From the Paleontological Cabinet of the Technological Institute in Tomsk.

M. Janischewsky.

THE LOWER CARBONIFEROUS LIMESTONE

NEAR CHABARNY

IN THE ORSK DISTRICT, ORENBURG GOVERNORATE

With 21 plates and 1 map.

(The plates, together with the map, are appended to the Russian text in Vol. XVII, 1910, No. 1, of the News of the Technological Institute in Tomsk.)

Tomsk.

Typo-lithography of the Siberian Association of Printing, corner of Dvoryanskaya Street and Yamskoy Lane, own building.

1911.

Foreword.

The present text is a detailed extract from the work that appeared in Russian under the same title, constituting volume XVII (1910, No. 1) of the Proceedings of the Tomsk Technological Institute.

Since the printing of the German text in Tomsk was attended by great difficulties and took almost an entire year, this extract could not appear simultaneously with the Russian text.

The 21 plates and the map mentioned in the extract are appended to the Russian text.

The Author.

Foreword

The present text is an extensive excerpt from the work that appeared in Russian under the same title, forming Volume XVII (1910, No. 1) of the News of the Technological Institute in Tomsk.

Since the printing of the German text in Tomsk was beset with great difficulties and took almost an entire year, this excerpt could not appear simultaneously with the Russian text.

The 21 plates and the map mentioned in the excerpt are appended to the Russian text.

The Author.

...lead to, than I had assumed. We chose the village of Chabarnij as our headquarters and from there undertook excursions in various directions through the area to be investigated. In the process, considerable material was collected, which substantially supplemented what I had gathered earlier.

In addition to the material collected by me, another collection from the same region was at my disposal. This material was handed over to me for study by Prof. Loewinson-Lessing. It is housed in the Geological Institute of the University in St. Petersburg, where I studied it during my stay there, in the years 1905 and 1906.

I also take this opportunity here to express my sincere thanks to all those who contributed to the execution of the present work.

I feel especially indebted to Prof. Loewinson-Lessing, who placed at my disposal the above-mentioned paleontological material, and also to the Professors’ Council of the Technological Institute in Tomsk, which provided me with the funds necessary to carry out the work.

Prof. M. Janischewsky.

Concerning the limestone of the environs of the village of Chabarnij we find in the literature only a few scanty references. Professor Loewinson-Lessing reports,* that as early as 1890, during an excursion into the Guberlinsk Mountains, he encountered, among other things, an Upper Devonian limestone with a rich clymenia fauna, one verst distant from the so-called village of Chabarnej.

At his request Mr. Krasnojarzeff, of Orenburg, was sent into this region for the purpose of collecting Devonian fossils on the river Rasbojka and in the environs of Chabarny. Mr. Krasnojarzeff, in addition to Devonian material, also collected material from other formation beds; he sent a collection of fossils from the environs of Chabarnij and from the road that leads to the so-called Molokan settlement. These fossils came from white limestones, which were determined as Lower Carboniferous. Loewinson-Lessing reports that the fauna collected by Krasnojarzeff consists chiefly of brachiopods and of a large number of Productus striatus Fisch., Productus semireticulatus Mart., and Spirifer trigonalis Sow. Particularly characteristic are these limestones by reason of numerous, longitudinally elongated, narrow, almost cylindrical productids (from the group of Productus striatus?), which at first sight may be taken for corals. As the author notes, the material collected by Krasnojarzeff was handed over to me for determination.

To what has just been stated I can add the following: the material collected by Krasnojarzeff is rather extensive and comes, as is evident from the accompanying labels, from three points of observation: from two ravines, one of which lies one verst from the village of Chabarnij, and the other also on the left bank of the same river; the third point of observation is about 3 versts from the village of Chabarnij. The two ravines are probably the so-called Klutschiki and Otnoschka ravines; the third point of observation, however, lies north of Otnoschka (see below).

I should also like to point out that already in my “Preliminary Report on the Excursion into the Guberlinsk and Mugodzhary Mountains, 1904”**)

* Centralblatt für Miner., Geol. und Palaeont., pp. 131–132, 1904.
** See “Nachrichten des Technolog. Inst. zu Tomsk,” 1906, p. 17.

to a Lower Carboniferous limestone from the vicinity of Chabarnij, with such typical representatives as Productus striatus Fisch. and Pr. giganteus Mart. The material collected by Krasnojarzeff was at that time still unknown to me.

Finally, it should also be noted that the geologist of the University of Kazan, Privatdozent Noinsky, found the above-mentioned limestone, where he collected some material; the latter is at present in Kazan.

This is, finally, all that had hitherto been known to me about the occurrence of the Lower Carboniferous limestone in the vicinity of the little village of Chabarnij. During my stay in Kazan I became acquainted with the material sent by Noinsky, and even then I resolved to occupy myself in detail with this limestone. I succeeded in doing so, in that I encountered a fauna of more than 280 forms, which contributes much to the knowledge of the Uralian Lower Carboniferous.

Chapter I.

Topographical and geological overview.

The Lower Carboniferous limestone from which the fauna described here derives is situated, as already mentioned, in Orsk District, Orenburg Governorate, about 5 versts north of the Cossack village of Chabarnyj. It covers an insignificant part of the area, which is bounded on the western side by the so-called Guberlin Mountains, and on the eastern side by mountain chains extending in a N–S direction and composed of siliceous shales, among which diabases and diabase-porphyries also occur. In the south this area is bounded by the Ural River, which here flows in an E–W direction; toward the north, however, it extends rather far and forms, in a meridional direction, a tectonic valley. The local relief is, in general, insignificant and inclined toward the east and south. Only in the south-western part, not far from the village of Chabarny, does it display a rather sharply expressed hilly character, which is attributable to outcrops of volcanic rocks—feldspar porphyries and porphyrites; in the remaining parts the surface is flat. The local relief is, however, complicated by a number of valleys, ravines, and left tributaries of the Ural. These tributaries and ravines take their beginning in the western, higher-lying part of the area and extend eastward, finally emptying into the Ural. In traversing the area from N to S, the following streamlets and ravines should be noted: the ravine “Krutoj,” into which the more southerly ravine “Iswestkovyj” empties; farther south, the ravine “Klutschiki” or “Klutschi,” which actually consists of three ravines that farther east unite and then disappear in the lowland situated in the middle meridional part of this area. One of the ravines that form the “Klutschiki” is called “Otnoschka”; the other, lying farther south, is the actual “Klutschi” or “Klutschiki.” Still farther south we find the little river “Rasbojka,” which takes its rise farther to the west, in the mountain branches of Guberlin, where it has the character of a mountain stream, while farther on, flowing through the steppe, it finally empties into the Ural. Into the Rasbojka empties from

To the north, the little river Topkaja. Still farther south we find the river Klutsch, then the river Baktsewka, and finally the river Banka, which flows already near the village of Chabarny. As already mentioned, all these little rivers and ravines have their beginning in the higher-lying part of this region and at first extend almost in a W–E direction, which is to be attributed to the higher position of the western part of the Guberlin Mountains and of their western outlying range. Farther east, however, the larger little rivers and ravines change their direction to a more or less meridional one; finally they empty into the lowland which forms an old alluvial terrace of the Ural River. This change in direction of the little rivers and ravines is caused by the general inclination of the above-mentioned meridional valley toward the Ural River, which here flows in a W–E direction. The little rivers and ravines mentioned cut deeply and vigorously through the region, form considerable stratigraphic profiles and, in individual cases, mountain clefts. All this naturally indicates that denudation processes have played, and still play, an important role here. These ravines and little rivers, especially near their sources, possess a fairly luxuriant flora; one even finds representatives of shrub and tree vegetation, whereas the remaining parts of the region are covered exclusively with grass; for the most part meadows are encountered here, which here and there are intersected by grain fields. Besides the village of Chabarny, the following hamlets must also be mentioned: Chabarninsky, which is situated on the river Rasbojka, not far from the great road from Orsk to the village of Guberlin; Iwanowsky on the left bank of the Krutoj ravine; the recently established hamlet Ekaterinoslawsky, on the same Krutoj ravine, but one and a half versts from the place where the Iswestkowy ravine flows into the former; and finally, not far from the hamlet Troschin.

The little rivers and ravines are not distinguished by abundance of water: while the larger ones carry water throughout the whole summer, in the smaller little rivers and ravines water is encountered only in spring. Moreover, it is to be assumed that the courses of some little rivers are waterless for the reason that they here and there assume a subterranean character. This is to be attributed to limestone outcrops, in which, through the cutting and washing activity of the water, underground cavities, grottoes, and subterranean river courses arise. This is to be observed, for example, at the Iswestkowy ravine, where the brook flowing in it disappears upon reaching the Lower Carboniferous limestone region.

Of greatest interest to us are the following ravines: Izvestkovy, Klutshiki or Klutshchi with the Otnoshka, and the little river Rasboika. Here significant stratigraphic sections are exposed, which elucidate in detail the geological structure of this region in general and the stratigraphic relations of the Carboniferous beds from which the entire fauna described was derived. Along the rivers and ravines mentioned, in addition to other rocks, outcrops of limestone are also encountered. The latter have long been known to the local inhabitants, since lime is obtained from them. Lime kilns are to be seen everywhere here, which until quite recently were in operation, or are even still used now. The limestone outcrops will receive special consideration; before, however, proceeding to their precise description, we consider it expedient to mention a few points concerning the geological structure of the region in general. Both volcanic and sedimentary rock formations take part in the structure of this region.

The volcanic rocks are represented here by orthoclase porphyries, diabases and diabase porphyrites, coarse-grained diallage rocks, and serpentines. These rocks form the western, southwestern, and eastern boundaries of the region under consideration. In the southwestern part, orthoclase porphyries occur chiefly, forming individual hills or chains of hills. From time to time we find isolated, approximately nest-shaped outcrops of diabase rocks. Diabases and diabase porphyrites occur chiefly in the eastern part. Here they occur together with siliceous shales, the latter often being metamorphosed into jaspis in the contact zone. Diallage rocks, of greenish-gray color, coarse-grained, often well preserved, occur in the form of rocky hills in the western part on the little river Topkaya and between the latter and the little river Rasboika. Finally, at the upper course of the Izvestkovy ravine and occasionally at the upper course of the Rasboika, we find serpentines. In the serpentines there occur significant secondary segregations of magnesite.

Sedimentary rocks are represented by Devonian, Carboniferous, Post-Pliocene, and Recent formations.

Of Devonian deposits we find here siliceous shales of various greenish colors, rarely shaly clays and limestones. The siliceous shales are mostly thin-bedded and occur either alone or in alternation with slab-like greenish limestones. They often show a sharply expressed bedding, which contributes to knowledge of the conditions of deposition. In addition, the siliceous shale is fissured in nature and easily splits into sharp-edged pieces.

of often regular form, in which the influence of tectonic processes can be demonstrated here and there. The Devonian limestones are yellowish-white in color and of finely crystalline structure; nodular and breccia-like varieties also occur. They are thick- or thin-bedded; they often contain crinoid columnals in great quantity and only rarely other fossils. Only in one place is a large quantity of clymenias found.

The Devonian rocks mentioned occur in the Isvestkovy ravine, on the upper course of the Klutschi ravine, and on the little river Rasbojka; they are also found in the eastern part of the meridional tectonic valley. The conditions of bedding here are as follows: limestones overlie beds of siliceous shale and are in turn covered by the latter; they occur either alone or in alternation with greenish limestone beds. The Devonian rocks form, as it were, an arc, which on the western, southwestern, and southern sides is surrounded by more recent formations, namely Carboniferous ones. In an eastern, northeastern, and northern direction from the volcanic rocks, which occur in the western, southwestern, and southern parts of this area, it can be seen that directly upon them there first lie siliceous shales, then farther on Devonian limestones, and finally again siliceous shales, which alternate with limestones. The same was also observed at the Isvestkovy ravine and on the little river Rasbojka; at the Isvestkovy ravine it can still be seen that the beds of siliceous shale and limestone strike NNE and dip toward ESE at an angle of 60°–65°. The dip and strike on the little river Rasbojka are different; the siliceous shales and limestones here strike approximately W–E and dip toward N, so that the little river flows along the strike direction. The Devonian limestone is distinguished here as well by its white color; it also rises above the adjacent parts of the area, which is to be attributed to its greater resistance to the action of denudation processes. Thus, for example, the limestone at the Isvestkovy ravine forms a rather sharp ridge, which projects as a rock wall above a small brook flowing in this ravine. (See Figure No. 1).

The Devonian formations are poor in fossils. As already mentioned, fragments of crinoid stem columnals often occur in the limestones; other fossils, however, are very rare. Only in one place is a large quantity of clymenias and goniatites found. This is the observation point from which comes the rather varied cephalopod fauna that Prof. Loewinson-Lessing*) has described. It is situated to the left of the little river Rasbojka, one verst

*) Bulletin de la Société Belge de géologie, Tome VI, 1892, p. 15–25.

toward N–E from the Chabarinsky hamlet, not far from the place where the country road that leads from Chabarny to the Izvestkovy ravine is cut by the stream Rasbojka. The limestone that contains the clymenia fauna forms a bed of insignificant thickness, which strikes in an almost W–E direction and is bounded on the northern and southern sides by siliceous shale. Remarkable is the fact that the clymenias occur in great abundance only at one point, whereas farther to the E and W they no longer occur. It is also remarkable that the limestone beds which form the continuation of the clymenia-rich bed to the E and W possess a greater thickness than the latter. It must, moreover, be noted that isolated clymenias also occur at another place on the left bank of the Rasbojka, not far from the place where the stream changes its course toward the south. Here clymenias occur together with other forms. Since the Devonian limestone is quarried here, one occasionally encounters fine sections that make it possible to gain an insight into the stratigraphic relations. Thus, for example, on the stream Rasbojka, in a quarry, the alternation of grayish and grayish-white limestone beds, which dip toward N at an angle of 45° and strike from W to E, can be observed. The fauna of the Devonian limestone indicates that the latter, as well as the adjoining siliceous shales, belong to the upper division of the Devonian system. The character of these Devonian formations resembles that of the Upper Devonian deposits from the vicinity of the town of Verkhneuralsk, which also contain clymenias, besides which, however, many other forms also occur here (see Karpinsky and Tokarenko*). The thickness of these Devonian deposits is fairly considerable: thus, for example, the deposits on the left bank of the Izvestkovy ravine, which cuts this complex of beds vertically, can be traced for about 1½ versts. They are strongly dislocated. The fissured character of the siliceous shales and the breccia-like structure of the limestones are also to be attributed to dislocation processes. The Devonian deposits of the eastern part of the region under consideration are represented by siliceous shales and diabases.

Before we proceed to an overview of the bedding relations of the Carboniferous limestone, we shall briefly consider the Post-Pliocene and Recent formations that occur here. The former are represented by the usual brownish sandy clays, which in places alternate with sandy formations, and we find them in various places—

* See Karpinsky. Nachrichten des Geologischen Comité, vol. I, 1885, p. 334.
Tokarenko. Nachrichten des Naturforschervereins zu Kasan, vol. XXXVII, issue II.

...of the ravines Krutoy, Izvestkovy, and others, where they form complexes of beds up to 5 meters thick. Probably also belonging here are the rather thick sandstone and gravel beds, whose rather high sections (up to 10 meters thick) can be observed on the left bank of the Krutoy or Red Ravine. It is possible that these formations are older, namely of Tertiary age, but I have no basis for a more precise determination of their age. The Recent formations occur along the small rivers and ravines, where they appear either as alluvium or as soil layers covering the older formations.

We shall now proceed to the description of the Carboniferous limestone outcrops. The Lower Carboniferous limestone, the principal object of my investigations, covers a relatively insignificant area, which extends in an approximately meridional direction. On the northern side this area is bounded by the Krutoy ravine, on the western side by chert-slate outcrops, and on the southern side by Devonian deposits lying on the left bank of the Rasboyka. Toward the east the limestone terrain mentioned gradually dips and becomes covered by a thick soil layer, so that east of the southern course of the Rasboyka no limestone outcrops are to be found anywhere; an exception is formed by a small limestone islet not far from the country road, near the so-called Alder Grove. This place is located one verst from the point where the country road crosses the small river Rasboyka, in the direction toward Orsk.

In general, the limestone outcrops occupy an area of about 8 square versts. It is of irregular form: while narrowing in the northern part, it becomes broader toward the south. In the north, individual limestone outcrops are still encountered between the ravines Krutoy and Izvestkovy; still farther north, however, the limestone bed apparently lies beneath a brownish diluvial clay, just as in the eastern part. Considerable limestone outcrops are found on the right and left banks of the Izvestkovy ravine; on both banks of the Klutschi ravine and of its tributary Otnosok, between the Izvestkovy ravine and the Klutschiki, and somewhat farther south between the latter and the small river Rasboyka. At all these outcrops it may be seen that the limestone forms a series of beds which have been displaced from their horizontal position. The wedge-like character of the limestone beds is probably also due to the dislocation.

The stratigraphic relations can be observed most clearly on the left bank of the Izvestkovy ravine. Here we find a profile of limestone beds in which, over the Devonian deposits appearing farther west,

limestone beds of such Carboniferous age are exposed, and together with the former dip conformably toward ENE at an angle varying from 45° to 75°. In some places insignificant synclinal and anticlinal folds may be seen. The limestone occurring here is yellowish-white and grayish-white in color and is sometimes thin-bedded, sometimes thick-bedded; it is in part of crystalline structure; breccia-like and, in rare cases, oolitic modifications also occur. The thickness of the limestone complex is to be regarded as not inconsiderable, if one takes into account the fact that the complex forms a series of synclinal and anticlinal folds, while the whole section of beds extends along the ravine for about 800 meters. In general it may be seen that the upper part of the complex consists of thin-bedded limestone, the lower of thick-bedded limestone.

The fossils derived from this bed I have designated by the number 359; they are not numerous: in the western part of the section of beds we encounter such forms as Productus semireticulatus Mart., Chaetetes radians Fisch., Syringopora, Lithostrotion, Dibunophyllum and others. Farther to the E there occur: Productus striatus Fisch. and Orthatetes crenistria Phill.; in the eastern part I found Productus giganteus (hemisphaericus) and several fragments of stems of larger crinoids. On the right bank of the ravine a rather large number of fossils was collected from two observation points (insignificant outcrops near the nearby country road). At one point I found crinoid stem segments, Fenestella veneris Fisch., Pr. plicatilis Sow., Pr. semireticulatus Mart., Pr. sp., Marginifera schartimiensis Jan., Rhynchonella pleurodon Phill., Spirifer, Brachymetopus cf. uralicus Vern., Entomoconchus Scouleri M’Coy and others. At another point, on the right bank of the Isvestkovy Ravine, I collected a rather large number of fossils, among which the gastropods play an important role. From this point I have identified the following forms:

Schizophoria resupinata Mart., Prod. Keyserlingianus Kon., Pr. Martini Sow., Pr. curvirostris Mart., Pr. pseudomargaritaceus Janisch., Rhynch. pleurodon Phill., Spirifer cf. trigonalis, Sp. cf. gracilis Jan., Sp. duplicicosta Phill., Spiriferina insculpta Phill., Sp. cf. acutiplicata Keys., Euomphalus ovalis Kon., Bellerophon hiulcus Mart. (?), Euphemus fllosus Kon., Ptychomphalus gigas Kon., Staparollus Dionysii Montf., several representatives of the genus Capulus, Naticopsis costulata Kon., Macrochilina polyphemoides Kon., Orthoceras sp. and others.

From all these observations one could draw the conclusion that the lower part of the limestone complex contains Prod. striatus Fisch., while in the upper part Prod. giganteus Mart. (hemisphaericus), and

from and among representatives of other brachiopods, as well as other forms. This, however, as we shall see further on, is at variance with observations in other localities of the limestone region.

As regards the other limestone outcrops, namely those of the Klutschiki ravine and of its tributary the Otnoschka, it must be noted that here the conditions of bedding cannot be observed with particular clarity: in both these ravines one encounters a series of insignificant stratigraphic sections, in which very little is to be seen, and only in rare cases is it possible to determine the dip and strike. Owing to this circumstance the observations made are fragmentary, for many fossils are found here, and it is very important to bring their localities into agreement with the stratigraphic conditions. For lack of stratigraphic points of reference, I was obliged, in order to obtain reference points for the various beds of the formation, to collect fossils from individual observation points in great number and with much effort. Be that as it may, on the basis of the observations that I made, I can assert the following:

In the ravines mentioned, the limestone beds do not lie horizontally: on the Otnoschka the beds dip to the E, while in the Klutschiki, in its western part, they also dip to the E, but in the eastern part to the W. This fact indicates that the limestone beds here form a synclinal fold with a strike NNW and SSE. This synclinal fold is not a simple one, since the beds composing it were subjected to a secondary folding, or were also disturbed by subsidences as a result of the dissolution of lower-lying limestone beds. The latter fact is corroborated by the caves occurring here. In this respect this locality recalls the limestone outcrops on the river Schartinka, on the eastern slope of the Urals.

The fossils from the various points, both of the Otnoschka and of the Klutschiki, indicate that in this district beds with Productus striatus Fisch. are developed everywhere. The latter occurs here in great abundance, and this fact is decisive for determining the age of the entire limestone complex. Here, however, we also find other forms, and at different points one encounters various combinations of fossils.

We shall now proceed to a detailed survey of the stratigraphic sections. We begin with the Otnoschka, i.e., with the northernmost part of the limestone region. In the upper course of the Otnoschka, near the country road that leads to the village of Iwanowsky, one encounters a considerable pit leading into a cave. Here I found no fossils. Somewhat farther down the Otnoschka (east of the preceding [[unclear: observation point]])

points of observation) at the point which I have designated by the number 31 a, I encountered, in a yellowish-white limestone of very finely crystalline structure, the following forms: Productus hemisphaericus Mart., Prod. semireticulatus Mart., Prod. punctatus Mart., Schizophoria resupinata Mart., Spirifer elongatus n. sp., Pugnax triplex M’Coy, and others.

Still farther on, toward the Otmoshka, at point 31 b, I collected in a finely crystalline limestone of yellowish-white color the following forms: Streptodes Murchisoni M. E. et H., Syringopora, and a large Spirifer.

Farther in the same direction, at point 31 c, in a yellowish-white limestone, I encountered in great quantity Prod. striatus Fisch. The bedding relations of the limestone cannot be clearly observed here; nevertheless it appears that the beds dip toward the east.

Farther in an easterly direction I encountered beds (31 d) in which gastropods and lamellibranchs occur together with Productus semireticulatus Mart., Tegulifera chabarnensis mihi, Schizophoria resupinata Mart., Spirifer aff. gracilis Jan., Dielasma sacculus Mart., and others.

About 20 meters farther east, at point 31 d, I found in finely crystalline greenish-white limestone numerous lamellibranchs (Aviculopecten Murchisoni M’Coy, Avicul. dissimilis Flem., Aviculop. sp., Aviculap. sp., Streblopteria laevigata M’Coy, Streblopteria sp., Pseudamusium ellipticum Phill., Parallelodon cf. tenuis Kon., and others), some gastropods together with Productus Martini Sow., Prod. laticostatus n. sp., Tegulifera chabarnensis n. sp., Schizophoria resupinata Mart. Besides these, there were found here: a representative of the goniatites (Pronorites cyclolobus Phill.) and many solitary corals (Amplexus coralloides Sow., Cyclophyllum (?) sp., and others).

About 80 meters farther east (31 e) I found in a yellowish-white limestone of finely crystalline structure: Productus striatus Fisch., Prod. costatus Sow., Pr. cf. Martini Sow., Prod. semiglobosus n. sp., Tegulifera chabarnensis n. sp., Schizophoria resupinata Mart., various spirifers, Orthotetes senilis Phill., Orthot. crenistria Phill., representatives of the lamellibranchs, goniatites, and others.

Finally, about another 34 meters eastward, I encountered, in a white limestone of distinctly crystalline structure (31 f), a rich fauna in which lamellibranchs of relatively large dimensions played a significant role. The forms encountered here: Eumicrotis hemisphaericum Phill., Pseudamusium ellipticum Phill., Aviculopecten sp., Cardiomorpha (?) sp., Parallelodon sp., and others, together with Productus undatus Defr., Prod. Martini Sow., Prod. punctatus Mart., Marginifera schartimiensis Jan., Pugnax triplex M’Coy, var., Leiopteria lunulata Phill., Schi-

...zophoria resupinata Mart., Prod. striatus Fisch., Reticularia lineata Mart., Martinia Davidsoni n. sp., Griffithides globiceps Phill., and many others. I had already designated this observation point during my excursion in 1904 by the number 360b. In addition, at that time I designated by the numbers 360, 360a, 360c, 360d observation points which also lie on the Otnoshka, and indeed nearer to its mouth. At all these places I found a generally analogous character of the limestone, which indicates that we are evidently dealing with one and the same complex.

All observations made on the Otnoshka lead us to the conclusion that the limestones exposed here have a fairly uniform petrographic character; they fall, apparently, toward the east. The beds occurring in the western part contain large Productidae (Productus hemisphaericus) together with Prod. semireticulatus, Pr. punctatus and others, corals (Strephodes Murchisoni M. E. et H., Syringopora) and a large spirifer. The beds occurring in the eastern part contain a rich fauna; here one finds many lamellibranchs together with various representatives of the brachiopods. A bed which occurs between the two layers just mentioned contains, in great quantity, shells of Productus striatus Fisch. This form, however, I also found at most of the other points on the Otnoshka, as likewise Schizophoria resupinata Mart. It is to be assumed that here we are dealing with different facies of one and the same system of beds.

The greatest number of fossils was collected in the ravine of Klutschi or Klutschiki. Here, at one time, limestone kilns were in operation, and we find here artificially produced stratigraphic profiles; also, considerable limestone fragments are found here, in part already roasted. The material described comes for the most part from this ravine. The ravine extends for about 1¾ versts from west to east. Its upper course disappears in the steppe region adjoining the mountains situated to the west; toward the east the ravine gradually disappears, merging with the depression which opens into the alluvial terrace of the Ural.

In a considerable part of this ravine (about one verst from W to E) a limestone is exposed which, at various places, exhibits insignificant modifications in petrographic respect, but in general is predominantly white in color and has a more or less sharply expressed crystalline structure.

The limestone outcrops are represented here by rock walls of no considerable dimensions, and in most cases the conditions of bedding cannot be determined; only in a few cases can it be established,

that in the western part of the ravine, nearer the upper course, the beds dip in the middle toward E and in the eastern part toward W; in other words, the beds here form a synclinal fold. The fossils collected in various parts of this ravine indicate the following:

At the western boundary of the ravine, near the brownish-colored siliceous shales that continue still farther westward, a yellowish- and greenish-white, very finely crystalline limestone crops out, in which occur Orthotetes senilis Phill., Straparollus Dionysii Montf., Monticulipora (?) Stuckenberg’i n. sp., and others. The conditions of bedding cannot be observed, since the outcrop is of insignificant size and is strongly denuded.

I have designated this observation point by the number 360. About 34 meters to the E I encountered a limestone outcrop (35), yellowish-white in color and of finely crystalline structure, in which the following forms occur: Productus hemisphaericus Sow., Prod. fimbriatus Sow., Marginifera schartimiensis Jah., Spirifer trigonalis Mart., Spirifer elongatus n. sp., Martinia glabra Mart., Reticularia lineata Mart., Straparollus Dionysii Montf., Glyphioceras cf. obtusus Phill.

Still farther to the E, about 60 meters from the preceding point, I encountered a limestone outcrop (34), yellowish-gray in color and of finely crystalline structure, in which the following forms occur: Productus hemisphaericus Sow., Productus striatus Fisch., Prod. fimbriatus Sow., Product. sp., Chaetetes sp., Orthotetes senilis Phill., Schizophoria resupinata Mart., Schizoph. mesoloba Jah., Marginifera schartimiensis Jah., Spirifer sp., Fenestella veneris Fisch., Eunifterus hemisphaericus Phill., Straparollus Dionysii Montf., Ptychomphalus gigas Kon., and others. At this point one may observe, though indistinctly, the bedding conditions: the beds dip gently, approximately toward ESE, and strike approximately toward NNW.

There follows a fairly considerable interval, about 500 meters long, where no outcrops at all are exposed: the banks of the ravine are covered by clayey alluvial deposits and are lower here. It may be supposed, however, that Lower Carboniferous limestone beds are also developed here, since the latter are encountered somewhat farther north, in a terrain adjoining the interval mentioned.

A new series of limestone outcrops, of larger dimensions than the preceding ones, begins at the place of the Klutsriki, where limekilns were still recently in operation. Here one encounters pits and heaps of already burned and still unburned limestone. The quarries afford an insight into the bedding conditions of the limestone, while the already weathered pieces of limestone are easily broken by the hammer—

to be knocked off. This circumstance naturally makes the collecting of fossils considerably easier, and it even happens that the latter can be prepared out undamaged by a blow of the hammer.

The greatest number of fossils comes from the point just mentioned; the material was taken partly directly from the heaps. (These are evidently limestones from different, though probably nearby, points), and partly it was collected in situ at individual observation points, each point being designated by a special letter or a special mark. I had to direct my particular attention to collecting fossils at various points, since only this makes it possible to gain an insight into the differing character of the fauna of the individual points and thus into the alternation of the different limestone beds. The stratigraphic relations cannot be observed directly at most of the outcrops. The material originating from the above-mentioned heaps I have designated by the number 358. This locality is shown in Figure No. 2.

On traversing the ravine in the direction W—E, one may observe the following on the left bank:

At a point which I have designated by the number 358a, a yellowish-white, fine-crystalline limestone comes to light. Here one finds, in great quantity, Productus plicatilis Sow., Spirifer subrotundatus M’Coy?, Reticularia lineata Mart.; in addition there also occur: Prod. latissimus Sow., Prod. Martini Sow., Productus punctatus Mart., Spirifer Mölleri Jan., Spirifer duplicosta Phill., Martinia cf. uralica Tsch., Hustedia radialis Phill., Dielasma attenuatum Mart., Rhynchonella pleurodon Phill., Aviculopecten dissimilis Flem., Brachymetopus uralicus Vern., and others. This outcrop can be followed for 26 meters. The bedding is not clearly observable.

180 meters farther on, another outcrop of limestone (358b) was encountered, the color of which is yellowish-greenish-white. Its structure is fine-crystalline, and here one finds, in great quantity, Productus striatus Fisch., var. angusta, together with Cyrtina sp., Martinia Davidsoni n. sp., Productus hemisphaericus Sow., Spirifer striatus Sow., Spirifer cf. trigonalis, Schizophoria resupinata Mart., Martinia glabra Mart., Productus Martini Sow. This outcrop can be followed for 64 meters. The bedding is not clearly observable.

50 meters farther on we find a limestone outcrop (358c), 6 meters long, with a considerable quantity of Bryozoa—Fenestella veneris Fisch.; in addition there were encountered: Productus inflatus Mc. Ch., Leptopsis sp., Productus latissimus Sow., Prod. hemisphaericus Sow., and others.

90 meters farther on, one encounters a yellowish-white, very finely crystalline limestone (358 d), in which chiefly brachiopods occur; the predominant form here is Spirifer bilobatus n. sp. Also found here were: Fenestella veneris Fisch., Dibunophyllum sp., Spirifer Darvini M’rr. ?, Rhynchonella pleurodon Phill., Euomphalus hemisphaericus Phill., Loxonema constrictum Mart., Euomphalus cf. pentangulatus Sow., and others. The limestone beds apparently dip toward W.

Farther to the E we encountered a limestone outcrop (358d—e) of light brownish-gray color and almost compact structure, in which chiefly Monticulipora (?) Stuckenbergii n. sp. and others occur, together with brachiopods, among which Productus fasciatiformis n. sp. appears as a new species. In addition, the following were found here: Prod. hemisphaericus Mart., Pugnax acuminata Mart., Aviculopecten sp., Stroboceras sulcatum Sow., Griffithides cf. seminiferus Phill., Brachymetopus uralicus Vern, and others.

Farther to the E, about 48 meters from point 358d, we encountered a yellowish-white, very finely crystalline limestone (358 e) with a rich fauna, which includes brachiopods as well as representatives of many Lamellibranchiata. Among the brachiopods the following new species are found here—Productus laticostatus n. sp., Prod. marginiferus n. sp., Tegulifera chabarnensis n. sp., Spiriferina imbricata n. sp., and others; Productus mesolobus Phill., Prod. Karpinskianus Jan., Spiriferina imbricata n. sp., Martinia glabra, and others also occur here frequently.

About 150—160 meters in an easterly direction from the preceding point, a yellowish-white, finely crystalline outcrop comes to the surface (358g). Here the bedding of the limestone can be observed: the beds strike NNW and dip 40°—45° toward WSW. The following were collected here: Schizophoria resupinata Mart., Prod. inflatus Mc. Ch., Spirifer Mölleri Jan., Martinia aff. uralica Tsch., var. longa Tsch., Reticularia lineata Mart., Straparollus Dionysii Montf., Cyrtoceras sp., Productus striatus Fisch., Prod. hemisphaericus Sow., and others.

Farther to the E one encounters a limestone outcrop (358 h) of grayish color with yellowish spots and a finely crystalline structure. Here were collected Chaetetes radians Fisch., Syringopora cf. ramosa Park., Orthotetes crenistria Phill., Chonetes cf. papilionacea Phill.

Farther to the E, over a distance of 360—400 meters, limestone outcrops can be observed at various points, in which Productus striatus Fisch. always occurs alongside other forms.

One may cite 10 such points. I have designated them (from W to E) as 32 VIII, 32 VII, 32 VI, 32 V, 32 IV, 32 III, 32 II, 32 I, HB 32a, HB 32b. At all these points the limestone is yellowish and grayish-white in color, finely crystalline; its bedding condi—

conditions, however, cannot be clearly observed; one may only suppose in advance that the dip here is analogous to that of the nearby point 358g, i.e., that the beds dip toward WWS.

In some places, as for example at point 32.I, which is situated near the mouth of the ravine, one encounters only brachiopods, while in other places, together with the latter, lamellibranchs, gastropods, and trilobites also occur. At one point (No. 3.32a), together with Productus striatus Fisch. and other brachiopods, representatives of Orthoceras and of the goniatites (among others Pronoritеs cyclolobus Phill., var. uralensis Karp.) were found in great quantity (cephalopod bed).

All observations made in the “Klutschiki” ravine lead us to the conclusion that here everywhere a Lower Carboniferous limestone comes to the surface. Its conditions of bedding cannot be clearly observed. On the basis of observations of Devonian deposits lying nearby (W), as well as of some observations at “Klutschiki” itself (see point No. 358g), the presence here of a synclinal fold is to be assumed.

The establishment of individual horizons and of their alternation is impossible, since there are no stratigraphic profiles in which the stratigraphic relationships could be seen. It was possible only to determine individual points at which various combinations of fossils occur. In addition, it remains to be added that in this ravine the form Productus striatus Fisch. occurs almost everywhere. This form is therefore characteristic of the limestone under investigation. In individual cases where Productus striatus is not present, the Lower Carboniferous character of the limestone is confirmed by the occurrence of such forms as Pr. mesolobus, Prod. hemisphaericus, and Chonetes papilionacea.

At the places where Productus striatus Fisch., var. angusta n. var., occurs in great quantity, other forms are rare.

Besides the outcrops mentioned, another piece of limestone should be noted, which my postilion found between Klutschiki and Otnoschka. I myself, despite many efforts, could not find the outcrop of this limestone. The limestone is grayish-brown in color, of very finely crystalline structure, and contains a rich, well-preserved fauna. I have designated it by the letter A. It contains the following forms: Monticulipora (?) Stuckenbergі n. sp., Orthotetes crenistria Phill., Orthot. senilis Phill., Schizophoria resupinata Mart., Prod. hemisphericus Sow., Spirifer striatus Mart., Reticul. lineata Sow., Martinia aff. uralica, var. longa Tsch., Goniophoria monstrosa n. sp., G. carinata n. sp., G. plana n. sp.

It must also be noted that south of “Klutschiki,” at a point situated near the siliceous shales cropping out still farther to the south,

which in turn rests upon Devonian limestones on the river Rasboika, there occurs a limestone in which Productus hemisphaericus, Naticopsis sp., Orthotetes senilis Phill. and others were found. The limestone is of a breccia-like structure, which is to be attributed to the influence of tectonic processes. The conditions of bedding cannot be clearly observed. Apparently the limestone strikes in a NNW direction and dips toward E by N.

Finally, mention should also be made of a small hill situated not far from the highway from Orsk to Orenburg, near the so-called Olchowy Wood—about one verst from the place where the highway crosses the R. Rasboika, on the left bank of the latter. From this hill come the following forms: Productus striatus Fisch., Prod. semireticulatis Mart., Chonetes conoides Sow., Pr. granulosus Phill., small Chonetes, Marginifera Schartimiensis Jan., Reticularia lineata Sow., Martinia glabra Mart., Schizophoria resupinata Mart., Spiriferina cristata Schl., Dielasma attenuatum Sow., Rhynchonella pleurodon Phill., a round smooth Spirifer, Monticulipora (?) Stuckenberg’i n. sp., Fenestella veneris Fisch., Aviculopecten granulosus Phill., Griffithides globiceps Phill., goniatites, and others.

In general, the fauna encountered here is analogous to that from the middle part of the Klutschiki ravine.

Having listed all the points where the Lower Carboniferous limestone occurs, we shall try to draw conclusions from all the observations and to establish its stratigraphic relations.

The Lower Carboniferous limestone, the object of my investigations, forms part of a basin which is bounded on the W, SW, and S by eruptive rocks, and, enclosing it on the E, NE, and N, by Upper Devonian Clymenia limestones and siliceous shales.

These formations encompass the limestone region in the form of an arc. This can be observed from the fact that these formations in the northern part (in the Iswestkowy ravine) strike NNE and dip ESE, while in the southern part, on the river Rasboika, they strike E and dip N. These bedding relations of the Devonian formations are in part to be attributed to the strike of the eruptive rocks.

As for the Lower Carboniferous limestone, its bedding relations can be clearly observed only in the Iswestkowy ravine, while at other points this is almost impossible. On the basis of the observations made, however, it may be established that the limestone forms a synclinal fold. The western limb of this fold runs parallel to the arc formed by the Devonian deposits. How far the limestone extends to the E is difficult to determine, since the

the region becomes lower toward the E direction and beyond, and here only alluvial deposits are to be seen, which probably in part cover the limestone. In any case, in an easterly direction no limestone outcrops are to be seen anywhere; the elevations situated near Orsk consist of siliceous shales and porphyrites.

The collecting of fossils at a considerable number of points in the limestone region indicates, as may be seen from the foregoing, that the limestone under investigation forms a complex of analogous beds, both petrographically and paleontologically. Although this complex appears to be rather thick, as is to be concluded from the considerable dimensions of the section of beds that extends along “Klutschiki,” and also from the fact that the limestone beds do not lie horizontally, it must nevertheless be supposed that, since the limestone beds form a fold, the section visible at Klutschiki represents only an insignificant part of the complex. Moreover, it is possible that the limestone fold is not a simple one, but has undergone secondary folding, so that the outcrops in the various ravines are formed by an insignificant complex, although at different points different kinds of beds may be observed. It is not readily possible, on the basis of the observations made by us, to establish completely the stratigraphic relations of the Lower Carboniferous limestone of this region, and thus to set up a scheme of the succession of beds of the Lower Carboniferous limestone of the Urals in general, since I cannot be certain that I have fully and diversely exhausted the paleontological material of this region. On the basis of the observations in the Izvestkovy ravine one might suppose that the sequence of deposition of the individual limestone beds is such that beds with Productus striatus Fisch. are followed by beds with Prod. hemisphaericus Mart. This, however, is contradicted by the observations made farther south at “Klutschiki” and “Otnoschka.” At Klutschiki, in the western part, i.e. where, on the basis of the general geological structure of the region, the beds are to be regarded as older, beds with Prod. hemisphaericus Mart. occur, whereas Prod. striatus, in the western part, i.e. in younger beds, occurs. The beds with Prod. hemisphaericus Mart., however, occur again in the eastern part of the limestone region at “Klutschiki,” at the place where the limestone outcrops disappear.

Likewise, at “Otnoschka” the beds with Prod. hemisphaericus occur in the more westerly part, while Prod. striatus Fisch. appears in the more easterly part of this ravine.

It is therefore to be assumed that the observations which were made at “Iswestkowy” are insufficient, and that the absence of Prod. hemisphaericus Mart. in the western part is only apparent and is to be attributed to the incompleteness of the observations (see above); in other words, it is to be assumed that the beds with Prod. hemisphaericus Mart., which farther west occur nearer to the Upper Devonian deposits, were not noticed, all the more since the mountain ridges in which the limestone was first discovered are separated from the Devonian deposits by a considerable intervening space, in which no outcrops are to be seen. The character of the fauna which was encountered in the mountain ridges is also such that the beds must undoubtedly be regarded as belonging to older horizons. As for the limestone beds with Prod. hemisphaericus Mart. which occur farther east, nearer the mouth of the Iswestkowy, they are most likely to be considered older. They form the eastern limb of the syncline, which in turn is formed by the Lower Carboniferous limestone; this also apparently indicates the fact that the syncline is narrower in its northern part than in the southern.

On the basis of all the observations and facts cited above, we arrive at the following conclusion.

The synclinal fold which, in the region under investigation, is formed by Lower Carboniferous limestone beds extends in a meridional direction and is of irregular form. In its northern part, where it can be traced for about 8 meters, it is narrower; in the southern part, however, it attains a width of up to 2 versts. This syncline was subjected to a secondary folding, a fact which can already be quite clearly observed at “Iswestkowy.” The limbs of the syncline are formed by limestone beds with Prod. hemisphaericus Mart., to which are added corals from the families Lithostrotion, Syringopora, Chaetetes and others; the middle part is formed by limestones with Prod. striatus Fisch. and by limestones which contain a very rich fauna and, in most cases, also Prod. striatus Fisch., though in individual cases they do not contain this form. Such cases may be observed both at “Otnoschka” and at “Klutschiki.” It is to be assumed that these beds are the youngest in comparison with all the others developed here.

The ravines Iswestkowy, Otnoschka, and Klutschiki cut across the syncline approximately in the transverse direction: “Iswestkowy” cuts it in its narrower part, “Otnoschka” its western limb and its middle, and “Klutschiki” almost its entire width at the very broadest place.

In conclusion, something more remains to be said about the material which was collected by Krasnojarzeff and is kept at the University in Petersburg be-

is to be added. This material comes, as already mentioned, from 3 points: from ravine I, on the left of the River Rasbojka, one verst from the village of Chabarninsky; from ravine II, on the left of the River Rasbojka; and from a point (III) that is 3 versts from the village of Chabarninsky. It is to be assumed that ravine I is none other than the ravine “Klutschiki,” and ravine II is the “Otnoschka.” Point III is evidently the point situated north of “Otnoschka”—probably not far from “Jswestkowy.” In the palaeontological material that comes from the 3 mentioned points there is also Prod. striatus Fisch.; as for Prod. hemisphaericus Mart., it was found only in ravine I. It is to be assumed that the material collected at each of the mentioned points comes not from a single bed, but from different beds.

If we compare the Carboniferous deposits with which we are concerned with those developed in various parts of the Urals, we must necessarily come to the conclusion that these deposits belong to the lowest stage of the lower division of the Carboniferous system (to stage C according to Tschernyscheff*), with both zones being developed here: a) beds with Prod. giganteus Mart. (hemisphaericus) and b) beds with a large quantity of Prod. striatus Fisch.

Of great interest is the fact that the fauna of our limestone, besides a large number of specific forms, also includes forms common to the fauna of the limestone on the Fl. Schartimka. This fact again confirms my view concerning the Lower Carboniferous age of the Schartim limestone. That this is so will be further demonstrated by the detailed study of the fauna of the Chabarny limestone, as well as by comparing the latter with the Schartim fauna and the fauna of various other localities of Carboniferous age.

* See Tschernyscheff, General Geological Map of Russia, Sheet 139, p. 246.

Chapter II.

Description of the Fauna.

Protozoa.

Rhizopoda.

Foraminifera.

Coelenterata.

Anthozoa.

Tetracorallia Haeckel.

Amplexus Sowerby.

1. Amplexus coralloides Sowerby.
   Plate I, Fig. 1a, b.

Zaphrentis Rafinesque et Clifford. 1820

1. Zaphrentis Phillipsi M. Edw. et Haime.

Pentaphyllum de Koninck. 1871.

1. Pentaphyllum cf. caryophyllatum Kon.
   Plate I, Fig. 2.

Clisiophyllum Dana. 1846.

1. Clisiophyllum (?) sp.
   Plate I, Fig. 3a, 3b.

Dibunophyllum Nicholson et Thomson. 1876.

1. Dibunophyllum sp. (No. 1).
   Plate I, Fig. 5, 7, 8

2. Dibunophyllum Barboti Stuck?
   Plate I, Fig. 6

Cyclophyllum Duncan et Thomson 1882.

1. Cyclophyllum (?) sp.
   Pl. I, Fig. 4a, 4b.

Lithostrotion Fleming. 1828.

1. Lithostrotion cf. caespitosum Martin.

Strephodes M’Coy 1849.

Hexacorallia Haeckel.

Tabulata. Milne Edwards et Haime.

Favosites Lamarck.

11. Favosites (?) sp.
Plate I. Figs. 9 and 10.

To this genus apparently belongs a small colony of fan-like arranged prismatic tubular cells, whose walls are perforated by pores. Horizontal floors are not clearly visible, and therefore the assignment of this form to Favosites cannot be established precisely.

Locality—“Otnoschka” (31d).

Michelinia de Koninck. 1842.

12. Michelinia tenuisepta Phill.

Cladochonus M’ Coy 1847.

13. Cladochonus aff. Michelini Edwards et Haime?

Syringopora Goldfuss 1826.

14. Syringopora cf. ramulosa Park.

Chaetetes Fischer v. Waldheim. 1837.

15. Chaetetes radians Fisch.

Geinitzella Waagen et Wentzel. 1887.

16. Geinitzella columnaris Schl.

17. Monticulipora (?) d’Orbigny.

Thin lamellae, which often form tubes of various diameter or also nodular bodies of various form. — The lamellae consist of a layer of numerous closely adjoining prismatic tubular cells, perpendicular to the surface of the mouth of the colony. Often one sees on the lamellae, especially when they form thick bodies, irregularly distributed round openings, similar to those in the family Coscinium¹. Our form has a considerable similarity to the last-named family, but differs in that its lamellae consist of only one row of tubular cells, whereas the family Coscinium possesses two such rows. It is to be assumed that the colonies of this form lived rolled up into empty little tubes, and only later were the latter filled by foreign masses. The assignment of this form to the family Monticulipora is somewhat doubtful, since it

from their usual representatives by the very slight height of the tubular cells and by the absence of horizontal floors. It also resembles Ceriopora, from which it is likewise distinguished by very short tubular cells. It is possible that it belongs to the bryozoans. It occurs often in the limestone of Chabarny and is represented by the species which I call Montic. (?) Stuckenbergii n. sp. The form belongs to the same family to which the so-called Monticulipora (?) inflata Kon. also belongs.

18. Monticulipora (?) Stuckenbergii n. sp.

Plate I, Figs. 11, 12, 13.

The pieces are of various form and consist of thin lamellae, which often form empty little tubes. The lamellae consist of a layer of prismatic cells standing perpendicular to the surface. The thickness of the lamellae is about 0.5 mm and does not exceed 1 mm. Their outer surface appears granular, since the boundaries between the individual cells are somewhat depressed. The cells are very small: on an area of 1 mm there are 3–4 of them. The form is very similar to Monticulipora (?) inflata Kon.,² but differs in the rounded openings in the lamellae of the pieces and in somewhat larger cells: in Koninck’s species there are 28 cells on an area of 5 mm, in my form only 15–20.

This form is found everywhere in the Chabarny limestone: at “Klutschiki”—at points 36, 32. VIII, 32. IV, 32, III, 358, 358(a), 358(c–d); at “Otnoschka”—at points 360, 31 (d.) between Otnoschka and Klutschiki, and near the Otchowy grove.

Echinodermata.

Crinoidea.

Plate I, Figs. 14, 15, 16a, 16b, 17.

Bryozoa.

Fam. Fenestellidae King.

Fenestella Lonsdale 1839.

19. Fenestella veneris Fisch.

Plate II, Figs. 1, 2 and 11.

20. Fenestella virgosa Eichwald.

Plate II, Figs. 3, 7, 8 and 10.

21. Fenestella orientalis Eichwald.

1. Fenestella Morrissii M’Coy.

2. Fenestella sp.

Polypora M’Coy.

1. Polypora Kutorgae Stuck.

Plate II, Fig. 9.

Synocladia King. 1849.

1. Synocladia sp.

Family Acanthocladiidae. Zittel.

Ichtyorachis M’Coy.

1. Ichtyorachis Newenhami M’Coy?

Palaeoflustra Joulien, 1896.

1. Palaeoflustra aff. Jolieti Joul.

Plate II, Figs. 5, 6.

Brachiopoda.

Strophomenaceae. Schuckert.

Family Strophomenidae.

Strophomena Blainville.

1. Strophomena analoga Phill.

Plate II, Fig. 12 and Plate XX, Figs. 5a, 5b, 5c.

Orthotetes Fischer von Waldheim. 1830.

1. Orthotetes crenistria Phillips.

Plate II, Figs. 15a, 15b.

1. Orthotetes senilis Phillips.

Plate II, Figs. 13a, 13b.

1. Orthotetes radialis Phillips.

Plate II, Fig. 14.

Family Productidae

Chonetes Fischer 1837.

1. Chonetes comoides Sowerby.

Plate III, Fig. 3 and Fig. 13.

1. Chonetes cf. papilionacea Phillips.

Plate III, Fig. 11.

1. Chonetes Dalmaniana Koninck.

Plate III, Fig. 7.

1. Chonetes Laguessiana Kon.

Plate III, Figs. 9a, 9b.

1. Chonetes Hardrensis Phill.
     Pl. III, Figs. 4, 5.

2. Chonetes sp.,

3. Chonetes tuberculata M’Coy?
     Pl. III, Figs. 10 and 12.

4. Chonetes variolata d’Orb.?
     Pl. III, Fig. 8.

5. Chonetes crassistria M’Coy.
     Pl. III, Figs. 1, 2.

Productus Sowerby. 1814.

1. Productus striatus Fischer.
     Pl. IV, Figs. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6.

1830–1837. Mytilus striatus Fischer. Oryctogr. du gouvernement de Moscou, p. 181, pl. 19, Fig. 4. 1900. Productus striatus. M. Janischewsky. Die Fauna des Steinkohlenkalkes, am Flusse Schartimka, östlicher Abhang des Ural, p. 112 (see synonymy).

In the Carboniferous limestone near Chabarny this species occurs in an enormous number of specimens. Here one finds both typical representatives, which differ in no respect from the forms described by Verneuil, Koninck, and Davidson, and also forms that differ from the latter in certain respects. The difference consists in their being unusually narrow and curving toward the lateral margins, which gives them the shape of small tubes. In addition, these forms have a very narrow hinge margin and a pointed beak. The latter is very rarely preserved, which is most probably to be explained by the fact that this part of the shell is the youngest and therefore the thinnest. Such narrow forms always occur in groups, with the individual specimens arranged parallel to one another, which at first sight recalls the stock of a compound coral (see Figs. 3 and 6). This form is so characteristic that it must be designated as a special variety, and I propose to name it

var. angusta.

I regard it as a variety because it is closely connected with the typical representatives of Prod. striatus by gradual transitions.

Geological distribution: This species is strongly represented in the limestone near Chabarny and is found in all beds. Particularly many representatives of this species (var. angusta) are encountered in bed 358 b (“Klutschiki”); it is also found at Otnoschka (31 c). Also in the Krasnojarzeff material—

material it is present and comes from gully I (an enormous quantity), from gully II, and from the point 3 versts distant from the village of Chabarny. This species is represented in the Lower Carboniferous of the Urals and of European Russia and constitutes a form characteristic of these deposits. This form has also been found in Belgium (near Visé), in England, and in Ireland.

42. Productus hemisphaericus Sowerby.
Plate III, Figs. 16, 17; Plate V, Fig. 7; and Plate VII, Figs. 7, 8, 10.

1. Productus hemisphaericus, Sowerby. Miner. Conch., p. 31, pl. 328 and p. 117, pl. 561.

2. Productus giganteus, Koninck (pars). Monographie du genre Productus, p. 34, pl. 1, fig. 2 a, b, c; pl. III, 1 a; pl. IV, fig. 1 a, b, c, d; pl. XI, fig. 8.

1857—1863. Productus giganteus Davidson (pars). British carboniferous Brachiopoda, p. 141, pl. XL, fig. 4—9.

1. Productus giganteus M. Janischewsky. Die Fauna des Steinkohlenkalkes am Flusse Schartimka, p. 114 (pars).

In the limestone that occurs north of the village of Chabarny, one often finds a large Productus. It differs in no way from the forms that occur in the Lower Carboniferous of the Urals and were usually regarded as Prod. giganteus Mart. From the typical representatives of the latter species, however, it differs in the complete absence of longitudinal folds on the ventral valve. As I already pointed out in my work cited in the synonymy, this character is of a fairly constant nature, and therefore the forms in question had to be regarded as a variety. Now I even consider it possible to separate the forms completely, and I propose retaining the name hemisphaericus, which Sowerby had already given to such forms. This species was designated by Koninck, Davidson, and other authors as completely identical with Prod. giganteus, but, on the basis of the above-mentioned feature, they must be separated. Together with the large forms, smaller ones also occur in the limestone of Chabarny; these very closely resemble the smaller representatives of Prod. hemisphaericus figured by Sowerby and Davidson. These forms might also be taken for Prod. Cora d’Orb. or corrugatus M. Coy, but they differ in a broader form and in the more strongly enrolled umbo of the ventral valve.

Koninck points out that large foldless Productus, which he calls giganteus, occur in the environs of Visé; these forms apparently also belong to Prod. hemisphaericus.

Among these forms one often finds such as possess, at the frontal margin, a loop-like extension, as is the case, for example, in Prod. lineatus.*)

This form was encountered at “Klutschiki” at points 358 (c–d)?, 358 (d–e), 358–360, between Klutschiki and Otnuschka (A), at “Otnuschka,” and at “Iswestkowy.”

One specimen is also present in Krasnjarzeff’s material and comes from ravine I, to the left of “Rasbojka,” one verst from the village of Chabarninsky.

43. Productus latissimus Sowerby.
    Plate IV, Fig. 1.

44. Productus aff. latissimus Sowerby.
    Plate I, Fig. 19.

In my collection there is also a very large Productus, which in general closely resembles Prod. latissimus, but whose great dimensions compel us to designate it as aff. latissimus. It also recalls Prod. giganteus, but its weakly developed longitudinal folds and its broader form distinguish it from this species as well.

The width of this specimen is not less than 180 mm, its length about 100 mm. Locality—“Klutschiki.”

45. Productus corrugatus M’Coy.
    Plate VI, Figs. 1 and 2.

46. Productus Neffedievi Verneuil.
    Plate VI, Figs. 3 and 5,

47. Productus tenuistriatus Verneuil 1845.
    Plate VI, Figs. 4, 6a, 6b and 9.

48. Productus semireticulatus Martin. 1809.
    Plate VII, Figs. 1, 2, 3, 4.

(Pars Productus semireticulatus Davidson and Koninck, see below).

This form has a considerable distribution in the Carboniferous deposits. As is evident, however, from the work of Th. N. Tschernischew, this species is entirely absent from the Upper Carboniferous deposits of the Urals and the Timan, and those forms which were formerly regarded as Prod. semireticulatus are divided by Tschernischew into several distinct, though related, species, which differ quite definitely from Prod. semireticulatus. Comparison of the Prod. semireticulatus from Chabarny with that from Schartim showed complete identity of the two.

*) See Tchernischew. Die obercarbonischen Brachiopoden des Ural und des Timan, p. 285, Plate XLVIII, Fig. 4.

Just as among the representatives from Schartym, besides typical forms, strongly arched and plate-like forms also occur, so among the representatives from Chabarny the same modifications are found. Here one finds forms with a sharply—or also weakly—developed sinus of the ventral valve.

I designate as Prod. semireticulatus those forms which Koninck and Davidson call variet. antiquatus: forms distinguished by large dimensions, a regular arching of the ventral valve, a relatively broad form, a distinct sinus, and sharply expressed concentric folds on the visceral side of the shell. Such forms have been found at points 358 (d), 358 (a), 360 (b). In Krasnoyarz’s material as well, a large quantity of such specimens is present.

1. Productus Martini Sowerby.
     Plate III, Fig. 14 and Plate VII, Figs. 5, 6, 9 and 11.

2. Productus Martini Sowerby. Miner Conchol., vol IV, p. 15 pl. 317, fig. 2, 3, 4.

3. Productus concinnus Sowerby. Ibidem, p. 16, pl. 318, fig. 1.

4. Productus semireticulatus Koninck (pars). Monogr. du genre Productus, p. 83, pl. VIII, fig. 1 g, h; pl. IX, fig. 1 a, b, g, h, i.

1858—1863. Productus semireticulatus Davidson (pars). British carboniferous Brachiopoda, p. 149, pl. XLIII, fig. 7—10.

In the material from the vicinity of Chabarny one finds many forms which correspond completely to Sowerby’s description of Prod. Martini and at the same time connect Prod. Martini and Prod. concinnus to such a degree that it becomes difficult to separate them from one another. As is known, Koninck and Davidson regarded these forms as varieties of Prod. semireticulatus; but since in this way the last-named species receives too broad limits, it is more expedient to separate them. I consider it possible to include under Prod. semireticulatus those forms which Koninck and Davidson call var. antiquatus Pr. antiquatus Sow.; those forms, however, which appear in them as var. Martini and concinnus, I regard as one species, since they are connected by gradual transitions. Sowerby’s drawings of these forms also possess a considerable similarity. Koninck’s description of these forms also does not contradict this union. It is to be assumed that Prod. concinnus represents merely a young modification of Prod. Martini. The distinguishing characters of Prod. Martini and Prod. semireticulatus are the following: the former possesses smaller dimensions, a more elongated form, a more irregular development of the anterior extension, a less pronounced sinus

of the ventral valve, a knee-shaped bend of the same, and less sharply developed concentric furrows, also occurring over a smaller area, which cut across the longitudinal ribs in the visceral part of the shell.

In some specimens of my collection the formation of a trail at the frontal margin can be observed.

Koninck and Davidson point out that Prod. antiquatus and Prod. Martini are connected with one another by gradual transitions. In my material, however, a sharp boundary between these two forms is noticeable, which makes their separation still more necessary. The smaller specimens of this form very closely resemble the Productus from the Schartym fauna which I have identified as Prod. longispinus Sow.; it is possible that the latter should be identified as Prod. Martini.

Prod. Martini occurs at “Klutschiki”—at points 358 (a), 358 (e), 358 (d—e); on the Otnoschka,—at points 360, 360 (a), 360 (b), and in the Iswestkowy ravine (359).

50. Productus aff. transversalis Tschernischeff.
Plate V, Fig. 13.

1902 Productus transversalis Tschernischeff. Die Obercarbonischen Brachiopoden des Ural und des Timan, p. 258, Plate XXIX, Figs. 4—6.

A large fragment of a ventral valve, which in its general habit strongly recalls Prod. transversalis Tsch. Our specimen, like the species mentioned, has a broad form, relatively coarse ribs, and ears which are sharply delimited from the remaining part of the valve. The length of the shell is 70 mm, the width about 80 mm. I cannot decide to designate my specimen as completely identical with the form mentioned above, since, first, I possess only a fragment whose surface is worn away, and since, secondly, the specimen available to me is distinguished by somewhat less developed ears and more weakly expressed concentric folds. The specimen comes from point 358 (Klutschiki).

My fragment is completely identical with a specimen which comes from Boland (Yorkshire) and is in one of the collections of the palaeontological cabinet of the Technological Institute in Tomsk. This specimen has erroneously been identified as Prod. giganteus, but in reality is completely identical with the form just described.

51. Productus inflatus Mc. Chesney 1867.
Plate III, Fig. 19 and Plate XX, Fig. 2a, 2b.

52. Productus chabarneensis n. sp.
Plate VI, Figs. 11a, 11b and 11 c.

A relatively large form. In its general habitus it is very reminiscent of Prod. semireticulatus, but differs from the latter in that it has no sinus on the ventral valve, and in that the concentric folds are very weakly developed and cover only a small part of the shell near the beak; they become more distinct near the ears. The ventral valve is strongly arched, and its beak projects somewhat beyond the straight hinge margin. The ears are not sharply delimited from the rest of the shell. The middle part of the shell is somewhat flattened. The dorsal valve is somewhat concave, and between it and the ventral valve there is a considerable intervening space. Longitudinal ribs—as in Prod. semireticulatus. Their number increases by dichotomy and intercalation. They are intersected by fine growth striae. Besides the ribs, a weak longitudinal folding is to be observed; this is especially visible on the internal molds. On the surface, especially on the ears, traces of spines can be observed. The shell has its greatest width at the straight hinge margin—42 mm, the length—34 mm; the distance between the valves—12 mm. On the basis of the characteristic features possessed by this form, I decided to establish it as a new species under the name Prod. Chabarnensis. It resembles Prod. Martini, but differs from the latter by the absence of the sinus and by the irregular continuation of the frontal margin.

I found this form on the Klutschiki (upper course 35), in the middle course 358e, and on the Otnoschka 360 (b).

1. Productus longispinus Sowerby.
2. Productus constitutus Sowerby.
3. Productus aculeatus. Martin. 1809.
4. Productus curvirostris Schellwien.
     Plate XX, Fig. 4a, 4b.
5. Productus semiglobosus n. sp.
     Plate VI, Fig. 7a, 7b,

A very small, hemispherical form. Ventral valve uniformly convex. Its beak projects only weakly beyond the straight hinge margin, where the broadest part of the shell is situated. Along the hinge margin of the ventral valve appear small angular ears, which are not sharply delimited from the remaining part of the shell. The surface is covered with sparse, somewhat longitudinally elongated tubercles, arranged in an approximately checkerboard-like pattern. The dorsal valve is considerably concave and covered with pits corresponding to the tubercles of the ventral valve.

It also possesses angular auricles, which are not sharply delimited from the remaining part of the shell. Dimensions: the length of one specimen—5 mm, of the other—9 mm; the width of the first—5 mm, of the second—10 mm; the distance between the valves—1 mm and 3 mm.

In its sculpture the form recalls Prod. Keyserlingianus Kon., Prod. aculeatus Mart., and Prod. curvirostris Schellw., but differs from the two latter by the weakly recurved and broader beak, and from the former by its narrower form, less developed auricles, and weakly developed beak.

Locality—various points of the “Klutschiki,” “Otnoschkä,” and the Iswestkowy ravine. The form also occurs in the material from Krasnojarzeff and was mistakenly identified by me as Prod. Keyserlingianus.

1. Productus rarituberculatus Janisch.

2. Productus granulosus Phillips 1836.
       Pl. IV, Fig. 11.

3. Productus sp.
       Pl. IV, Fig. 10.

The sculpture of the shell differs in no respect from that of Prod. granulosus Phill.; on the frontal margin there is an indication of a tubular spine, which suggests that we are here evidently dealing with a new form. Owing to lack of material, however, it seems impossible to us to establish a new species.

Locality—Point (Klutschiki).

1. Productus Karpinskianus Jan.
       Plate X, Figs. 17, 18.

2. Productus mesolobus Phillips. 1836.
       Plate V, Figs. 6, 8.

3. Productus undatus Defrance.
       Plate V, Fig. 12.

4. Productus sp. (No. 1),
       Plate V, Fig. 11.

An elongated, concave dorsal valve, of acute-angled form except for the auricles. The auricles are rectangular, large, somewhat depressed, and separated from the remaining part of the shell by furrows. The surface of the shell is covered with very fine longitudinal ribs, which are almost imperceptible, since they are cut by numerous sharp concentric folds. The auricles are smooth and are covered only with traces of accretion. The shell has its greatest width at the straight hinge margin. The scul-

in sculpture it recalls Prod. undatus, but differs from it by its elongated form, its sharp beak, and large, smooth ears. Length—15.5 mm, width—14.5 mm.

Locality—Klutschiki and Otnoschka.

65. Productus sp. (No. 2).

Plate V, Fig. 4.

An incomplete impression of a fairly large dorsal valve, almost semicircular in form. The shell is nearly flat, and its surface is covered with numerous fine radial ribs, which are intersected by closely arranged, sharp, angular concentric folds. The regular character of the folds is partly disturbed by fractures of the shell, which apparently occurred while the animal was still alive. Dimensions: width (near the straight hinge margin)—38 mm, length—27 mm. In character this form recalls Kayser’s figure from the Upper Carboniferous fauna of Loping (Richthofen. China, Vol. IV, p. 188, Pl. 2b, Fig. 12), which is supposed to represent Prod. undatus Defr. It is, however, highly doubtful whether this determination is correct. Moreover, he himself also doubts its correctness, pointing to the large dimensions of his form and its coarser concentric folds.

Locality—Klutschiki, point 358 (a).

66. Productus sp. (No. 3).

Plate V, Fig. 1.

The elongated dorsal valve is bent knee-like and has a straight hinge margin. Near the latter are the ears, which are set off from the rest of the valve by a slight elevation. The surface of the valve is covered with radial ribs and concentric folds, which are identical with those of Prod. sp. No. 1; however, this specimen differs from the latter in its broader beak, broader form, and folded ears. Dimensions: length—27 mm, width—29 mm.

Locality.—Klutschiki, point 358 (a).

67. Productus plicatilis Sowerby.

Plate V, Figs. 3, 5, 9, 10.

68. Productus planus n. sp.

Plate V, Figs. 2a, 2b, 2c.

A semicircular form with a weakly projecting blunt beak, which scarcely protrudes beyond the hinge margin. The visceral part of the ventral valve is weakly convex, occupies more than 2/3 of the shell length, and

only at the frontal margin is the shell bent outward in a knee-like manner. It possesses flat, sharp-cornered ears, which are not very strongly delimited from the remaining part of the shell. The hinge margin is straight and represents the greatest width of the shell. The surface of the shell is covered with radial ribs, which in the visceral part are only very weakly perceptible, since they are intersected by numerous sharp concentric folds. The surface of the shell shows no traces of tubular spines. On the hinge margin, on the other hand, rare, relatively long tubular spines may be clearly observed. The diameter of the tubes becomes gradually smaller in the direction from the ears toward the umbo. There are 4 of them on each side of the umbo. Dimensions: width—27 mm; length—20 mm; the distance between the valves reaches 6 mm. The shells are thin.

This form is very reminiscent of Prod. plicatilis Sow., but differs from the latter in its flat shells, the absence of a sinus of the ventral shell, and in the long tubular spines on the hinge margin. This form also recalls Prod. Griffithianus Kon.,¹ but differs from the latter in the spines, which stand not on the ears but on the hinge margin, in their varying diameter, and in the absence of a sinus of the ventral valve.

Locality—Klutschiki, point 358.

69. Productus punctatus Martin. 1809.
Plate X, Fig. 16.

70. Productus fimbriatus Sow. 1824.
Plate IV, Fig. a, 8b, and 9.

71. Productus cf. pyxidiformis. Kon. 1847.

72. Productus fasciatiformis n. sp.
Plate X, Fig. 11a, 11b, 11c.

A not especially large, semicircular form. The ventral valve is uniformly convex, and its umbo projects with its pointed end a little beyond the hinge margin. The umbo gradually passes into the middle part of the shell. The ears are almost flat, have rounded ends, and are not sharply delimited from the remaining part of the shell. The hinge margin is straight. The surface of the shell appears to be smooth, but on closer observation proves to be covered with weak, narrow, concentric ribs, which divide the entire shell surface into relatively broad, concentric, flat bands. Each of the latter bears a row of weakly developed, rare tubercles. The dor-

shell is concave; it is regularly depressed in the middle, and this depression is not sharply delimited from the almost flat ears; in general it follows the form of the ventral shell. Like the latter, the dorsal shell also has narrow concentric ribs on its surface. These divide the surface into flat concentric bands, which are provided with tubercles; only on the dorsal shell is this sculpture somewhat more sharply expressed. The tubercles represent the former point of attachment of the spines; this can be observed on the dorsal shell, where the spines attached to the tubercles are in part preserved. Dimensions: length = 20 mm, thickness = 5 mm, width = 25 mm. The shell is thin.

This form recalls Prod. fasciatus Kut., but differs in its smaller dimensions, weakly expressed concentric ribs, and tubercles, which form only a single row on each concentric band.

By the same characters this form also differs from Prod. punctatus and fimbriatus. From Prod. pustulosus it differs by its smaller dimensions, the regular convexity of the ventral shell, and by the sparse tubercles.

Locality—Klutschniki, point 358d–e, and near the Olchovy grove.

73. Productus laticostatus n. sp.
Plate VI, Figs. 8a, 8b, 10.

An almost hemispherical specimen of medium dimensions. The ventral shell is strongly convex; its beak projects beyond the hinge margin and rapidly broadens in the direction of the latter. The middle part of the shell is regularly convex and falls rather steeply toward the sides. The ears are small, somewhat convex, and are delimited from the remaining part of the shell by weak depressions. The straight hinge margin is smaller than the greatest width of the shell. The dorsal shell is strongly concave and in general follows the form of the ventral valve. The surface of the shell is covered with thick, rounded ribs, which become broader in the direction of the anterior margin. Their number increases by dichotomy and intercalation. In some places on the valves an irregularity of these ribs can be observed. Here and there, especially near the ears, swellings occur on the ribs, which apparently served for the attachment of the spines. In addition, growth traces, which become especially distinct at the anterior margin, may be observed. Dimensions: first specimen—length = 30 mm, width = 34 mm; second specimen—length = 30 mm, width = approximately 30 mm; distance between the shells = 9 mm. Smaller specimens also occur.

This form is somewhat reminiscent of Prod. macrocephalus Kon.,¹ but differs in the more regular convexity of the ventral valve and in the thicker ribs.

Locality—Klutschiki 358, 358 (c—d), 358 (e), Otnoschka 360 (a). In addition, in Krasnoyartzeff’s collection there is also a specimen from the point situated 3 versts from the village of Chabarninsky.

74. Productus marginiferus n. sp.

Plate VI, Fig. 12 and Plate XX, Fig. 1a, 1b.

A form of medium dimensions, with a sharply bent ventral valve, which possesses a weakly indicated sinus. The dorsal valve is weakly depressed and has a scarcely noticeable median elevation. The hinge margin is straight; it is somewhat shorter than the greatest width of the shell. The ears are small; from the remaining part of the shell they are delimited by shallow, rounded depressions. Near the frontal margin, at their common point of contact, the valves form a sharp line of flexure, which runs cornice-like from one ear to the other. The surface of the valves is covered with radial ribs; the latter possess elongate, irregularly distributed swellings. On these swellings the attachment traces of the spines can be observed. The latter were also present in considerable quantity on the ears. In the visceral part the radial ribs are cut by irregular, weakly expressed concentric folds. The ribs are also to be observed on the cornice-like elevations which the valves form near the frontal margin. The distance between the valves is relatively large.

In sculpture the described form recalls Prod. scabriculus Mart. and Prod. pyxidiformis, but differs in the presence of the cornice-like elevation at the frontal margin. The latter character is also possessed by Prod. marginalis Kon., but it differs in larger dimensions and in an entirely different sculpture. It is possible that this form is the ancestor of such distinctive forms as Proboscidella Kutorgae Tschern.², although I have no evidence at my disposal on the basis of which this relationship could be proved.

In Krasnoyartzeff’s material we find representatives of this species from ravine I and from the point situated 3 versts from the village of Chabarninsky.

Dimensions:

		of one	of the other
Length	with border	18 mm	21 mm
Length	without border	15 mm	19 mm
Width	with border	26 mm	32 mm
Width	without border	22 mm	27 mm (approximately)

This form is also present in my material. Locality—Klutschiki, point 358 (e).

75. Productus pseudomargaritaceus Janisch.
Plate III, Fig. 15.

76. Productus medusa Koninck.
Plate III, Fig. 18.

77. Productus ermineus Koninck.
Plate XX, Figs. 3a, 3b.

Marginifera Waagen. 1889.

78. Marginifera Schartimiensis Janisch.
Plate VIII, Figs. 11, 12, 14, 15.

79. Marginifera (?) sp.

A small specimen, of which only part of the dorsal valve is preserved. In its general habit this form strongly recalls Marginifera Schartimiensis, but differs by an irregular projection on the cardinal margin in the manner of the tubular continuation of the genus Proboscidella. Length—11 mm; width—16 mm. Locality—point 358 (e), Klutschiki; also the point 3 versts distant from the Chabarni village (Kranzarzeff’s collection).

Proboscidella Oehlert.

80. Proboscidella guberlinkiana n sp.
Plate VIII, Figs. 10a, 10b.

A relatively small form. In its external outline it resembles the letter T. The ventral valve is convex and has a strongly curved profile in the middle part. The convex beak projects somewhat above the hinge margin and rapidly increases in width in the direction of the cardinal margin. Near the cardinal margin, on the middle part of the shell, there is an insignificant longitudinal depression, which disappears farther on, and in its place a swelling appears, which continues farther to the ear-shaped projection of the cardinal margin. This projection is bounded on the sides of the shell by impressions; the cardinal margin

forms there, where the tubular extension departs, a rectangular depression. The frontal margin is straight; near it are situated the convex auricles, which are separated from the remaining part of the shell by noticeable depressions.

The lateral parts of the valve form two wings, which go off to both sides at a right angle, their anterior and posterior sides being parallel to one another. From the middle part of the shell an elevation extends in a diagonal direction toward each of the wings. The surface of the shell is covered with radial ribs that are not especially distinct. In the visceral part they are intersected by concentric folds. The radial ribs may also be seen on the tubular extension, though still less distinctly than on the shell itself. On the surface, especially near the auricles, traces of attachment of the spines may be observed. The dorsal valve is flat and forms a sharp indentation at the place where it joins the ventral valve. It is also furnished with radial ribs, which are intersected by indistinct concentric folds. Dimensions: length, without tubular extensions = 16 mm; with tubular extension 25 mm; width = 27 mm; the width of the tube at the place where it departs from the frontal margin = 11 mm.

This form recalls Proboscidella genuina Kut.,¹) but differs in smaller dimensions, less sharply developed ribs, and a more distinct sinus.

Locality—points 360 and 360 (b) (Otn schka). A specimen is also present in Krasnojarzeff’s material (from ravine II).

§1. Proboscidella proboscidea Vern.
Tegulifera Schellwien. 1900.

§2. Tegulifera chabarnensis n. sp.
  Plate VIII, Figs. 1, 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b, 4, 5a, 5b, 5c, 6, 7a, 7b, 8, 9.

In the limestones near Chabarny one encounters many representatives of this genus. The general habitus recalls the species described by Schellwien. But since the habitus of these brachiopods is very variable, it is not possible to establish a difference in this respect. This difference is noticeable in the sculpture of the shells. It must, however, be pointed out that on my specimens only the dorsal valves are overgrown, which contradicts Schellwien’s description²); he points out that

¹) See Kutorga, Verhandl. Russ. Kais. Miner. Gesellsch., p. 33, pl. X, Fig. 1 (a–c). Koninck. Monogr. du genre Prod., p. 68, pl. VI, fig. 3 (a–c). Tschernischeff. Die obercarbonischen Brachiopoden, p. 311, Plate XXVIII, Fig. 7, XXXI, Fig. 1, LIX, Fig. 4–6.

²) Schellwien. Fauna der Tragekofelschichten. Brachiopoda, p. 60, ibidem, p. 59, pl. XI, Fig. 1–16.

both valves may be fused together. The ventral valve is convex and possesses a pointed, irregularly bent beak extending beyond the hinge margin. The hinge margin is short. Auricles are scarcely indicated. The surface of the valve is covered with very irregular transverse folds. In addition, very fine longitudinal ribs can be seen, and near the auricles traces of attachment of spines. The dorsal valve is weakly concave and triangular in form. It is almost smooth, covered with radial ribs and barely perceptible concentric folds. The ribs and folds are here much less noticeable than on the ventral valve. The dorsal valve can be seen only when the shell has split apart. Otherwise it is completely hidden beneath the spreading margins of the ventral valve. This accreted part of the ventral valve forms a tube of irregular shape, which completely covers the dorsal valve. The tube is covered with irregular folds, which are analogous to the folds of the ventral valve. The length of the tubular continuation is more or less considerable. Its varied form—conical to irregularly cylindrical—also depends on its length. On its surface longitudinal ribs may be observed, as can also be seen on the dorsal valve. The fusion of the dorsal valve begins at the hinge margin. The distance between the valves varies, as Schellwien also notes; he explains this by the fact that during the lifetime of the animal the dorsal valve was movable within the ventral valve.

The length of a large specimen together with the tube = 36 mm; the length of the visceral part of one specimen = 20 mm; the width = 14 mm; the distance between the valves = 10 mm; the length of the visceral part of another specimen = 20 mm, the width = 18 mm; the distance between the valves = 7 mm.

This form recalls Teguliferа deformis Schellw.¹, but differs from the latter in that its radial ribs are more sharply expressed, and also in that the attachment sites of the spines near the auricles and on the continuation that encloses the dorsal valve are shifted; beneath the beak and on the surface of the shell they are not to be seen. From Tegulifera uralica Tschern.² it differs in its larger dimensions, the elongated form of the valves, the character of the sculpture, and the short hinge margin.

Locality. This form occurs in a considerable number of specimens at “Klutschiki” (point 358e), at “Otnoschka” (360b), and between Klutschiki and Otnoschka.

¹ Schellwien. Fauna der Tragekofelschichten. Brachiopoda, p. 60. Ibid., p. 59, pl. XI, fig. 1—16.

² Tschernischeff, “Die obercarbonischen Brachiopoden des Ural und des Timan,” p. 330, plate LX, fig. 14.

Fam. Orthidae.

Schizophoria King.

1. Schizophoria resupinata Martin.
     Pl. VIII, Figs. 22, 24; Pl. IX, Figs. 1, 2, 4,

2. Schizophoria Lyelliana Koninck.
     Pl. VIII, Fig. 26.

3. Schizophoria Keyserlingiana Koninck.
     Pl. VIII, Fig. 25.

4. Schizophoria infracarbonica n. sp.
     Pl. VIII, Fig. 21.

A small form which in general recalls Schiz. resupinata, but differs from the latter in that it possesses a well-developed median fold, which is bounded on the sides by longitudinal depressions, and also in that on the dorsal valve there is, corresponding to the median fold, a clearly developed sinus. By means of the sinus one can observe the W-shaped bending of the middle part of the frontal margin, when the dorsal valve is directed downward.

In other respects the form resembles Schiz. resupinata. Width = 17 mm, length = 13 mm, thickness = 9 mm.

This form is very similar to Schizophoria supracarbonica Tsch.,¹ but differs in the sharper line of bending of the frontal margin and in the presence of two longitudinal depressions on both sides of the median fold of the ventral valve. This form also recalls Orthis Keyserlingiana Kon.² and Orthis mesoloba Ian.³ but differs from the former in the sharp median fold of the ventral valve and in less convex shells, and from the latter in its smaller dimensions, the sharper fold of the ventral valve, and less convex valves.

Locality—Klutschiki (358).

This form is also present in the Krasnojarzeff collection (from point—3 versts from the village of Chabar). The Krasnojarzeff specimens show gradual transitions from forms with a sharp median fold of the ventral valve to forms in which the fold is less sharply developed.

1. Schizophoria mesoloba Ian.
   Plate IX, Fig. 3.

2. Schizophoria interstriata n. sp.
   Plate VIII, Fig. 18.

A small specimen of oval form, which recalls Schiz. resupinata Mart.; not strongly convex. The dorsal valve is more convex than the ventral valve. The beak of the ventral valve is bent slightly over the area, which occupies an insignificant part of the hinge margin. The beak of the dorsal valve projects slightly above the hinge margin. Both shells are either uniformly convex, or near the frontal margin possess a weakly developed sinus. Characteristic of this form is its sculpture: the latter consists of two systems of radial ribs—larger ones, sparsely arranged, with broad intervening spaces, and numerous finer ones, which occupy these intervening spaces. By this character our form differs from Schizophoria resupinata, which in general habit it recalls. Dimensions of a large specimen: length = 15.5 mm, width = 20 mm. Locality—Klutschiki (358a).

1. Schizophoria sp.
   Plate VIII, Figs. 16, 17.

Dorsal valve of a form which differs strongly from all the other representatives of this family. Characteristic is the geniculate bending line of the valve near the frontal margin. This bend separates the considerable, regularly convex umbonal part from the relatively small frontal-margin region, which in its middle part is somewhat depressed. The hinge margin is relatively large; it is somewhat shorter than the greatest width of the shell. Its margins are rounded. The surface is covered with numerous fine radial ribs. One can distinguish rarer and coarse, and numerous and fine ribs. Near the frontal margin concentric growth stripes appear. Since I possess no ventral valve of this form, I cannot describe it as a new species.

Locality—Klutschiki (358a).

Rhipidomella Oehlert. 1890.

1. Rhipidomella Michelini l’Eveille.
   Plate VIII, Figs. 19, 20, 23.

Camarophoria King. 1844.

1. Camarophoria cf. Verneuiliana Grünewaldt.

2. Camarophoria sp.

A small form, which is very reminiscent of Camarophoria Verneuiliana. It differs from the latter in having 3 weakly developed rounded ribs at the sinus of the ventral valve and on the median elevation of the dorsal valve. In this form, among other things, the median septa of both valves can be well observed.

Locality—Klutschiki (358).

1. Camarophoria rhomboidea Philips.

2. Camarophoria sp. (No. 1).

Plate IX, Fig. 19 and Plate XX, Fig. 9.

A strongly inflated form of small dimensions, which in its habit recalls Camarophoria seminula Phill.; it also possesses 2 folds at the sinus of the ventral valve and 3 folds on the median elevation of the dorsal shell. It differs, however, from Phillips’s species by its more band-like, round form and by the more sharply developed median furrow, which runs between the two inner folds of the ventral valve. Our specimen more closely resembles those representatives of Phillips’s species which Koninck¹ depicts in his work.

Locality—the gorge II and point 3 versts from the Chabarninsky village (Krasnoyarzeff collection). Dimensions:

Length	Width	Thickness
10 mm	13 mm	9.5 mm
11 mm	14 mm	9 mm

“I found this form on the Otnoschka (360).

1. Camarophoria sp. (No. 2).

Plate IX, Fig. 18.

I possess a specimen which undoubtedly belongs to the genus Camarophoria. In its external form it recalls representatives of Camarophoria seminula Phil., which Koninck depicts in figures 42—45, but it differs from the latter by larger dimensions and by a greater number of relatively sharp folds at the sinus of the ventral valve and on the corresponding elevation of the dorsal valve: in the first case there are 3 of them, in the second—4; in addition, on the sides of the shell 2 weakly developed rounded folds can be observed. This form also recalls Camarophoria sp. No. 1, but differs in its greater thickness, the greater number of folds in the middle part of both shells, and by weakly developed folds on the sides of the shell.

Dimensions: width = 14 mm, length = 12 mm, height = 11 mm.

Locality—Otnoschka (360b).

96. Camarophoria glabra n. sp.
Plate IX, Fig. 14.

A relatively large form, rather inflated, with a smooth surface. The ventral valve is less convex than the dorsal valve. Its beak projects somewhat beyond the hinge margin. The part of the ventral valve lying near the beak is fairly regularly convex; farther, however, in the direction toward the frontal margin, a weakly indicated sinus appears in its middle, which continues farther as far as the frontal margin. The latter forms a rounded, strong line of curvature. In the middle of this sinus there extends a narrow furrow, which begins near its beak. The dorsal valve is regularly convex, and only in the middle there appears a weakly developed rounded elevation, corresponding to the sinus of the ventral valve. The surface of the shells is smooth, and only growth striae occur here.

Ground specimens show the septa and dental plates characteristic of the genus Camarophoria. Dimensions:

Length	Width	Thickness
20 mm	21 mm	14 mm
18 mm	20 mm	12 mm

This form recalls Camarophoria indentata Kon.,¹ but differs in its larger dimensions and the absence of folds on the shell surface. It also recalls some representatives of Camarophoria globulina, which are figured by Davidson on Plate XXIV, Figs. 18–23,² but differs in its larger dimensions and broader outline.

Locality—Otnoschka (360).

Rhynchonellidae Gray.

Pugnax Hall. 1894

97. Pugnax (Rhynchonella) pugnus Martin.

98. Pugnax (?) triplex M’Coy.
Plate IX, Figs. 20, 22, 23.

99. Pugnax triplex M’Coy, var.

A small form, which comes very close to Pugnax triplex M’Coy

differs from it, however, by the sinus. It is somewhat broader and flatter, and here there are still one to two folds, in addition to the two folds that occur at the sinus of the ventral valve and on the elevation of the dorsal valve. In other respects the form is similar to Pugnax triplex.

Locality—Otmoschka (360 and 360b); also at the point which is 3 versts distant from the village of Chabarninsky (Krasnojarzeff collection).

100. Pugnax (Rhynchonella) acuminata Martin.
Plate IX, Figs. 12, 13.

101. Pugnax acuminata Martin, var. platyloba Sowerby.
Plate IX, Fig. 21.

102. Rhynchonella pleurodon Phillips.
Plate X, Fig. 15.

103. Rhynchonella pulchella Kon. (?)
Plate IX, Figs. 15a, 15b, 15c, 15d. Plate XX, Figs. 8a, 8b, 8c.

Goniophria nov. genus.

Rhynchonella Davidson (pars).
Rhynchonella Grünewaldt (pars) Rhynchonella Koninck (pars).
„ Möller (pars).

The shell, in its external form, recalls the genus Rhynchonella, but differs from it in that it is compressed at the sides, especially in the umbonal region, where even on both sides of the umbo, on both valves, depressions are present. In addition, the folds that cover the surface of the shell are very high and sharp, which gives the frontal margin the form of a broken line with acute angles. The depressions located on both sides of the umbones are bounded by arcuate keels, which on both valves extend from the umbo to the margin and form acute angles with one another. Besides the sharp folds, one sees on the surface of the shells also a number of very fine radial ribs, transverse layers, and growth rings.

The umbo of the ventral valve is bent somewhat over the narrow hinge margin. Beneath the umbo there is a triangular opening, which is delimited from the sides by sharp keels. The deltidium is represented by 2 triangular plates, which bound the opening from below.

The ventral valve possesses teeth that are borne by dental plates. The latter unite and form a distinct median septum. On

on the inner surface of the dorsal valve there is also a median septum. The character of the armature and the muscle impressions remained unknown.

The shells possess a fibrous structure.

This genus was formerly described under the name Rhynchonella, but its characteristic features are of such a nature that it must be regarded as a separate genus. The external features are: characteristic impressions on the sides of the umbones, sharp lateral keels which depart from the umbones of both valves at acute angles, a high frontal margin, which forms a zigzag line with acute angles, and fine radial ribs on the outer surface of the shell. The internal features: a median septum of the ventral valve. The latter fact indicates a similarity of this genus with Camarophoria, but it differs markedly from the latter in its external form. Moreover, the internal structure also cannot be identified, since some features relating to it remained unknown in the forms at hand. I propose to name this genus Goniophoria.

Rhynchonella angulata Linn.¹) and Rhynchonella confinensis Schell.²) are also to be placed in this genus.

105. Goniophoria monstrosa n. sp.

Plate IX, Figs. 5, 6, 7, 8.

A very hollow form compressed laterally. Ventral valve with umbo, which is bent a little over the area. The middle part of the shell is triangular in form and bounded at the sides by sharp keels, which depart at an angle. Near the umbo the middle part of the shell is slightly convex, but near the frontal margin it is just as slightly concave. Rare radial folds begin in this part of the shell and are here scarcely perceptible, becoming clearer in the direction of the frontal margin; at the frontal margin they are extremely sharply developed. Five such folds occur on this part of the shell. The sides of the shell, which are separated from the middle part by sharp keels, possess strong impressions, whereby the shell margin in the direction of the frontal margin forms a strong angular upward-directed line of curvature.

Both valves are similar to one another. The dorsal valve is slightly convex in the middle, and this part is separated from the uncompressed sides of the valve by sharp keels. Six folds become increasingly distinct in the direction of the frontal margin and at the latter form a zigzag-shaped

¹) Davidson. British carbon Brachiopoda, p. 107 pl. figs 11–16.
²) Schellwien. Fauna des Karnischen Fusulinen-Kalks Palaeontographica, B. XXXIX.

line with high bends, whereby the shell becomes very high at the anterior margin. The ventral valve possesses dental plates and a median septum; the dorsal valve—a median septum. The remaining parts of the internal structure have remained unknown. The surface of the shell is covered with very fine radial ribs.

Dimensions:

	Length	Width	Thickness
1 specimen	35 mm;	about 28 mm.	38 mm.
2 ″	35 ″	″ 27 ″	25 ″
3 ″	30 ″	″ 23 ″	20 ″

The present form differs from Goniophoria angulata Lin. by its larger dimensions and by rarer and higher folds.

Locality—Point A, between Klyuchiki and Otnoshka, and at Klyuchiki (N. B.—32a).

106. Goniophoria carinata n. sp.
Pl. IX, Fig. 9.

The form recalls the preceding one, but differs in its external outline and in the character of the folds. Both valves possess slightly convex middle parts, and their profile is distinguished by a rather steep arc. The middle parts of the shell are delimited from the laterally depressed parts by sharp keels, which depart from the umbones at an acute angle. The ventral valve possesses an umbo which projects above the hinge margin and bends over. On the surface of the shell, near the umbo, there begins a narrow sinus; near the anterior margin this sinus follows the curvature of the shell and sinks strongly downward, so that at this place the anterior margin forms a prominent, narrow, downward-directed angle. On the sides of the sinus, on the middle part of the shell, folds of still unequal dimensions are indicated; however, near the anterior margin they become clearer and impart to the latter the form of a sharp wavy line. On each side there are 4 to 5 such folds. The dorsal valve possesses on its middle part a narrow elevation corresponding to the sinus of the ventral valve. Near the anterior margin this elevation forms a sharp median keel, which corresponds to the sharp angular bend of the ventral valve. Laterally from it lie folds which are still indistinct on the middle part of the shell, but farther on become sharper and at the anterior margin form a wavy line corresponding to that of the ventral valve. There are 4 to 5 such folds on both sides. The surface of the shell is covered with numerous very fine radial ribs. The dimens-

The dimensions of one specimen are as follows: length = 25.5 mm, width = 20 mm, and thickness of the middle part of the shell = 16 mm.

This form has a resemblance to the preceding one, but differs in its general outline, in more numerous, smaller folds, and in the sharp elevation on the middle part of the frontal margin of the dorsal valve.

Locality—Point A (between Klutschiki and Otnoschka) and on the Klutschiki (32 III).

1. Goniophoria plana n. sp.
    Plate IX, Fig. 10.

A triangular form. Both valves possess no folds, and only on larger specimens are they faintly indicated. The middle parts of the valves are weakly convex and separated from the impressed lateral parts, which run from the beaks at acute angles. Because of the absence of folds, or their weak development, the form of the frontal margin is also determined: in the former case it has no curvatures; in the latter they are weakly expressed. The distance between the valves is insignificant, which gives the shell a weak form. The shell surface is covered with numerous very fine radial ribs. From the preceding species the present one differs by the absence or weak development of the folds and by the flat shell.

Locality—Point A (between Klutschiki and Otnoschka).

1. Goniophoria angulata, Lin.
    Plate IX, Fig. 11.

Fam. Terebratulidae.

Dielasma King.

1. Dielasma vesicularis Koninck.
    Pl. X, Figs. 6, 7, 8, 10.

2. Dielasma sacculus Martin.
    Pl. X, Figs. 5, 9.

3. Dielasma attenuatum Martin.
    Pl. X, Fig. 1.

4. Dielasma hordeaceum Koninck.
    Pl. X, Fig. 13 and Pl. XX, Figs. 11a, 11b.

5. Dielasma amaenum Koninck
    Pl. X, Fig. 3.

6. Dielasma hastatum Sowerby.

1. Dielasma cf. gemmula Koninck
     Pl. X, Fig. 2.

2. Dielasma canaliferum Koninck?

3. Dielasma sp.
     Pl. X, Fig. 28, a, b.

A form of medium dimensions. The ventral valve is strongly ventricose near the beak. In the middle of the frontal margin of the ventral valve there is a depression, which continues for some distance in the form of a narrow groove. The dorsal shell is regularly convex. The margins of the shell are blunt. Length = 22 mm., width = 16 mm., thickness = 12 mm.

This form recalls Diel. gemmula Kon., but differs in that the greatest width of the shell lies nearer the hinge margin and the margins are blunt. It also recalls D. sacculus, but differs in its larger dimensions and in that the greatest width of the shell lies nearer the hinge margin.

Locality—Otnoschka, point 360b.

1. Dielasma cf. normale Koninck
     Pl. X., Fig. 4, a, b.

Fam. Spiriferidae.
Cyrtina Davidson.

1. Cyrtina sp.
     Pl. XIII. Fig. 4.

Internal-cast fragment of the ventral valve of a large specimen, on which the dental plates uniting into a median septum are clearly visible. On the surface of the core one sees impressions of coarse radial ribs. It somewhat recalls Cyrtina septosa Phill. (see: Davidson, Brit. carb. Brach., pl. XIV) but differs in a straighter and higher area.

Locality—Klutschiki, point 358 (b)

Spirifer Sowerby.

1. Spirifer trigonalis Martin.

2. Spirifer aff. trigonalis Martin.
     Pl. XII, Fig. 2, 12, a, b.

3. Conchyliolithus anomites trigonalis W. Martin. Petrif. Derbyensis, p. 9, pl. XXXVI, fig. 1.

1. Spirifer trigonalis Koninck. Faune du calc carbonifère de la Belgique, Brachiopodes, p. 121, pl. XXVI, fig. 5–8; pl. XXVIII, fig. 7, 8, 24–44, 48.

2. Spirifer trigonalis Mart. Scupin. Die Spiriferen Deutschlands, p. 188, pl. IX, fig. 7a, b.

In the limestones of the vicinity of Chabarny one encounters relatively large spirifers which, in their form, in the character of the ribbing, and in the area stand very close to Spirifer trigonalis.

They possess a particularly great similarity to the specimens figured by Koninck in figs. 5, 6, 7, and 8 of plate 26 (see synonymy). Certain distinguishing features, however, which are to be observed in my specimens, oblige me to designate them as aff. These differences consist in a greater wingedness, a less sharply projecting elevation of the dorsal valve, and thicker ribs of the sinus of the ventral valve in comparison with those which lie at the sides of the sinus.

I have specimens which are very reminiscent of the Sp. trigonalis, v. lata figured by Skupin (see synonymy), but differ in a higher area and more rounded outlines of the hinge margin. These forms also recall Sp. bisulcatus Sow.,¹ but differ in greater wingedness and lesser length.

Dimensions: length = 35 mm; width = 70 mm, thickness = 25 mm.

Locality—Klutschiki, at points 358, 358a, 31d, 35 (upper course).

Together with forms that possess rounded radial ribs, there is in my collection an incomplete specimen (dorsal valve) with somewhat angular ribs. Since this specimen is identical in all other parts with the typical forms, I consider it possible not to separate it from the latter. The ribs probably acquired their angular form through compression of the valve.

Locality—Klutschiki (point 358).

122. Spirifer triangularis Martin
Plate XI, figs. 11, 12, 13, 14.

123. Spirifer aff. princeps M’Coy.
Plate XII, fig. 13.

124. Spirifer Mölleri Jan.
Plate XI, fig. 6.

125. Spirifer crassus Koninck.
Plate XI, 1a, b.

1. Spirifer subrotundatus M’Coy?
     Pl. XI, Figs. 3, 4, 5, 7.

2. Spirifer bilobatus n. sp.
     Pl. XII, Figs. 14, a, b, c, d, 15, 16.

Specimens of medium dimensions in the form of two circles touching one another. The ventral valve is somewhat more convex than the dorsal valve. Its beak is bent over the low, somewhat concave area, which occupies the entire hinge margin. The length of the hinge margin is shorter than the greatest width of the shell. The area is furnished with vertical furrows. The weakly developed ears are rounded. In the middle of the shell, from the tip of the beak to the frontal margin, there extends a sharp, deep, angular sinus, which, approximately in the form of a constriction, divides the shell into 2 halves. The sides of the sinus are convex. It becomes deeper toward the frontal margin, and the latter, owing to this circumstance, has in the middle a sharp, angular indentation. The parts of the valves which lie on both sides of the sinus are uniformly convex and slope gradually toward the lateral margins of the shell. The surface of the shell is covered with weakly rounded, not sharp, radial ribs that become broader in the direction of the frontal margin; of these, 6–7 are on the sinus and about 13 on both lateral parts of the valve. Their number is increased by dichotomy and intercalation. The dorsal valve is convex and in general follows the outlines of the ventral valve. Its frontal margin has in its middle a sharp, angular indentation. The beak of the valve projects somewhat above the hinge margin. In the middle of the valve there is a sinus which is less developed than that of the ventral shell. It represents approximately the continuation of the constriction formed by the sinus of the ventral valve. It is not always to be observed: in some cases a weak furrow appears instead of it. On both sides there are radial ribs analogous to those of the ventral shell. Up to 20 of them occur on each side. Near the ears the ribs are scarcely noticeable. The ribs lying in the immediate vicinity of the sinus (on its two sides) project somewhat above the others.

Dimensions:	Length	Width	Thickness
1 specimen	21 mm.	30 mm.	15 mm.
2 ”	16 ”	24 ”	13 ”

By its characteristic constriction, which divides the shell into 2 symmetrical halves, the form is sharply distinguished from the other representatives of the genus Spirifer. It possesses some similarity to Sp.

subrotundatus M’Coy, as Koninck understands it; this form has, on the elevation of the dorsal valve, a furrow which divides the shell into 2 halves. This furrow, however, is not as deep as that of the present form; moreover, the sinus of the former is much less sharply developed than in the latter, which is why in the former the notch on the frontal margin of the dorsal valve is also lacking.

Locality—points 358 d and 358 (Klutschiki).

1. Spirifer striatus Martin. 1809
    Plate XI, figs. 2, 10.

2. Spirifer duplicicosta Phillips
    Plate XI, figs. 8, 9, 15.

3. Spirifer integricosta Phill (?)

4. Spirifer elongatus n. sp.
    Plate XII, figs. 1, 3, 5, a, b, 6.

An oval form. The width is greater than the length. The ventral valve is somewhat more convex than the dorsal valve. The elongated beak is strongly bent over the hinge margin. The latter is about twice shorter than the greatest width of the shell. Near it is the triangular concave area. Its lateral edges are rounded and pass gradually into the lateral margins of the shell. The middle part of the ventral valve is weakly depressed and forms a small surface, from which the sides of the shell fall steeply to the right and left. Auricles are almost entirely absent. The surface of the shell is covered with weakly rounded ribs, which partly dichotomize. On the sides one sees 6 ribs, of which those lying farthest laterally are scarcely perceptible. The dorsal valve has a rather sharp elevation, which increases in height in the direction toward the frontal margin, whereby the latter receives a sharp line of flexure. The middle elevation is occupied by five ribs. On the sides of the elevation one sees five ribs on each side. In smaller specimens the sinus is more weakly developed and the number of ribs reaches 3 to 4 on each side. The length of the shell = 22 mm, the width = 19 mm, the thickness = 18 mm. On an incomplete specimen, in which the shell surface is better preserved, in addition to growth lines a fine transverse striation is to be observed.

This form recalls Spirifer lyra Kut.,¹) but differs by a shallower sinus of the ventral valve, a sharper middle elevation of the dorsal valve, and by larger ribs.

¹) Kutorga, Second Contribution to the Palaeontology of Russia, Proceedings of the Imperial Russian Mineralogical Society, p. 92, pl. IX, fig. 7. Tschernischeff, The Upper Carboniferous Brachiopods of the Urals and Timan, p. 150, Plate VI, figs. 6, 7; Plate VIII, figs. 4–5.

The present form bears some similarity to the variety Sp. duplicicosta, which is figured by Davidson on Plate IX, Fig. 8 (British Carbon. Brachiopod.), but it differs in having coarser ribs. It also recalls Spirifer fasciata M’Coy¹.

The present form also bears some similarity to specimens which Davidson identified as Spirifer integricosta—for example, Fig. 18, Plate IX—but the latter differ in their broader outlines, a less sharply developed elevation of the dorsal valve, and the absence of the narrow median rib on the sinus of the ventral valve.

Locality—on the Klutschiki: upper course (35), middle part (358), eastern part (32 VI, 32 IV), on the Otnoschka (360 a and 31a). In addition, it is also present in Krasnojarzeff’s collection, namely from bed 2 and from the point 3 versts from Chabarninsky village.

132. Spirifer aff. gracilis J n.

Plate XII, Fig. 17 and XX, Fig. 6, a, b, c.

1. Spirifer gracilis. M. Janischewsky. Die Fauna des carbonischen Kalksteines am Flusse Schartimka, p. 148, Plate II, Fig. 5a, b, c.

In the limestone near Chabarny I found several specimens of this form, which are somewhat smaller than those from Schartim, have a less overhanging beak and a broader area than the latter, but otherwise are completely identical with them. The two characteristic folds at the sinus of the ventral valve are also present in the specimens at hand. The differences mentioned compel me to designate this form as aff. gracilis.

Locality—Otnoschka (360, 360a, and 360 b) and the Iswestkowy ravine (359).

This form is also present in Krasnojarzeff’s collection—bed 2 (many specimens) and the point 3 versts from Chabarninsky village. These specimens differ from the Schartim forms by several additional characters: in the middle, along the line of symmetry of the shell, the Krasnojarzeff forms are somewhat more constricted than the Schartim specimens, which is attributable to a more strongly developed furrow lying between the two inner radial folds of the sinus².

133. Spirifer triradialis Phillips

Plate XII, Fig. 4, a, b and 11, a, b

134. Spirifer aff. trisulcosus Phillips.
Pl. XII, Fig. 8 and Plate XX, Fig. 7a, b.

135. Spirifer sp.
Pl. XI, Fig. 18.

A fragment of a dorsal valve of very broad, winged, and short form. The middle part has two relatively large folds; on the sides there are relatively small, not especially sharply developed, rounded ribs, which gradually disappear farther laterally. These ribs are more distinct at the frontal margin than near the umbo. Laterally from the median fold one sees nine such ribs; at the lateral margins of the shell—not a single one. They are cut by numerous fine transverse lines, which form a wavy line on the ribs. The shell has its greatest width at the hinge margin. It is = 50 mm, the length = 14 mm.

In its outline this form recalls Sp. convolutus Phill.,¹) Sp. fusiformus Sow.,²) and Sp. Dieneri Tschern.³). It differs from these forms, however, by the 2 folds in the middle of the dorsal valve and by the more weakly developed ribs lateral to these two folds. Moreover, for lack of material I can say nothing about the area of my form.

All in all, this indicates that this specimen should be regarded as a new species; unfortunately it is too poorly preserved, and therefore I cannot describe it as a new species.

Locality—Klutschiki (358d).

136. Spirifer sp.
Pl. XI, Fig. 16, a, b.

Ventral valve of a form which, in its outline, is similar to the preceding one, but differs from it by a sharply developed sinus, which is bounded on both sides by 2 clearly developed folds, and by very weakly indicated ribs lateral to these folds. In addition, its area is high and straight, with a narrow triangular opening beneath the umbo. The surface of the shell is finely concentrically striated. This form is somewhat reminiscent of Spi-

¹) Phillips, Geol. of Jorkshire, p. 217, pl. IX, fig. 7. See Davidson, British. carbon. Brachiopoda, p. 35, pl. V, figs. 2–15; pl. L, fig. 1, 2; Koninck, Faune du calc. carb. de la Belgique, 7, pl. XXIX, fig. 4, 5, 6.
²) Phillips. Ibid., pl. IX, fig. 10, 11.
³) Tschernischeff. Die obercarbonischen Brachiopoden des Ural und des Timan, page 147, plate IX, figs. 6–8.

rifer sp. from the Schartym limestone,¹) which I described at the time, but differs in having a straight area and weakly indicated ribs on the sides of the sinus of the ventral valve. The present form also recalls the Spirifer acutiplicatus Eichw.²) determined by Krotoff, but differs in the straighter and higher area and in the more numerous, more weakly developed ribs on both sides of the sinus.

Locality: the Isvestkovy ravine (359).

137. Spirifer.

Plate XVII, Fig. 15.

An incomplete specimen of oval form, with a short hinge margin and not especially sharply convex valves. The surface of the shells is covered with sparse rounded folds. Such folds are seen on each side of the sinus of the ventral valve—4, and on each side of the fold of the dorsal valve—3. Length = 27 mm, width = about 40 mm, thickness = 16 mm. Owing to lack of material, this isolated form cannot be described as a new species.

Locality—Point 358d.

138. Spirifer Darwini Morris?

139. Spirifer sp.

Plate XVII, Fig. 21.

Fragment of a large form. Rather flat. Outlines rounded. The surface of the shell has a weakly developed radial folding. On each side of the weakly developed sinus of the ventral valve one sees 2 such folds; on the sides of the fold of the dorsal valve—one each. In addition, concentric growth bands are visible on the surface of the shell. Width of the shell nearly 80 mm, length nearly 60 mm. This form recalls Spirifer Darwini Morr., which often occurs in the Carboniferous deposits of Australia, but differs in the smaller number and weaker development of the folds.

Locality—Klutshiki (368e). A very large internal mold with a weakly expressed sculpture of the shell was also found near the little fir grove (10), but was not determined more precisely; it may possibly belong here as well.

140. Spirifer (?) sp.

¹) Die Fauna des Schartimkalksteines, p. 150, Pl. I, Figs. 12a, b, c.
²) Krotoff. Geologische Untersuchungen, p. 418, Pl. I, Figs. 26–28.

Relatively large specimens of irregular form with thick shells. Such specimens are also encountered in the Schartim limestone.

Locality—Ravine II, to the left of the Fl. Rasbojka.

In addition to the representatives of the genus Spirifer listed above, several incomplete specimens were also found in the limestone of Chabarny; however, they remained undetermined.

Spiriferina d’Orbigny.

1. Spiriferina insculpta Phillips.
     Plate X, Fig. 21, a, b, c, 27 and Plate XII, Fig. 19.

2. Spiriferina imbricata, n. sp.
     Plate XII, Fig. 18, 20, 21, a, b and XIII, 2, 3

A specimen of medium size, of nearly elliptical form. The ventral valve has a beak which bends over the short hinge margin. The area is concave, not sharply delimited from the lateral parts of the valve, and rather narrow. The deltidial fissure occupies approximately one-third of the surface of the area. The lateral margins of the shell are strongly rounded, and the greatest width of the shell lies in the middle part of the valve. In the middle there is a relatively broad, scarcely angular sinus. On both sides of the latter there are five rounded folds. Near the auricles no folds are to be seen. The dorsal valve is less convex, but in general follows the outlines of the ventral shell. The dorsal valve possesses a slightly angular fold, which corresponds to the sinus of the ventral valve. On both sides of the fold there occur five rounded folds on each side. The surface of both shells is covered with sharp concentric lamellae, in such a way that one slightly overlaps the other, giving the surface a roof-tile-like form. The shells are distinctly punctate. Width—24 mm, length—17 mm, thickness—12.5 mm.

This form recalls a species occurring in the clay shales of the environs of Tomsk, which I call Spiriferina concentrica, but differs by more rounded outlines, which is connected with the smaller dimensions of the area and the more rounded folds. From Spiriferina insculpta Phill.¹) the present form differs by the sharp contrast between the width of the sinus and that of the lateral folds, as well as by the greater number of the latter. From Spiriferina ornata Waag.²) our form differs by its broader, flatter form and by more rounded folds.

¹) Phillips. Geol. of Yorkshire, p. 216, pl. IX, fig. 2, 3.
²) Waagen. Productus limestone, p. 505, pl. L., fig. 1.

Locality—Klutschiki (358 and 358 e). Two specimens also come from point 3 west of the village of Chabarninsky (Krasnojarzeff collection).

1. Spiriferina Kentuckiensis Shumard?
   Plate X, Figs. 14a, 14b.

2. Spiriferina cf. acutiplicata Kon.
   Plate XVII, Fig. 16.

3. Spiriferina cf. cristata Sch., var. octoplicata Sow.

4. Reticularia M’Coy.
   Reticularia lineata Mart.
   Plate XI, Figs. 17, 20.

5. Reticularia lineata Mart., var. elliptica Pril
   Plate X, Fig. 20, a, b,

6. (Reticularia) Spirifer Urii Fleming. (?)

   Martinia M’Coy.

7. Martinia glabra Martin
   Plate XIII, Fig. 1.

8. Martinia glabra Mart., var. sinuata n. var.
   Plate XVII, Figs. 17 and 18.

9. Martinia glabra, var. minima n. var.
   Plate X, Fig. 19.

10. Martinia Davidsoni n. sp.
    Plate X, Figs. 22, 23, 24

11. Martinia linguifera Phillips.
    Plate XIII, 7a, 7b.

12. Martinia rhomboidalis M’Coy, 1844
    Plate X, Figs. 25a, 25b.

13. Martinia cf. semiglobosa Tsch.

14. Martinia cf. uralica Tsch.

15. Martinia aff. uralica, var. longa Tsch.
    Plate X, Figs. 26a, 26b.

Fam. Athyridae Phillips.

Athyris M’Coy.

1. Athyris subtilita Hall?
   Plate XVIII, Fig. 18.

Hustedia Hall 1894.

1. Hustedia (?) radialis Phillips.
    Plate X, Fig. 12.

Retzia King.

1. Retzia (?) sp.
    Plate XX, Figs. 10a, 10b.

2. Retzia multicostata Kon?

Mollusca.

Lamellibranchiata.

Taxodonta.

Superfamily Nuculacea.

Family Nuculidae Gray.

Nucula Lamark 1799.

1. Nucula gibbosa Fleming?
    Plate XV, Fig. 19.

Family Parallelodontidae

Parallelodon Koninck. 1885.

1. Parallelodon obtusus Phillips.

2. Parallelodon Geinitzi Kon.

3. Parallelodon tenuis Koninck.
    Plate XV, Fig. 18.

4. Parallelodon undatus Koninck?

5. Parallelodon Koninckianus Jan?
    Plate XV, Fig. 13.

6. Parallelodon aff. ornatissimus Koninck.
    Plate XX, Fig. 12.

7. Parallelodon sp.

A small shell of variable, more or less longitudinally extended form. The middle convex part of the shell is not sharply delimited from the posterior auricle. The fine sculpture of the shell surface consists of numerous fine concentric lines and less distinct numerous radial ribs (visible only with a magnifying glass), which stand out somewhat more sharply on the posterior part of the shell. Through this combination of concentric lines and radial ribs, the latter acquire a hilly surface. The length of one specimen = 16 mm, its height approximately 10 mm.

This form recalls Par. theciformis Kon.,¹ but differs in the presence of distinct, though weak, radial ribs, as well as in other outlines. In sculpture the present form recalls Par. ornatissimus Kon., but is much smaller than the latter. In its sculpture the present shell also recalls the Parallelodon sp. from the Schartim limestone described by me,² but differs in its shorter form.

Locality—3 versts from the village of Chabarninsky (Krasnojarzeff collection).

1. Parallelodon cf. grandis Jan.
     Plate XV, Fig. 22.

2. Fam. Conocardiidae
   Conocardium Bronn. 1825
   Conocardium aliforme Sowerby.
     Plate XV, Fig. 6.

3. Conocardium rostratum Martin.
     Plate XV, Figs. 10 and 11.

4. Conocardium cf. truncatum Koninck
     Plate XV, Figs. 12a, 12b,

Fam. Pteriidae.

1. Leiopteria Hall. 1884.
   Leiopteria lunulata Phillips., var.
     Plate XIII, Fig. 9. Plate XV, Figs. 23, 24.

2. Leiopteria Benediana Kon.?
     Plate XIII, Fig. 13.

Eumicrotis Meek 1864.

1. Eumicrotis hemisphaericus Phillips.
     Plate XIII, Figs. 12, 15 and 18.

2. Eumicrotis ovalis Koninck.
     Plate XIII, Fig. 8.

Fam. Myalinidae Frech.
Myalina Koninck. 1842.

1. Myalina cf. lamellosa Koninck. 1843.
     Plate XIII, Figs. 10, 11.

¹ Ibid., p. 158, pl. XXIV, figs. 26, 27.
² Ibid., p. 217.

1. Myalina Flemingi M’Coy?

Posidoniella Koninck. 1885.

1. Posidoniella vetusta. Sowerby 1829.

Plate XV, Fig. 2.

Fam. Pectinidae Lamarck.

Streblopteria M’Coy 1851.

1. Streblopteria laevigata M’Coy.

Plate XIII, Fig. 23.

1. Streblopteria rellensis Koninck.

Plate XIII, Fig. 14 and Plate XIV, Fig. 19.

1. Streblopteria pullus Koninck.

Plate XIII, Fig. 6.

Pterinopecten Hall. 1884

1. Pterinopecten radiatus Phillips.

Plate XIV, Figs. 12, 13.

1. Pterinopecten cf. granosus Sow.

Plate XIV, Fig. 11 and XV, Fig. 3.

1. Aviculopecten dissimilis Flem.

Plate XIV, Figs. 1, 4a, 4b, 15, 16a, 16b.

1. Aviculopecten plicatus Sowerby. 1829.

Plate XIV, Fig. 10

1. Aviculopecten clathratus M’Coy.

2. Aviculopecten gentilis J. de C. Sowerby,

Plate XIV, Fig. 6.

1. Aviculopecten gracilis Jan.

Plate XIV, Fig. 5 and XVII, Fig. 19.

1. Aviculopecten sp.

Plate XIV, Fig. 17.

1. Aviculopecten neglectus Kon?

Plate XIV, Fig. 18.

1. Aviculopecten sp.

Plate XIV, Figs. 22a, 22b.

A small left valve of almost semicircular form. Weakly convex. The anterior auricle is pointed, much smaller than the posterior one, and more sharply delimited than the latter from the remaining part of the valve. The posterior auricle is of nearly rectangular form and joins, by gradual—

passes into the remaining part of the valve. The beak projects only very slightly beyond the straight hinge margin. The surface of the shell is covered with fine radial ribs, between which there are broader interspaces. The number of ribs increases by intercalation. The ribs are crossed by numerous concentric transverse lines, which lie much closer together than the ribs. On the auricles (especially the anterior one) only the concentric transverse lines are visible. Length = 8 mm, height = 7 mm. The number of radial ribs = 20. This form recalls Aviculopecten Forbesi M’Coy¹, but differs in that the concentric transverse lines lie much closer together than the radial ribs.

Locality—Klutschiki (358d—e and 358e)

1. Aviculopecten interstitialis Phillips.
     Plate XIV, Fig. 14.

2. Aviculopecten Murchisoni M’Coy.

3. Aviculopecten mactatus Grünewaldt (non Koninck)
     Plate XIV, Fig. 2.

4. Aviculopecten spino-costatus n. sp.
     Pl. XIV, Fig. 3 and Plate XV, Fig. 4.

Medium-sized form. The left valve is weakly convex. The cardinal margin is straight, a little shorter than the greatest length of the shell. The anterior margin is semicircular and is separated from the anterior triangular auricle by an angular indentation. The anterior margin passes gradually into the semicircular lower margin; the latter passes in the same way into the posterior margin. The posterior margin of the shell passes directly into the posterior margin of the posterior auricle and receives only at the boundary with the latter a barely perceptible indentation. The beak is blunt and scarcely projects beyond the hinge margin. The umbonal part is bounded from the anterior auricle by a sharp indentation, whereas it is almost not bounded from the posterior auricle. The posterior auricle is a little larger than the anterior. The surface of the valve is covered with numerous fine radial ribs, which are separated from one another by broad smooth interspaces. In the posterior part of the shell these ribs break up into spines. This is especially observable in large specimens. They are crossed by concentric ribs, the interspaces of which are larger than those of the radial ribs. On both auricles radial ribs are visible. On one specimen 38 such ribs could be counted (including those which are on the posterior part of the mu-

...shell into spines). The number of concentric ribs = 18. Dimensions of a larger specimen: length = 13.5 mm, height = 12.5 mm, length of the hinge margin = 11 mm.

This form recalls Aviculopecten nobilis Kon.¹), but differs from the latter in the characteristic dissolution of the posterior ribs into spines and in the more sharply developed radial ribs on the auricles.

Two specimens of this species were collected at point 358 (Klutschiki).

198. Aviculopecten Sedgwicki M’Coy.

Obliquipecten Hind. 1903.

199. Obliquipecten aff. laevis Hind.
Plate XIII, Fig. 20.

Pseudamusium Klein. 1858.

200. Pseudamusium ellipticum Phillips.
Plate XIII, Fig. 19 and Plate XV, Fig. 1.

201. Pseudamusium cf. auriculatum M’Coy.
Plate XIII, Fig. 25.

202. Amusium concentricum Hind.
Plate XIII, Fig. 22 and Plate XIV, Fig. 7.

Fam. Limidae.

Limatulina Koninck. 1885.

203. Limatulina loricata Koninck.
Plate XV, Fig. 26.

204. Limatulina (?) sp.

Several left valves, which were collected at point 360 b (Otnoschka), probably belong to this genus. Their surface is strongly damaged, a fact which makes their determination extremely difficult.

205. Limatulina sp.
Plate XIV, Fig. 20.

Internal mold of the right valve of a small, high form with a pointed beak. The surface is covered with radial, rounded ribs arranged in pairs. The auricles are apparently smooth.

¹) Koninck. Description des animaux fossiles de la Belgique, Lamellibranches, p. 217, pl. XXXVI, figs. 27, 28, 30.

This form is somewhat reminiscent of Limatulina selecta Kon.,¹ but differs in the different character of the sculpture.
Locality—Otnoschka (360 b).

1. Limatulina cf. Heberti Koninck. 1885.

2. Limatulina alternata M’Coy.

Palaeolina Hind. 1903.

1. Palaeolina simplex Phillips.
   Plate XIV, Fig. 21.

Nothamusium Wh. Hind. 1904.

1. Nothamusium radiatum W. Hind
   Plate XV, Figs. 7 and 21.

Modiola Lamarck. 1801.

1. Modiola lacryma Koninck.
   Plate XIII, Fig. 16.

2. Modiola cf. consobrina Eichw.
   Plate XIII, Fig. 17.

Fam. Crassatellidae

Cypricardella Hall

1. Cypricardella Selysiana Koninck.

2. Cypricardella orbitosa Ryck.

Fam. Cyprinidae.

Mytilomorpha Wheelt. Hind. 1899.

1. Mytilomorpha rhombea Phillips. 1836.
   Plate XV, Fig. 9

Astartacea Doll.

Fam. Curtonotidae.

Protoschizodus Koninck.

1. Protoschizodus axiniformis Portlock.

2. Protoschizodus subrossicus Jan.

Fam. Grammysiidae.

Cardiomorpha Koninck. 1842.

1. Cardiomorpha Egertoni M’Coy. 1844.
   Plate XIV, Fig. 9.

2. Cardiomorpha oblonga Sow.

3. Cardiomorpha cf. limosa Fleming.

Edmondia Koninck. 1843.

1. Edmondia globularis Janisch.

2. Edmondia rudis M’Coy. 1851

Gasteropoda.

Fam. Pleurotomariidae d’Orbigny.

Ptychomphalus L. Agassiz.

1. Ptychomphalus gigas Koninck
   Tafel XVI, Fig. 1a, 1b, 1c.

2. Pleurotomaria (Ptychomphalus) tornatilis Phil.
   Taf. XVI, Fig. 4.

3. Pleurotomaria (Mourlonea?) gemmulifera Phil.
   Tafel XVI, Fig. 18a, 18b, 18c.

Mourlonia Koninck.

1. Mourlonia fimbriata Koninck.
   Tafel XVII, Fig. 3a, 3b.

2. Mourlonia Portlockiana Koninck?

3. Mourlonia sp.
   Tafel. XVII, Fig. 1a, 1b, 7b.

Porcellia C. Levellé. 1895.

1. Porcellia Verneuili A. d’Orbigny
   Tafel XVI, Fig. 5a, 5b.

2. Porcellia Woodwardii W. Martin.
   Tafel XVI, Fig 20 und Tafel XVII, Fig 14

3. Porcellia Mosana Koninck
   Taf XVI, Fig 19.

Polytrenaria Koninckiana n. sp.
Tafel. XVI, Fig. 6.

A shell of medium dimensions.

It is bluntly conical and consists of 7 convex whorls. The sutures between the individual whorls are clearly visible. The slit-band is replaced by a row of elliptical holes. These are visible only on the last quarter of the last whorl; in the lower-lying parts of the shell the holes are filled in, but their traces are visible on all whorls. These holes lie immediately above the suture. The umbilicus is absent. The surface of the shell is covered with fine spiral ribs, which are arranged below and above the holes. The

The number of ribs between the suture and the row of perforations of the last whorl is approximately 14. In addition, faint transverse, curved growth bands can be seen.

Height = 10 mm, width = 14 mm, the height of the last whorl = 6.5 mm. The size of the apical angle varies between 100° and 120°.

This form recalls Polytremaria catenata Koll.,¹ but differs in its smaller dimensions, a blunter apical angle, and a greater number of spiral ribs.

Locality — Klutschiki (358).

Fam. Bellerophontidae M’Coy.
Bellerophon.

232. Bellerophon insculptus Koninck.
Plate XVII, Fig. 2.

233. Bellerophon hiulcus Mart. 1809, var.

234. Bellerophon costatus Sowerby.
Plate XVII, Fig. 13.

Bucania

235. Bucania cf. textilis Koninck.

236. Bucania cf. reticulata M’Coy.

237. Bucania sp.

A small specimen with a poorly preserved shell. This specimen was found in Ravine II, to the left of the Rasbojka River (Krasnojarzeff collection), and is undetermined.

238. Eupehemus aff. filosus Kon.
Plate XVI, Fig. 15a, 15b.

Fam. Euomphalidae de Koninck.
Platyschisma M’Coy. 1844.

239. Platyschisma glabrata Phillips.
Plate XVI, Fig. 3.

Straparollus D. de Monfort. 1810.

240. Straparollus planorbiformis L. G. de Koninck.
Plate XVI, Fig. 23.

241. Straparollus Dionysii D. de Monfort.
Plate XVI, Fig. 16, 17.

Euomphalus Sowerby. 1814.

1. Euomphalus acutiformis Koninck.
    Plate XVI, Fig. 2.

2. Euomphalus cf. pentangulatus Sowerby. 1812.

3. Euomphalus elegans Koninck.

Schizostoma H.–G. Bronn. 1835.

1. Schizostoma cf. catillus W. Martin.

Fam. Neritopsidae Fischer.
Naticopsis M’Coy. 1844

1. Naticopsis globosa Hoeninghaus. 1829.
    Plate XVI, Figs. 8, 9a, 9b.

2. Naticopsis cf. ampliata Phillips
    Plate XVI, Fig. 11.

3. Naticopsis cf. costulata Koninck.
    Plate XVII, Fig. 6.

Fam. Pyramidellidae Gray.
Macrochilina Bayle.

1. Macrochilina polyphemoides Koninck.
    Plate XVII, 4a, 4b.

2. Macrochilina pusilla Koninck.
    Plate XVII, Fig. 8,

3. Loxonema constrictum Martin.
    Plate XVI, Fig. 7.

4. Loxonema breve M’Coy?
    Plate XVII, Figs. 9a, 9b.

Fam. Capulidae Cuvier.
Capulus D. de Montfort. 1810.

1. Capulus dorsatus Koninck.
    Plate XVI, Fig. 22.

2. Capulus sp.
    Plate XVI, Fig. 13.

A medium-sized shell, conical, compressed at the sides. It becomes narrower in the direction toward the whorl. The whorl is pointed and bent backward. On the anterior side there is a sharply pronounced keel. This form is reminiscent of the preceding one, but differs in the upper part of the mu-

shell, which, in the direction toward the apex, decreases in width more rapidly and has more significant lateral compression; it is also distinguished by an almost straight profile of the dorsal side. Dimensions: height = 18 mm, width of the aperture = 15 mm.

Locality—points 358e and 359. In addition, in Krotov’s collection there is a Capulus from bed II, which remained undetermined.

255. Capulus sp.
Plate XVI, Fig. 21.

Shell conical, somewhat curved. On the convex side 4 weakly expressed rib-like elevations are visible, which extend from the apex toward the aperture. The character of the aperture cannot be precisely determined, since the margin is not completely preserved. Dimensions: length = 18 mm, diameter of the aperture in the transverse direction = 11 mm, diameter in the longitudinal direction = 13 mm. This form is somewhat reminiscent of Capulus obesus Kon., but differs by its smaller dimensions, is more curved, has a larger apical angle, less sharply expressed rib-like elevations on the surface, and apparently a different form of the aperture.

Locality—point 359.

In addition, 4 forms belonging to the genus Capulus are still at my disposal, but they could not be determined more closely.

Fam. Patellidae.

256. Lepetosis sp.
Plate XVII, Fig. 20.

A specimen of oval form and of rather large dimensions. The apex is blunt-edged and is situated near the broader side of the oval. Dimensions: length of the oval = 56 mm, width about 50 mm, apical angle 117°.

This form recalls Lepetopsis ellipticus Kon.¹) but differs by its larger dimensions, the oval form, and the position of the apex. The specimen is poorly preserved and therefore cannot be determined more precisely.

Locality—point 358 (c), Klutchiki.

• Metoptoma Phillips. 1836.

257. Metoptoma imbricatum Phillips.
Plate XVII, Fig. 10

¹) Faune du calcaire carbonif. de la Belgique, Gaster., p. 192, pl. XXVIII, fig. 6, 7, 8.

Cephalopoda.
Nautiloidea.
Orthoceras Breyn.

1. Orthoceras laterale Phillips.
     Pl. XVIII, Fig. 3.

2. Orthoceras cf. ovale Vern. (non Phillips).

3. Orthoceras cf. variabile Foord.

4. Orthoceras cf. conquestum Koninck.
     Pl. XVIII, Fig. 8.

5. Orthoceras Sollasi Foord?
     Pl. XVIII, Fig. 6.

6. Orthoceras sp.

An insignificant fragment of a large shell with large, somewhat curved transverse furrows on the surface. Between the furrows there are broad, flat interspaces, the width of which is not always the same. This sculpture apparently cannot be observed on the surface itself, but rather somewhat deeper, while on the surface the furrows disappear and the former appears smooth. It is possible that this form is identical with Orth. cinctum Sow.¹), but I have no points of support for a definitive resolution of this question.

The fragment comes from the cephalopod bed (N33? a), on the left bank of the Klutschibi.

1. Orthoceras sp.
     Pl. XX, Fig. 13.

A form of medium dimensions with a small apical angle. Cross-section circular. Septa rare. The surface has a complicated, fine sculpture—transverse furrows, which are unequally distant from one another and are intersected by numerous close, wave-like, curved longitudinal ribs. The latter, in turn, possess a hilly structure, which is attributable to the presence of numerous very fine transverse lines. The dimensions of a fragment of this form are as follows: length—105 mm, diameter of the lower end—9 mm, diameter of the upper—18 mm. In the lower part of the shell there are 4 septa per 20 mm of length. Apical angle 6°. The position of the siphuncle remained undetermined.

¹) Sowerby, Miner. Conchology, vol. VI, p. 168, m. 588, Fig. 3.

This form is somewhat reminiscent of Orthoceras salvum Kon.¹), but is distinguished by the more complicated character of the sculpture.

Locality—bed I on the small river Rasboika. (Krasnoyarzef collection).

265. Orthoceras rarisepfatus n. sp.
Pl. XVIII, Figs. 2a, 2b, 4, 7.

A shell of medium dimensions with a smooth surface. The septa are widely separated from one another. This distance is equal to \(2/3\) of the diameter of the adjoining upper part of the shell. The size of the apical angle is insignificant. Cross-section circular. The siphon is central. The septa are strongly concave.

The dimensions of an incomplete specimen are as follows: length = 52 mm, diameter of the upper end = 12 mm, of the lower = 8.5 mm.

This form differs from other Carboniferous representatives of Orthoceras by the widely separated septa.

In this respect this form recalls Orthoceras sp., which Holzapfel²) described, but it differs also from that form by the more rarely displaced septa.

Locality—on the left bank of the Klutschiki (Cephalopod bed No. 32a). A considerable number of fragments of this form were collected here.

Gyroceras Koninck. 1844.

266. Gyroceras propinquum Koninck. (?)
Pl. XVIII, Figs. 11, 12

Coelonautilus Foord.

267. Coelonautilus sp.
Pl. XVIII, Figs. 10a, 10b.

A fragment which, in its sculpture, recalls Coelonautilus canaliculatus Eichw.³), but differs in that the spiral ribs on the sides of the whorls are pointed and not rounded, as Zwetaiewa indicates. In addition, the number of ribs on the outer side of the whorls is 12, on the umbonal part—3, whereas the specimen which—

¹) Koninck. Faune du calc. carb. de la Belgique, I–ie partie, p. 67, XXI, fig. 6.
²) Holzapfel. Die Cephalopoden-führenden Kalke des unteren Carbons von Erdbach–Breitscheid bei Herborn (Palaeont. Abhandlung, Neue Folge B. I, H. I. S. 47, Taf. I, Fig. 2.
³) See Zwetaiewa. Die Nautiloidea und Ammonaea der untern Abteilungen des central-russischen Kohlenkalkes. S. 10 Tafel II, Fig. 6.

…which Zwetajew cites and figures, has 10 in the first case and 5 in the second.

Locality of the fragment—the left bank of the Klutschiki (cephalopod bed No. 32a).

Stroboceras Hyatt. 1883.

1. Stroboceras cf. sulcatum Sowerby.
     Plate XVIII, Fig. 9.

Ephippioceras Hyatt.

1. Ephippioceras cf. bilobatum Sow.

Ammonoidea.
Fam. Goniatitidae von Buch.
Glyphioceras Hyatt.

1. Glyphioceras cf. striatum Sowerby.
     Plate XVIII, Figs. 1a, 1b.

2. Glyphioceras striatum Sow., var. minima n. var.
     Plate XVIII, Fig. 17, Plate XIX, Figs. 2, 4–8. 1900? Glyphioceras sp. Janischewsky. Die Fauna des Schartimkalkes, p. 326.

A small shell which possesses all the characters of Glyphioceras striatum Sow. In its dimensions, however, it is much smaller than the forms figured by Sowerby and Koninck, for which reason I designate it as a variety of this species. The diameter is 14 mm, the thickness of the last whorl 8 mm.

A large number of specimens of this form were found on the left bank of the Klutschiki near its mouth (32 III, 32 VII, No. 93, 32a). To this also most probably belongs the form which I collected on the Schartimka River and named Glyphioceras sp.

This form somewhat recalls Goniatites (Glyphioceras) subcircularis Mil¹, but differs in having a larger umbilicus and more closely spaced spiral ribs. This latter form occurs in the St. Louis group.

1. Glyphioceras (Beyrichoceras) obtusum Phillips.
     Plate XIX, Figs. 3, 9a, 9b and Plate XX, Figs. 14a, b.

2. Glyphioceras cf. diadema Vern (non Goldf) var. Verneuilli Jan.
     Plate XX, Figs. 15, 15a.

3. Glyphioceras mutabile Phillips.
     Plate XX, Fig. 16.

1. Glyphioceras cf. platylobum Phillips.
    Plate XIX, Figs. 10, 11.

Fam. Prolecanitidae Hyatt.
Prolecanites Mojsisovics 1882.

1. Prolecanites (?) serpentinus Phillips. 1836.
    Pl. XIX, Figs. 1a, 1b, 1c.

Pronoritēs Mojsisovics.

1. Pronoritēs cyclolobus Phill., var. uralensis Karp.
    Pl. XVIII, Figs. 13a, 13b, 14, 15, 16.

Crustacea.
Entomostraca.
Ostracoda. Entomoconchus M’Coy. 1839.

1. Entomoconchus Scouleri M’Coy. 1839.
    Pl. XX, Figs. 17a, 17b, 17c.

Trilobitae.
Fam. Proetidae.
Phillipsia Portlock.

1. Phillipsia Debyensis Mart., var.
    Pl. XIX, Fig. 15.

Griffithides Portlock.

1. Griffithides globiceps Phillips.

2. Griffithides (Phillipsia) cf. seminiferus Phillips.
    Pl. XIX, Figs. 17, 19, 20, 23.

Brachymetopus M’Coy.

1. Brachymetopus uralicus Verneuil.
    Pl. XIX, Figs. 22, 18a, 18b.

Phyllocarida.
Rhinocaridae Clarke.
Fam. Rhinocarina.
Chaenocaris Jones et Woodward. 1899.

1. Chaenocaris tenuistriata M’Coy. 1844.
    Plate XIX, Figs. 12, 16.

The plates on pp. 172–187 of the Russian text show the distribution of the forms cited in my work in the various divisions of the Carboniferous of the Urals, Russia, Belgium, England, and North America. These plates are based on the works of Krotow, Krasnopolsky, Stuckenberg, Tschernischeff, Nikitin, Stru-

…ve and Sibirzeff. Since Prof. Krotóff divides the Uralian Carboniferous into only 2 divisions, and thus the Middle Carboniferous is not distinguished in his work, I had, as Nikitin¹) also did, to examine the lists of forms which Krotóff collected at various points of the area investigated by him, in order to determine which forms were found together with Prod. striatus and Prod. giganteus, and which with Spirifer mosquensis, and thereby to determine which of the forms listed by Krotóff under \(C_1^2\) belong to the lower and which to the middle division. Since the latest detailed investigations by Tschernischeff²) showed that many brachiopods of the Upper Carboniferous in the Urals, which earlier had been identified with western European forms, are in reality only similar to the latter, when citing these forms I have added a question mark to them. In determining the number of forms common to various other Carboniferous deposits, only those were considered which are completely identical with one another, and the forms marked with cf. and closely related forms were not taken into account. Identical forms I have indicated with signs, similar ones with (X).

Those forms which occur especially often in the limestone of Chabarny are printed in spaced type.

The Roman numerals I, II, and III indicate that the corresponding forms from Krasnoyarzeff were collected in Gully I (I), in Gully II (II), and at the point which is 3 versts distant from the village of Chabarninsky (III).

¹) Nikitin. The Carboniferous deposits of the Moscow Basin, p. 46.
²) The Upper Carboniferous Brachiopods of the Urals and of the Timan.

Chapter III.

General Conclusions.

We shall now consider all groups of fossils separately and determine the character of each.

Let us begin with the corals.

Corals are not numerous in the Chabarny limestone—only seventeen of them have been recorded, and they are represented by an insignificant number of solitary corals.

In the Chabarny limestone one does not encounter a single form that would belong exclusively to the upper division of the Carboniferous system.

Among the collected corals is the genus Pentaphyllum, new for Russia and for the Urals.

In the more westerly situated parts, at the Izvestkovy ravine and at the Otnoshka, the predominance of colonies must be noted, whereas in the westerly situated parts solitary corals dominate. It may be assumed that this circumstance is to be attributed to differences of facies. The more western parts of the area belong to a shallow-water facies, while the more easterly situated ones are to be assigned to a deep-water facies.

Besides the corals listed above, in the Chabarny limestone one encounters a polyp, which I have provisionally identified as Monticulipora and named Monticulipora (?) Stuckenbergii n. sp. It is even possible that this form represents a bryozoan; in any case, however, it belongs to the same genus as Monticulipora (?) inflata, described by Koninck. It is highly doubtful whether it belongs to this genus, as was already indicated in the preceding chapter; however, a more precise determination proved impossible. This form is found in various beds of the Chabarny limestone and is characteristic of it.

The bryozoans are represented as follows: Fenestella—5, Polypora—1, Synocladia—1, Ichtyorhachis—1, and Palaeoflustra—1. Particularly widespread are Fenestella veneris Fisch and Fenestella virgosa Eichw.

In general, it must be pointed out that the bryozoans are not characteristic of the Chabarny limestone and in themselves do not make possible an exact determination of its geological age; on the other—

on the other hand, they are undoubtedly found together with other forms of Lower Carboniferous age, and in some cases show a more considerable vertical distribution in the Uralian Carboniferous than would have been expected on the basis of earlier investigations. What has just been mentioned applies, for example, to such forms as Fenestella veneris Fisch. and Fenestella orientalis Eichw. Polypora Kutorgae Stuck., too, which until now occurred only in the Upper Carboniferous of the Timan, appears also, as it turns out, in the Lower Carboniferous.

The greatest distribution in the Chabarny limestone is naturally attained by the brachiopods:

Family	Genus	Number
Fam. Strophomenidae	Strophomena	1 species
Fam. Strophomenidae	Orthotetes	3 species
Fam. Productidae	Chonetes	9 species
Fam. Productidae	Productus	38 species
Fam. Productidae	Marginifera	2 species
Fam. Productidae	Proboscidella	2 species
Fam. Productidae	Tegulifera	1 species
Fam. Orthidae	Schizophoria	7 species
Fam. Orthidae	Rhipidomella	1 species
Fam. Pentameridae	Camarophoria	6 species
Fam. Rhynchonellidae	Pugnax	4 species
Fam. Rhynchonellidae	Rhynchonella	2 species
Fam. Rhynchonellidae	Goniophoria	4 species
Fam. Terebratulidae	Dielasma	10 species
Fam. Spiriferidae	Cyrtina	1 species
Fam. Spiriferidae	Spirifer	21 species
Fam. Spiriferidae	Spiriferina	5 species
Fam. Spiriferidae	Reticularia	3 species
Fam. Spiriferidae	Martinia	9 species
Fam. Athyridae	Athyris	1 species
Fam. Athyridae	Hustedia	1 species
Fam. Athyridae	Retzia	2 species

In all, 139 species were determined. The family of the Productidae predominates here.

The most widespread are the following species: Prod. striatus Fisch., Prod. striatus var. angusta n. var., Prod. hemisphaericus Sow., Prod. semireticulatus (= antiquatus Sow.), Prod. Martini Sow., Prod. inflatus M’Chesn., Prod. curvirostris Schllw., Prod. granulosus Phill., Prod. Karpinskianus Ian., Prod. undatus Defr., Prod. plicatilis Sow.

Almost all these forms usually occur in the lower division of the Carboniferous system of Russia and Western Europe. There are 20 such forms here. Among them are forms that are characteristic exclusively of the lower division of the Carboniferous system, such as, for example, Prod. striatus Fisch., Prod. hemisphaericus Sow., Prod. corrugatus M’Coy, Prod. Neffedievi Vern., Prod. mesolobus Phill., Prod. plicatilis Sow., Prod. pyxidiformis Kon., Productus medusa Kon., Prod. ermineus Kon.

Among these forms there occur some whose presence in the Russian Carboniferous is mentioned for the first time in my work, for example, Prod. ermineus Kon. In addition, it should also be pointed out that a large number of forms are identical with those from the Scharjym limestone. This circumstance naturally indicates that, in age, the latter stands very close to that of Chabarny.

Finally, among the productids there also proved to be several new species, namely Prod. striatus Fisch., var. angusta, Prod. aff. latissimus Sow., Prod. aff. transversalis Tsch., Prod. chabarnensis mihi, Prod. planus mihi, Prod. fasciatiformis mihi, Prod. marginiferus mihi.

It is interesting to emphasize the following fact. As Tschernischeff¹ points out, the fauna of the Upper Carboniferous brachiopods of the Urals possesses a more sharply expressed Mesozoic character than does the younger system—the Permian.

Does this fact not indicate that, at the time of the formation of the upper division of the Carboniferous system, an intensive formation of new forms took place, or, in other words, a more progressive development of the fauna occurred at that time in connection with the Upper Carboniferous transgression in Eastern Europe?

Is, on the other hand, the “atavistic” character of the Permian fauna, as Tschernischeff expresses it, not the result of the fact that the formation of species during the Permian time—at least as far as the European continent is concerned—proceeded more slowly, which is to be attributed to the closed character of the Permian basins? Attention should be drawn to a circumstance that emerges in studying the productid fauna of the Chabarny limestone. Many representatives of this fauna bear a continuation of the frontal margin of the ventral valve in the form of a train or a jabot, similar to what was established by Tschernischeff for Prod. lineatus and Prod. porrectus. I observed the same in Prod. hemisphaericus Sow., Prod. semireticulatus, Prod. Martini Sow., Prod. tenuistriatus Vern., Prod. marginiferus, Prod. medusa. Interesting is the fact that these trains occur more often in finely ribbed forms.

In passing, I also observed cases of a tubular extension similar to that in the genus Proboscidella. I observed such cases in Prod. granulosus and Prod. Martini Sow. On the other hand, in the fauna of the Chabarny limestone we find representatives of such genera as Proboscidella and Tegulifera. Do we not have full grounds, from the concurrence of these two facts, to draw the conclusion that they are not accidental in nature, but stand in a close relationship to one another? It is to be assumed that in the Chabarny limestone we encounter the productids at that stage of their development when, from forms that possessed some sort of continuation of the frontal margin, true representatives of the genera Proboscidella and Tegulifera—from which, in turn, the Upper Carboniferous representatives of the same genera are descended—began to form. An interesting fact is that the representatives of the genus Proboscidella from the Upper Carboniferous deposits of the Urals occur chiefly only in these beds; and it is to be assumed that here they developed as a specifically Uralian group and did not spread to any great distances from the place of their origin.

Representatives of Proboscidella that are identical with the Uralian specimens were recently established by Prof. Stuckenberg¹ at “Samarskaja Luka.” From this fact one may conclude that their settlement proceeded in a westerly direction, but did not spread far, as may be seen from the fact that such Uralian forms are not known in Western Europe.

Among other representatives of the family Productidae, the genus Chonetes should be mentioned, which occurs in seven species in the Chabarny limestone. The representatives of the genus Chonetes here possess a sharply expressed Lower Carboniferous character.

Besides the genera mentioned, attention should also be drawn to the genus Marginifera, which in the Chabarny limestone is represented by Marginifera schartimiensis. This form was first encountered by me in the Schartim limestone; it is widely distributed in the Chabarny limestone and is even characteristic of it.

It is therefore evident that this genus already existed in the Lower Carboniferous; however, it reached the peak of its development in the Upper Carboniferous, not only in the Urals and on the Timan, but also in India, as may be seen from the writings of Waagen² and Tschernischeff³.

Finally, a few more things must be mentioned concerning the genera Proboscidella and Tegulifera. The former is represented by 2 species—by Proboscidella proboscidea and by a form which I name Proboscidella guberlinskiana. Tegulifera is also represented by a new species. The presence of these forms gives the fauna of the limestone of Chabarny a special character and is possibly connected, as I have already mentioned, with the presence of such Productus forms in which an overgrowth of the frontal margin of the ventral valve is to be observed. Tegulifera has hitherto been mentioned only from the Upper Carboniferous by Schellwien¹ and, with some doubt, by Tschernischeff². As it now proves, however, representatives of this genus already existed in the Lower Carboniferous.

The family Orthidae is represented by 2 genera: Schizophoria and Rhipidomella. The first genus is represented by a large number of individuals, (?) which belong chiefly to Schizophoria resupinata Mart. The latter species is characteristic of the limestone of Chabarny.

The genus Rhipidomella is represented only by Rhip. Michelini L’Eveill, which occurs chiefly in the Lower Carboniferous.

Not a single representative of the family Orthidae from the limestone of Chabarny is identical with the Uralian and Timanian Upper Carboniferous orthids, as is evident from Tschernischeff’s lists.

The family Strophomenidae is represented by the genera Strophomena and Orthotetes. The first genus, in turn, is represented only by Strophomena analoga Phill.

Orthotetes is represented by 3 species: Orthotetes crenistria Phill., Orthotetes senilis Phill. and Orthotetes radialis Phill. Orthotetes senilis is, among the species just cited, the most widespread in the Chabarny limestone.

The Pentamerids are represented in the fauna of the Chabarny limestone by 6 species: Camarophoria, of which 2—Camaroph. cf. Verneuiliana Grün. and Camar. rhomboidea Phill.—are identical with those from the Schartym fauna.

Of the representatives of the family Rhynchonellidae, the genera Rhynchonella and Pugnax must be mentioned. Especially widespread here is Pugnax triplex M’Coy, var., which occurs in a large number of specimens. These representatives of Pugnax are the usual forms occurring in the Lower Carboniferous of Western Europe; the same also applies to 2 representatives of Rhynchonella: pleurodon and pulchella.

Besides the forms listed, a new genus occurs in the limestone of Chabarny, which I have named Goniophoria. The forms that belong to this genus are very characteristic—they are distinguished by sharply developed ribs and, in their external features, stand close to Camarophoria; on the other hand, however, they also recall Rhynchonella. A representative of this genus—Goniophoria angulata Lin., which is known from the Carboniferous of Western Europe and from the Shartym River—was formerly regarded as a Rhynchonella. A precise study of this form, however, showed that it possesses all the characters proper to the genus Goniophoria established by me. This form also occurs in the limestone of Chabarny; in addition there are new forms, which give the fauna of Chabarny a special character. There are three such forms here: Gon. monstrosa, Gon carinata, and Gon. plana. All of them were collected almost exclusively in the limestone between Klutschiki and Otnoschka. I place this genus in the family Rhynchonellidae.

The family of the Terebratulids is represented by the forms usual in the Lower Carboniferous of Western Europe. From this family we find in the fauna of Chabarny nine species of Dielasma. Together with the usual forms Dielasma vesicularis Kon., Dielasma sacculus Mart., Dielasma attenuatum Mart., and Dielasma hastatum Sow., forms were encountered which also occur in the limestone near Visé and were described by Koninck: Dielasma hordeaceum, Dielasma amaenum, Dielasma cf. gemmula, Dielasma canaliferum, Dielasma cf. normale. Of the Dielasma fauna it must also be said that, on the basis of the lists of Tschernischeff, it has very little in common with the Upper Carboniferous fauna of the Urals and of the Timan.

The family of the Spiriferids is represented by a very considerable number of forms, and in this respect it falls only a little short of the family of the Productids, but it is not distinguished by such a large number of individuals as the latter. From the family of the Spiriferids we find in the fauna of Chabarny one Cyrtina, 21 species of Spirifer, 5 species of Spiriferina, 3 species of Reticularia, and nine species of Martinia. The greatest importance here is possessed by the Spirifers, the greater part of which occur in the Lower Carboniferous of Western Europe. There are 7 such undoubted forms here, and 4 standing very close to the Western European forms. In addition, we find here forms that are identical with those from the Shartym limestone, such as, for example, Spirifer Moelleri mihi, or forms standing close to the latter, such as, for example, Spirifer aff. gracilis. Furthermore, we also find here new forms, such as, for example, Spirifer bilobatus mihi, Spirifer oblongus, Spirifer elongatus n. sp., and several forms not more closely determined. We find here, among others, a form,

which is very reminiscent of the Australian Spirifer Darwinii Morr. The widest distribution here is possessed by Spirifer aff. trigonalis Mart., Spirifer triangularis, and Spirifer bilobatus mihi.

The genus Spiriferina is represented by 4 species, which also occur in the Western European Lower Carboniferous. One of these species—Spirifer cristata var. octoplicata—also occurs in the Middle and Upper Carboniferous of Russia¹). We also find here a fifth—new—species, which I have named Spirifer imbricata. There has also been encountered here a form which recalls the American Spiriferina Kentukiensis Shum.; I have, however, determined it as such with some doubt; this doubt is caused not only by the poor preservation of the specimen encountered, but also by the rather improbable presence of this American Upper Carboniferous form in the Lower Carboniferous of the Urals.

The genus Reticularia is represented by 2 forms, Retic. lineata Mart. and Retic. lineata, var. elliptica Phill., of which the former occurs in large quantity in the Chabarny limestone. As is known, it occurs in all divisions of the Russian Carboniferous. The second form has not hitherto been encountered in the Russian Carboniferous. In addition, representatives of the Spiriferids have been collected which, with some doubt, were determined as Reticularia (?) Urii Flem.

The genus Martinia is also represented by a large number of individuals. Here the widely distributed species Martinia glabra Mart. was encountered in great quantity, and from this species several new forms are separated, such as, for example, Martinia glabra var. minima mihi and Martinia Davidsoni n. sp.

Together with these forms, Martinia linguifera Phill. and Martinia romboidalis M’Coy were also encountered. All these forms occur in the Western European Lower Carboniferous, although Krotov points to the presence of Martinia glabra also in the Upper Carboniferous of the Urals²). Together with these there also occur forms which are identical with, or stand close to, the Upper Carboniferous forms of the Urals and of the Timan, such as Mart. semiglobosa, Mart cf. uralica Tsch. and—Mart. aff. uralica var. longa Tsch.

The family Athyridae is represented by Athyris, Hustedia, and Retzia, but in the Chabarny limestone it is not of essential importance and is represented by doubtful forms.

If one draws general conclusions concerning the characterization of the brachiopod fauna of the Chabarny limestone, one finds the follow—

¹) Tschernyscheff, Obercarbonische Brachiopoden des Ural und des Timan, p. 116.
²) Krotow, Untersuchungen am wästilch. Abfalle des Urals im Tscherdyn--und Ssolikamskbezirke, p. 378.

of these: of the 139 brachiopods, one encounters in Belgium—55, in England—57, in the Schartym limestone—38, 1 closely related species and 1 doubtful one; in the Lower Carboniferous of Central Russia—30 species; in the Upper Carboniferous—10; in the Lower Carboniferous of the Urals—18; in the Upper Carboniferous—14. With regard to the latter figures, the following must be mentioned: the number 18 is small because the fauna of the Uralian Lower Carboniferous has not yet been sufficiently investigated, whereas the fauna of the Upper Carboniferous has been described in detail by Tschernischeff.

In the present fauna, our particular attention is drawn to the large number of forms which also occur in the English-Belgian Lower Carboniferous, which naturally points to a close connection of the basin in which the Chabarny limestone was deposited with the English-Belgian basin.

In addition, we find a large number of forms which are identical both with those from the Schartym limestone and with those from the Lower Carboniferous of Central Russia.

This, naturally, also points to a close connection of these Carboniferous deposits with the Chabarny limestone. As regards the Upper Carboniferous of the Urals and of Central Russia, only a weak connection between the two former and the Chabarny limestone can be demonstrated. Evidently, during the deposition of this division of Carboniferous time, the fauna had enough time to change considerably. Such a conclusion may be drawn not only on the basis of the study of the fauna of Chabarny, but also on the basis of what is known about the fauna of the Lower Carboniferous of other regions of the Urals; however, since this fauna has not yet been sufficiently investigated, it is to be assumed that a corresponding study will answer the question touched upon more exhaustively.

The lamellibranchs are represented in the Chabarny limestone by a large number of forms, namely by 60. They were collected for the most part in the eastern part of the Otnoshka and in the middle course of the Klutschiki.

The following forms occur here:

Family	Genus	Number
Fam. Nuculidae	Nucula	1
Fam. Parallelodontidae	Parallelodon	8
Fam. Conocardiidae	Conocardium	3
Fam. Pteriidae	Leiopteria	2
Fam. Pteriidae	Eumicrotis	2
Fam. Myalinidae	Myalina	2
Fam. Myalinidae	Posidoniella	1

Family	Genus	Number
Fam. Pectinidae	Streblopteria	3
Fam. Pectinidae	Pterinopecten	2
Fam. Pectinidae	Aviculopecten	13
Fam. Pectinidae	Obliquipecten	1
Fam. Pectinidae	Pseudamusium	2
Fam. Pectinidae	Amusium	1
Fam. Limidae	Limatulina	5
Fam. Limidae	Palaeolima	1
Fam. Limidae	Nothamusium	1
Fam. Mytilidae	Modiola	2
Fam. Crassatellidae	Cypricardella	2
Fam. Cyprinidae	Mytilomorpha	1
Fam. Cyrtodontidae	Protoschizodus	2
Fam. Grammysiidae	Cardiomorpha	3
Fam. Grammysiidae	Edmondia	2

As may be seen, the number of genera is considerably greater than among the Brachiopods; however, with respect to the number of individuals the Lamellibranchiates do not constitute so imposing a group as do the Brachiopods.

The family Conocardiidae, which occurs very frequently in Carboniferous deposits, is represented by 3 European (English–Belgian) species, among which there is a form so common in the Lower Carboniferous of Western Europe, the Urals, and Central Russia as Conocardium alaeforme Sow.

The family Pteriidae is represented in the limestone of Chabarny by 2 species of Leiopteria (Leiopteria lunulata Phill., var. and Leiopteria Benediana Kon.?) and 2 species of Eumicrotis (Eumicrotis ovalis and Eumicrotis hemisphaericus). Of the forms mentioned, Leiopteria lunulata Phill., var., and Eumicrotis hemisphaericus var. usually occur in the Chabarny limestone.

All these forms are also characteristic of the English–Belgian Carboniferous. The family Myalinidae is represented by 2 genera—Myalina and Posidoniella—and is not characteristic of the fauna of the Chabarny limestone.

The greatest importance among the Lamellibranchiates of the fauna of Chabarny is possessed by the family Pectinidae. This family is distinguished not only by a large number of genera, but also by many species; of especially great importance here is the genus Aviculopecten, which is represented by 13 species.

For the most part these species occur in the English–Belgian Lower Carboniferous; among them such forms as Avicula dissimilis Flem., Avicula

Murchisoni M’Coy occurs in a large number of individuals. Together with these forms, one also finds here forms identical with those from the Schartim fauna, for example Avicula gracilis mihi and Avicula mactatus Grün.

Finally, several new forms were also found, one of which was described as a new species—Avicula spinocostatus n. sp. Of the other genera belonging to the Pectinidae, the following two should be mentioned: the genus Streblopteria, represented by two Belgian and one English-Belgian form, and the genus Pseudamusium, represented by two forms, of which one—Pseudamusium ellipticum—occurs in a large number of individuals and is identical with the corresponding forms from Schartimka, from the Lower Carboniferous of Central Russia, Belgium, and England, while the other—Pseudamusium cf. auriculatum M’Coy—also occurs in the Lower Carboniferous of England.

Furthermore, the following should be mentioned: two English-Belgian species of Pterinopecten, of which one—Pterinopecten granosus Sow.—also occurs in the Schartim limestone; a species of Obliquipecten, which recalls Obliquipecten laevis Hind; and a doubtful form that I have determined as Amusium Mirticum Hind?

As can be seen, this group of pectinids possesses a sharply expressed West European Lower Carboniferous character.

The family Limidae is represented by 7 forms: 5 Limatulinae, 1 Palaeolima (simplex) Ph., and 1 Nothamusium. Limatulina is represented partly by Belgian species, partly by new ones, and partly by forms not more precisely determined. Palaeolima and Nothamusium are represented by English species. Palaeolima simplex also occurs in the Schartim limestone.

To the family Mytilidae belongs the Belgian form Modiola lacryma Kon.; in addition, we find here Modiola consobrina Eichw., which is distinguished by a considerable vertical distribution, since it passes through the entire Russian Carboniferous and reaches the Permian system.

From the family Crassatellidae we have the English-Belgian Cypricardella Selysiana Kon., which also occurs in the Schartim limestone, the Belgian Cypricardella orbitosa Ryckh., and in addition Mytilomorpha rhombea, which also occurs in the Lower Carboniferous of Belgium, England, and in the Schartim limestone.

From the family Cyrtodontidae we have a doubtful English form, Protoschizodus axiniformis Portl.?, and the Schartim form Prot. subrossicus Jan.

Finally, the family Grammysiidae is represented by 3 species of Cardiomorpha and by 2 species of Edmondia, of which Cardiomorpha Egertoni also occurs in the English-Belgian Lower Carboniferous, Cardiomorpha

oblonga Sow., C. cf. limosa Flem., Edmondia rudis M’Coy in the Lower Carboniferous of England, and Edmondia globularis mihi is identical with the corresponding specimens from the Schartym fauna.

From what has been said about the lamellibranchs, it may be seen that a large number of their representatives from the Chabarny Limestone also occur in the English–Belgian basin. This is evident from the following figures. Among 60 lamellibranchs from the Chabarny Limestone we find 29 forms which are identical with those from the Belgian limestone, and 33 forms identical with those from the English. Likewise, among the lamellibranchs from the Chabarny Limestone we find 18 forms which are shared with those from the Schartym Limestone.

As regards the relation of the lamellibranchs of the Chabarny Limestone to those of the Uralian and Central-Russian Carboniferous, this cannot at present be determined precisely, since the lamellibranch fauna of the regions mentioned has as yet been little studied. If, however, we were to base ourselves on the scanty literature relating to this matter, we would have to say that in the Chabarny Limestone very few forms are identical with those from the Uralian and Middle-Russian Carboniferous.

The gastropods are represented by 36 species. Here we find the following families and genera:

No.	Family	Genera	Number
1.	Fam. Pleurotomariidae, with the genera:	Ptychomphalus	2
1.	Fam. Pleurotomariidae, with the genera:	Mourlonia	4
1.	Fam. Pleurotomariidae, with the genera:	Porcellia	3
1.	Fam. Pleurotomariidae, with the genera:	Polytrémaria	1
2.	Fam. Bellerophontidae, with the genera:	Bellerophon	4
2.	Fam. Bellerophontidae, with the genera:	Bucania	2
2.	Fam. Bellerophontidae, with the genera:	Euphemus	1
3.	Fam. Euomphalidae, with the genera:	Platyschisma	1
3.	Fam. Euomphalidae, with the genera:	Straparollus	2
3.	Fam. Euomphalidae, with the genera:	Euomphalus	3
3.	Fam. Euomphalidae, with the genera:	Schizostoma	1
4.	Fam. Neritopsidae, with the genus:	Naticopsis	3
5.	Fam. Pyramidellidae, with the genera:	Macrochilina	2
5.	Fam. Pyramidellidae, with the genera:	Loxonema	2
6.	Fam. Capulidae, with the genus:	Capulus	3
7.	Fam. Patellidae, with the genera:	Lepetopsis	1
7.	Fam. Patellidae, with the genera:	Metoptoma	1

The gastropods were collected for the most part in the eastern part of the Otnoshka and in the middle course of the Klutschiki.

The number of specimens of the individual species is not large; for the most part these species are represented by single forms. Exceptions are Ptychomphalus gigas Kon., Bellerophon hiulcus Mart., Straparollus Dionysii Montf. and Naticopsis globosa Hoeningh., which occur in a large number of individuals.

The character of the gastropod fauna is analogous to that of the lamellibranch fauna—we find here almost exclusively forms that are characteristic of the English-Belgian mountain limestone. Thus, among the 36 species collected, 29 forms are identical with those from the Belgian Lower Carboniferous and 17 with those from the English. In the Carboniferous deposits of Russia we find the greatest number of forms in common with the gastropods from the Chabarny limestone in the Schartim limestone; here we find 7 such forms. As for the remaining Uralian Carboniferous, we find here: 2 forms in common with the Lower Carboniferous, 3 with the Middle Carboniferous and 4 with the Upper Carboniferous. Here we encounter the following number of forms in common with the Carboniferous of Central Russia: in the Lower Carboniferous—2, in the Middle Carboniferous—1, and in the Upper Carboniferous—not a single form. These numbers are not especially valuable: it is to be assumed that in the future, when our knowledge of the gastropod fauna of the Uralian and Central Russian Carboniferous is more complete, the relationship of the gastropod fauna of the Chabarny limestone to that of the deposits mentioned will become clearer.

Among the gastropods there was also found a new form—Polytrenaria Koninckiana mihi.

In the gastropod fauna from the Chabarny limestone, the families Pleurotomariidae, Bellerophontidae and Euomphalidae are strongly represented and by fairly diverse genera. Other families are more weakly represented, although some of them possess forms that occur in a large number of specimens, as for example Naticopsis globosa Hoeningh.

The cephalopod fauna here bears a distinct Lower Carboniferous character. In the Chabarny limestone representatives of the Nautiloidea and Ammonoidea were collected, but they occur here in a far smaller number than the other groups.

Only at one point, on the left bank of the Klutschiki, near its mouth, was a bed encountered that is filled with cephalopods (see above No. B. 32 a).

Among the representatives of the Nautiloidea we find in the Chabarny limestone the genera Orthoceras—7 forms, Gyroceras—1, Coelonautilus—1, Stroboceras—1, and Ephippioceras—1.

The greatest importance here belongs to the fam. Orthoceratidae with the genus Orthoceras, which is represented by seven forms. One of these—Orthoceras laterale Phill.—also occurs in the Schartim limestone, in the Lower and Middle Carboniferous of central Russia, and in the Lower Carboniferous of England and Belgium; Orthoceras cf. ovale Vern. (non Phill.) we also find in the Schartim limestone; Orthoceras cf. variabile Foord.—in the Lower Carboniferous of England; Orthoceras cf. conquestum Kon.—in the Belgian Carboniferous, and the English Orthoceras Sollasi Foord (?) appears doubtful. In addition, 3 more forms were collected, of which one could be described as a new species—Orthoceras rariseptatus mihi.

From the fam. Nautilidae we find here Stroboceras sulcatum Sow., Ephippioceras cf. bilobatum Sow., Gyroceras propinquum Kon., and Coelonautilus.

The Ammonoidea are represented by the genera Glyphioceras, Prolecanites, and Pronorites. The greater part of the forms belongs to the genus Glyphioceras; we find 6 such forms here, of which 4—Glyphioceras cf. striatum Sow., Glyphioceras obtusum Phill., Glyphioceras mutabile Phill., and Glyphioceras cf. platylobum Phill.—also occur in the Lower Carboniferous limestones of England and Belgium, as well as in other regions where the West European Lower Carboniferous is developed.

Glyphioceras cf. diadema Vern., var. Verneuili Jan., also occurs in the Schartim limestone. Glyphioceras striatum Sow., var. minima n. var., occurs in a large number of specimens and represents a new variety.

Extremely interesting in the Chabarny limestone is the presence of the forms Prolecanites (?) serpentinus Phill. and Pronorites cyclolobus Phill., var. uralensis Karp. As may be seen from the works in which the Ammonoidea from the Carboniferous deposits were described¹), the genus Prolecanites is characteristic of the Lower Carboniferous. Prolecanites serpentinus Phill. occurs in the Lower Carboniferous of England.

It appears as a predecessor of the genus Pronorites, which, however, was encountered together with it in one bed (N B 32a). This fact naturally indicates that, even if Pronorites has its ancestors among forms related to Prolecanites, they are to be sought in still older deposits. Interesting is the fact that Pronorites cyclolobus var. uralensis Karp. also in the Schartim limestone

¹) Holzapfel. Die Cephalopoden—führenden Kalke des unt. Carbon vom Erdbach—Breitsch u. s. w., p. 12. Karpinsky. Von den Ammoneen der Artinskischen Etage u. s. w., p. 79. Taf. K.

according to Tschernischeff, with respect to the brachiopods—24, or about 9%; or, if one also takes as a basis the lists compiled by earlier authors for the Upper Carboniferous of the Urals (Krotow, Krasnopolsky, Stuckenberg), we obtain the number 47, or about 12%. This latter number, however, cannot be retained, because after Tschernischeff’s detailed study of the Upper Carboniferous brachiopods of the Urals and of the Timan, many forms which were formerly regarded as identical with corresponding western European ones must now be assigned to other species, which possibly in many cases stand very close to the western European forms.

We also find here 15 forms which are common to the Moscow stage of Central Russia (about 5.3%) and 9—with the upper one (about 3%).

These numbers can in no case be regarded as decisive, since they depend on a more or less thorough study of the Carboniferous fauna of the Urals and Central Russia, as well as on the broader or narrower interpretation by different authors of the concept “species.” But, however that may be, the above-mentioned figures nevertheless point to a significant predominance of forms shared with the Lower Carboniferous of the Urals and Central Russia.

All the foregoing indicates that the Chabarny limestone occupies a definite position in the Lower Carboniferous.

Thus, the decisive elements here appear to be not merely index fossils such as Prod. striatus and Prod. hemisphaericus, but the entire Chabarny fauna en masse points to the Lower Carboniferous age of the limestone.

Here something must also be said about the relationship of the Chabarny fauna to the Upper Carboniferous fauna of “Samarskaja Luka,” which was described in Prof. Stuckenberg’s last work¹.

There are very few forms common to both here—16, i.e., about 5.8%. Moreover, these forms generally have a broad vertical distribution, as for example Fenestella veneris Fisch., Fenestella virgosa Eichw., Reticularia lineata Mart., Productus punctatus Mart., and others, or at any rate are not exclusively characteristic of these deposits.

Of interest is the question of the relation in which the Chabarny limestone stands to the older deposits occurring in the same region. It might be assumed that the proximity of the Lower Carboniferous limestone under consideration to the uppermost stages of the Devonian system would exert some influence on the character of the fauna. It might also be assumed that in some animal groups occurring here

their genetic relations could be traced, as, for example, among the cephalopods in general and among the ammonoids in particular, for representatives of these groups occur quite often both in the Carboniferous and in the Devonian. But the establishment of a precise genetic connection proves impossible, since the Upper Devonian Clymenia limestones do not pass gradually into Lower Carboniferous ones, but are separated from the latter by beds of siliceous shale; and the construction of series of forms appears here to be impossible. It must be assumed that, during the time when in other regions the Tournaisian beds were being deposited, the formation of marine deposits here was interrupted.

As we established earlier, the Chabarny limestone stands in a close relation to the Lower Carboniferous of England and Belgium. It was evidently deposited under quite analogous conditions. Communication with the English-Belgian basin took place through Central Russia, where analogous deposits were formed.

Likewise it must be assumed that this basin constitutes only a part of that which washed the Urals.

As regards the extension of this basin in an easterly direction, it was only very slight. This conclusion may be drawn from a comparison of the fauna of Chabarny with the fauna of the Lower Carboniferous fauna of Siberia; the character of these deposits, as may be seen from the works dealing with these deposits,¹ is quite different—one finds here neither Prod. giganteus nor Prod. striatus, but, on the contrary, such forms as Spirifer tornacensis and Syringothyris cuspidata occur here. This character of the deposits is repeated over a considerable extent in Siberia and is similar to the Lower Carboniferous deposits of North America. The facts cited indicate that the Siberian Lower Carboniferous represents an older formation than the stage with Prod. giganteus, and indeed belongs to the Tournai stage. The close faunistic connection of the Siberian Lower Carboniferous with the American leads to the conclusion that the connection of the Siberian basin with the North American during Tournai time was far more significant than that with the West European. Some authors, such as, for example, Peetz,² even suppose that the connection of the Kuznetsk basin with the Franco-Belgian did not take place through Russia, but by means of the American Burlington group.

¹ See: Travaux de la Section géologique du Cab. d. sa Majesté: Poljenoff, Inostranzeff, Derjawine, Venukoff, Peetz, Tolmatscheff.

² Travaux de la Sect. geolog., vol. III, p. 92 (Russian text).

Tolmatscheff¹ likewise points out that the Carboniferous fauna of the Altai, in its character and in many common forms, stands closer to the American than to the Belgian, although he postpones a detailed development of this opinion until a thorough treatment of the fauna. But that a connection of the Siberian basin with the West-European one existed in Tournai time is proved, first, by Lissitzin’s discovery of Tournai deposits in the Government of Kaluga², and, second, by the occurrence of deposits with Syringothyris cuspidata at various points lying farther south in Asia, as, for example, at some points in Persia³. It must therefore be assumed that the connection of the basins mentioned existed through the more southerly parts of Europe and Asia, as may also be seen on Frech’s map⁴. Such a conclusion must be drawn on the basis of what is known at the present time about the distribution of Carboniferous deposits in Europe and Asia. This conclusion will probably be modified in part when we become more precisely acquainted with the Carboniferous deposits of the more southerly parts of Europe and Asia.

It must likewise be said that the fauna of the Carboniferous deposits of Siberia has not yet been studied in detail, and therefore it is difficult to draw any definite conclusions from it. It is possible that, after such a study, it will be necessary substantially to correct the conclusions of the Petersburg geologists, who parallel the Lower Carboniferous deposits of Siberia with those of Western Europe.

Be that as it may, however, we must still from time to time discuss questions that cannot yet be supported by sufficient scientific material. Thus, for example, we must pose the question whether a close connection of the European Lower Carboniferous basin with the Siberian one existed, and whether the broad connection of the Russian Carboniferous sea with the Indian and North American seas did not arise later, at the time of the formation of Upper Carboniferous deposits.

In any case, as follows from the works of Tschernischeff and Enderle⁵, the connection of the Urals with India and North America during the Upper Carboniferous time was very great, which is why one also finds

in the Uralian Upper Carboniferous such a quantity of Indian and American forms.

Likewise, from the works of Jakowleff¹, who, for example, points to 8 American forms (i.e., 40%) among 20 lamellibranchs of the Donets Basin, it is evident that the Upper Carboniferous of Russia has much in common with the Upper Carboniferous deposits of America. Do these facts not indicate that the connection of the Upper Carboniferous basin of the Urals, Timan, and southern Russia with the Indian and American ones was very close, and that the spread of Indian and American forms westward proceeded with extreme intensity? It is to be assumed that during this time many forms spread chiefly from the east, whereas during the Lower Carboniferous the spread took place chiefly from the west, which may perhaps be explained by the sea’s retreating from west to east. This is also confirmed by the conclusions of Tschernischeff² and Frech³.

It is natural to assume that the fauna of the Upper Carboniferous deposits of the Urals and Timan developed autochthonously—from an older fauna that existed there. The fact, however, that the Chabarny limestone possesses very few forms in common with the Upper Carboniferous fauna of the Urals indicates that the autochthonous development here was insignificant, or perhaps is masked by the immigration of forms from the east. Tschernischeff points to the distinctly Mesozoic character of the Upper Carboniferous fauna of the Urals and Timan. This indicates that the fauna of the Upper Carboniferous deposits of the Urals and Timan bears a progressive character; during this time the formation of new forms was taking place. This can also be observed in the Upper Carboniferous fauna of Samarskaja Luka.

This fact once again indicates the uninterrupted developmental character of the organic world and confirms the absence of sharp boundaries between the Paleozoic and the Mesozoic.

The character of the Chabarny fauna stands out more sharply if we cite its negative features in comparison with the Upper Carboniferous fauna of the Urals and Timan.

In the latter we find many genera which did not yet exist in the Lower Carboniferous, such as, for example, among the pelecypods—Placunopsis, Mysidi-

optera, Pseudomonotis; among the Brachiopods: Hemiptychina, Notothyris, Rhynchopora, Ambocoelia, Meekella and others. And if one may say that the fauna of the Upper Carboniferous deposits of the Urals and Timan bears a rather Mesozoic character, then the fauna of the Lower Carboniferous Chabarny limestone bears a Paleozoic character.

With regard to how the fauna of Chabarny relates to that from the Schartim limestone, the following must be mentioned. Despite Tschernischeff’s opinion, I regard the Schartim limestone as Lower Carboniferous. In favor of my view speaks not only the fact that it contains a quantity of West-European forms which are characteristic of the Lower Carboniferous, but also a considerable number (27%) of forms which are identical with those from the Chabarny limestone, while the latter undoubtedly represents Lower Carboniferous deposits. As regards the partly analogous character of the Chabarny fauna with that of Schartimka, it should further be noted that not only is the number of common forms significant, but also many forms widely distributed in the Schartim limestone are characteristic also of the Chabarny limestone. This fact stands out especially clearly in the brachiopod fauna, and we shall cite the following relevant forms:

*Schizophoria resupinata.* *Productus striatus.* *Pr. semireticulatus.* *Pr. punctatus.* *Marginifera schartimiensis.* *Reticularia lineata* *Martinia glabra.*

It would have to be assumed that the Chabarny limestone represents a formation parallel to that horizon of the Schartim limestone which I have designated as C₁(b),¹ and which contains a quantity of Productus striatus together with other forms characteristic of the goniatite horizon. But since the latter is closely connected with the preceding horizon, it must be said that the goniatite horizon too represents a formation which, if not contemporaneous, is in any case very close in age.

Among other things, it would be highly interesting to know which forms Tschernischeff has in mind when, in a note to his work,² to which he draws some attention, he says that, together with several Lower Carboniferous forms, the fauna of the Schartim goniati-

¹ See Fauna of the Schartim Limestone, p. 74.
² See ibidem, p. 399.

layers contain a series of cephalopods (among them ammonoids), pelecypods, gastropods, and brachiopods, which until now have not been encountered lower than in the Middle Carboniferous, either in Russia or beyond its borders. It must be noted that Tschernyscheff’s assertion, so long as he adduces no indubitable factual proofs, is not very convincing.

If we seek the Chabarny limestone in the general scheme of the Carboniferous deposits of the Urals, we come to the conclusion that it belongs to that division of the Carboniferous formation which Tschernyscheff designates as \(C^1\); here both horizons cited by this author can be observed: horizon (a), which contains corals such as Syringopora gracilis Keys., Lithostrotion affine Mart., Lith. caespitosum Mart., Lit. irregulare Phill., numerous representatives of Pr. giganteus Mart., Chonetes papilionacea Sw., and a small number of Pr. striatus Fisch.; and horizon b, which is characterized by a great quantity of Prod. striatus, accompanied by Prod. giganteus, Prod. semireticulatus, and Prod. corrugatus. These horizons, however, prove impossible to separate from one another, since they are closely linked both faunistically and petrographically. Tschernyscheff also points to this difficulty for the Carboniferous of the Urals.

Higher-lying horizons of the Uralian Carboniferous, such as, for example, the upper stage of the Lower Carboniferous (\(C^2\)), cannot be observed in the Chabarny limestone; this conclusion is to be drawn on the grounds that in the Chabarny limestone Prod. striatus represents a characteristic form, and even if it is absent in some layer, we find there other forms which, like Prod. striatus, do not occur in this stage of the Uralian Carboniferous. On the contrary, in the Chabarny limestone many forms are absent which are characteristic of this stage, such as, for example, Allorisma regularis King, Spir. cf. mosquensis Fisch., Fusulina Verneuili Möll., and others.

Recently attempts have been made to establish zones for the Lower Carboniferous limestone, as already exists for other formations. We see this in the Carboniferous deposits of England; thus, for example, Vaughan²) proposed for the Bristol area the subdivision that is cited on page 214 of the Russian text.

Such a subdivision into zones was also successfully made by Sibly³) for another region in which Lower Carboniferous deposits are present, for Men-

¹) See General Geological Map of Russia. Sheet 139, pp. 246–247.
²) Vaughan. Palaeontogr. Séquence in the Carbonif. Limestone of the Bristol Area, 181. Quart. Journal, 1905.
³) Sibly. On carbonif. Limestone of the Mendip Area, p. 37. Quarterly Journal, 1906.

dip Area. Finally, Vaughan¹ applied the same zonal division in a third locality—in the vicinity of Rush, in Ireland.

How far the proposed division can be carried out everywhere is difficult to say; the parallelization, however, which Vaughan carries out for the English–Belgian Carboniferous and for the Carboniferous of other regions, suggests that we are dealing here with a very important fact, one of general significance.

In order to clarify the relation to the various zones established by Vaughan, we must determine which of the forms most widely distributed in the Chabarny limestone are also characteristic of Vaughan’s several zones. Unfortunately, here we must confine ourselves to the corals and brachiopods, since Vaughan characterizes his different zones only by means of these groups. Thus, for example, Syringopora cf. ramulosa is proper to Zone S (Seminula), which belongs to the Viséan stage.

The greater part of the corals which were encountered in the Chabarny limestone and which are identical with those from the English Carboniferous occur in the higher-lying beds of the English Carboniferous.

As regards the brachiopods, we find here the following forms, widely distributed in the Chabarny limestone, which are likewise characteristic of the several stages of the English Carboniferous:

Reticularia lineata.

Schizophoria resupinata.

Orthotetes crenistria.

Productus Martini

Prod. semireticulatus

Prod. aff. cora (= Pr. corrugatus).

Prod. giganteus.

Prod. hemisphericus.

Reticularia lineata is represented, through various mutations, in different horizons, from horizon Z (zone with Zaphrentis) up to the upper horizon D₂ (zone with Dibunophyllum). It must be mentioned that Reticularia aff. lineata, which is characteristic of the zone with Zaphrentis, according to Vaughan² differs from the form figured by Davidson by a deeper sinus; by the same character it also differs from the representatives of Reticularia lineata in the Chabarny limestone, and it is to be assumed that for the Cha-

…among the mutations occurring in the higher-lying horizons forms identical with the Chabarny limestone and the English Carboniferous are to be sought. Schizophoria resupinata is very frequent in the lower beds of horizon \(Z_2\). This is apparently the only form which, in the Carboniferous of the Bristol—Area, occurs in relatively lower horizons and at the same time is also frequent in the Chabarny limestone. Vaughan, however, points out that the Bristol representatives of this species are distinguished by considerable dimensions and by a deeper dorsal valve.^1

Perhaps here too we are not dealing with identical forms, and the latter are to be sought in higher-lying horizons.

Orthotetes crenistria is weakly represented in the Chabarny limestone by its typical forms; here, however, one often finds that form which Phillips in his time regarded as an independent species—Orthotetes senilis—and which was later placed by authors in the synonymy of Orthotetes crenistria.

Unfortunately Vaughan does not illustrate the various modifications of this form which were encountered in different horizons, and confines himself to two examples, which illustrate the differences between two forms found in different horizons (mut. \(Z\) and mut. \(C\)^2).

This makes more difficult the comparison of the forms from Chabarny and from Bristol, and therefore one does not know where identical forms are to be sought; one can only suppose that mut. \(C\) represents a more closely related form.

As regards Productus Martini Vaughan, the form which Vaughan calls Productus cf. Martini is entirely absent in the Chabarny limestone. The form which I so designate differs from Vaughan’s form in the geniculate bending of the ventral valve, and in this respect stands closer to Sowerby’s type, which differs from Vaughan’s form likewise by a geniculate bend and, as the latter assumes, is merely a younger developmental stage of Prod. Martin, whereas the typical representatives of this species are a later stage and never occur together with Prod. cf. Martini Vaughan.^3

Prod. semireticulatus Mart., according to Vaughan,^4 probably arose from forms which are closely connected with Prod. cf. Martini at the time when stage \(Z_2\) was being deposited, and it reaches its highest development in horizon \(\gamma\) and in the lower part of horizon \(C\) (zone with Syringothyris).

^1 Ibidem p. 296.
^2 Ibidem p. 296.
^3 Ibidem p. 288.
^4 Ibidem p. 289.

Higher appears a mutation of the type Productus longispinus with numerous and long spines; this mutation occurs near the upper boundary \(S_1\).

The representatives of Prod. semireticulatus from the Chabarny limestone stand very close to Martin’s type, and I consider it possible to identify them; and, if this is so, then the beds of the Chabarny limestone that contain Prod. semireticulatus stand nearer to the upper boundary of the Tournaisian and to the lower boundary of the Viséan.

Such beds we find in the western part of the ravine Iswestkowy. Among the representatives of Productus Cora d’Orb., in the English Carboniferous the mutation \(S_2\) is noteworthy, since in the Chabarny limestone forms occur that stand extremely close to those which Vaughan designated by this name¹; this is Prod. tenuistriatus Vern. One may even assume that here we are dealing with identical forms; but since Productus Cora, mut. \(S_2\), occurs in the stages \(S_2\) and \(D_1\), we arrive at the conclusion that the Chabarny limestone, on the basis of this form, is most probably to be paralleled with the uppermost beds of the Viséan. Prod. aff. Cora (= corrugatus M’Coy) does not occur often in the Chabarny limestone, but by its presence also shows that the latter must be paralleled with the Viséan beds, since Prod. corrugatus, according to Vaughan’s indications, occurs in great abundance in \(S\), is commonly present in \(D_1\), and rises up to the uppermost beds of the Viséan.

Prod. giganteus (typical specimens) are absent from the Chabarny limestone. Here we find forms for which I retain the designation Prod. hemisphaericus, but it must be mentioned that those forms which Vaughan names by this designation differ from the mentioned forms of the Chabarny limestone. Since in Vaughan’s possession there were forms that are identical with those forms which Sowerby in his time named Prod. hemisphaericus, it must be said that the forms from Chabarny, which I designated by the same name, merely stand very close to Prod. hemisphaericus, but in any case belong to the group Prod. giganteus. If, however, we take into consideration that both Prod. giganteus and Prod. hemisphaericus are characteristic of the upper beds \(S_2\) and the beds \(D_1\), i.e. of the subdivision Viséan, then the Chabarny limestone too must most probably be paralleled with this subdivision of the English Carboniferous.

From what has just been adduced it is therefore to be seen that the Chabarny limestone is most probably to be paralleled with the Viséan subdivision of the Engli-

…is to be correlated with the English Carboniferous, since the Productus species most widely distributed in the Chabarny limestone have the greatest similarity to those from the Viséan beds.

This is further confirmed by another English author—Sibly¹—who cites two characteristic forms from the upper beds of the Viséan of another area of development of the Carboniferous, the Mendip area: Productus concinnus (Sow.) mut. D₂ and Productus cf. Erstere Form is extremely similar to my Productus Martini from the Chabarny limestone. The second form is very similar to the forms I have identified as Prod. hemisphaericus.

Both forms are characteristic of the upper beds of the zone with Dibunophyllum of the Viséan subdivision. This apparently indicates that the Chabarny limestone also stands close to the upper subdivision of the English Carboniferous.

Three other forms that are widely distributed in the Chabarny limestone—Reticularia lineata, Schizophoria resupinata, and Orthotetes crenistria—provide no such points of reference for correlating the Chabarny Carboniferous with the English, since it is difficult to say with which variations of these forms the Chabarny representatives should be compared; one can only suppose that identical forms are to be sought in the higher-lying beds of the English Carboniferous.

Thus the conclusion must be drawn that the Chabarny limestone is to be correlated with the upper subdivision of the English Carboniferous—Viséan. As regards the question, however, of which zones the Chabarny limestone represents, its solution is impossible at present, since for this purpose the latter would have to be divided into separate horizons, which, in the absence of good profiles in the area under consideration, is impracticable. One can only assume that in the Chabarny limestone not merely one zone is present, but several, already on the basis of its considerable thickness.

Recently a work by Lissitzin appeared in which the fauna of the Lower Carboniferous Chernishin limestone, from the Likhvin and Kozelsk districts of Kaluga Governorate (brachiopods and goniatites), is described. Lissitzin finds that the fauna of this limestone is represented chiefly in the lower and middle zone of the Tournaisian stage (according to Vaughan), i.e. it represents the oldest Carboniferous fauna of Russia. If we compare the latter with the fauna of Chabarny, we find here common and closely related forms; in general, however, they cannot be correlated, since the Chabarny fauna is younger

is and belongs to the Visean stage. Lissizin correlates the Tschernischin fauna with that of the lower half of the Tournaisian stage of England, since the former contains chiefly elements of the fauna of the lower and middle zones of this stage (according to Vaughan). It must therefore be said that, although the Tschernischin fauna also contains forms in common with that of Chabarny, these are nevertheless forms which either possess a great vertical distribution or are merely similar, but not identical.

Of the 24 brachiopods which Lissizin has described, the following 10 attract our attention¹:

Prod. semireticulatus var. antiquissimus
Prod. laevicostus.
Prod. cf. mesolobus.
Chon. hardrensis.
Leptaena analoga.
Orthotetes crenistria.
Schizophoria resupinata.
Spiriferina octoplicata
Martinia glabra.
Pugnax pugnus.

The last four forms possess a great vertical distribution, since they occur both as typical representatives and also as mutations in various beds of the Carboniferous.

Prod. semireticulatus var. antiquissimus represents only a form similar to the typical representatives of Productus semireticulatus from the Chabarny limestone. According to Lissizin, its form is the oldest in the group Prod. semireticulatus and, together with the closely related Prod. burlingtonensis, is characteristic of the lowermost beds of the Carboniferous. For this reason, despite the similarity of this form to the Chabarny representatives of Prod. semireticulatus, one cannot identify the two.

Productus laevicostus is very similar to Prod. tenuistriatus and undoubtedly belongs to the same group. Lissizin does not indicate the distinguishing features of these two forms, and it is therefore difficult to determine how closely they are related to one another. If, however, one were to identify them, one would have to conclude that Prod. tenuistriatus is distinguished by a great vertical distribution. This possibility is confirmed by the fact that both the study of the Chabarny and Scha r

...tim limestone, as well as the works of Tschernischeff, indicate that Prod. tenuistriatus Vern. occurs both in the lower and in the upper division of the Carboniferous.

In any case, the occurrence in the Chabarny limestone of Productus species which, although not identical with Prod. laevicostus from the Tschernischin fauna, nevertheless stand close to it, cannot yet serve as a basis for correlating these two limestones.

Productus mesolobus is represented in Lissizin by a poorly preserved specimen and in any case differs from the typical representatives of this species which occur in the Tournaisian and Visean. This also provides no basis for any possible correlation of the limestones mentioned.

Chonetes hardrensis occurs very rarely in the Chabarny limestone and is therefore not characteristic of it; consequently, there can of course be no question here of a correlation. The same also applies to Leptaena (Strophomena) analoga Phill., which occurs in the Tschernischin limestone and in Western Europe in the Tournaisian, but is not characteristic of the Chabarny limestone. Finally, Orthotetes crenistria Phill. is represented only by a variety, and for that reason here too there can be no question of a correlation.

We therefore arrive at the conclusion that the Tschernischin limestone, in terms of its age, cannot be correlated with that of Chabarny; the latter represents a younger formation. As older beds of the Carboniferous formation at Chabarny, one may regard those alternating beds of siliceous shales and limestones which lie at the boundary between Upper Devonian and Lower Carboniferous strata.

What conclusions can we draw from everything that is known about the character of the fauna of the Chabarny limestone?

The absence at Chabarny, as also in the Urals generally, of the lowest beds of the Carboniferous formation with Spirifer tornacensis and Syringopora cuspidata indicates that during this time the areas mentioned represented dry land. The Western European basin of Tournaisian time extended eastward as far as the Government of Kaluga; whether it extended still farther to the east and communicated directly with the Siberian basin is unknown, since east of Tschernischin, in European Russia, the Tournaisian stage has not been encountered. Probably no close connection existed here. It should rather be assumed that the Siberian Lower Carboniferous basin was, in Tournaisian time, much more closely connected with the North American basin.

Only later did the transgression begin in the Urals, during which beds of Viséan age were deposited here; at that time the connection of the Uralian basin with the western European one was very broad. As regards, however, the extension of the basin eastward—toward Siberia and eastern Asia—it was insignificant, though such a connection apparently existed, for beds with Prod. giganteus have been encountered at various points in Asia¹.

In the period that followed the Viséan, the sea began to retreat from various parts of the eastern Urals, and a broad connection began to be established between the western Uralian coal basins and the basin of central and southern Russia with the Indian basin, and through the latter with the American one. At the same time the sea retreated strongly from the more northerly parts of Siberia, and the formation of the productive coal measures began.

As a result of the tectonic processes that took place in the Urals in general, the Carboniferous beds of the vicinity of Chabarny were displaced from their original position relative to one another. Later, the denudation processes began their activity and brought the vicinity of Chabarny into its present condition.

1. Frech, Carbonformation, pp. 380, 381. ↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩

2. Quarterly Journal, p. 299. 1905. ↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩↩

3. Frech. Carbonformation, S. 398. ↩↩↩↩

4. Ibid., Map VI. ↩

5. Enderle. Ueber eine antrocolithische Fauna von Balia Maaden in Kleinasien. Beiträge zur Palaeont. und Geol. Oest.-Ung., Bd. VIII, Heft II. ↩