesiaster) americanus_____ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ ___ ___ ____ _ _ _ _ __ _ ___ 38 

micrococcus, Cassidulus_ _ _ ___ __ __ __ _ __ ___ __ _ ____ _ __ _ ___ _ _ __ __ __ ___ ____ __ _ _ __ _ _ 21 

Hardouinia _____ --------------------- ____ ----------- ___ --- 3, 19, 21, 22, 23, pis. 6, 7 milleri, Echinus___ __ _ __ _ _ __ ____ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ ___ __ __ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ _ 9 

minim us, Hemiaster _____ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ ___ _ ___ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ 33 

minor, Nucleopygus__ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ ____ __ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ 13 

mississippiensis, Catopygus ____________________________________________ ____ 3, 15, pl. 5 

montmollini, Pygurus ____________________________________ -- _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ 19 

morgani, Pygurostoma _____ _________________________________ , __________________ 14, 15 

mortoni, Cyphosoma _____ __________________ -------- _______ ---- _ -- _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ 9 

Hardouinia _______________________________________________________________ 19, 20 

Procassidulus _______________ ---------- _____ ---------------------------- ___ 20 Rachiosoma __ __________________________________________________________ 3, 9, pl.1 

mortonis, Echinanthus _____ ____________________________________________________ 19, 20 

H,ardouinia _________ ---------------- _ ----------------------- 3, 19, 22, 23, 25, pl. 5 Pygorhynchus __ ________________________ ---- ______________________ ---- __ __ _ 19 

mortonis emmonsi, Hardouinia __ --------------------------------------- 3, 19, 20, pl. 5 

N 

nahalakensis, Cidaris__ _ ___ _ ____ ___ __ __ ___ __ _ _ __ ____ ____ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ 5 

nodulosus, Spatangus __ -------------------------------------------------- _____ 26 

Nucleolites __ ________________________________ ------- _ -- ___ ------------ ______ --- 17 

carinatus ___________________ ----- _______________________ ---_--_____________ 15 

castanea _______________ ---------- ____ -------------------------- ______ ----_ 12 cerceletL _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 17 

columbaria __ _____________________________________________________________ ·_ 15 

depressa ______ __________________________ ---------- _____________ ----- __ __ _ __ 12 

pyriformis. ____________ ------ ______________________ ------ ____________ --_-- 16 

requienii_ __ ______________ -------- ______ -_ -- _____________ -____________ -- ___ 17 

wilderae __________________________________________________________________ 17, 18 

Nucleopygus ____ ______________________________________________________________ 12, 17 

minor_____________________________________________________________________ 13 

texanus ______________________________________________________________ 3, 13, pl. 4 

Nucleopyrina_ _ _ ___ _ _ __ ___ _ ______ _ __ _ ____ __ __ ____ _ _ _ __ _ __ ____ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ ____ __ 11 

nucleus, Globator ____________________________ • __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ ___ _ ___ _ __ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ 12 

nucula, Conulus ____________ ------- __ ____ _ ___ ___ _ ___ _ ___ ___ ___ _ ____ __ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ 12 

Nuculites scutata_____ __________ _ _ ____ __ __ _ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 13 

0 

Oolopygus ________________________ ----- ______ ----- _______ --------------------- 16 

Oolopygus gracilis_____________________________________________________________ 16 

pyriformis ___________________________________________ --___________________ 16 

(Oolopvgus) williamsi, Catopygus ______________________________________ 2, 3, 16, pl. .'i 

oregonemis, Hemiaster __ ----------------------------- _____ ____ ____ __________ __ 1 

ovata, Ananchytes_ ------------------------------- _______ -· _ -------- ___ -c- __ __ 25 
44 SHORTER CONTRIBUTIONS TO GENERAL GEOLOGY 

p Page 8 Page 

papillata, Cidaris _ ---------------- _________ ----------- _ ___ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ _________ 4 sabinal, Hemiaster _ -------------------------------------------------- 3, 30, 94, pl. 13 

paBionensis, Pygurostoma _______________________________________________ 3, 14, pl.16 Salenia. ----------------------- __ ----------------------------------------- _ ___ 5 

Pedinopsis ___ ____ ------ -~---------- _ __ ____ _ _ _____ _ _________ ____ ______ _ __ ______ 7 hondoensis _______ ------ _____________ ---------------------------------- 3, 6, pl. 1 

meridanensis __ __ ------------------- ____________ -------- ___ _____ ___ __ ____ __ 7 

pondL --------------------------------------- _________________________ 3, 7, pl. 2 

sergipensis __________________________________________ -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 6 

Schizaste.r --------------------- ____________________ ------------- ___________ --~ _ 36 Peltastes _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 6. antiguus _____ --------- ____ ----------- _- __ -------------- _- _- _______ -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ 36 

Petalobrissus burckhardtf _______ ------------- _______ ____ _______ _ __ _ __ _ ___ ___ ___ 17 atavus ______________ ------- ___ ------------------------------------ _ _____ _ _ a6 

petricoriensis, Globator ________ ------------------ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ ______ ___ _ __ _ __ 12 (Linthia) _____ ------ _ ---------------- ___ ---------------------------------- 35 

Pyrina _____ ---------------------------------------- ___ _ _ __ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ __ ___ 12 scutata, Nuculites _____________________ --------------------------------- ____ _ __ 13 

Phyllobrissus _____ --- _ ___ ___ _______ ____ _______ _______ __ _ __ _ ___ _ ___ __ _ ___ ___ ___ 17 scutatus, Echinocorys _____ __________ ------------------------------- __________ __ 25 

cubensis __ - _- ---------------------------------- ______________________ 3, 17, pl. 5 Scutellaster cretaceus ____________ _______________ ------------------------------- 1 

pusillus ______ --------- _ ------------ _____ ______ _ ____ _ _ _ ____ __ _ ____ __ __ _ _ ___ 15 scutiger, Cidarites ____ ---------------------------------------------------- ___ __ 5 Phymosoma ______ ____________________________ •__ _ ___ _ ___ ___ ___ _ __ _ ______ _ ___ ___ 9 sergipensis, Salenia _____ --- ____ --- ____ -- _- ____________ ---- __ _ ___ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 6 

hitli_ _____ ----------------------------------------------------------------- 3 slocumi, Hemiaster (lntegraster) ____ ------------------------------------------ 31 koenigiL ____ ------ _ ___ _______ ____ ___ ___ _______ _ __ _ __ _ ___ _ _ __ __ _ __ __ ___ ____ 8 smocki, Cardiaster ---------------- _____ .c _ ------------------- ___ -------- 2, 3, 28, pl. 11 Piliscus ____ ____ ------- _____________ ---- _ ------ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ __ ____ _ ___ _ _ _ ______ __ 7 Spatangus bufo ___ ------------------------------------------------------- _ ____ 30 

planatus, Holectypus ( Coenholectypus) -------------- _ ___ ___ ____ _ ___ _ __ ___ _ __ _ __ 10 coranguinum ____ _ ----- ___ -____ ------- ______ ---------- ______ -_ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 37 

(Plesiaster) american us, Mtcraster_ --------------------------------- ___ ________ 38 cordiformis __ -_--- _---- __ --- __ -------- _--------------- ___ -- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 27 

(Pliotoxaster) humphreysi, Toxaster ___ ----------------------------------------- 31 granulosus _________ --- _____________ --____________ --- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 27 

Pomelechinus____________ __ _____ __ ___ _ __ __ ___ _ __ _ __ __ __ ____ _____ ___ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ 8 lacunosus __________ -_- _____________ -- ____________ ---- _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ 36 

Pomelia ________ ---------------- ____ ----- __ _ ___ ______ _ __ _ __ _ ___ _ ___ ___ _ __ _ ___ __ 16 nodulosus _____ ___ ------ ____ ----------------------------------------------- 26 delgadoi_ __ -------- ___ ------- ___ --- _ _ __ ____ ______ _ __ _ ___ ____ ___ _ __ _ _ __ __ _ __ 16 ungula _____________________________________________ --_____________________ 34 

Pomeliopsis ___ ___ ------- _ __ __ _____ _ __ ___ _________ __ _ _ ___ __ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ ___ ___ _ __ 16 stantoni, Cassidulus __ ---------------------------------------------------- _ __ _ _ 23 

ponderosa, Exogyra ____ __________________ ------------ _ __ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _____ ·. 26 Jfardouinia_ ------------------------------------------------ 1, 3, 19, 29,24, pl. 8 pondt, Pedinopsis _________________________________________________________ 3, 7, pl. 2 Procassid1tlus. -------------- ______ ---------------------- _ ----------- _ __ _ __ ZJ 

Porobrissus ____ ------- _ __ _ _ __ _______ __ __ _______ __ ___ _ ______ _ ___ ____ __ _ __ ____ _ _ 13 stephensoni, Codiopsis _____________________ ·--------------------------------- 3, 8, pl. 1 

Porosoma __ ___ ------------ ______ ------- _ --------------- _______________ -------- 6, 8 Conulus_ ---------------------------------------------- _______________ 3, 11, pl. 3 

cribrum ___ _ ------- ________ -- _ ---- __ - ___ ------------- ____ _ ____ __ _ _ _ _ _____ _ _ 6 Pseudananchys ____ _____ --------------------------------------- __ --- __ 3, 26, pl. 9 reesidei_ ____________________________________________________________ 1, 3, 6, pl. 1 Stereocidaris ____ ------------------- ___ --------------------- _ ------ __ ----- __ ___ 5 

porrecta, hardouinia __ -------------------------------------------------------- 21 stetsoni, Hardouinia __ _ ---- ________ ---- ______ -______ ------ ____________________ 20, 21 

porrectus, Cassidulus ___________________________________________ _______________ 21,22 stolleyi, Isomicraster ___ ------------ _____ ------------------------ __ ------- ___ _ __ 29 potosiensis, Hardouinia ____ ____________________________________________________ 19, 22 Stratigraphic chart ___ ---------------------------------------------------_____ 2 

Procassidulus_ ---------- ______ ------- ______________________________________ 16, 19, 22 striata, Ananchytes ___ --- _ -- ________ -_ ---- __ --- _ ------------- _____ -- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 25 

ftorealis_ __ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ ____ __ _ __________ ___ ___ _ ___ ___ _ ___ ___ _ __ _ __ _ _____ 23 Echinocorys vulgaris ___________ -------_----------------------______________ 25 

lapis cancri ______ --- ______________________________________________________ 22, 23 subangulatus, Cassidulus ___ ________ ---------------------------- _____ ---------- 20 

mortonL _________ ---- __ _ _______ _ __ _ _ ___ __ ____ _ __ _ ___ ___ ____ _ __ _ __ ____ _ ____ 20 Gonioclypeus _____ _ ------- _______ ----------------------------- _____________ 19, 20 

stantoni_ __ ____ ---------- _ ------ _ __ _ ___ ____ ___ _ ___ ______ __ __ _ ___ _ _ _ _ ___ ___ _ 23 subconica, Procassidulus --- _______ - _------ ______ -___ --- _-- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ 20 

subconica ___ -------- ___ ___ _______ _ __ __ ___ ____ ____ __ ________ ___ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ _ 20 subconicus, Cassidulus ____ ---------------------- __ ------------------------ ____ 19, 20 

Procassidulus (Hardouinia) bassleri____ __ _________ __ _ _ _ ____ _ ____ __ _ ___ _ ___ _____ 22 subquadrata, Hardouinia __________ --------- ________ ---------- __ ------------- __ 20 

Proraster _____ ----------------- ___________________________________ -··- ___ ______ 96 subquadratus, Cassidulus __________________________________ ______ -------------- 19, 20 

atavus ____ ---------------- _ ___ ___ _ __ __ ___ ___ _ ___ _ __ _ ___ ___ _ ___ _ __ _ _______ _ 36 sylvaticus, Holaster ___ ------------------- ____ ------------------------------ ___ _ 26 

dallL--------------------------------------------------------------- 3, 96, pl. 15 symmetrica, Dumblea ___ ------------------------------------------------------ 7 

(Proraster), Hemiaster __ ----------------------------------- ________ ----------- 36 

(Proraster) dalli, Hemiaster ------------ -----------~--------- ------------------- 36 T 

Pseudananchys __________ ______________________________________________________ 25, 30 taylori, Cassidulus ___ --------------------- __ -------------------- _ ------- ___ _ _ _ 24 algira__ ____ __ _ ___ ___ ___ _ _ __ _ __ ______ __ _ __ _ ___ ___ _ ___ _ __ ____ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ ____ 26 Hardouinia-----------------------------------------------------~ 1, 3, 19, 24, pl. 8 completa__ ___ ___ _ ___ _ __ ____ _ ___ _____ __ _ __ ____ ___ _ ___ ___ __ __ _ ___ _ _ __ __ _____ 26 tehemaensis, Cidaris __ ------------------------ __ ------------- _________ --------- 1 

stephensoni__ _________________________________________________________ 3, 26, pl. 9 tenuiporus, Catopygus _____ ___________ --- _____________ ---- _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 16 

Pseudodiadema hilli_ _ ___ _ __ _ _ __ _ _______ _ __ _ ___ ___ ___ _ ___ ___ __ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ _ 9 Tetragramma hilli. ___ ----- _ --- _ ------------- _ -- __ -- _------ _ -- __ ---- __ -- _ __ _ _ _ _ 9 Pseudopyrina _________________________________________________________________ 11, 12 texana, Ananchytes ___ ------ ____ -- _ --------- _ -------------------------------- _ _ 25 

pusillus, Catopygus _____ ________________________________________________ 2, 3, 15, pl. 5 texan us, Cidaris _____ ------------------------------------------------------ _3, 5, pl. 11 

Phyllobrissus _____________ _______________ ------- __ _ __ _ ____ ___ _ ___ ___ _______ 15 Doroctdaris _________ ------------------- _______ ----------------------- __ _ __ 5 

pustulosa, Ananchytes__ ____ _ _ ___ _ ___ ___ ____ _ __ _ ____ ___ __ _ ____ ___ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _____ 25 Echinobrissus _______ ------------------- ________ --------------------- _ ___ __ 13 

Pygorhynchus mortonis____ ___________ ________ __________________ _______ ________ 19 Echinocorys ______________________________________________________ 3, 25, pis. 10, 11 

pyriformis, Catopygus___ ___ ___ _____ __ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ ___ _ __ ____ _ _ __ _ __ ___ __ ____ ___ 16 Hemiaster _ ------------------------------------------------- 3, 30, 99, 34, 35, pl. 13 Echinites ______ _______________________________________ . _ __ ___ _ ____ _ _ ___ ____ 16 Nucleopygus ____ _ ---------------------------------------------------- 3, 19, pl. 4 Nucleolites ___ _______________________________________________________ ------ 16 Toxaster (Pliotoxaster) humphreysL-------------------------------------- __ ___ 31 

Oolopygus _________________________________________________ --------------- 16 Trochalia _____ -------------------------------------------------------------- _ _ 17 Pyrina __ ____ ----------- ___ -- _ -------- __________________________________ 10, 11, 12, 13 trojana, Lefortia __________________________________________________________ 3, 17, pl. 4 

petricoriensis __ ___________________________________ --------- _ _ __ ___ _______ _ _ 12 

Pygurostoma ___ ____ ---- _ ___ ___ ___ ____ _______ _ __ ____ _______ _ __________ _ ___ ___ _ _ 14 u geometricum _______________________________________________________ 2, 3, 14, pl. 4 uddeni, Micraster ------------------------------------------------------- 3, 97, pl. 15 

morgani_ ____ ------- __________ --------------- ______________________________ 14, 15 ungula, Hemiaster ___________________________________________________ 3, 30, 94, pl. 14 

pasionensis _ -------- _______ -- _ ---- _________________ ----------- ______ 3, 14, pl. 16 Hemiaster (Gregoryaster) __ ------------- _______ ------------- _______ ----- _ _ _ 34 Pygurus__ _ ____ _ ___ ____ ___ __________ ________ _ __ _ ___ __ __________ ___ ___ _ ___ ___ _ _ 19 Holaster ____ ----------------- _ -------- _________ ------------------- _ __ ___ __ 34 apicalis ___________________________________________________________________ 1.'>, 14 Micraster ___ ------------------------------ _ --------------------------- __ _ _ 34 ftorealis__ _ __ _ _ ___ ___ _ ____ ___ ___ __ _ _____ ____ ___ _ __ ________ ____ ____ ______ ___ 26 Spatangus _________ -------------------- ___ ------------------------ _ --- __ __ 34 geometricus_ __ ___ ___ _ ______ _ __ ___ _ _ ___ ______ _ _ _______ ____ ___ __ _ _ ___ ___ _ ___ 14 uvaldana, Lanieria _______________________________________________________ 3, 10, pl. 3 

montmollini_____ _ ___ _ __ _ __ _ ____ __ _____ ___ _ ___ _ __ _______ ____ _ __ _ _______ _ ___ 19 

v 

R variabilis, Linthia_ ------------------------------------------------------ 3, 96, pl. 14 Rachiosoma_ ____ ___ ____ _ __ ______ _ ______ _ ___ _ __ ____ _ __ _ __ _ ____ ___ _ _ __ ___ _ ___ __ _ 8, 9 vaughani, Globator ____________________________________________________ 3, 11, 12, pl. 4 

detammareL _ _ _ __ ___ _ ___ _ __ _ _ ___ _ _______ __ _ __ _ _ __ ____ ___ _ ___ __ _ _ ____ __ _ ___ 8 vulgaris, Echinocorys_ ------- _____________ -______ ------------------------------ 25 

hondoensis _____________________________________ · ______________________ 3, 7, 8, pl.3 vulgaris striata, Echinocorys _ -----------------------~--- -- _ -------------------- 25 

mortoni_ __________________________________________________________________ 3, 9, pl. 1 wahalakensis, Cidaris ______________________________________________________ 3, 5, pl. 1 

reesidei, Porosoma ______________________________________________________ 1., 3, 6, pl. 1 welleri, Hemiaster _____________________________________________________ 2, 3, 85, pl. 14 

requienii, Echinobrissus _ __ ______ _ __ _ _ __ ____ _ __ _ ___ _ __ _ _______ ____ _ __ ______ ____ 17 Hemiaster (Integraster) ________ -------- _____ ----- _ ----------------- __ _ ___ __ 35 

Nucleolites__ _______ _ __ _ __ _ ___ ___ _ __ _ ____ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ ____ ___ __ __ ___ _ __ _ ___ 17 wetherbyi, Hemiaster ------------------------------------------ 3, 30, 91, 32, 35, pl. 12 References____________________________________________________________________ 38 wilderae, Nucleolites _____________ _ ---------- __ --------------------------------- 17, 18 

rossi, lsomicraster __ c ____________________________________________________ 3, 29, pl. 11 williamsi, Catopygus __ -------------------------------------------------------- 16 rotula, Galerites__ ______ _ __ _ ___ __ _ _ ___ _____ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ _ _ ___ ___ _ _ ___ ___ ______ 12 Catopygus (Oolopugus) _____________________________________________ 2, 3, 16, pl. 5 

0 
PLATES l-16 
FIGURES 1, 2. 

3, 4. 

5-8. 

9-11. 

14. 

PLATE 1 

[All figures natural size except as indicated on plate 

Cidaris wahalakensis De Loriol (p. 5). Spines, U.S.N.M. 108365. From the Prairie Bluff chalk at U.S.G.S. 18143, Sumpter County, Ala. 

Salenia hondoensis Cooke, n. sp. (p. 6). Holotype, U.S.N.M. 108366. From the Anacacho limestone at U.S.G.S. 12902, King's water hole, 3 miles west of 

Hondo, Tex. 

Porosoma reesidei Cooke, n. sp. (p. 6). 

5-7, Bottom side, and top of holotype, U.S.N.M. 108367, from U.S.G.S. 23423. 

8, Top of paratype, U.S.N.M. 108368, from U.S.G.S. 19537, showing spines. Both from the top of the Frontier 

formation in NE% sec. 1, T 42 N, R 107 W, Fremont County, Wyo. 

Codiopsis stephensoni Cooke, n. sp. (p. 8). 

From the lower part of the Escondido formation at U.S.G.S.15347, Nueces River, Uvalde County, Tex. 

Rachiosoma mortoni (De Loriol) (p. 9). 

Side and bottom of U.S.N.M. 108370. From the Ripley formation at U.S.G.S. 850, Chattahoochee River below 

Eufaula, Ala. 

Cidaris texan us Clark (p. 5). 

Holotype, U.S.N.M. 8381. Possibly from the Anacacho limestone in Bexar County, Tex. 
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 254 PLATE l 

3 

5 

X2 

1 

4 

12 X2 

9 

10 

CIDARJS, SALENIA, POROSOMA, CODIOPSIS, AND RACHIOSOMA 
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 254 PLATE 2 

PEDINOPSIS 
A•;··~' 

PLATE 2 

[All figures natural size except as indicated on plate] 

FIGURES 1-5. Pedinopsis pondi Clark (p. 7). 

Side, bottom, top, and parts of the upper and lower surfaces of holotype, U.S.N.M 103707. From the Austin chalk 

in Travis County, Tex. 
FIGURES 1-3. 

4, 5. 

6, 7. 

8-13. 

PLATE 3 

[All figures natural size except as indicated on plate] 

Lanieria uvaldana Cooke, n . sp. (p. 10). 

Bottom, top, and side of holotype, U.S.N.M. 108372. Probably from the Anacacho limestone at U.S.G.S. 1771, 

Turkey Creek at Carbonville, Uvalde County, Tex. 

Rachiosoma hondoensis Cooke, n. sp. (p. 8). 

Side and bottom of holotype, U.S.N.M. 108371. From the Escondido formation at U.S.G.S. 7686, Blue Water 

Hole, Hondo Creek, Medina County, Tex. 

Phyosoma hilli (Clark) (p. 9). 

Top and bottom of the largest of three cotypes, U.S.N.M. 8311. From Bell County, Tex., formation unknown. 

Conul1ts stephensoni Cooke, n. sp. (p. 11). 

8- 10, Left side, bottom, and top of holotype, U.S.N.M. 108373, from U.S.G.S. 15626. From the Austin chalk 1 

mile northeast of Padrone Hill, Bexar County, Tex. 

11-13, Posterior end, left side, and bottom of paratype, U.S.N.M. 108374, from U.S.G.S. 16880. From the Austin 

chalk on the south side of the valley of Medio Creek, 13 miles west of San Antonio, Tex. 
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 254 PLATE 3 

LANIERIA, RACHIOSOMA, PHYMOSOMA, AND CONULUS 
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 254 PLATE 4 

5 

1 4 6 

11 

9 

8 10 

13 

14 

15 

GLOBATOR, NUCLEOPYGUS, LEFORTIA, FAUJASIA, AND PYGUROSTOMA 
PLATE 4 

[All figures natural size except as indicated on plate] 

FIGURES 1-4. Globator vaughani Cooke, n. sp. (p. 12). 

Top, posterior end, left side, and bottom of holotype, U.S.N.M. 108375. From the Anacacho limestone at U.S.G.S. 

1771, Carbonville, Uvalde County, Tex. 

5-7. Nucleopygus texan us (Clark) (p. 13). 

Left side, bottom, and top of holotype, U.S.N.M. 20266. From the Austin chalk at U.S.G.S. 768, Austin, Tex. 

8-10. Lefortia trojana Cooke, n. sp. (p. 17). 

Top, bottom, and right side of holotype, U.S.N.M. 108376. From the Ripley formation at U.S.G.S. 17259, Troy, 

Miss. 

11-14. Faujasia chelonium Cooke, n. sp. (p. 14). 

Left side, posterior end, top, and bottom of holotype, U.S.N.M. 108377. From the Escondido formation at U.S.G.S. 

10854, Indio Ranch, Maverick County, Tex. 

15-20. Pygurostoma geometricum (Morton) (p. 14). 

15-17, Holotype, Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 1496, an internal cast, from the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal, 

Del. 

18-20, Top, bottom, and side of U.S.N.M. 108378, from the Marshalltown formation at U.S.G.S. 17753, the 

Chesapeake and Delaware Canal 2,000 feet east of the railroad bridge, Delaware. 
FIGURES 1, 2. 

3-6. 

7- 10. 

11-14. 

15- 18. 

19-21. 

22-24. 

PLATE 5 

[All figures natural size except as indicated on plate] 

Catopygus pusillus Clark (p. 15). 

Top and posterior end of type, U.S.N.M. 2210. From the Merchantville clay at Wordills, Monmouth County, N.J. 

Catopygus mississippiensis Cooke, n. sp. (p. 15). 

Top, bottom, posterior end, and right side of holotype, U.S.N.M. 108379. From the Prairie Bluff chalk at U.S.G.S. 

6851, 5 miles northeast of Houston, Miss. Catopygu.~ williamsi Clark (p. 16). 

Top, bottom, right side, and posterior end of holotype, U.S.N.M. 103698. From the Navesink marl at Atlantic 

Highlands, N. J. 

Phyllobrissus cubensis (Weisbord) (p. 17). 

Posterior end, left side, bottom, and top of U. S.N.M. 108380. From the Anacacho limestone at U.S.G.S. 22407, 

northeast of Castroville, Tex. 

Clarkiella hemispherica (Slocom) (p. 18). 

Top, side, bottom, and posterior end of type of Cassidulus conoideus Clark, U.S.N.M. 31199. From the Providence 

sand at the Narrows, Pataula Creek, Georgia. 

H ardouinia morton is (Michelin) (p. 19). . Top, posterior end, and bottom of holotype of Gonioclypeus subangulatus Emmons, U.S.N.M. 108381. From the 

Peedee formation in North Carolina. 

H ardouinia morton is emmonsi (Stephenson) (p. 20). 

Top, posterior end, and bottom of holotype, U.S.N.M. 73423, after Stephenson. From the Peedee formation at 

U.S.G.S. 12262, 1 mile northeast of Rocky Point, N. C. 
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 254 PLATE 5 

1 

5 

3 4 

9 

7 8 

11 

13 

12 

14 

18 

23 

20 

19 

CATOPYGUS, PHYLLOBRISSUS, CLARKIELLA, AND HARDOUINIA 
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 254 PLATE 6 

1 

6 

5 8 

7 

2 

9 

3 

HARDOUINIA 
PLATE 6 

[All figures natural size except as indicated on plate] 

FIGURES 1- 10. Hardouinia micrococcus (Gabb) (p. 21). 

1-4, Left side, posterior end, bottom, and top of specimen from· Barbour County, Ala. Geological Survey of 

Alabama. 

5-8. Top, posterior end, right side, and bottom of cotype, Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 1480, from Eufaula, Ala. 

9, 10, Posterior end and top of holotype of Cassidulus porrectus Clark, U.S.N.M. 21890, from U.S.G.S. 858, Alexanders Bluff, Chattahoochee River, Ala. 

All probably from the Ripley formation. 
FIGURES 1- 5. 

6-11. 

12. 

PLATE 7 

[All figures natural size except as indicated on plate] 

Hardouinia kellumi (Stephenson) (p. 21). 

Peristomial region, top, apical region, posterior end, and bottom of holotype, U.S.N.M. 73420. From the Peedee 

formation at U.S.G.S. 13585, 1 mile northeast of Rocky Point, Pender County, N. C. 

Hardouinia bassleri (Twitchell) \p. 22). . 6, 7, Top and bottom of holotype, U.S.N.M. 9476. 

8-11, Top, posterior end, right side, and bottom of U.S.N.M. 108382. 

Both from the Tombigbee sand member of the Eutaw formation at U.S.G.S.17010, Catoma Creek, Montgomery 

County, Ala. 

Hardouinia micrococcus (Gabb) (p. 21). 

Bottom of holotype of Cassidulus porrectus Clark, U.S.N.M. 21890. 

From the Ripley formation at U.S.G.S. 858, Alexanders Bluff, Chattahoochee River. Ala. 
GEOLOGICAL SU HVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 254 PLATE 7 

HARDOUINJA 
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

1 2 

7 8 

11 12 

15 16 

18 

23 

3 

X2 

24 

IIARDOUINTA 

21 

9 

13 

25 

PROFESSIONAL PAPER 254 PLATE 8 

5 6 

10 

14 

22 

26 
FIGURES 1-6. 

7-10. 

11- 14. 

15-22. 

23- 26. 

PLATE 8 

[All figures natural size except as indicated on plate 

Hardouinia taylori (Warren) (p. 24). 

1-3, Top, bottom, and right side of cotype 301. 

4, Top of cotype 302. 

5, 6, Top and bottom of cotype 303. 

All cotypes Univ. Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. From the Birch Lake sandstone, Birch Lake, Alberta. 

Hardouinia stantoni (Clark) (p. 23). 

Left side, posterior end, top, and bottom of holotype, U.S.N.M. 20268. From the Codell sandstone member of 

the Carlile shale near Quillian's ranch, Huerfano County, Colo. 

Hardouinia .florealis (Morton) (p. 23). 

Top, bottom, posterior end, and left side of type, A cad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 1495. From the Delaware and 

Chesapeake Canal, Del. 

Hardouinia aequorea (Morton) (p. 22). 

15-18, Top, bottom, posterior end, and right side of holotype, Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 1475, from Prairie 

Bluff, Ala. 

19-22, Posterior end, left side, bottom, and top of U.S.N.M. 108383, from. the Prairie Bluff chalk at U.S.G.S 

6794, Shell Bluff, Prairie Creek, Ala. Hardouinia mcglameryae Cooke, n. sp. (p. 24). 

Bottom, top, left side, and posterior end of holotype, U.S.N.M. 108384. From the Providence sand near Youngblood, Pike County, Ala. 
FIGURES 1-5. 

6-9. 

PLATE-'9 

All figures natural size except as Indicated on the plate] 

Holaster feralis Cooke, n. sp. (p. 26). 

1-3, Left side, right side, and top of holotype, U.S.N.M. 108385, from Wild Horse Park, 14 miles northwest of 

Pueblo, Colo. 

4, 5, Bottom and top of para type, U.S.N.M. 108386, from U.S.G.S. 22899, Model Dome, Las Animas County, Colo. 

Both from near the bottom of the type Greenhorn limestone. 

Pseudananchys stephensoni Cooke, n. sp. (p. 26). 

6- 8, Left side, top, and bottom of holotype, U.S.N.M. 108387. 

9, Bottom of paratype, U.S.N.M. 108387. 

Both prQbably from the Austin chalk at U.S.G.S. 3197, a creek on the Waco-Gholson road, McClennan County, Tex. 
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 254 PLATE 9 

.. ./< ,,. 

7 

HOLASTER AND PSEUDANANCHYS 
<;EOLOGJCAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL <'APER 254 PLATE 10 

5 

6 

7 

1 

3 

ECIIINOCORYS, CARDJASTER, AND IIOLASTER 
-,. 

PLATE 10 

[All figures natural size except as Indicated on \plate] 

FIGURES 1, 2. Echinocorys texanus (Cragin) (p. 25). 

Top and bottom of U.S.N.M. 108388. From the Anacacho limestone at U.S.G.S. 12909, Seco Creek 3 miles northwest of D'Hanis, Tex. 

3-6. Cardiaster deciper Cooke, n. sp. (p. 27). 

Bottom, top, posterior end, and left side of holotype, U.S.N.M. 108389. From the Saratoga chalk at U.S.G.S. 

13539, Big Deciper Creek 5.4 miles southwest of Arkadelphia, Ark. 

7. Holaster feralis Cooke, n. sp. (p. 26). 

Posterior end of paratype, U.S.N.M. 108386. From the bottom of the type Greenhorn limestone at U.S.G.S. 

22899, Model Dome, Las Animas County, Colo. 
FIGURES 1-7. 

8- 10. 

11-13. 

14. 

15, 16. 

17. 

PLATE 11 

[All figures n~tural size except as indicated on plate] 

Cardiaster leonensis Stephenson (p. 28). 

1-3, Top, bottom, and posterior end of holotype, U.S.N.M. 76279, from the Corsicana marl in Bexar County, Tex. 

4- 7, Posterior end, bottom, top, and left side of U.S.N.l\1. 108390, from the Anacacho limestone 2 miles south of 

Cline, Uvalde County, Tex. 

Cardiaster smocki Clark (p. 28) . Top, left side, and bottom of holotype, New Jersey State Museum. From the Merchantville clay 2Jf:l miles northwest of Matawan, N. J. 

Isomicraster danei Cooke, n. sp. (p. 29). 

Left side, posterior end, and top of holotype, U.S.N.M. 108391. From the Annona chalk at U.S.G.S. 13506, 

Rocky Comfort, Ark. 

Cardiaster curtus Clark (p. 28). 

Top of cotype, U.S.N.M. 31201. From the upper part of the Pierre shale 25 miles southwest of Wibaux, Mont. 

Isomicraster rossi Cooke, n. sp. (p. 29). 

Bottom and top of two cotypes, U.S.N.l\'I. 108392. From the Eagle Ford shale at U.S.G.S. 16855, Terlingua 

region, Texas. 

Echinocorys texanus (Cragin) (p. 25). 

Left side of U.S.N.M. 108388. From the Anacacho limestone at U.S.G.S. 12909, Seco Creek 3 miles north by 

west of D'Hanis, Tex. 
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

1 

3 

PROFESSIONAL PAPER 254 PLATE 11 

2 4 

5 

9 

8 10 

17 

CARDIASTER, ISOMICRASTER, AND ECHINOCORYS 

6 

7 
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 254 PLATE 12 

3 

1 2 

4 

5 

6 10 

9 

7 

11 

8 

12 14 

13 

17 18 

I-IEMIASTER 
FIGURES 1-4. 

5-11. 

12- 16. 

17, 18. 

PLATE 12 

[All figures natural size exeept as indicated on plate] 

Hemiaster humphreysanus Meek and Hayden (p. 30). 

1-3, Top, bottom, and posterior end of U.S.N.M. 108393, from the Nacatoch sand at U.S.G.S. 13541, Ouachita 

River 1% miles above Arkadelphia, Ark. 

4, U.S.N.M. 108394, from the Mobridge member of the Pierre shale at U.S.G.S. 6641, Terry Field, Wyo. 

Hemiaster jacksoni Maury (p. 33). 

5-8, Right side, posterior end, top, and bottom of U.S.N.M. 108395, from the Turonian at U.S.G.S. 16952, Born 

Jesus, Sergipe, Brazil. 

9-11, Posterior end, bottom, and top of U.S.N.M. 108396, from the Eagle Ford shale at U.S.G.S. 14174, 21 miles 

west of Langtry, Tex. 

Hemiaster arcolensis Cooke, n. sp. (p. 32). • Anterior end, right side, posterior end, top, and bottom of holotype, U.S.N.M. 108397. From the Arcola limestone member of the Mooreville chalk 3 miles northeast of Haynesville, Lowndes County, Ala. 

Hemiaster wetherbyi De Lorio! (p. 31). 

Top and bottom of U.S.N.M. 108398. From the Prairie Bluff chalk at U.S.G.S. 6856, 2 miles east of Pontotoc, Miss. 
FIGURES 1- 4. 

5, 6. 

7-10. 

PLATE 13 

[All figures natural size except as indicated on plate) 

Hemiaster texanus Roemer (p. 33). 

Top, bottom, right side, and posterior end of U.S.N.M. 108399. From the Anacacho limestone at U.S.G.S. 1878. 

Sabinal River 3 miles above Sabinal, Tex. 

"Hemiaster" kummeli Clark (p. 35). 

Top and bottom of holotype, New Jersey State Museum. From the Woodbury clay at Lorillard clay pits near Keyport, N. J. 

Hemiaster sabinal Cooke, n. sp. (p. 34). 

Posterior end, right side, and bottom of holotype, U.S.N.M. 108400. From the Austin chalk at U.S.G.S. 1873, 

Sabinal River at Dillard's.ranch house. 
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 254 PLATE 13 

3 

1 2 

4 

7 

6 

5 

8 

HEMIASTER 
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 254 PLATE 14 

5 

1 2 3 4 

6 

7 8 

9 

11 12 13 

10 

14 

16 

15 

17 

21 

18 

20 

19 

• 'p 

25 

CARDIASTER, HEMJASTER, AND LINTHIA 
FIGURES 1- 5. 

6-9. 

10- 14. 

15-17. 

18-25. 

PLATE 14 

[All figures natural size except as indicated on plate] 

Cardiaster marylandicus Clark (p. 28) . 1, 2, Bottom and top of type, Maryland Geological Survey. 

3, 5, Top, bottom, and side of another specimen. 

From the Monmouth formation at Brightseat, Prince Georges County, Md. All figures after Clark, 1916. 

Hemiaster delawarensis Clark (p. 35). 

Top, posterior end, right side, and bottom of holotype, Johns Hopkins University. Probably from the Mount 

Laurel sand 1 mile east of St. Georges, Del. After Clark, 1916. 

Hemiaster ungula Morton (p. 34). 

Top, sides, posterior end, and bottom of holotype, Acad. Nat. Sci. Philadelphia 1503. From the Delaware and 

Chesapeake Canal, Del. 

Hemiaster welleri Clark (p. 35). 

Top, side, and bottom of holotype, New Jersey State Museum. From the Merchantville clay in a railroad cut 

1 mile south of Lower Jamesburg, N. J. 

Linthia variabilis Slocom. (p. 36). 

18-21, Bottom, top, posterior end, and left side of U.S.N.M. 73448, from U.S.G.S. 6852. 

22- 25, Top, bottom, posterior end, and left side of U.S.N.M. 108401, from U.S.G.S. 11652. 

Both from the Brairie Bluff chalk at One Mile Run, Pontotoc, Miss. · 
PLATE 15 

[A~gures natural size except as Indicated on plate] 

FIGURES 1-5. Proraster dalli (Clark) (p. 36). 

1, Top of U.S.N.M. 108402, from U.S.G.S. 12904, Rio Medina at Siphon No. 2, 4 miles north-northwest of Rio 

Medina ,Tex. 

2-5, Top, bottom, posterior end, and left side of U.S.S.M. 108403, from U.S.G.S. 17990, Grosenbacher Road, Bexar 

County, Tex. 

Both from the Anacacho limsetone. 

6-9. Micraster uddeni Cooke, n. sp. (p. 37). 

Bottom of cotype 1, both sides and top of cotype 2. From the Austin chalk at U.S.G.S. 16768, Tequesquite Creek, 

Maverick County, Tex. U.S.N.M. 108404. 

1Q-13. Micraster americanus Stephenson. (p. 38). 

10, Top of U.S.N.M. 108405, from the Saratoga chalk at U.S.G.S. 13404, Saratoga, Ark. 

11-13, Top, posterior end, and bottom of holotype, U.S.N.M. 76285, from the Corsicana marl at U.S.G.S. 15502, 

6 miles east of Castroville, Tex. 
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAP.E):{ 254 PLATE 15 

2 3 

4 

1 

5 

6 

7 

8 

11 

12 

PRORASTER AND MICRASTER 
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 254 PLATE 16 

ITEMIASTER, BARNUMIA, AND PYGUROSTOMA 
FIGURE 1. 

2-5: 

6-11. 

PLATE 16 

[All figures natural size except as indicated on plate] 

Hemiaster amelianus Cooke, n. sp. (p. 35). 

Type, U.S.N.M. 108408. From the Campanian (?) at Santa Amelia, Peten District, Guatemala• 

Barnumia browni Cooke, n. sp. (p. 30). 

2-4, Top, inclined side view, and bottom of cotype 1. 

5, Top of cotype 2. 

U.S.N.M. 108408. From the Campanian (?) at Santa Amelia, Guatemala. 

Pygurostoma pasionense Cooke (p. 14). 

6-8, Side, bottom, and top of holotype, Am. Mus. Nat. History 26901. 

9- 11, Bottom, side, and top of topotype, U.S.N.M. 108406. From the Campanian (?) at Santa Amelia, Guatemala.