Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T22:10:21.654Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

II.—On the Palæontology of the Selachian Genus Notidanus, Cuvier

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 May 2009

A. Smith WoodWard
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Among the Selachians of the existing fauna, there are none of greater interest and higher morphological importance than Notidanus, Cestracion, and the recently-discovered Chlamydoselachus from Japanese seas. These are the solitary survivors of once flourishing types, whose immediate congeners are only known to Biological science through the fragmentary remains preserved in the geological record; and the value of the archaic features they present is even further enhanced by the slight information already acquired regarding the geological distribution of their numerous extinct allies.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Geological Magazine , Volume 3 , Issue 5 , May 1886 , pp. 205 - 217
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1886

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 205 note 1 Huxley, T. H., “On Ceratodus Forsteri, with Observations on the Classification of Fishes,” Proc. Zool. Soc. 1876, pp. 40–45.Google Scholar

page 205 note 2 See excellent figures by Gegenbaur, C., “Das Kopfskelet der Selachier” (1872), plate x.Google Scholar

page 205 note 3 Huxley, T. H., loc. cit. p. 42, fig. 8.Google Scholar

page 206 note 1 In Jordan and Gilbert's “Synopsis of the Fishes of Korth America,” Bull. U. S. National Museum, No. 16 (1883), p. 967.Google Scholar

page 206 note 2 See detailed descriptions of C. Hasse, “Das Natürliche System der Elasmobranchier— Besonderer Theil” (1882), pp. 39–52, pls. vi. vii.Google Scholar

page 206 note 3 Loc. cit. p. 50.Google Scholar

page 206 note 4 St. Mivart, G., “Notes on the Fins of Elasmobranchs,” Trans. Zool. Soc. vol. x. (1879), p. 477.Google Scholar

page 206 note 5 Günther, A., “Catalogue of Fishes Brit. Mus,” vol. viii (1870), pp. 397–399.Google Scholar

page 207 note 1 Jordan and Gilbert, “Fishes of N. America,” loc. cit., p. 62: and S. Garman, Bull. Essex Institute, vol. xvi. (1884), pp. 56, 57.Google Scholar

page 208 note 1 Münster, , “Beiträge zur Petrefaktenkunde,” pt. vi. (1843), p. 55.Google Scholar

page 208 note 2 A. Oppel, “Der mittlere Lias Schwabens,” Württb, Jahresh. vol. x. (1854), p. 62, pi. i. fig. 1.Google Scholar

page 208 note 3 Tate, and Blake, , “The Yorkshire Lias” (1876), p. 256.Google Scholar

page 208 note 4 This and the other Jurassic homons have been kindly supplied by Mr. Etheridge.

page 209 note 1 Hasse, C., “Natürl. Syst. Elasm.—Besond. Theil,”pp. 51, 52, pl. vii. figs. 23–25.Google Scholar

page 212 note 1 Besides others already named, I have also to thank the following friends and correspondents who have kindly assisted me in the search for Jurassic Notidanidæ:— Mr. E. T. Newton, of Jermyn Street; Mr. T. Roberts, of the Woodwardian Museum, Cambridge; Mr. H. M. Platnauer, of the York Museum; Mr. H. J, Moale, of the Dorset County Museum; and Mr. H. E. Quilter, of Leicester.

page 215 note 1 The lower teeth of N. einereus also exhibit some approach to this character.

page 215 note 2 Garman, S., “A species of Heptranchias supposed to be new,” Bull. Essex Institute, vol. xvi. (1884), pp. 56, 57.Google Scholar

page 215 note 3 Newton, E. T., “On Two Chimsæroid Jaws from the Lower Greensand of New Zealand,” Q. J. Geol. Soc. vol. xxxii. (1876), pp. 329, 330, pl. xxi. figs. 6—9.Google Scholar

page 216 note 1 In addition to Notidanus dentatus, the National Collection also comprises three teeth of Oxyrhina and one of Odontaspis from these beds; the former bear a very close resemblance to the common O. Mantelli of the European Cretaceous, though there are not sufficient materials to establish their identity; and the Odontafpis is indistinguishable from the well-known O. subulata of the same age.

page 217 note 1 In his second paper (1879) Probst confirms his original determination (1858) and suggests that Lawley's fossil probably belongs to N. gigas or N. Meneghinii.