Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 May 2009
More than forty years ago the detached teeth of Hybodont Sharks were recognized by Reuss in the Cretaceous rocks of Bohemia, and these were referred to the genus Hybodus under no less than eight specific names. About twenty years later, evidence of a somewhat similar Selachian was discovered by Mr. William Davies and Mr. S. J. Mackie, in the Lower Chalk of Kent; and the cartilages of the jaw, with a few teeth, were briefly described by the last-named geologist under the name of Hybodus dubrisiensis. In 1886, the present writer pointed out, from more recently discovered specimens, that the English Cretaceous species was more specialized in every respect than any of the typical forms of Hybodus; and quite lately it has been proposed to regard this fossil as generically distinct, with the new name of Synechodus.
page 496 note 1 Reuss, A. E., “Verstein. böhm. Kreideform.,” 1845–1846, pt. i. p. 2; pt. ii. pp. 97, 98, with figs.Google Scholar
page 496 note 2 Mackie, S. J., “On a new species of Hybodus from the Lower Chalk,” The Geologist, vol. vi. (1863), pp. 241–246, pl. xiii.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
page 496 note 3 Woodward, Smith, “On the Relations of the Mandibular and Hyoid Arches in a Cretaceous Shark (Hybodus dubrisiensis, Mackie),” Proc. Zool. Soc., 1886, pp. 218– 224, pl. xx.Google Scholar
page 496 note 4 Woodward, Smith, “A Synopsis of the Vertebrate Fossils of the English Chalk,” Proc. Geol. Assoc. vol. x. (1888), p. 288.Google Scholar
page 496 note 5 See figures in Proc. Zool. Soc. 1886, pl. xx.
page 497 note 1 Proc. Zool. Soc. 1886, pl. ix. fig. 3a.
page 499 note 1 SirEgerton, Philip, “Figs, and Descrips. Brit. Organic Remains” (Mem. Geol. Surv.), dec. xiii. (1872), pl. vii.Google Scholar
page 499 note 2 Davis, J. W., “On the Fossil Fish Remains of the Tertiary and Cretaceo-Tertiary Formations of New Zealand,” Trans. Roy. Dublin Soc. [2] vol. iv. (1888), p. 25, pl. v. figs. 11—13.Google Scholar