TEXAS MEMORIAL MUSEUM BULLETIN 26 Lower Cenomanian and Late Albian (Cretaceous) Ammonites, Especially Lyelliceridae, of Texas and Mexico Keith Young THE TEXAS MEMORIAL MUSEUM, 2400 TRINITY STREET, AUSTIN, TEXAS 78705 A MUSEUM OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN WILLENA C. ADAMS EDITOR CONTENTS Abstract Introduction Acknowledgments Stratigraphy of the Buda Limestone Zonation of the middle part of the Texas Cretaceous Interregional Correlations Paleontology Faunal Lists Paleoecology Systematic Paleontology Genus Hypophylloceras Salfeld Genus Sciponoceras Hyatt Genus Mariella Nowak Genus Turrilites Lamarck Genus Otoscaphites Wright Genus Eoscaphites Breistroffer 1 Genus Scaphites Parkinson 32 1 Genus Puzosia Bayle 32 5 Genus Desmoceras Zittel 33 6 Subgenus Pseudouhligella Matsumoto 33 13 Genus Lewesiceras Spath 33 15 Genus Euhystrichoceras Spath 35 17 Genus Prionocycloides Spath 38 18 Genus Forbesiceras Kossmat 38 22 Genus Ficheuria Pervinquiere 39 23 Genus Adkinsia Bose 39 23 Genus Stoliczkaia Neumayr 40 23 Subgenus Stoliczkaia Neumayr 41 25 Subgenus Faraudiella Breistroffer 48 27 Genus Budaiceras Bose 61 30 Register of Localities 75 32 References 93 III ILLUSTRATIONS Figures 1. Locality map, Texas& northern Mexico 2. Areas of Texas& Mexico showing outcrops of middle Cretaceous rocks 3. Biostratigraphic & lithic relations using base of range zone of Graysonitesadkinsi as base of Graysonites adkinsi zone 4. Biostragraphic& lithicrelations using top of abundant Plesioturrilites brazoensis as base of Graysonites adkinsi zone 5. Paleogeography of northern Mexico & Texasduring middle Cretaceous 6. Biostratigraphy of Upper Albian & Lower Cenomanianammonite zones, north Texas to central Texas 7. Biostratigraphy of Upper Albian & Lower Cenomanian ammonite zones, central Texas 8. Relations of late Albian to Cenomanian rocks. Maverick Basin to Devils River Trend (not to scale) 9. SuturesofOtoscaphites,prionocycloides, Ficheuria, Sciponoceras, & Scaphites; sections of Otoscaphites, Ficheuria, Hypo­phylloceras, Faraudiella, Pseudouhligella, Puzosia, Stoliczkaia, & Scaphites 10. Sections of Prionocycioides, Adkinsia, & Stoliczkaia; sutures of Adkinsia 11. SuturesofBudaiceras&Faraudiella; sections of Budaiceras, Faraudiella, Euhystricohceras, Lewesiceras, and Stoliczkaia 12. Presumed evolution of late Albian & Lower Cenomanian lyellicerid genera 13. Presumed evolution of American species of Faraudieiia 14. Regression of number of ribs per whorl & diameter in Faraudieiia texana (Shattuck) 15. Regression of number of ribs per whorl & diameter in Faraudieiia roemeri (Lasswitz) 16. Presumed evolution of species of Budaiceras 17. Scatter plot of U & D for Budaicerashyatti (Shattuck) 74 3 18. Scatter plot of U& D for Budaiceraselegantior(Lasswitz) 75 7 19. Scatter plot of H& D for Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) 76 20. Scatter plot for H & D for 9 Budaiceraselegantior(Shattuck) 77 21. Scatter plot of U& H for Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) 78 22. Scatter plot of U & H for 9 Budaiceraselegantior (Lasswitz) 78 23. Regression of number of ribs per whorl 10 & diameter for Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) 79 24. Regression of number of ribs per whorl 11 & diameter for Budaiceras elegantior(Lasswitz) 80 12 Plates 13 1. Turrilites, Eoscaphites, Otoscaphites, Scaphites, Sciponoceras, Adkinsia, Prionocycloides, Mariella, Forbesiceras, & Pseudouhligella 24 2. Hypophylloceras, Euhystrichoceras,26 Ficheuria, Puzosia, Stoliczkaia, & Lewesiceras 29 34 45 3. Stoliczkaia & Faraudiella 4. Faraudiella 56 5. Faraudiella 58 6. Faraudiella& juvenilemantellicerines 62 36 7. Budaiceras, Faraudiella, & Stoliczkaia 64 49 8. Budaiceras & Stoliczkaia 68 9. Budaiceras & Stoliczkaia 70 50 Tables 53 1. Zonation of the latest Albian & Early Cenomanian of northern 55 Mexico & Texas by ammonites 14 2. LowerCenomanian correlationsby 55 ammonites for Texas, Africa, England, & southern France 16 V EARLY CENOMANIAN AND LATE ALBIAN (CRETACEOUS) AMMONITES, ESPECIALLY LYELLICERIDAE, OF TEXAS AND MEXICO* Keith Young** ABSTRACT The Early Cenomanian of Texas and north­ern Mexico contains numerous species of lyellicerines, and the late Early Cenomanian Buda Limestone is especially dominated by them. The three lyellicerine genera are Sto-Hczkaia, Faraudiella, and Budaiceras, and the latter two are particularly abundant. The 50 species of Early Cenomanian ammonites are distributed among 28 genera, mostly heter­morphs, scaphitines, and lyellicerines. Because of Tethyan faunal affinities the Early Cenomanian of Texas and northern Mexico can be correlated more easily with that of North Africa and Madagascar than with the more classical sections of northern Europe. Unfortunately, no horizon-differentiation in the Buda Limestone can be ascertained by fossils. The Main Street Limestone and Del Rio Clay are correctable with the Hypo­turrilitas schneegansi zone of North Africa, the Buda Limestone with the lower part of Zone II and the Woodbine with the upper part of Zone 11 and most of Zone 111. The H. carcitanensis zone of England would appear to be equivalent to the upper part of the Del Rio Formation, the Mantel­liceras saxbii zone mostly equivalent to the Buda Limestone, and the M. dixoni zone equivalent to the Maness Shale and the lower part of the Woodbine Formation. Lower Cenomanian strata thin onto the San Marcos Platform, the Devils River trend. ’This report is a contribution to the IGCP project "Mid-Cretaceous Events." ’’Department of Geological Sciences, The University of Texasat Austin. the Sierra del Carmen trend, and the south­ern Coahuila platform. These strata, in turn, thicken into the North Texas Basin, the Maverick Basin, and the Chihuahua Trough. INTRODUCTION In the days before wide use of the auto­mobile Professor F. L. Whitney took his paleontology class to Shoal Creek, which is only a few blocks from the campus of the University of Texas at Austin. Here his stu­dents collected fossils from the Buda Lime­stone only because the only other formation exposed along Shoal Creek is the Del Rio Claystone, and it does not yield abundant, good megafossils other than Uymatogyra arie­tina (Romer, 1852). Thus, over those earlier years at the University of Texas, Professor Whitney accumulated an outstanding collec­tion of fossils from the Buda Limestone. That this formation remained his favorite throughout his active collecting career is indi­cated by the fossils from the Buda Limestone being far better curated than fossils he col­lected from other formations. The collection from the Buda Limestone is remarkable only because that formation is so difficult to collect. Whitney started collecting the Buda Limestone in 1909 and published two papers on its fossils (Whitney, 1911 and 1913; 1916). The 1913 date is a republica­tion of his 1911 paper; Professor Whitney told me that when the first Texas Academyof Science became defunct in 1913, he was treasurer. He did not have enough manu­scripts to deplete the treasury, so he repub­lished his own paper in order to spend all of the money left in the treasury. Whitney con­ 1 tinued collecting the Buda Limestone, and many of the fossils were accumulated after 1913. There are a number of ammonite species heretofore unknown from the Buda Lime­stone. This report is largely concerned with these species, plus an amplification of the knowledge of related ammonites from the Georgetown, Del Rio, and Grayson Forma­tions. I have omitted the mantellicerines, most of which will be studied by W. J. Ken­nedy and J. M. Hancock. Except for two or three species, I leave the scaphitines to Jost Wiedmann for study. In a letter from Emil Bose to W. S. Adkins (University of Texas at Austin archives), dated August 15, 1920, Bose stated that he had found a very interesting ammonite fauna near El Remolino, Coahuila, Mexico [from the Buda Limestone], but that he had not found time to study it; from this time on, Bose was interested in someone publishingthe Buda fauna. In a letter to Adkins (ibid.) dated September 24, 1924, Bose reported that Sehores Vivar and Hizazumi of the In­stitute de Geologia had returned with a beautiful ammonite from the Buda Lime­stone of northern Chihuahua, Mexico. He implied that it was the same as the new genus [later named Budaiceras by Bose (1928)] from El Remolino, and further stated that his new genus occurred at Shoal Creek, Austin, Texas. In a letter from Bose to Adkins (Univer­ sity of Texas at Austin archives), dated October 15, 1924, Bose indicated that Adkins had been to El Remolino to collect, and fur­ ther that he, Bose, knew of the Whitney collection and its value when he said: Have you prepared any of your Buda ammonites from the Buda of Remolino and what genera have youfound there? I only want that somebody describes the Buda ammonites because that will furnish the finishing touch to the determination of the age of the Washita. I do not care who it is if he does the work well and I much fear that Whitney will not be able to do it. Bose did not comment on why Whitney would be unable to do the Buda ammonites, but one feels in reading the correspondence that Bose understood the temperament that prevented Whitney from publishing but little of the great mass of geological data he ac­cumulated during his 40-plus years at the Uni­versity of Texas. The nearest Whitney ever came to working his Buda ammonite col­lection was to supervise a thesis by Katherine Archer (Mrs. Knox Tyson); although over-split, her work was quite good and accurate, and especially her figures helped in identify­ing many of the better specimens in the col­lections. Unfortunately, this work was never published and is now outdated by a complete­ly altered taxonomy. The absence of middle Cretaceous ammonites from El Remolino (fig. 1) in either the Adkins or the El Aguila collections (La Compania Shell de Mexico, for which Adkins worked from early in 1921 until his year at the Sorbonne, now Univer­sity of Paris, in 1924), now at the Texas Memorial Museum, sheds some doubt on any visit by Adkins to that area. Although Bose (1928) cited the description of species of his new genus, Budaiceras, by Shattuck (1903) and Lasswitz (1904), he ig­ nored their works. Perhaps he did not have a copy of Lasswitz, although that is doubtful since he did much of his library work at the Institute de Geologia in Mexico City. Certain­ ly he knew enough to ignore Lasswitz's fig­ ures, since, in many letters, he remonstrated with Adkins to ignore the Lasswitz figures be­ cause they were so poor (e.g., letter from Bose to Adkins, dated September 30, 1926, in U. T. Austin archives). Perhaps Bose had seen the George Stolley collection, since he says (op. cit.) that he had been told by Clement Schluter and by Freeh that the originals of Rdmer's first (1852) publication were at Bonn and his second (1888) publica­ tion were at Breslau. This Breslau collection should contain the material that George Stol­ ley, an early Austin, Texas school teacher. 2 3 collected and sent to F. Romer. Bose further points out, though it is not pertinent to the present story, that Alexander Deussen gave some Texas paleontological material In 1906 to Dr. Staub to take back to Breslau. Also, fossils were sent by E. T. Dumble, director of the Geological Survey of Texas, probably in 1888 or 1889 (Herndon, 1891, p. 33). Anyway, it is not quite clear why Bose ignored Lasswitz and Shattuck as much as he did, unless he was so isolated from collections and literature that he could not properly evaluate their papers. Most of Bose's paper was written on his own time at night while he was working for the Richmond Petroleum Company (during the day), and it was written at Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, Mexico, far from collections and library. By the spring of 1925 Bose was still not completely satisfied with the collections and he and either O. A. Cavins or C. L. Baker re­visited El Remolino (letter from Bose to Ad­kins, Aug. 10, 1925, U. T. Austin archives) to gather further information on the Del Rio and Buda Formations of that area. In 1928 Bose published those Buda fossils to which he had access. Not much more in­ formation was obtained on the Buda ammo­ nites, then, until Miss Archer's thesis (1936). The Whitney collection at the University of Texas at Austin contains many new and some peculiar species. On the other hand, the Buda Limestone is an unusually hard limestone, or, when nodular, weathers to caliche rapidly and is extremely difficult to collect. Consequent­ ly, some species are represented by a sample of only one or two individuals. Bose did not have access to the Whitney fossils, so his de­ scriptions did not include many ammonites known by him to exist, except for the speci­ men illustrated on plate 18, fig. 7 (Bose, 1928) [herein illustrated as Budaiceras ele­ gantior (Lasswitz) on pi. 8, fig. 9], which Adkins added editorially without Bose's knowledge. From this early work Bose (1928) finally described Budaiceras mexicanum Bose, Euhy­strichoceras remolinense Bose, ManteUiceras "mantel/i" (Sowerby), and "ManteUiceras" laticlavium (Sharpe) var. mexicanum Bose from the Buda Limestone. In addition, he described the following species from the Del Rio Claystone, the Grayson Marl, and other strata of the Washita, all of which he con­ sidered Cenomanian. Dei Rio Claystone or Grayson Marl TurrHites brazoensis Rdmer Tetragonites brazoensis Bose Turri/itesbosquensis Adkins Wintonia graysonensis Adkins Baculites sp. cfr. bacuioides Mantel I Stoliczkaia uddeni Bose Stoliczkaia sp. aff. S. dispar (D'Orbigny) ManteUiceras wacoense Bose M. bravoense Bose Seaphites bosquensis Bose S. subevolutus Bose Engonoceras bravoense Bose Adkinsiaadkinsi Bose A. tuberculata Bose A. sparsicosta Bose A. bosquensis (Adkins) A. semiplicata Bose Georgetown-Del Rio (or Grayson) transition beds Turri/ites brazoensis Romer Acanthoceras cunningtoni Sharpe var. Pawpaw Formation Stoliczkaia adkinsi Bose ManteUiceras worthensis Adkins Much of Bose's collecting was incidental to his search for evidence for an ancient landmass that he called the Coahuila Penin­sula (Bose, 1923a). ACKNOWLEDGMENTS In addition to acknowledging the extensive collection of F. L. Whitney, Professor Whit­ney's kindness to the writer and his many willing discussions of the stratigraphy of central Texas have contributed to the writing of this paper. The master's thesis of Katherine Archer (Mrs. Knox Tyson) was invaluable in the early stages of the work when I was still plagued by the localities of specimens and the immense amount of data. Further collec­tions by W. S. Adkins, Grant Moyer, Con­stance Wollman, D. F. Reaser, W. T. Haenggi, J. R. Underwood, Bob F. Perkins, F. E. Lozo, Bob Lowe, Ken Martin, R. K. DeFord and his many students, and others, but especially the late Roy T. Hazzard, have been utilized in this report. Several days in the field on out­crops of Buda Limestone and Del Rio Clay-stone with Hazzard and Robert L. Cannon, in 1959, were especially beneficial. Discussions with Adkins and Lozo were many and always fruitful. In addition, grants from the University of Texas Research Institute and the Geology Foundation of the Department of Geological Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, have provided financing, publication, and re­print costs, and time for the writer to ac­ complish much of this study. And finally, I most grateful to Drs. am Richard Reyment, Donald F. Reaser, and Ernest L. Lundelius for their suggestions and careful reading of the manuscript. 5 STRATIGRAPHY OF THE Woodbine Formations in the Grayson County BUDA LIMESTONE area, a condition that Clark (1965) apparentlyoverlooked. Shattuck (1903) lamented that he knew no­thing of the stratigraphy of the Buda Lime­stone, and that he had to condense his state­ments concerning that stratigraphy from Hill (1901). Martin (1961; 1967) gave brief ac­counts of the historical concepts of the Buda Limestone, and Lozo (1951) and Adkins and Lozo (1951) also considered a few statements regarding earlier concepts of the stratigraphyof the Buda Limestone. Hazzard (1959) also discussed some of the problems of the stratig­raphy of the Buda Limestone. Understanding of the regional stratigraphic relations within the Buda and Del Rio-Gray­son Formations has progressed little since Hill (1901) insofar as published information is concerned. Other known data might be im­portant to anyone studying the Buda Lime­stone, but their exact interpretation is, asyet, incomplete. The distribution of middle Cre­taceous rocks in northern Mexico and Texas is depicted on figure 2, and some remarks con­cerning the stratigraphy of the Buda Lime­stone include; 1. In the Grayson County area (fig. 1) the middle limy member (Modlin Limestone member of some authors) of the GraysonFormation contains Budaiceras and Faraudi­eiia roemeri (Lasswitz), fossils restricted to the Buda Limestone in other areas. Buda­iceras also occurs in the Grayson Formation above the Modlin Limestone member in Gray­son County, Texas, and near the top of the Grayson Formation on Denton Creek, east of Roanoke, Denton County (Stephenson, 1944). These occurrences support Taff's contention (Taff and Leverett, 1893; Hill, 1901) that at least the upper part of the Gray­son Formation is equivalent to the Buda Limestone (figs. 3, 4). 2. Lozo (1951) pointed to the absence of disconformity between the Grayson and 3. The bored boulder horizon of lime­stone boulders of the Buda Limestone at the boundary of the Grayson and Woodbine Formations (Winton and Scott, 1922) and other evidence (Adkins and Lozo, 1951) indi­cates submarine erosion in the McLennan­Johnson-Hill-Bell counties area between the Del Rio (or Buda, if present) and the Wood­bine Formations, although Kummel collect­ed a single specimen of Budaiceras from high in the Grayson Formation of central Hill County. 4. The Buda Limestone in central Texas, near Austin, is divided into lower and upper members, the boundary between the two members being reported as disconformable by Whitney (in Adkins, 1933). Martin (1967) interprets this mid-Buda disconformity as in­creasing in magnitude in time to the north, but since it is within the Budaiceras hyatti zone, no great amount of time can be in­volved. 5. The Belton high (Murray, 1961; Tuck­er, 1962) seems to have been an effective posiment during most of Cretaceous deposi­tion and provides a plausible explanation for items 3 and 4 above, since the Denton and Grayson counties area was in the East Texas Embayment to the north (figs. 5—7). 6. From San Marcos into the Rio Grande Embayment there is no disconformity within the Buda Limestone. 7. In the Rio Grande Embayment the Buda Limestone is divisible into three mem­bers (Hazzard, 1959), the middle member being softer and more nodular than the other two; the upper member is a sponge-bearing(Verticellites) porcellanite. 8. The relationships of two members in central Texas to three members in the Mav­erick Basin (fig. 5) are unknown. Neverthe­less, fossils generally restricted to both mem­bers in Hays, Travis, and Williamson counties FIGURE 2 Areas of Texas and Mexico in which outcrops of middle Cretaceous (Upper Albian-Turonian) outcrops may be found. Scale of the map is too small to delineate the in­dividual outcrops, or even the individual mountain ranges. Index to counties of Texas and states of Mexico is with figure 1. 7 range throughout the lower two members of Claystone, and a sandy layer (Eagle Moun­the Buda Limestone in the Maverick Basin tains Sandstone ?) occurs between the Kent and are found only sporadically in the uppermember; but generally, the upper member, the sponge facies, is devoid of ammonites. 9. As pointed out by Winter (1961), in more than 160 kilometers of subsurface of the Maverick Basin the thickness of the up­per member of the Buda Limestone varies less than two meters; this indicates lack of truncation at its top. 10. The Del Rio Claystone pinches out onto the Edwards Plateau north of the Mav­erick Basin and west of the outcrop of the Balcones Fault in Comal County (figs. 6-8).On this old platform the Buda Limestone becomes softer, more nodular, and rests on rocks of pre-Del Rio deposition. The softer, middle (nodular) member of the Buda Lime­stone was formerly called "yellow stuff" or even Del Rio in the absence of the lower member of the Buda. 11. Onto the Devils River trend, north of the Del Rio.pinchout, the lower member of the Buda Limestone also pinches out. This leaves the middle member of the Buda Lime­stone resting unconformably on limestone (Salmon Peak Formation or its Devils River limestone equivalent) carrying an undescribed species of Mortoniceras with large umbilical tubercules, which species is restricted to the Drakeoceras /asswitzi zone (fig. 8). This is the widespread mid-Washita unconformity of Rose (1972). 12. The Del Rio Claystone not only pinch­es out onto the Devils River Trend to the north, but also pinches out onto the Terrell Arch to the west of the Rio Grande Embay­ment; this pinchout is usually interpreted as non-depositional. In addition, in the area around Comstock, Terrell County, large boul­ders of Buda Limestone can be observed where they were reworked into the base of the overlying Boquillas Formation. 13. In the Kent area, San Martine Quad­rangle, Trans-Pecos Texas, there is no Del Rio Station Limestone and the Buda Limestone. Here the Buda Limestone contains few am­monites, is rudistaceous at some levels, and at other levels is a Nerinea porcellanite. Faraudi­ ella borachoensis, n. sp., occurring elsewhere in the upper part of the Del Rio Claystoneand in the Eagle Mountains Sandstone, in the Kent area occurs below the sandstone in the upper part of the San Martine Member of the Kent Station Limestone, the upper partof which is apparently a limestone facies of the Del Rio Claystone in other areas. 14. The Eagle Mountains Sandstone is gener­ally considered a member of the Del Rio Claystone where the Loma Plata, Del Rio, and Buda constitute the sequence of formations in the Eagle Mountains and southward into Chihuahua. 15. In the northeastern Chihuahua area (Powell, 1963) the zone overlying the Buda Limestone is the zone of Forbesiceras brun­drettei (Young) and though not carrying the index species, contains Ostlingoceras brandi Young, Pseudouhligella e/gini Young, and Euhystrichoceras adkinsi Powell, fossils usual­ly considered to represent the top of the Lower Cenomanian. The same fauna, which I still consider to be derived because the fos­sils bear chatter marks (Young, 1958b), is represented in the base of the Boquillas For­mation on the northeast side of the Davis Mountains (Young, 1958b). Here this fauna probably represents eroded pebbles on a dis-conformable surface. Overlying it are speciesof the Zone of Metoicoceras geslinianum(d'Orbigny) [e.g., Metoicoceras sp. Young = (1958b) Meticoceras boesei Jones (1938) = M. whitei Hyatt (1903)]. Forbesiceras brundrettei and associated fossils lie between the faunas of the Buda Limestone and the overlying faunas of the Boquillas and Wood­bine-Eagle Ford formations. 16. To the south, in southwestern Coa­huila, on the west flank of the Coahuila Pe­ 8 FIGURE 3 Biostratigraphic and lithic relations using the base of the range zone of Graysonites adkinsi as the base of the Graysonitesadkinsi zone (not to scale). K. Young, 1976 FIGURE 4 Biostratigraphic and lithic relations using the top of abundant Plesioturrilites brazoensis asthebaseoftheGraysonitesadkinsizone(nottoscale). K. Young, 1976 ninsuia, the equivalents of the Buda Lime-tion the mididentification by Jones of a stone, Del Rio Claystone, and even the upper Kanabiceras fragment as Turrilites. This part of the Georgetown Limestone, are in the means that the upper part of the Lower Ceno­lower member of the Indidura Formation manian and most of the Upper Cenomanian (Kellum and Mintz, 1962). are missing, as pointed out by R. T. Hazzard 17. On the other hand, along the southern in unpublished notes in the W. S. Adkins pa-edge of the Coahuila Peninsula there seems to pers. It is possible that a low sill, connectingbe considerable hiatus, typical Del Rio Clay-the Coahuila Peninsula with the Miquihuana stone (Graysonites fossils) resting with sharp Platform, separated the Mesozoic Gulf of discontinuity below beds containing Kanabi-Mexico from the Cordilleran geosyncline du­ceras, which in turn are overlain by beds con-ring a part of the middle Cretaceous. taining Romaniceras and Spathites (Jones, 18. To the east of the Coahuila Peninsula 1938). W. J. Kennedy first called to my atten-the entire section gradually changes from the FIGURE 5 Paleogeographyofnorthern MexicoandTexasduringtheMiddleCretaceous 10 "Washita" marl, Del Rio, and Buda of the Monclova area to the cherty, thin-bedded limestone facies known as the Cuesta del Cura Limestone (Bishop, 1964). At Rancho An­dres, on the west flank of Sierra Comas south of the west end of Bustamante Canon, the upper beds of the Cuesta del Cura (Buda Limestone member) are thick-bedded grain-stones with rudistids similar to species of !m­ --manitas (Palmer, 1928). Fossils are not as yet well enough zoned to aid in solving all of the stratigraphic problems of the Buda Limestone. The interval repre­short time (measured by evolu­ sents such a tion) that the fossils may never help in these problems. Consequently, no regional picture of the stratigraphy of the Buda will be pre­ sented here. The above review of the state of knowledge is for the benefit of workers who may, with it, be able to add more significant information. ZONATION OF THE MIDDLE PART OF THE TEXAS CRETACEOUS Young (1966, 1967b, 1974) and Young and Powell (1978) have recently published zonations of the Cretaceous of Texas. Parts of those zonations are reproduced here (table 1) with little modification, and the study of the ammonites of the Buda Limestone has not greatly improved the zonation, either because the distribution of ammonites in the Buda Limestone is not understood or because there is no differentiation of zones through the Buda interval. Furthermore, the zonation of the Del Rio interval, in this writer's opin­ion, is not as detailed and as easily defined as indicated by the diagram of zones pub­ lished by Adkins and Lozo (1951). On the other hand, W. S. Adkins knew more about the stratigraphy of the Del Rio Claystone than I, or else his prejudices enabled him to reach conclusions unavailable to me. FIGURE 8 Relations of late Albian to Cenomanian rocks, Maverick Basin to Devils River Trend (not to scale). The zonation given in table 1 has two ques­tionable aspects. In Trans-Pecos Texas there is no doubt that the zone of Forbesiceras brun­drettei overlies the zone of Budaiceras hyatti. On the other hand, there is some question of the relationship in the East Texas Embay­ment, where the Woodbine Formation over­lies the Buda Limestone, the Grayson Marl, or in the subsurface, the Maness Shale. The mid­dle ammonite zone of the Woodbine in Ad­kins and Lozo (1951, p. 155) is based on scarce data, but a fragment of an ammonite with schloenbachiine ribbing from this zone on Aquilla Creek, Hill County, is probably a Forbesiceras brundrettei (Young). It is not well preserved, but I can find no midventer keel as in Sch/oenbachia. Furthermore, F. sp. cf. F. brundrettei occurs in the Maness Shale, above the Buda Limestone, in the subsurface (pi. 1, figs. 74, 75). Above the F. brundrettei level the fossils of the east Texas zones are boreal, more closely related to North Euro­pean forms, whereas the fossils of the Trans-Pecos zones are dominated by those more closely related to North African, Tethyanspecies. Adkins and Lozo (1951) present what ap­pears to be a detailed zonation of the Del Rio Claystone, but it is misleading, because theyindicate a sequence of zones that does not exist at any one locality. Some of these zones overlap or duplicate others, yet by the use of such epiboles and overlaps much good stratig­raphy has been accomplished. Adkins and Lozo state that these are local zones. In my opinion some of the distribution is undoubt­edly environmental, such as the restriction of abundant Texigryphaea roemeri (Marcou) = [ Texigryphaia graysonana (Stanton)] to the upper part of the Del Rio Claystone, or the rarity of Exogyra cartledgei Bose in east Texas. In northern Coahuila there is a facies in which Kingena-Wke brachiopods are par­ticularly abundant in the Del Rio Formation. The restriction of many of the pyritizedmicromorphs (Adkins and Lozo, 1951) to the TABLE 1 ZONATION OF THE LATEST ALBIAN AND LOWER CENOMANIAN OF NORTHERN MEXICO AND TEXAS BY AMMONITES Stage Substage Zone Upper Conlinoceras tarrantense Forbesiceras brundrettei BudaicerashyattiCenomanian Lower Graysoniteslozoi Graysonites adkinsi Plesioturrilites brazoensis Drakeoceras drakei Albian Upper Mortoniceras wintoni Drakeoceras lasswitzi synclinal areas likewise indicates environment­al control, either depositionally or diageneti­cally. For these reasons I am not using the zonal systems of Adkins and Lozo (1951, pp. 153-156). Furthermore, for construc­ing a zonal sequence to compare with other such sequences from other areas, I prefer to restrict myself to ammonites rather than mixing ammonites, echinoids, and pelecy­pods, as is so frequently done for local stratigaaphy. It must be emphasized, how­ever, that the purpose of my zonation, for wider correlation, is somewhat different from that of Adkins and Lozo (1951), which was constructed to help solve local stratigraphicproblems requiring more detail. Furthermore, I agree with Kummel (1948)that Turrilites bosquensis Adkins, "Subman­telliceras" brazoense (Bose), "S." wacoense (Bose), and the different species of Adkinsia described by Adkins (1920) and Bose (1928) are all juveniles. Using juveniles for zonal pur­poses is distasteful because usually we do not even know to which genera they really be­long, or what they mean stratigraphically,ecologically, diagenetically, or nomencla­torally. Critics may take me to task, as Tatum 14 (1931) took Bose and Gavins (1928) to task, for not tying the zones more thoroughly into the local rock units. Still, any chart that ties zones to local rock names is misleading, be­cause it is good only for a specific section with a specific definition of zones. For exam­ple, the Graysonites adkinsi range zone, in my interpretation, ranges from the upper partof the Pawpaw Formation into the GraysonFormation in north Texas; in central Texas it ranges through the top three or four feet of the Georgetown Limestone into the Del Rio Claystone, and the Plesioturri/ites brazoensis range zone overlaps more of the Graysonites adkinsi range zone in north Texas than in central Texas, but the P. brazoensis zone, in that interpretation (fig. 3) is that part of the P. brazoensis range zone that does not overlap the range zone of G. adkinsi. An alternative technique is to make the G. adkinsi zone equal to that part of its range zone that does not overlap the range zone of P. brazoensis (as in fig. 4). The apparent relationships of the Del Rio Claystone to underlying forma­ tions change with the technique of defining the zones. This is the reason that correla­tion charts involving the use of lithic units and biostratigraphic units concurrently are so often misleading, and is also the reason why they have been kept separate here. INTERREGIONAL CORRELATIONS Adkins and Lozo (1951) suggested that the Woodbine Formation probably represents the Pseudacompsoceras vectense and Mantelh­ceras costatum zones of the Spath (1926a) system, approximately the Turrilites costatus and Mantelliceras dixoni zones of Kennedy and Hancock (1971). This means the Wood­bine (zone of C. tarrantense and upper part of the zone of F. brundrettei) spans the boun­dary between the Upper and Lower Ceno­manian. I agree with Adkins and Lozo and correlate my zonal system as shown in table 2, including the admonition of Kennedy and Hancock (1971) that the C. tarrantense zone may be slightly younger than the costatus fauna. Of course, one must realize that the zonation of table 2 suffers, from among many defects, whatever inaccuracies are in­troduced by the vagaries of animal migra­tions and the inaccuracies of local strati­graphy. I have purposely made most of the boundaries disagree because the probability that they would agree is much too preposter­ous. From 1919 to 1925, in their correspond­ence, Adkins and Bose argued about the cor­relation of the Washita Division with the Euro­pean system. At first Bose wanted to include everything, including the infiata zone, in the Vraconian, down to and including his Duck Creek. Of these two it was Adkins who first felt that the Vraconian should be correlated higher, and after Bose began to study Adkins's Pawpaw fauna (1920), the Washita faunas (Adkins and Winton, 1920), and the Del Rio fauna (Bose, 1928) he raised the base of the Cenomanian to the base of the Plesio­turri/ites brazoensis zone and, following Spath (1926a), no longer worried much about the Vraconian. Scott (1926) had included the Grayson Formation in the Vraconian. Bose (1928) considered the Plesioturri/ites brazo­ensis zone as Cenomanian, but considered the Pawpaw as equivalent to bed XIII of the Gault at Folkestone, England. I consider the larger (upper) part of the Pawpaw Formation, which is a lithic facies of the Main Street Limestone part of the zone of P. brazoensis, as most likely earliest Cenomanian, and hence donot have to worry about compressed mantellicerines, such asM. worthense Adkins. Matsumoto and Inoma (1975) neatly get around this problem, perhaps correctly, by considering "Mantelliceras" worthense Adkins a juvenile Sto/iczkaia. I have not observed an overlap of P/esioturrilites brazoensis and any of the mortonicerines, but this is most certain to occur at some locality, and the description of the Pawpaw fauna (Adkins, 1920) indicates 15 TABLE 2 LOWER CENOMANIAN CORRELATIONS BY AMMONITES—­TEXAS, AFRICA, ENGLAND, AND SOUTHERN FRANCE in this formation an overlap of normally Cenomanian species with normally Albian species. The best compromise is to draw the Cenomanian-Albian boundary between the highest mortonicerines and the lowest mantel­licerines, and in the Pawpaw, in which they may overlap, take a choice. Most of the Paw-paw mortonicerines are unusual forms, such as Spathiceras wenoense (Adkins) and Neo­kentroceras worthense (Adkins), which are difficult to compare and correlate with other species. Consequently, I prefer to use the base of the mantellicerines, that is, the base of "Submantelliceras'' worthense (Adkins), which is the oldest mantellicerine in Texas, as the base of the Cenomanian. If Matsumoto and I noma (1975) are correct, and "Man­telliceras" worthense Adkins is really a ju­venile Stoliczkaia, then one need not be con­cerned over mantellicerines and mortoni­cerines occurring together in Texas. Since Graysonites adkinsi Young is not a common fossil, and since Plesioturrilites brazoensis (Romer) and Turrilites bosquensis Adkins are extremely abundant, the base of a zone carrying Plesioturrilites becomes the best base for the Cenomanian. This is true especial­ ly since the rarer compressed mantellicerines appear within the upper part of the range of P. brazoensis. Thus, if we exclude the questionable juve­nile "Submantelliceras" worthense (Adkins), most of the zone of Plesioturrilites brazoen­sis is below the compressed mantellicerines, but also above the mortonicerines. I correlate it with Dubourdieu's (1956) horizon A of his Hypoturrilites schneegansi zone, which is also without mantellicerines, but above the Stoliczkaia dispar zone which correlates with the Drakeoceras drakei zone of Texas. Mantelliceras saxbii (Sharpe) [= Acantho­ceras hoplitoides Lasswitz] occurs in the Buda Limestone along with M. cantianum = Spath [= M. budaensis Adkins M. charles­ton'! Kellum and Mintz]. Between the Buda­iceras hyatti zone (with M. saxbii and M. can­tianum) and the P. brazoensis zone are the zones of Graysonites adkinsi and Graysoniteslozoi; these two species have compressedmantellicerines as juveniles. According to Kennedy and Hancock (1971) M. martimpreyi is a synonym of M. saxbii. On the other hand, it seems doubtful to the writ­er that all of the compressed mantellicerines 16 that have been referred to M. martimpreyi in the African literature are actually synony­mous with M. saxbii. In other words, the compressed mantellicerines of Dubourdieu's (1956) horizons B and C of his H. schnee­gansi zone are probably older than M. saxbii and correlate with the two zones of Grayson­ites in Texas and northern Mexico. The faunas of the Del Rio and Buda forma­tions of Texas and northern Mexico are close­ly related to North African faunas, with Man­telliceras martimpreyi (Pervinquiere, 1907, pi. 16, figs. 18ab only, non Coquand) and com­pressed mantellicerines in common, in addi­tion to similar species of Euhystrichoceras, Sharpeiceras, Sciponoceras, Scaphites, Oto­scaphites, Fiickia, Ficheuria, and so forth. The same statement can be made for faunal relations between Texas and Madagascar. A more detailed zonation of the Indian rocks is needed before a close correlation can be made to that area. Matsumoto (1959b) points to the absence of mantellicerines in Japan, but his unde­ scribed Graysonites fauna may represent the Del Rio equivalents. California, likewise, has Del Rio equivalents in the beds containing Graysonites wootdridgei Young (Matsumoto, 1959b) and perhaps Buda equivalents in Baja California, in the beds represented by unde­ scribed Sharpeiceras ? (Matsumoto, 1959b). Undoubted Lower Cenomanian ammonites have yet to be described from South America. The Schloenbachia illustrated by Burgl (1957) is more closely related to species assigned by Powell (1963) to his genus Quitmaniceras from the Kanabiceras septemseriatum zone in northeastern Chihuahua. Similar species occur in Venezuela, Estado Ejido, with a lower Turonian species of Lewisiceras. PALEONTOLOGY Although the fauna of the Del Rio Clay- stone is not unusual, comparing well with faunas of the Lower Cenomanian of North Africa and Madagascar, with its Flickiidae and compressed mantellicerines, such as Gray­sonites, the lyellicerid genera, Faraudieiia and Stoiiczkaia, begin to develop in numbers un­known in the Lower Cenomanian of other parts of the world. The fauna of the Buda Limestone is quite unique and probably in­digenous to Texas and northern Mexico (Young, 1972). It consists of a great relict flowering ofthelyellicerinegeneraStoiiczkaia, and especially Faraudieiia and Budaireras. More than 95 percent of the ammonites from the Buda Limestone belong to the genera Fa­raudieiia and Budaiceras. The genus Buda­iceras has been reported outside Texas and northern Mexico only by Besairie (1936), but his species have since been correctly assigned to Neophlycticeras by Collignon (1964). They lack the smooth areas between the ventral ends of the ribs and the row of peripheral tubercles, and have only one peripheral tu­oercle per rib. They also appear to be Albian rather than late Early Cenomanian. Along with this late Early Cenomanian adaptive radiation of the lyellicerine genus Budaiceras, there was a similar holdover of other lyellicerine genera such as Stoiiczkaia and Faraudieiia, not unknown in the Early Cenomanian of other parts of the world, but certainly not dominating the ammonite fauna as does Faraudieiia in Texas and northern Mexico, just as though these lyellicerines were isolated and undergoing a final develop­mental burst. I have suggested elsewhere (1972) that this last, geographically restrict­ed adaptive radiation was on the broad Co­manche Shelf (Rose, 1972) behind the pro­tection of the Stuart City Barrier Reef. The rarity of lytocerine species in the Buda, such as species of Ostlingoceras, Plesioturrilites, and Hypoturrilites, along with a scarcity of phyllocerines, pachydiscines, puzosiines, and mantellicerines, seems to indicate that these forms were not entirely adapted to the en­vironment represented by the Buda Lime­stone, behind the Stuart City barrier reef; 17 barely enough of these generally cosmopoli­tan forms occur in the Buda Limestone to provide a few specimens for a sound correla­tion. Likewise, nautiloids, though present, are not at all abundant in the Buda Limestone. ively, at that diameter. H/W is the ratio. must agree with Schobel (1975) that the usual measurements taken on ammonites are rather useless, but editors usually insist that they be included. For the rib counts T, P, S, The fauna of the Buda Limestone contains two species of nautiloids, Paracymatoceras hilli (Shattuck) and Cymatoceras loeb/ichi Miller and Harris. From the Buda Limestone there is one species of Hypophy/loceras, one species of OstHngoceras, one species of Plesio­turrilites, and two species of Hypoturrilites. There is a single species of Euhystrichoceras. Among the pachydiscines and puzosiines there is one species of Lewiceras and a species of Puzosia related to P. crebrisulcata Koss­mat. The single desmocerine is an indetermi­nant species of Pseudouhligella. Adkinsia knikerae, n. sp., of the Flickiidae, is apparently such a rare form, if indeed it is not a juvenile of some early species of Lewesi­ceras, because it is so small that its rarity re­sults from being overlooked on the outcrop by collectors. Among the lyellicerines there are five species of Faraudiella, three species of Budaiceras, and two species of Stoliczkaia. There are two species of Mantilliceras, three species of Sharpeiceras, and one species of Paraca/ycoceras, representing the acantho­cerines. Many of the Del Rio species have been suf­ficiently described until more is known of their occurrence and distribution. Two spe­cies of Stoliczkaia from pre-Grayson beds are described. In all, 27 species of ammonites are known from the Buda Limestone and 27 species from the Del Rio and Grayson Formations. Measurements and terminology used herein are generally standard, except some measure­ments, where noted, are given in millimeters rather than percent of D, because D could not be measured. D is the diameter at which a measurement is taken. U, H, and W are the width of the umbilicus, the height of the whorl, and the width of the whorl, respect- and B refer respectively to total, primary, secondary, and bifurcating pairs. A number of common statistical treatments were used where the samples were large enough, culmi­nating in a comparison of the means of dif­ferent samples. Generally, such treatments, when tested, were insignificant and not in­cluded in the discussions. This insignificance points up either (1) the unsuitability of stan­dard ammonite mensuration, or (2) that in chalks, marls, and soft limestones measure­ments are too inaccurate because of sedimen­tary and diagenetic distortion. Where signifi­cant results were obtained, such are tabulat­ed. FAUNAL LISTS Known Early Cenomanian faunas of north­ern Mexico and Texas include the followingspecies of ammonites: Pawpaw Formation (usually listed as Al­bian, but the upper part of the formation is probably a facies of the Main Street Lime­stone and therefore Lower Cenomanian; the fossils have not been collected in sufficient detail to determine exact levels. Hypoturrilitesprimitivus Clark, 1965 Scaphites hilli Adkins and Winton, 1920 Worthoceras worthense (Adkins and Winton, 1920) Stoliczkaia adkinsi Bose, 1928 Graysonites (?) or Stoliczkaia (?) worthensis (Adkins, 1920) Main Street Limestone and Main Street equi­ valents in the Georgetown Limestone (Zone of Plesioturri/ites brazoensis and lower part of zone of Graysonites adkinsi) Ostlingoceras conlini Clark, 1965 18 Plesioturri/ites brazoensis (Romer, 1852) P. rhacioformis Clark, 1965 Graysonites adkinsi Young, 1958 G. wooldridgei Young, 1958 Stoliczkaia crotaloides (Stoliczka, 1864) [ = Stoliczkaia texana (Cragin, 1893)] [ = Stoliczkaia uddeni Bose, 1928] Del Rio and Grayson Formations (upper part of the zone of Graysonites adkinsi and the zones of G. iozoi and Budaiceras hyatti.) Sciponoceras sp. cf. S. baculoides (Mantel),1822) Plesioturri/ites brazoensis (Romer, 1852) P. pecosensis Clark, 1965 P. rhacioformis Clark, 1965 Turrilites bosquensis Adkins, 1920 Turrilites multipunctatus Bose, 1923 Wintonia graysonensis (Adkins, 1920) Tetragonites brazoensis Bose, 1928 Eoscaphites sp. aff, E. tenuicostatus (Pervin­qui£re, 1907) Scaphites bosquensis Adkins, 1920 Otoscaphites subevotutus (Bose, 1928) Scaphites sp. cf. S. hugardianus d'Orbigny Ficheuria sp. aff. F. pernoni, Dubourdieu, 1953 Stoliczkaia crotaloides (Stoliczka, 1864) [ = S. texana (Cragin, 1893)] [ = S. uddeni Bose, 1928] S. scotti Breistroffer, 1936 Faraudiella borachoensis, n. sp Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz, 1904) (Modlin Limestone member of the Grayson Forma­tion) Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck, 1903) (from the Grayson only in north Texas, and question­ably from the Del Rio in Chihuahua = [ Sch/oenbachia roemeri var. harpax Lass­witz, 1904] = [ Budaiceras mexicanum Bose, 1928, all except pi. 23, fig. 2] Prionocycloides sp. cf. P. proratum (Coquand, 1880) Adkinsia bosquensis (Adkins, 1920) [ = A. adkinsi Bose, 1928] [ = A. semiplicata Bose, 1928] [ = A. sparsicosta Bose, 1928] - [ A. tuoerculata Bose, 1928] Engonoceras bravoense Bose, 1928 E. retardum Hyatt, 1903 E. uddeni (Cragin, 1893) Graysonites wooldridgei Young, 1958 G. adkinsi Young, 1958 = [ G. reynoldsi Kellum and Mintz, 1962] G. fountain! Young, 1958 G. lozoi Young, 1958 G. (?) Wacoensis (Bose, 1928) [juveniles] G. (?) brazoensis (Bose, 1928) [juveniles] Buda Limestone (zone of Budaiceras hyatti) Hypoturrilites tubercu/atus (Bose, 1801) H. roemeri (Whitney, 1911) Ost/ingoceras sp. (?) P/esioturrilites brazoensis (Romer, 1852)Marietta wysogorskii (Lasswitz, 1904) Hypophylloceras sp. cf. H. tanit (Pervin­quidre, 1907)Puzosia sp. cf. P. crebrisutcata Kossmat, 1898 Pseudouhlige/la sp. Lewesiceras sp. Euhystrichoceras remolinense Bose, 1928 Adkinsia knikerae, n. sp. Stoliczkaia crotaloides (Stoliczka, 1894) = [ S. texana (Cragin, 1893)] = [ S. uddeni Bose, 1928] S. scotti Breistroffer, 1936 Faraudiella texana (Shattuck, 1903) = [ Scholenbachia frechi Lasswitz, 1904] = [ Sch/oenbachia curvata Lasswitz, 1904] = [ Sch/oenbachia haberfellneri Lasswitz, 1904, non von Hauer]Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz, 1904) F. archerae, n. sp. F. franciscoensis (Kellum and Mintz, 1962) Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck, 1903) = [ Schloenbachia roemeri var. barpax Lasswitz, 1904] = [ Budaiceras mexicanum Bose, 1928, all except pi. 23, fig. 2] 19 Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz, 1904) = [ Schloenbacnia roemeri var. elegantior Lasswitz, 1904] = [ Schloenbachia evae Lasswitz, 1904] [ = Budaiceras mexicanum (pro parte)Bose, 1928, pi. 23, fig. 2 only] = [ Budaiceras evae Adkins, 1928, pi. 23, fig. 2, non Lasswitz] Budaiceras alticarinatum, n. sp. Sharpeiceras tlahualiloense (Kellum and Mintz, 1962) = [ Tlahualiloceras tlahualiloense Kellum and Mintz, 1962] Sharpeiceras f/orencae Spath, 1926 S. mexicanum Bose, 1928 Mantelliceras cantianum Spath, 1926 [ = M. budaense Adkins, 1931] [ = M. charlestoni Kellum and Mintz, 1962] MantelIicerassaxbii(Sharpe, 1857) = [ Acanthoceras hop/itoides Lasswitz, 1904] ManteUiceras sp. [ = Acanthoceras martimpreyi Pervin­qutere, 1907, pi. 16, figs. 18ab, only, non Coquand] Paraca/ycoceras sp Ammonite lists by zones follow; the fauna of the Pawpaw has been omitted. Based on physical stratigraphy, the Pawpaw Formation is largely equivalent to the Main Street Lime­stone to the south. This could make it Ceno­manian, but it has usually been included in the latest Albian because it contains Mortoni­ceras and Spathiceras. The presence of man­tellicerines, however, give it a Cenomanian cast. The early collecting of pyritic micro-morphs was not in sufficient detail to deter­mine if the mortonicerines and mantelli­cerines actually occur in the same beds. Zone of P/esioturrilites brazoensis Ostlingoceras conlini Clark, 1965 Turrilitesbosquensis Adkins, 1920 P/esioturrilites brazoensis (Romer, 1852) P. rhacioformis Clark, 1965 Scaphites hilliAdkins, 1920 Graysonites adkinsi Young, 1958 G. wooldridgei Young, 1958 Zone of Graysonitesadkinsi Sciponoceras sp. cf. S. baculoides (Mantell, 1822) Turrilites bosquensis Adkins, 1920 Turrilitesmultipunctatus Bose, 1923 P/esioturrilites brazoensis (Romer, 1852) P. rhacioformis Clark, 1965 P. pecosensis Clark, 1965 Wintonia graysonensis (Adkins, 1920) Otoscaphites subevolutus (Bose, 1928) Eoscaphites sp. aff. E. tenuicostatus (Pervin­ qui£re, 1907) Scaphitesbosquensis Bose, 1928 Engonoceras bravoense Bose, 1928 Ficheuria sp. aff. F. pernoni Dubourdieu, 1953 Adkinsia bosquensis (Adkins, 1920) = [ A. tuoerculata Bose, 1928] [ = A. adkinsi Bose, 1928] [ = A. sparsicostata Bose, 1928] [ = A. semiplicata Bose, 1928] Prionocyc/oides sp. cf. P. proratum (Coquand) Stoliczkaia crotaloides (Stoliczka, 1864) [ = S. texana (Cragin, 1893)] [ = S. uddeni Bose, 1928] Graysonitesadkinsi Young, 1958 G. fountain! Young, 1958 G. wooldridgei Young, 1958 G. (?) wacoensis (Bose, 1928) [ = ManteUiceras wacoense Bose, 1928] [ = ManteUiceras brazoense Bose, 1928] Zone of Graysonites lozoi Tetragonites brazoensis Bose, 1928 Sciponoceras sp. cf. S. oaculoides (Mantell, 1822) Turrilites bosquensis Adkins, 1920 Wintonia graysonensis (Adkins, 1920) 20 Otoscaphites subevolutus (Bose, 1928) Scaphites bosquensis Bose, 1928 Engonoceras bravoense Bose, 1928 E. retardum Hyatt, 1903 E. uddeni (Cragin, 1893) Faraudiella borachoensis, n. sp.Adkinsia bosquensis (Adkins, 1920) [ = A. adkinsi Bose, 1928] [ = A semip/icata Bose, 1928] - [ A. sparsicostata Bose, 1928] [ = A. tuberculata Bose, 1928] Sto/iczkaia scotti Breistroffer, 1936b [ = S. dispar Scott, 1926, pi. 3, figs. 3, 4, non d'Orbigny] [= Sto/iczkaia n. sp., Adkins 1928,p. 236] [ = S. scotti Stoyanow, 1949] [ = S. patagonica Stoyanow, 1949] [ = S. excentrumbilicata Stoyanow, 1949] S. crotaloides (Stoliczka, 1864) [ = S. texana (Cragin, 1893)] [ = 5. uddeni Bose, 1928] Graysonites lozoi Young, 1958 G. (?) wacoensis (Bose, 1928) [ = Mantelliceras wacoense Bose, 1928] [ = Mantelliceras brazoense Bose, 1928] Zone of Budaiceras hyatti Hypophylloceras sp. cf. H. tanit (Pervin­ qui£re, 1907) Ostlingoceras spp (?) Plesioturrilites brazoensis (Rdmer, 1852) Marietta wysogorskii (Lasswitz, 1904) Hypoturrilites roemeri (Whitney, 1911) H. sp. cf. H. tuberculatus (Bose, 1801) Puzosia sp. cf. P. crebrisu/cata Kossmat, 1898 Pseudouhligella sp. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck, 1903) [ = Barrosiceras texanum Shattuck, 1903] [ = Schloenbachia frechi Lasswitz, 1904] [ = Schloenoachia frechi var. curvata Lass­witz, 1904] = [ Schloenbachia haberfellneri Lasswitz,1904, non von Hauer] Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz, 1904) [ = Schloenoachia roemeri Lasswitz, 1904] F. archerae, n. sp. Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz, 1904) [ = Schloenbachia roemeri var. elegantiorLasswitz, 1904] = [ Schloenbachia evae Lasswitz, 1904] = [ Budaiceras mexicanum (pro parte) Bose, 1928, pi. 23, fig. 2 only] [ = Budaiceras evae Adkins, 1928, pi. 23, fig. 2] [ = Budaiceras sp. Adkins, 1928, p. 237; Bose, 1928, pi. 18, fig. 7] Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck, 1903) [ = Barroisiceras hyattiShattuck, 1903] = [ Schloenbachia roemeri var. harpax Lasswitz, 1904] [ = Budaiceras mexicanum Bose, 1928, all except pi. 23, fig. 2] Budaiceras alticarinatum, n. sp.Mantelliceras cantianum spath, 1926 = [ M. budaensis Adkins, 1931] [ = M. charlestoni Kellum and Mintz, 1962]Mantelliceras sp. = [ Acanthoceras martimpreyi Pervin­qui£re, 1907, pi. 15, figs. 18ab, only, non Coquand] Mantelliceras saxoii (Sharpe, 1857) = [ Acanthoceras hop/itoides Lasswitz,1904] Sharpeiceras florencae Spath, 1925 S. mexicanum Bose, 1928 S. tlahuali/ocnse (Kellum and Mintz, 1962) = [ Tlahualiloceras tlahualiloense Kellum and Mintz, 1962] Paracalycoceras sp. PALEOECOLOGY As usual, with extinct animals, the paleon­tologist has to stretch his imagination to even use the word ecology with a prefix, but in this section some distribution phenomena that do not seem to fit any other place will be dis­cussed. Martin (1961, 1967) has discussed the corrosion zones within the Buda Lime­stone and the apparent thin depositional rhythms represented by its different beds. He has further pointed out that in the base of some beds specimens of Budaiceras are col­lected keel down, as though buried in and held up by soft mud, but that above the few basal centimeters of such a bed all ammonites are found lying on their sides. This phenome­non is correlated with a dominant micrite at the base becoming more sparry toward the top of the thin sedimentary cycle. Reyment (1970) has discussed this problem. The am­ monites of the Buda Limestone are highly compressed and would need support to stay upright. Nearly all of the fossils of the Buda Lime­stone are steinkerns, but the species of Buda­iceras appear to be thin-shelled in those rare specimens that possess a little replacement spar where the shell should be. This may account for their extreme rarity in the upper part of the buda Limestone of Travis and Wil­ liamson counties, Texas, which was deposited in an environment of higher energy than the lower member of the Buda Limestone (Mar­tin, 1967). Budaiceras hyatd (Shattuck) seems to be generally widespread throughout the area of Buda deposition, except in the rudistid and Nerinea facies of the Kent area, Culberson County, Texas, and adjacent counties, and in the facies with sponges on either side of the Rio Bravo, Texas and Chihuahua. Ammonites are also rare in the upper porcellaneous facies of the Rio Grande Embayment. On the other hand, B. elegantior (Lasswitz) is generally more restricted to the Edwards Plateau and the East Texas Embayment. Faraudiella roe­meri (Lasswitz) is widespread, but not abun­dant, and is only rarely found on the Edwards Plateau in Edwards, Sutton, and Kinney counties. In contrast to this, Faraudiella tex­ana (Shattuck) completely dominates the fauna of the Buda Limestone in the Eagle and Quitman mountains, Hudspeth County. It is interesting that in the early Upper Albian Adkinsites imlayi Young dominates the faunas from this same area in the zone of A. bravo­ensis (Bose) (Young, 1966). Other species of Budaiceras and Faraudiella are not represent­ed by enough specimens to draw conclusions concerning distribution. The latter statement is also true of other ammonites from the Buda Limestone; most of them are from the cen­tral Texas area because Professor Whitney col­lected that area so thoroughly. Sharpeicerasflorencae Spath is widespread, but not com­mon, except in the middle (nodular) member of the Buda Limestone along the western mar­ gin of the Maverick Basin. Sharpeiceras tlahualiloense (Kellurn and Mintz, 1962) may or may not deserve sepa­rate specific designation; it appears inter­mediate between S. florencae Spath and S. Iaddavium (Sharpe), Among the Del Rio ammonites species of Graysonites are distributed widely, but are rare. This statement is also true of Stoliczkaia crotaloides (Stoliczka) and Faraudiella bora­choensis, n. sp. The micromorph faunas are fairly abundant at some localities and hori­zons, particularly in the synclinal areas (Ad­kins and Lozo, 1951), but this is probablyrelated to environments resulting in the rightgeochemical conditions for producing pyritemicromorphs of the juvenile whorls or the small specimens, or siliceous micromorphs as in northeastern and eastern Zacatecas, Mexico (Bose, 1923). 22 SYSTEMATIC PALEONTOLOGY Order AMMONOIDEA Suborder PHYLLOCERINA Arkell, 1950 Superfamily PHYLLOCERACEA Zittei, 1884 Family PHYLLOCERIDAE Zittei, 1884 Subfamily PHYLLOCERINAE Zittei, 1884 Genus HYPOPHYLLOCERAS Salfeld, 1924 Type species: Hypophylloceras onoense (Stan­ton, 1895) by original designation of Sal­feld (1924). Neophylloceras Shimizu, 1934; Paraphyllo­ceras Shimizu, 1935 (nom. nud.j (non Sal­feld, 1919),Hyporbulites Breistroffer, 1947; Goretophylloceras Collignon, 1949;Aphro­diticeras Mahmoud in Breistroffer, 1951 (nom. nud.); Euphylloceras Drushchish, 1953; Ephphylloceras Collignon, 1956. HYPOPHYLLOCERAS sp. cf. H. TANIT (Pervinquiere, 1907) pi. 2, figs. 1-3; text fig. 9h cf. Phylloceras tanit Pervinquiere, 1907, pp. 53-54, fig. 5, pi. 3, figs. 3-9 [ = Phyllo­ceras seresitense Spath, 1923, non Pervin­qutere, 1907] cf. Hypophy/loceras seresitense tanit (Per­vinqutere) Wiedmann, 1962, p. 143 Hypophylloceras sp. cf. H. tanit (Pervin­quiere) Young and Powell, in press Remarks.— The specimens of Hypophyllo­ceras from the Buda Limestone are lirate as< in H. seresitense (Pervinquiere), and if one in­terprets H. seresitense as consisting of the sub­species of H. seresitense seresitense and H. seresitense tanit (Pervinquiere) as does Wied­mann (1962a), then the Buda Limestone specimens compare most favorably with H. seresitense tanit. The second specimen, even more poorly preserved, is also from the Buda Limestone. Nothing new can be added to the description of the species from these specimens, and the Texas forms are higher and narrower in whorl section than those specimens normally assigned to H. seresi­tense seresitense. Measurements of UT-17375: DU HWH/W 1.69 65.0 8.5 58.5 35.5 1.75 38.0 7.1 64.5 37.0 29 0 58.0 36.0 1.62 - Horizon and localities. Of the three specimens of Hypophylloceras sp. cf. tanit (Pervinquiere), UT-17375 is from the Buda Limestone at Shoal Creek and 29th Street, Austin, F. L. Whitney Collection. Ken J. Mar­tin collected another specimen from Bear Creek, and Whitney collected a third speci­men from Manchaca Road and Williamson Creek. All specimens are from the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Travis County, Texas. Suborder LYTOCERATINA Hyatt, 1900 Superfamily TURRILITACEAE Meek, 1876 Family BACULITIDAE Meek, 1876 Genus SCIPONOCERAS Hyatt, 1884 Type species: Hamites baculoides Mantell, 1822 Cyrtochilus Meek, 1876 (non = 1875) Cyrtochilella Strand, 1929 SCIPONOCERAS sp. cf. S. BACULOIDES (Mantell, 1822) pi. 1, figs. 41-45; text fig. 9j Baculites sp. cf. baculoides Mantell in Bose, 1928, pp. 210-211, pi. 3, figs. 11-14; pi. 4, figs. 3-11 Sciponoceras baculoides (Mantell) in Young and Powell, in press [1978] Remarks.— These specimens are from the Del Rio Claystone, and like Bose (1928) I cannot tell them from Mantell's species. How­ ever, all specimens are more or less slightly distorted and incomplete, and it seems best just to compare them to Mantell's species. Horizon and localities.-There are a number of specimens from the Grayson Formation, 3.8 kms. west of Aquilla, Hill County, Texas, and several more from the Del Rio Formation, east of the Santa Fe railroad tracks, 7.2 kms. south of McGregor, McLennan County, Tex­as. Eight specimens are from the Del Rio For­mation, Rancho la Bamba, west side of the Sierra La'grima, northeastern Chihuahua, Mexico. MARIELLA WYSOGORSKII (Lasswitz, 1904) pi. 1, fig. 60 Synonymy: as given by Clark (1965, p. 42) Marietta wysogorskii (Lasswitz) Young and Powell, in press Family TURRILITIDAE Meek, 1876 Genus MARIELLA Nowak, 1916 Type species: Turrilites bergeri Brongniart,1822 PLATE 1 1-4Turrilites bosquensis Adkins; 1, basal, 2, 4, lateral, and 3, apical views of UT-6973, from the Del Rio Formation,Rancho la Bamba, Chihuahua, Mexico; collected by W. T. Haenggi; 1, 4, X 2,2, 3, X 1. 5-8— Turrilites multipunctatus (Bose); 5, 7, lateral and 6, 8, apical, views of UT-6982, from the Del Rio Formation, Rancho la Bamba, Chihuahua, Mexico, collected by W. T. Haenggi; 5, 8X 2.6, 7, X 1. 9-16—Eoscaphites sp. cf. E. tenuicostatus (Pervinquidre);9, 15, apertural, 13, 16, ventral, and 10-12, 14, lateral views of UT-6987, from the Del Rio Formation, Rancho la Bamba, Chihuahua, Mexico, collected by W. T. Haenggi; 9, 10, 13, 14,X 1,11, 12, 15, 16, X 2. 17-35—Otoscaphites subevolutus (Bose); 17, lateral view of BEG-18621-Z (see also text fig. 9d); 18, 21, lateral, 19, sectional, and 20, 22, ventral views of BEG-18621-W (see also text fig. 9b); 23-25, lateral, ventral, and dorsal views of UT-7302-A (see also text fig. 9g); 26, a composite of three specimens; 27, 28, ventral views of body chamber of UT-8648 ; 29, 33, 34, lateral and 32, 35. ventral views of UT-8640; 31, lateral view of body chamber of UT-8647; 17-22, from the Grayson Formation, 2.4 kms. west of Aquilla, Hill County, Texas, collected by Bernhard Kummel; 23-35, from the Del Rio Formation, Rancho la Bamba, Chihuahua, Mexico, collected by W. T. Haenggi; 17-20, 23-25, 27, 29-33, X 2; 21,22, 26, 28, 34, 35, X 1. 36-40—Scaphites sp. cf. S. hugardianus d'Orbigny; 36, 38, lateral, and 39, ventral views of UT-8651 ,37, 40, lateral views of UT-8650 (see also text figs. 9pr);both from the Del Rio Formation, Rancho la Bamba, Chihuahua, Mexico, collect­ed by W. T. H aenggi; 36, 37, X 1; 38-40, X 2. 41-45—Sciponoceras sp. cf. S. baculoides (Mantell); 41, 42, 44, BEG-18621-V, from the Grayson Formation, 2.4 kms. west of Aquilla, Hill County, Texas, collected by Bernhard Remarks. -The specimen illustrated herein is the same specimen, UT-30537, that Clark illustrated (1965, pi. 11, fig. 2). It is from the Buda Limestone, west of Diezyocho (VanHorn) Creek, Jeff Davis County [ not Presidio Kummel; 43, 45, BEG-18750-A (see also text fig. 9j) from the Del Rio Formation east of the Santa Fe railroad track, 7.2 kms. south of McGregor, McLennan County, Texas, col­lectedbyW.S.Adkins;41,44,45, X2',42,43,X 1. 46-55, 61-66—Adkinsia bosquensis (Adkins). 46, 49, lateral,47, 50, ventral, and 48, sectional views of a tuberculatespeci­men, BEG-18621-A (see also text figs. 10cf);5/,54, ventral, and 52, 53, 55, lateral views of BEG-18621-T (see also text fig. 10b), a less tuberculate specimen; 58, 59, 61, lateral, 60,63, ventral, and 62, apertural, views of BEG-18621-V, a va­riant with reduced tuberculation; all from the Grayson For­mation, 2.4 kms. west of Aquilla, Hill County, Texas, col­lected by Bernhard Kummel; 46, 47, 51-53, 63, 64, X 1; 48-50, 54, 55, 61, 62, 65, 66 X 2. 56-59, 67-69—Prionocycloides sp. cf. P. proratum (Co­quand); 56, 57, ventral, 58, 69, apertural, and 59, 67, 68, lateral views of UT-6895 (see also text figs. 9c, 10a), from the Del Rio Formation, Rancho la Bamba, Chihuahua, Mexico, collected by W. T. Haenggi; 56, 58, 59, 67, X 2; 57, 68, 69, X 1. 60—Mariella wysogorskii (Lasswitz); from the middle (nodu­ lar) member of the Buda Limestone, west of Diezyocho Creek, Jeff Davis County, Texas, collected by Philip Braith­waite; X 1. 70-72—Adkinsia knikerae, n. sp.; lateral and ventral views of the holotype, UT-17388, from the Buda Limestone, Austin,Texas; F. L. Whitney Collection; 70, 72, X 2; 71, X 1. 73, 74-Forbesiceras sp. cf. F. brundrettei (Young); lateral views of WSA-4980, from the Maness Shale, depth of 3747.5 ms.. Union Producing Company, Smithers no. 1, Walker County, Texas, collected by F. E. Lozo, Jr.; 73, X 2;74, X 1. 75, 76—Pseudouhligella sp. indet.; ventral and lateral views of UT-18005 (see also text fig. 9k) from the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Travis County, Texas; F. L. Whit­ney Collection; X 1. County as stated by Clark (1965)], Texas. Without further information and specimensthere is no need for further discussion. Genus TURRILITES Lamarck, 1801 Type species: Turrilites costatus Lamarck 1801 TURRILITES BOSQUENSIS Adkins, 1920 pi. 1, figs. 1-4 Synonymy: See Clark (1965, p. 47) for sy­nonymy.Plesioturrilites sp. aff. P. oehlerti (Pervin­quiere, 1907) in Young and Powell (in press). Remarks.—This species has been described by Adkins (1920), Bose (1928), and Clark (1965). Clark's interpretation is somewhat broader than those of Adkins and Bose, and if correct, Turrilites bosquensis might well be­ come a synonym of Turrilites aumalensis Coquand (1880); some of Clark's specimens(1965, pi. 17, figs. 9, 13, 15, 16) even show the clavate tubercles that Breistroffer (1953) attempts to use to define his subgenus Meso­turri/ites. The marked plesioturrilitid groovedoes not show well in the pyritic micro-morphs, and if T. bosquensis is to be assigned to P/esioturri/itesit must be done by accept­ , ing the assignment of the large specimen il­lustrated by Clark (1965, pi. 15, fig. 1) to this species, a hazardous assignment at best I had compared the specimen illustrated on plate 1, figs. 1-4, to Turrilites oehlerti (Pervinquidre, 1907) (Young and Powell, in press), but would now consider Bose's (1923b,pi. X, figs. 25-31) Turrilites carrancoi as prob­ably synonymous with T. oehlerti Pervin­quiere, because of the more delicate ribbingin the earlier whorls. FIGURE 9 a, b, d, g, n—Otoscaphites subevolutus (Bose); a, suture of UT-8642; b, section of BEG-18621-W (see also plate 1, figs. 18-22); d, suture of BEG-18621-Z (see also plate 1, fig. 17); g, suture of UT-7302-A Isee also plate 1, figs. 23-25); n, suture of UT-5643 at a diameter of 6 mm.; a, g, n, from Rancho la Bamba, Chihuahua, Mexico, collected by W. T. Haenggi; b, d, from the Grayson Formation, 2.4 kms. west of Aquilla, Hill County, Texas, collected by Bernhard Kum­mel;a// X 17. c—Prionocycloides sp. cf. P. proratum (Coquand); suture of UT-6895 (see also plate 1, figs. 56-59, 67-69, and text fig. 10-a), from the Del Rio Formation, Rancho la Bamba, Chi­huahua, Mexico, collected by W. T. Haenggi; X 7. e, f—Ficheuria sp. aff. F. pernoni Dubourdieu; section and suture of UT-7291 (see also plate 2, figs. 6-11), from the Del Rio Formation, Rancho la Bamba, Chihuahua, Mexico, col­lected by W. T. Haenggi; e, X 1; f, X 17. h-Hypophylloceras sp. cf. H. tanit (Pervinqui&re); sections of UT-17375 (see also plate 2, figs. 1-3), at diameters of 29, 38, and 65 mm., from the Buda Limestone, Shoal Creek, Austin, Texas, F. L. Whitney collections; X 1. i—Faraudiella sp. cf. F. rhamnonota (Seeley); sections of WSA-1962 (see also plate 3, figs. 3, 12), from the Denton Formation near Belton, Bell County, Texas, collected by W. S. Adkins; X 1. j—Sciponoceras sp. cf. S. baculoides (Mantell); suture of BEG-18750-A (see also plate 1, figs. 43, 45), from the Del Rio Formation, east of the Santa Fe Railroad track, 7.2 kms. south of McGregor, McLennan County, Texas; X 17. k—Pseudouhligella sp. indet.; section of UT-18005 (see also plate 1, figs. 75, 76), from the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Travis County, Texas, F. L. Whitney collection; X 1. m—Puzosia sp. cf. P. crebrisu/cata Kossmat; sections of UT-18025 (see also plate 2, figs. 12-14) at diameters of 20 and 38.5 mm., from the lower member of the Buda Lime­stone at Austin, Travis County, Texas; F. L. Whitney col­lection; X 1. o, q—Stoliczkaia adkinsi Bose; o, sections of UT-14466 (see also plate 3, figs. 8, 9), from 4.5 ms below the top of the Georgetown Limestone, Shoal Creek, Pease Park, Austin, Travis County, Texas, collected by K. Young; q, sections of the holotype (see also pi. 2, figs. 15, 19-21), the specimenillustrated by Bose (1928, plate 18, figs. 9-13), from the Paw-paw Formation, Glen Garden Country Club, Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas, collected by W. S. Adkins; both X 1. p, r—Scaphites sp. cf. S. hugardianus d'Orbigny; p, suture, and r, section of UT-8650 (see also plate 1, figs. 37, 40), from the Del Rio Formation, Rancho la Bamba, Chihuahua Mexico, collected by W. T. Haenggi; both X 17. Horizon and localities.-Turrilites bosquen­sis Adkins is common at many localities in the Del Rio Formation of Texas and northern Mexico. The specimen illustrated on plate 1, figs. 1-4, plus 11 other specimens, is from the Del Rio Formation, Rancho La Bamba, west flank of the Sierra La'grima, northeastern Chihuahua, Mexico, where it occurs with Fi­cheuria, Graysonites (?) sp. juv., Prionocy­cioides, Otoscaphites subevo/utus (Bose), Ad­kinsia, and species of Scaphites. TURRILITES MULTIPUNCTATUS Bose, 1923 Pl-1, figs. 5-8 Turrilites multipunctatus Bose, 1923, pp. 154-155, plate X, figs. 48-58 ? Paraturrilites kerkourensis Dubourdieu, 1953, pp. 48-50, plate 4, figs. 4-10 Remarks. -In the number of tubercles per volution and the four rows of tubercles, this species was compared to Turrilites bergeri Brongniart by Bose (1923b, p. 155), but un­ like Turrilites Pergeri, T. multipunctatus shows tubercles elongate parallel to the axis of coiling. There are four rows of tubercles, three seen from the side and one from the base only. The tubercles are separated by weaker areas of ribbing, that Bose actually called "smooth areas," between the first and second and second and third rows, designat­ing the rows from apicad. Bose points out that the number of rows of tubercles per volution ranges from 24 to 32, and he at­tributes the specimen with 24 to an unde­scribed variety. My specimen has closer to 34 rows of tubercles per whorl. The range of variation of the apical angle is excessive in pyrite micromorphs, and therefore not worth measuring; part of that range seems to be the result of uneven expansion during pyritiza­tion. Bose's specimens were silicified. Horizon and localities. -In addition to the Bose locality between Camacho and the Trinidad Mine, Zacatecas, Mexico, 12 speci­mens, including the one illustrated on plate 1, figs. 5-8, have been identified from the Del Rio Formation, Rancho la Bamba, west flank of the Siera La'grima, northeastern Chi­huahua, Mexico. PLATE 2 1-3—Hypophylloceras sp. cf. H. tanit (Pervinquiere); lateral and ventral views of UT-17375 (see also text fig. 9h), from the Buda Limestone, Shoal Creek, Austin, Texas; F. L. Whit­ ney Collection;X 1. 4, s—Euhystrichoceras remolinense Bosef lateral and ventral views of a cast of the holotype, BEG-35236 (= UC-35764) (see also text fig. lid), from the Buda Limestone near El Remolino, Coahuila, Mexico; collected by Emil Bose; X 1. 6-11—Ficheuria sp. aff. F. pernoni Dubourdieu; 6, 10, 11, lateral, 7, 8, ventral, and 9, apertural views of UT-7291 (see also text figs. 9de), from the Del Rio Formation, Rancho la Bamba, Chihuahua, Mexico, collected by W. T. Haenggi; 6,8,9, 77,X2.7, 10.X 1. 12-14—Puzosia sp. cf. P. crebrisulcata Kossmat; ventral and lateral views of UT-18025 (see also text fig. 9m), from the lower member of the Buda Limestone at Austin, Travis County, Texas; F. L. Whitney Collection; X 1. 15-25-Stoliczkaia adkinsi Bose; 15, 21, lateral, and 16, 20, ventral views of the holotype (see also text fig. 9q), illus­trated by Bsse (1928, pl. 18, figs. 9-13), from the Pawpaw Formation, Glen Garden Country Club, Fort Worth, Tar-rant County, Texas, collected by W. S. Adkins; 17, 19, 22, lateral, and 18, 25, ventral views of the paratype illustrated by Bose (1928, pl. 18, figs. 15, 17c) from the Pawpaw For­mation on Sycamore Creek, southeast of Fort Worth, Tar-rant County, Texas, collected by W. S. Adkins; 23, lateral, and 24, ventral views of UT-273 (see also text fig. 11b), from 4.5 ms. below the top of the Georgetown Limestone, Pease Park, Shoal Creek, Austin, Texas, collected by K. Young, 15-17, 22-25, X 1; 18-21, X 2. 26, 27—Lewesiceras n. sp.; ventral and lateral views of UT-30495 (see also text fig. llkk), from the Buda Lime­stone, Rubbrecher Ranch, Comal County, Texas, collected by Victor King; X 1. 29 Superfamily SCAPHITACEAE Meek, 1876 Family SCAPHITIDAE Meek, 1876 Subfamily SCAPHITINAE Meek, 1876 Genus OTOSCAPHITES Wright, 1953 Type species: Ammonites (?) bladensis Schliiter, 1872 OTOSCAPHITES SUBEVOLUTUS (Bose, 1928) pi. 1,figs. 17-35;textfigs.9abdgn Synonymy given by Clark (1965, p. 59) Eoscaphites subevolutus (Bose) Young and Powell, in press, pi. 8, figs. 1, 7 Description Conch is discoidal, evolute, ± and 30 mm. in greatest dimension, the coiled part about 10 mm. of this and the hook almost another 10 mm., leaving the shaft to take up the remainder. The shaft opens sharply from the coil with slightly prosiradiate ribs, flexed at mid-flank and bifurcating or intercalating just ventrad of midflank. Ribs on the shaft be­come more prosiradiate toward the hook. The coiled part of the conch contains from 15to20primaryribsatadiameterof 10mm., with secondary ribs appearing between diame­ters of 5 and 6 mm. Secondary ribs inter­calate or bifurcate at the outer one-third of the flank to outer one-fourth of the flank and are largely restricted to the venter. Juvenile whorls prior to a diameter of 8 mm. are ex­tremely variable in shape and density of orna­mentation, and the smallest whorls are smooth although the designation by Bose (1928, p. 226) of the three smallest whorls as smooth is inaccurate, since the length of the smooth part varies from individual to individual. The umbilicus is usually imperforate, but per­forate specimens are known [ pi. 1, fig. 30, herein and Bose (1928) pi. 7, figs. 10 and 17, at least]. The coiled part of the conch may have as many as 3% or 4 whorls, and prior to a diameter of from 5 to 7 mm. the whorl width is greater than the whorl height. Over­lap of the flank by any succeeding whorl may vary from an overlap of one-half the flank to almost no overlap, as pointed out by Bose (1928, p. 226). The hook is nearly symmetrical, almost a half circle, and has rather strong bullae ex­tending from just laterad of the impressed zone to the outer one-third of the flank, where they usually bifurcate to three ribs on the venter. Other ribs may intercalate at the outer one-third of the flank and also extend over the venter. There is a well developed impressed zone on the shaft that continues throughout the length of the hook. Of the 20 or so hooks examined most are distorted by pyritization, and apertural edges do not seem to be pre­served; the question as to the presence or absence of lappets in this species is still un­resolved. The E, L, and I elements of the suture are well developed at all stages ascertainable, and P'l is also easily seen. The U element is some­what obscure on sutures from the coiled part (text figs. 9gn), which appear to be scaphi­tine, whereas the U element is well developed on sutures from the shaft, and these sutures are more like those of other species of Oto­scaphites. Measurements of coiled parts from two specimens (UT-6981); D U H W H/W 8.6 4.4 9 1 34.0 36.5 36.0 44.0 34.0 42.0 38.5 48.0 36.5 1.14 0.71 1.15 3.8 47.5 39.5 53.0 0.75 Measurements from Bose (1928, p. 227),six specimens: 14.4 32.0 42.0 44.0 0.95 11.1 42.0 41.0 33.0 1.24 9.3 41.0 38.0 32.0 1.19 8.8 38.0 41.0 38.0 1.08 7.6 37.0 37.0 36.0 1.03 5.0 50.0 32.0 40.0 0.80 30 Remarks.—Otoscaphites subevolutus (Bose) is most often compared with Scaphites evo­lutus Pervinqui&re (1910), from which it differs in having a higher whorl section be­yond the diameters of 5 to 7 mm., less dense ribbing in the juveniles, and a larger number of whorls in the coiled part of the conch. The ornamentation is generally stronger than that on most species of Otoscaphites, but the ornamentation on the shaft is very close to that on the shaft of the specimen figured as Otoscaphites awanuiensis by Wright (1957, pi. 54, fig. 6), except that or­namentation on the New Zealand specimen is weaker. The ornamentation is not quite the same on Wright's other specimen (1957, pi. 54, figs. 7ab). Most species of Otoscaphites are younger than O. subevolutus, and their ornamentation is also more reduced (e.g., Wiedmann, 1965, pi. 58, figs. 2-4, 6 and pi. 59, figs. 1-2), but the ornamentation of 0. subevolutus, especially plate 1, figures 17, 29, 33, 34, could be the precursor to the ornamentation of 0. bladensis (Schluter, 1872) as illustrated by Wiedmann (1965, pi. 58, especially figs. 2a-c, 3, and 4). Wied­ mann's figures 3 and 4 also apparently show the variation of evoluteness so emphasized by Bose (1928, p. 226). The U element of the suture is less well developed in Otoscaphites subevolutus than in other species of the genus, except for sutures on the shaft (text figs. 9a, g). Perhaps the lack of the development of the U element in the coiled part of the conch is because of the early stage of this species in the otoscaphi­ tine lineage, providing the generic designation is correct. The L and Pi elements are much narrowed on the shaft, compared to the coil. Wiedmann's (1965) and Wright's (1953) suggestions that Scaphites evolutus (Pervin­ qui&re, 1910) be assigned to Otoscaphites may well be correct, but in 0. subevolutus (Bose) the type of suture typical of Oto­ scaphites is almost restricted to the shaft. Because of the lack of preservation of mouth edges, I do not yet believe the generic designation is completely satisfactory, but feel, because of the open hook and the great extension of the shaft and the ornamentation, that Otoscaphites is the best assignment un­til someone demonstrates otherwise. Clark (1965) points to the absence of shafts and hooks in the Bureau of Economic Geology collections (collections now deposit­ed with the Texas Memorial Museum, The University of Texas at Austin). He is partly correct; specimens on plate 1, figures 17 and 18 are from these collections, and they show parts of the shaft. I do not understand why there should be no hooks unless earlier col­lectors failed to pick them up because they did not recognize them for what they were. In a clay sediment as fine as the Del Rio Claystone there should be no sorting. In the Rancho la Bamba section, northeast Chi­huahua, Mexico, there are many shafts and hooks, but the hooks are more often distort­ed by pyritization than the shafts or coiled parts. All of the hooks, and some 20 have been examined, are broken from the shafts at the last suture. The shaft is usually separated from the coil at the first suture with a free impressed zone. Again the clay sediment is remarkably fine at Rancho la Bamba, where different parts are dissociated but in the same deposit, and one would suspect scavengers or bioturbation to be responsible for the dis­ sociation of shafts, hooks, and coils, since the dissociation does not seem to be restricted to the weathering profile. Horizon and localities.—Otoscaphites sub­ evolutus (Bose) is Lower Cenomanian, occur­ ring in both the zones of Graysonites adkinsi and G. tozoi. It occurs in the Del Rio and Grayson Formations throughout Texas and northern Mexico, except on those platform areas where the formations are thin and more nearly the composition of limestone. Distribu­ tion, locally, is restricted stratigraphically to distinct, thin levels that have not been cor­related with each other and probably cannot be correlated with each other. Specimens illustrated on plate 1 are from the Grayson Formation, 2.4 kms. west of Aquilla, Hill County, Texas, and from the Del Rio Forma­tion, Rancho la Bamba, west flank of the Sier­ra Lagrima, northeastern Chihuahua, Mexico. Genus EOSCAPHITES Breistroffer, 1947 Type species: Ammonites (?) circularis J. de C. Sowerby, 1836 EOSCAPH/TES (?) sp. cf. E. TENUICO-CO­STATUS (Pervinquiere, 1910) pi. 1,figs. 9-16 cf. Scaphites tenuicostatus Pervinquiere, 1910, p. 28, text fig. 12, pi. 2, figs. 17-19; Reeside, 1927, p. 34. cf. Eoscaphites tenuicostatus (Pervinquiere) Wiedmann, 1962b, p. 212; Wiedmann, 1965, pp. 410-411, pi. 53, figs. 7abc. Eoscaphites tenuicostatus Young and Powell, in press, pi. 6, figs. 13, 14. Remarks.— I am not likely to add much to the knowledge of this species or its generic assignment with the single example illus­trated on plate 1, figs. 9-16. Even the generic assignment is still as questionable as it was when Wiedmann (1965) questionably assignedthis species of Pervinquiere (1910) to Eosca­phites Breistroffer. The Mexican specimen seems to be intermediate between Eoscaphites tenuicostatus (Pervinquiere) and Scaphites simplex Jukes-Brown (1975). The Mexican specimen is more strongly ribbed than Per­vinquiere's, but less strongly ribbed than S. simplex. The specimen from Mexico is also just beginning to show the lateral bulges or thickenings of the shaft that is so well de­veloped in S. simplex. Horizon and locality.—The single specimen illustrated on plate 1 was recovered from the Del Rio Formation, Rancho la Bamba, west flank of the Sierra Lagrima, northeastern Chihuahua, Mexico, and it occurs with Oto­ scaphites subevolutus (Bose). Scaphites sp. cf. S. hugardianus d'Orbigny, Turrilites bosqden­ sis Adkins, Ficheuria sp., Prionocycloides sp,cf. P. proratum (Pervinquiere), and juvenilespecimens of Graysonites. Genus SCAPHITES Parkinson, 1811 Type species: Scaphites aequalis Sowerby,1813, designated by Meek, 1876 SCAHP/TES sp. cf. S. HUGARDIANUS d'Orbigny, 1841 Pi-1,figs. 36-40; text figs. 9p,r Remarks. -A few specimens of Scaphitesfrom Mexico, much less tumid than S. bos­quensis Bose, S. simplex Jukes-Brown, or S. auma/ensis Coquand, seem to conform to the earlier whorls of S. hugardianus d'Orbignyin involution, bifurcation of ribs just ventrad of midflank, and whorl height-width ratios. The absence of shafts and hooks prevents the accurate identification, because the tubercles on the flanks of the shafts and hooks, so typi­cal of the meriani group, have not yet devel­oped. Horizon and locality.—Several specimens are from the Del Rio Formation at Rancho la Bamba, west flank of the Sierra Lagrima,northeastern Chihuahua, Mexico. They are associated with the same species that are associated with Eoscaphites (?) tenuico­status(Pervinquiere), above. Suborder AMMONITINA Hyatt, 1889 Superfamily DESMOCERACEAE Zittel, 1895 Family DESMOCERIDAE Zittel, 1895 Subfamily PUZOSIINAE Spath, 1922 Genus PUZOSIA Bayle, 1878 Pleuropachydiscus Hyatt, 1900Pseudosilesi­ , toides Breistroffer, 1952 (nom. nud.) Type species; Ammonites subplanulatus SchlCiter, 1871 (= P. p/anulata Bayle, 1878, non J. de C. Sowerby, 1827) PUZOSIA sp. cf. P. CREBR/SULCATA Kossmat, 1898 pi. 2, figs. 12-14; text fig. 9m Remarks.—ol-18025 is a small specimen(D=38.5), probably of a small species, almost as evolute as the much older species, P. sharpei Spath and P. communis Spath from the Greensand. The Buda Limestone specimen is more evo­lute than P. mayoriana (d'Orbigny) and more evolute than the species Pervinquiere (1907) identified as P. paronae Kilian. The latter species should be about the same age as the Buda Limestone. The Buda specimen is very similar to P. crebrisufcata Kossmat (1898), with the same bi-concave constrictions pro­jected sharply forward at midventer. P. ere­orisulcata occurs with fossils that indicate an age comparable to that of the Buda Lime­ stone. Measurements from the one individual, UT-18025, are. DU H W H/W 35.5 30.0 25.0 20.0 35.0 35.0 34.0 32.5 39.0 38.5 40.0 47.5 36.5 38.5 38.0 42.5 1.07 1.00 1.05 1.12 Horizon and locality. -Puzosia sp. cf. P. crebrisulcata Kossmat is from the lower member of the Buda Limestone at Austin, Travis County, Texas; F. L. Whitney Collec­tion. Subfamily DESMOCERINAE Zittel, 1895 Genus DESMOCERAS Zittel, 1884 Latidorsella Jacob, 1908; Phyllodesmoceras Spath, 1925 SubgenusPSEUDOUHLIGELLA Matsumoto, 1942 Pseudouhligella Matsumoto, 1938, nom. nud. Type species: Desmoceras whiteavesi var. japonica Yabe, 1902 DEMOCERAS (PSEUDOUHLIGELLA) sp. pi. 1,figs. 75, 76, text fig. 9k Remarks.—A small fragment, UT-18005, seems to belong to the subgenus Pseudouhli­ gella Matsumoto. This fragment has constric­ tions and ribs at about the same frequency as does Pseudouhligella vetus Murphy and Rodda (1959). However, the species described uy Murphy and Rodda is somewhat older, and somewhat higher whorled. Pseudouhligella sp. from the Buda has more frequent and less bi­concave constrictions than does P. ezoanum Matsumoto, and has more frequent and not so strongly biconcave constrictions as P. whiteavesi (Yabe) or P. japonica (Yabe). The constrictions of the specimen from the Buda Limestone are not as strongly biconcave as on most species of the subgenus, and since this is one of the diagnostic features of the genus, the assignment of this form to Pseu­douhligella may be questionable. Horizon and locality.—Pseudouhligella sp. is from the top of the lower member of the Buda Limestone at Manchaca, Travis County, Texas, and was collected by F. L. Whitney. Family PACHYDISCI DAE Spath, 1922 Genus LEWESICERAS Spath, 1922 Type species: Ammonites peramplus Mantell, 1822 LEWESICERAS sp. pi. 2, figs. 26, 27; text fig. 11mm Remarks. -Conch with few regularly ex­panding whorls, with walls sloping into a moderately narrow umbilicus, and with rounded venter. The larger whorl section is suboval, slightly depressed, being more oval than the juvenile whorl section. H/W ranges from 1.08 at the 50 mm. diameter to between 0.9 and 0.95 at greater diameters. The great­est intercostal width is justventrad of the po­sition of the umbilical bulla, and the greatest costal width is at the umbilical bulla. Ribbingis raised and nearly rectiradiate across the flank, projected forward on the venter. In the last volution there are 13 primary ribs, which extend to the umbilicus and end in umbilical nodes or bullae. Intercalated be­ FIGURE 10 a—Prionocydoides sp. cf. P. proratum (Coquand); section of UT-6985 (see also pi. 1, figs. 56-59, 67-69, and text fig. 9c), from the Del Rio Formation, Rancho la Bamba, Chihuahua, Mexico, collected by W. T. Haenggi; X 1. b, c, f, g—Adkinsia bosquensis (Adkins); b, suture of UT­-18621-T (see also pi. 1, figs. 51-55); c, f, section and su­tures of BEG-18621-A (see also pl.l, figs. 46-50); g, sutures of BEG-18621-E; these sutures are very unevenly spaced, and some of the later sutures are closer together;all from the Grayson Formation, 2.4 kms westof Aquilla, Hill County, Texas, collected by Bernhard Kummel; all, X 17. tween the primary ribs at one or more posi­tions on the flanks are approximately 30 secondary ribs. From a diameter of 60 mm or more the intercostae are wider than the cos­tae; prior to the 60 mm diameter the costae and intercostae are approximately the same width. The only specimen is entirely sep­tate, and there is no information on the body chamber or the aperture. d, e—Stoliczkaia scotti Breistroffer; d, section of UT-47893, from the Del Rio Formation, west side of the Sierra del Carmen, northern Coahuila, Mexico, collected by C. L. Baker; e, section of WSA-6032 (see also pi. 7, fig. 11, pi. 8, fig. 11), from the upper 8.2 ms of the Grayson Formation, Grayson Point, northeast of Roanoke, Denton County, Texas; collected by Roy T. Hazzard; both, X 1. Measurements of UT-30495 are D U H W H/W PS B T 100.0 24.5 13 30 — 43 75.00 26.0 45.5 48.0 0.95 60.0 26.5 46.5 51.0 0.91 50.0 22.0 39.0 36.0 1.08 Lewesceras sp. from the Buda Limestone is one of the earlier members of the genus. It is more densicostate than is the type species of the genus, L. peramplus (Mantell), and the ornamentation is not as robust. There are also more umbilical bullae per whorl on the Buda 34 Limestone species than on L. peramplus. The Turonian and Coniacian forms described by Collignon (1955) are all more coarsely and more robustly costate than this species from the Buda Limestone, and most of them have a more depressed whorl section. Horizon and locality. UT-30495 is from the outlier of Buda Limestone, one-third km. west of the Rubbrecher. ranch house, Comal County, Texas; it was collected by Victor King. Superfamily HOPLITACEAE H. Douvill6, 1890 Family SCHLOENBACHII DAE Parona and Bonarelli, 1897 Genus EUHYSTRICHOCERAS Spath, 1923 Type species; Ammonites nicaisei Coquand, 1862 EUHYSTRICHOCERAS REMOLINENSE Bose, 1928 pi. 2, figs. 4, 5; text fig. 11d Holotype.-The holotype, and only known specimen of the species, is from the Buda Limestone near El Remolino, District of Jimenez, Coahuila, Mexico, described by Bose (1928, pp. 247-250, pi. 9, figs. 13-15). This specimen is at the University of Cali­ fornia, Berkeley, and a cast, BEG-35236, from which the photographs on plate 2, figs. 4, 5, were taken, is at the Texas Memorial Museum, University of Texas at Austin. Remarks.— No other specimens of the genus Euhystrichoceras Spath have been recovered from the Buda Limestone since Bose de­ scribed E. remolinense in 1928. The only species of Euhystrichoceras from America, besides E. remolinense Bose, is E. aokinsi, described by Powell (1963) from the basal Ojinaga Formation of northeastern Chihuahua, Mexico. Euhystrichoceras remolinense Bose is most like the form described by Pervinquidre (1907, pi. 11, figs. 15a-c) as Mortoniceras nicaisei (Coquand), the thick variety. Pervin­quiere's (1907, pi. 11, figs. 13a-c and 14a-c) other specimens are much less thick whorled, being more like the specimen figured by Col­lignon (1928, pi. 16, figs. 16, 16a), but per­haps a little more compressed. Powell's spe­cies, E. adkinsi, is narrower and thinner, as in Pervinquiere's plate 11, figs. 13a-c and 14a-c, but is much more densely costate in the adult, more like "Prohysteroceras" (?) more tunisiense Spath (1926), which looks like a Euhystrichoceras than a Prohyster­oceras. Bose's species then, is more like the thick variety illustrated by Pervinqui£re, with the same general shape and configura­tion, but less densely costate. There are about 10 primary ribs per volution on each speci­men, Bose's and Pervinquiere's, but there are two intercalated ribs between each pair of primary ribs on Pervinquiere's specimen and only one intercalated rib between each pair of primary ribs on Bose's specimen. The specimens of E. nicaisei (Coquand), particularly figure 16 of plate 3, described by Collignon (1931) are more coarsely costate, as in the Bose species. Collignon's (1931) specimen illustrated on figure 17 of plate 3 has the more closely spaced sigmoid ribbing on what appears to be the body chamber, and is more densely costate than Bose's species. Measurements of the holotype are: H WH/WPSBT DU 0.96 38 16 27 35.0 31.5 35.5 37.0 30.0 31.5 33.5 35.0 0.95 25.0 32.0 36.0 40.0 0.90 20.0 30.0 40.0 42.5 0.94 The Buda Limestone is such difficult col­ lecting that the rarer species are represented usually by only one or two specimens, and the degree of variation cannot be ascertained. Horizon and locality. -Same as for the holotype, upper part of the Lower Ceno­ manian. 35 FIGURE 11 i—FaraudieUa sp. cfr. F. rhamnonota (Seeley); sections of UT-1350 (see also pi. 3, fig. 10 and pi. 5, figs. 13, 15),from about 5 ms below the top of the Georgetown Lime­stone, Barrow Branch, Austin, Travis County, Texas, collected by S. E. Clabaugh, X 1. b—Stoliczkaia adkinsi Bose; section of UT-273 (see also pi. 2, figs. 23, 24) from 4.5 ms below the top of the George­town Limestone, Pease Park, Shoal Creek, Austin, Travis County,Texas,collectedbyK.Young,X 1. c, e, f—Stoliczkaia crotaloides (Stoliczka); sections of c, UT­-1433 (see also pi. 3, figs. 4, 5), from the Del Rio Forma­tion; e, UT-41152, a cast of the specimen illustrated byBose (1928, pi. 4, figs. 12, 13) as Sto/iczkaia uddeni, from the Del Rio Formation, McLennan County, Texas, at a diameter of 20 mm., collected by W. S. Adkins; and f, of a cast ot the specimen illustrated by Bose (1928, pi. 4, figs. 14, 15) as Stoliczkaia uddeni, from the Del Rio Formation, McLennan County, Texas, at diameters of 30 and 45 mm., collected by W. S. Adkins; all, X 1. d—Euhystrichoceras remolinense Bose; section of a plaster cast of the specimen illustrated by Bose (1928, pi. 9, figs.13-15) (see also pi. 2, figs. 4, 5) from the Buda Lime­ stone, El Remolino, district of Jimenez, Coahuila, Mexico, collectedby Emil Bose, X 1 g—FaraudieUa borachoensis, n. sp.; sections of UT-14515, the holotype (see also pi. 4, figs. 1-4), from the top of the Kent Station Limestone, San Martine Quadrangle,Reeves County, Texas, collected by Grant Moyer, X 1. h, j, dd-jj,—Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck). h, hh, suture and section of UT-18029 (see also pi. 8, figs. 16, 17) from the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Shoal Creek, Austin, Travis County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection; j, section of higher whorled variant, WSA-2345 (see also pi. 7, fig. 5), from the lower part of the Buda Limestone, Gray Hill, Agua Fria Quadrangle, Brewster County,Texas, collected by C. Gardley Moon;dd-gg, sections atdiametersof69, 60,50, and40mm.,andjj,sutureof UT-18036 (see also pi. 7, figs. 7, 9, 11, and pi. 8, fig.18), from the Buda Limestone, Austin, Travis County,Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection;//, sections of UT-16743 (see also pi. 7, figs. 2-4, and pi. 8, fig. 15) at diameters of 50, 60, and 75 mm., from the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Shoal Creek, Austin, Travis County,Texas, F. L. Whitney Col lection; all X 1. I, w, z, mm, nn-rr—Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz); i, pp sutureandsectionofUT-18002(seealsopi.9,figs.5, 11, 12) from the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Man­chaca, Travis County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection; w, rr, suture and section of UT-17836 (see also pi. 8, fig.11), a high whorled variant from the Buda Limestone, Manchaca, Travis County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collec­tion; z, suture of UT-16755 (see also pi. 8, figs. 10, 12), from the Buda Limestone, Shoal Creek, Austin, Travis County, Texas; F. L. Whitney Collection; mm, suture of UT-957 (see also pi. 9, figs. 9, 10) from the Buda Lime­stone, Blanco River, Hays County, Texas; F. L. Whitney Collection; nn, sections of UT-14132-B (see also pi. 8, figs. 4-6) from the Buda Limestone, Shoal Creek, Austin, Travis County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection; 00, sec­tions of UT-14132-A (see also pi. 8, fig. 9) from the Buda Limestone, Shoal Creek, Austin, Travis County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection; qq, section of UT-19829 (see also pi. 8, figs. 7, 8) at a diameter of 44 mm., from the nodular (middle) member of the Buda Limestone, 1.6 km. east of the junction of highways 41 and 377, Ed­wards County, Texas, collected by Roy T. Hazzard; i, X 2; w, z, mm-rr X 1. k-o—FaraudieUa archerae, n. sp.; sections of UT-16746, the holotype (see also pi. 6, figs. 3-9) at diametersof 29, 25, 20, and 15 mm., from 0.6 m. below the top of the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Round Rock, Wil­liamson County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection, X 1. p, /—juveniles of mantellicerids and/or lyelIicerids; p, sec­tions of UT-18007-B (see also pi. 6, fig. 11) at diameters of 10 and 15 mm., from the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Bear Creek, Travis County, Texas, F. L. Whit­ney Collection; /, section of UT-17374 (see also pi. 6, fig. 10) from the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Bear Creek, Travis County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collec­tion;p, X 2;/, X 1. q-s, bb—FaraudieUa roemeri (Lasswitz); q, sections of WSA­-3478, a plaster cast of the holotype (see also pi. 6, figs.27-30), at diameters of 40 and 67 mm., from the Buda Limestone, Shoal Creek, Austin, Travis County, Texas, specimen illustrated by Lasswitz (1904, pi. 6, fig. 3); r, sections of WSA-6088 (see also pi. 5, figs. 12, 16),from the nodular (middle) member of the Buda Lime­ stone near Rock Springs, Edwards County, Texas, col­lected by Roy T. Hazzard, at diameters of 35 and 60 mm.; s, sections of UT-16760 (see also pi. 5, fig. 2, and pi. 6, figs. 1, 2) from 0.6 m. below the top of the lower member of theBuda Limestone, Round Rock, Williamson County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection; bb, sections of UT-18017-C (see also pi. 5, figs. 1,6, 11) a juvenile speci­men from the Buda Limestone, Shoal Creek, Austin, Travis County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection, at diameters of 14.5 and 21 mm.; all X 1. t-vFaraudieUa texana (Shattuck); t, sections of UT-32977 (see also pi. 4, fig. 14), from the nodular (middle) mem­ber of the Buda Limestone, southern Van Horn Moun­tains, Jeff Davis County, Texas, collected by Page C. Twiss; u, section of UT-6115 (see also pi. 4, fig. 4 and pi. 5, fig. 10), from the nodular (middle) member of the Buda Limestone near Rock Springs, Edwards County,Texas, collected by Roy T. Hazzard; v, section of UT­-18082 (see also pi. 5, fig. 8), from the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Blanco River, Hays County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection; all X 1. x, cc—Budaiceras alticarinatum, n. sp.; x, sections of UT­-18018 (see also pi. 9, figs. 1, 13, 17) at diameters of 65 and 72.5 mm., from the Buda Limestone, Central Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection; cc, sections of UT-19695,the holotype (see also pi. 9, figs. 2, 16), at diameters of 50, 60, and 75 mm., from the Buda Limestone on Sink Creek, Hays County, collected by Kenneth J. DeCook; all, X 1. aa—Budaiceras sp. juv.; sections of WSA-6200 (see also pi. 9, figs. 6-8), from the nodular (middle) member of the Buda Limestone, at the intersection of highway 41 and the road to the Devils Sink Hole, Edwards County,Texas, collected by Roy T. Hazzard; X 2. kk— Lewesiceras, n. sp.; section of UT-30495 (see also pi. 2, figs. 26, 27), from the Buda Limestone, Rubbrecher Ranch, Comal County, Texas, collected by Victor King,X 1. 37 Genus PRIONOCYCLOIDES Spath, 1925 Type species; Ammonites proratus Coquand, 1880 PRIONOCYCLOIDES sp. cf. P. PRORATUM (Coquand, 1880) pi. 1, figs. 56-59, 67-69; text figs. 9c, 10a cf. Ammonites proratus Coquand, 1880, p. 32 cf. Mortoniceras proratum Pervinquiere, 1907 p. 237, pi. 11, figs. 5-12 cf. Mortoniceras (?) proratum Pervinquiere, 1910, p. 66, pi. 6, figs. 20-28 cf. Prionocycloides proratum (Coquand) in Spath, 1925, p. 182;Wright, in Arkell, Kummel and Wright, 1957, p. L4OO, fig. 519-5; Collignon, 1964, pp. 22, 24, pi. 322 figs. 1422, 1423 Prionocycloides sp. aff. P. proratum (Co­quand) in Young and Powell, 1978 (in press) pi. 6, figs. 2-4 non Mortoniceras proratum (Coquand) in Scott, 1926, p.212, plate 1, figs. 6', 6” Remarks.-The single specimen compared to Prionocycloides sp. cf. P. proratum (Co­ quand) from Rancho la Bamba is probably distorted. It has the median keel so typical of Coquand's species (Pervinquiere, 1907, pi. 11, figs. 5-12; 1910, pi. 6, figs. 20-28). Spath (1925) cites Coquand (1854) as the correct reference, as does Wright (Arkell, Kummel and Wright, 1957). But the species is not mentioned in Coquand (1854). Per­ vinquiere (1907, 1910) correctly cites Co­ quand (1880) as the first description of the species. The specimen from Rancho la Bamba is flattened, and the keel has been extruded ventrad. In this respect one might suspect the specimen to be a juvenile specimen of Graysonites that has expanded under sedi­ mentary load during pyritization, as explained by Kennedy and Hancock (1971). But none of the identifiable specimens of Graysonites from the same locality have suffered this phe­ nomenon. The specimen is more coarsely ribbed, as in plate 11, figs. lOab of Per­vinquidre (1907), but with the long, low, weak umbilical bullae of his plate 11, figs. 9ab. Collignon's (1964, pi. 322, figs. 1422, 1423) specimens do not seem to be crushed, and the whorl sections seem to be more nor­mal than either mine or most of Pervin­qui£re's. His P. besairiei (pi. 322, fig. 1324) has a stronger keel, stronger ribbing, and is less compressed. The suture is like that published by Per­ vinquiere (1907, p. 238, fig. 97), except that the E-element is much deeper, which might also indicate that the specimen is a distorted or aberrant juvenile of the genus Graysonites. Horizon and locality.-Del Rio Formation, Rancho la Bamba, west flank of the Sierra La­grima, northeastern Chihuahua, Mexico; lower part of the Lower Cenomanian. Family FORBESICERIDAE Wright, 1952 Genus FORBESICERAS Kossmat, 1898 Discoceras Kossmat, 1895, non Barrande, 1867; Cenomanites Haug. 1898 Type species: Ammonites largilliertianus d'Orbigny, 1842 FORBESICERAS sp. cf. F. BRUNDRETTEI (Young, 1958) pi. 1,figs. 73, 74 cf. Neopulchellia brundrettei Young, 1958, pp. 289-291, pi. 39, figs. 1-3, 26-28, 33, 35-38; pi. 40, figs. 6, 9, 11; text figs. Ifikm; Young, 1959b, p. 79, p. 81, figs. 4, 7, 8, p. 83, fig. 4; Young, 1960, p. 44, figs. 4, 7, 8, p. 46, fig. 4 cf. Foroesiceras brundrettei (Young) in Young and Powell, 1978 (in press), pi. 3, figs. 1,2, 5 Remarks. -Forbesicers orundrettei (Young)is remarkably like the specimens of F. obtec­tum (Sharpe, 1853) illustrated by Pervin­quiere (1907, pi. 5, figs. 7-10), except that the ribbing is more uneven, more falciform, and lacks the mid lateral tubercle so charac­teristic of F. obtectum. Furthermore, with 38 F. brundrettei there is less ontogenetic changein the ribbing, the tabulate venter being maintained into the adult, and the ribbing maintaining its form onto the adult, at which stage the whorl becomes a little wider com­pared to its height. The specimen illustrated on plate 1, figs. 73, 74, is somewhat flattened and was taken from a core. The strength of the ribbing may also have been reduced bythe same sedimentary load that flattened the internal mold. There is no indication of a mid-flank tubercle, and for this reason the speci­men is compared to F. brundrettei (Young). Horizon and localities.—The specimen illus­trated on plate 1, figs. 73 and 74 is from the Maness Formation, Smithers No. 1, Union Producing Co., Walker County, Texas, depth of 3747.5 meters; there are other specimensof similar preservation from the same horizon in the core. Still another specimen similar to F. brundrettei (Young) is from a sandstone in the Woodbine Formation, about 23 ms. above the top of the Del Rio Formation on Alligator Creek, 8.0 kms. westnorthwest of West, Hill County, Texas [Stop 10. East Texas Geol. Soc. field trip for 1951 (Adkins and Lozo, 1951, p. 147, fig. 21)]. Superfamily ACANTHOCERACEAE Hyatt,1900 Family FLICKIIDAE Adkins, 1928 Genus FICHEURIA Pervinquiere,1910 FICHEURIA sp. aff. F. PERNONI Dubour­dieu, 1953 pi. 2, figs. 6-11; text figs. Bef aff.: Ficheuria pernoni Dubourdieu, 1953, pp. 35-36, fig. 11, pi. 3, figs. 51-54; Wright, in Arkell, Kummel and Wright, 1957, p. L409 and fig. 527-2 Ficheuria sp. aff. F. pernoni Dubourdieu in Young and Powell (1978, in press) pi. 7, figs. 7-9, 11 Remarks.—Ficheuria pernoni Dubourdieu is much more globose than F. kiliani Pervin­quiere (1907); also the sutural elements are narrower. In these respects the two specimensfrom the Del Rio Formation resemble Du­bourdieu's species more than Pervinquiere's. The MexicanspecimensdifferfromF.pernoniin the possession of a steeper umbilical wall and in the absence of the large undulations along the umbilical rim. The sutural elements of the Mexican form (text figs. 9ef) are al­most identical with those of F. pernoni (Du­bourdieu, 1953, p. 35, fig. 11). Horizon and locality.—Two specimens of Ficheuria sp. aff F. pernoni Dubourdieu are from the Del Rio Formation, Rancho la Bamba, northeastern Chihuahua, Mexico. Genus ADKINSIA Bose, 1928 Type species. Aokinsia bosquensis (Adkins, 1920 ADKINSIA BOSQUENSIS (Adkins, 1920) pi. 1,figs. 46-55, 61-66; text figs. 10bcfg FHckia (?) bosquensis Adkins, 1920, pp. 87-89, fig. 10, pi. 1, fig. 4, pi. 4, fig. 11 Adkinsia bosquensis (Adkins) in Bose, 1928, pp. 238, 240, 242-247, pi. 9, figs. 1-6. Adkinsia adkinsi Bose, 1928, pp. 237-238,240, 247, pi. 8, figs. 9-14 Adkinsia sparsicosta Bose, 1928, pp. 238-240, pi. 8, figs. 15-20 Adkinsia tuberculata Bose, 1928, pp. 240­242, 245, pi. 8, figs. 21-26; Adkinsia semiplicata Bose, 1928, pp. 246­247, pi. 9, figs. 7-12 Remarks.--Originally tentatively assigned to the genus FUckia by Adkins (1920), Bose erected the genus Adkinsia for this group of fossils in 1928. B6se assigned five species,four of them new, to the genus Adkinsia; they were Adkinsia bosquensis (Adkins), A. adkinsi Bose, A. sparsicosta Bose, A. tu­ oerculata Bose, and A. semiplicata Bose. Since all of these species occur together in some combination at one locality or another, and since there seem to be all gradations be­tween them, 1 interpret them in totality as representing one extremely variable species, which may even be the naepionic stage of some unknown adult. All specimens are septate throughout and mouth edges and body chambers are unknow. A. bosquensis (Adkins) is more robust and has more tuber­cles thatn A. knikerae, n. sp. Horizon and localities.-Adkinsia bosquen­sis (Adkins) occurs at many localities and several levels in the Del Rio Formation of Texas and northern Mexico, and the Grayson Formation of northern Texas. The specimens illustrated in pi. 1, figs. 46-55, 61-66, are from the Grayson Formation, 2.4 kms. west of Aquilla, Hill County, Texas. ADKINSIA KNIKERAE, n. sp. pi. 1, figs. 70-72 Holotype. UT-17388, from the Buda Lime­ stone at 29th and Shoal Creek, Austin, Travis County, Texas, collected by F. L. Whitney. Specific characters.-Conch with few whorls, regularly expanding; with umbilical walls sloping steeply into a narrow umbilicus; and with venter rounded. The whorl section is higher than wide, H/W ranging around 1.1. U ranges around 21.0. The greatest inter­ tuberculate width is just ventrad of the um­ bilicus, and the greatest width is at the umbilical tubercle. Ornamentation consists of about six sharp tubercles that are large in relation to the size of the shell. Between the tubercles there are faint constrictions which cross the flanks, but play out before the venter. The holotype and only specimen is entirely septate, and the suture is simple, with siphonal and two lateral lobes and three lateral saddles. The second lateral lobe occurs barely dorsad of the umbilical tubercle; the third saddle is largely on the umbilical wall. The sutures are entirely simple with no frills on either saddles or lobes. The aperture is unknown, and overlap is greater than 50 percent of the flank. The only specimen is entirely septate and there is no body chamber. Measurements of the holotype are: D U H W H/W 4.2 21.5 45.0 40.5 1.12 3.3 21.0 51.5 Remarks. —ln setting up the genus Ad­kinsia in 1928 Bose had five species, all of which I have included in A. bosquensis (Adkins, 1920). Adkinsia knikerae, n. sp.,differs from Bose's original species far more than they differed from each other. Although A. bosquensis contains forms that range from smooth to tuberculate at the umbilicus, when tubercles are present there are around nine, either nodate or bullate. A. knikerae has six nodate umbilical tubercles that are larger in relation to the size of the shell than are those of A. bosquensis. The constric­tions on the flanks of A. knikerae do not cross the venter, whereas the constrictions of A. bosquensis, although fainter, do cross the venter. A. knikerae is more discoid than A. bosquensis. Horizon and locality.—The horizon and lo­cality are the same as for the holotype. Family LYELLICERIDAE Spath, 1921 Genus STOLICZKAIA Neumayr, 1875* Type species: Ammonites dispar d'Orbigny,1841, designated by Diener (1925) Generic characters.— Conch with few whorls and umbilicus increasing in diameter with age; with umbilical walls sloping moderatelysteeply into a moderately narrow umbilicus. *This paper was set before I received the May, 1978 issue of Palaeontology containing the paper on Stoliczkaia by C. W. Wright and W. J. Kennedy. 40 The umbilicus on the whorl containing the body chamber is even wider, the body chamber having a tendency to loosen (be­come subscaphitoid). The ribs are strong or weak, dense or sparse; peripheral tubercles appear on the midline in the juvenile and in the subgenus Faraudiella extend into the adult stage and onto the body chamber. The suture is acanthocerid with reduced elements. Remarks. Breistroffer (1947) has sepa­rated from Stoliczkaia Neumayr, s. s., those species that have peripheral tubercles extend­ing into the adult stage and onto the body chamber, and has applied to these species the generic name Faraudiella, here considered a subgenus of Stoliczkaia. The genus is listed as Upper Albian by Wright (Arkell, Kummel, and Wright, 1957, p. L410). Although this grouping provides an easy morphological classification for two subgenera of Stolic­zkaia, Stoliczkaia, s. s., and Faraudiella, I am not convinced that all of the forms which I here assign to Faraudiella because of the morphological definition actually com­prise a single lineage, or even a single phyletic tree within the genus. Thus the genus as I consider it may be polyphyletic, but this cannot be determined for certain as yet. Such a species as S. (F.) archerae, n. sp., may not belong to the same lineage as S. (F.) Plancheti (Pictet and Campiche)., the type species of Faraudiella. The assumption in the present taxonomy is that the development of a greater number of peripheral tubercles than ribs, as in Buda­iceras, and the disappearance of the ribs across the venter, involved more basic organic changes than did any increase or decrease in strength of costation or increase in size of umbilical or other tubercles. In other words, in differentiating Stolicz­kaia Neumayr, s. s., from Faraudiella Breis­troffer only two characters are used: (1) the persistence of peripheral tubercles to a later growth stage, and (2) the persistence of an acute venter onto the whorl containing the body chamber. Even the second of these characters does not always hold for Faraudi­ella roemeri (Lasswitz), but most species of Faraudiella have peripheral tubercles and an acute venter persisting onto the whorl con­taining the body chamber. Budaiceras Bose is differentiated from both Stoliczkaia and Faraudiella by more basic and primary charac­ters, namely Budaiceras does not have ribs across the venter, and it has developed a great­er number of peripheral tubercles than ribs. However, the juveniles of some species of Budaiceras show the one-to-one ratio of peri­pheral clavi to ribs and only achieve the great­er number of peripheral clavi beyond the juve­nile whorls. The specimens Besairie (1936) as­signed to Budaiceras have since been placed in Neophlycticeras as N. madagascariense(Besairie) and N. spathi (Besairie) (Collignon,1963), the genus from which the Budaiceras-Stoliczkaia complex appears to have been de­rived. SubgenusSTOLICZKAIA Neymayr, 1875 Type species: Same as for the genus Subgeneric characters.—This subgenus con­tains those species of Stoliczkaia, s, 1., in which the peripheral tubercle or clavus is re­stricted to the juvenile whorls and does not extend onto the adult whorls, and in which the venter is more rounded and not acute. 41 STOLICZKAIA (STOLICZKAIA) CROTA­LOIDES (Stoliczka, 1864) pi. 3, figs. 1,2, 4-6, 8, 12, 14, 16, 17; text figs. 11cef Ammonites crotaloides Stoliczka, 1864, pp. 88-89, pi. 46, figs. 3, 3abc Ammonites dispar d'Orbigny in Lasswitz, 1904, pi. 4, fig. 1 only Hoplites texanus Cragin, 1893, pp. 235-236, pi. 4, figs. 1,2 Stoliczkaia uddeni Bose, 1928, pp. 211-212, pi. 4, figs. 12-15; Adkins, 1928, p. 236 Stoliczkaia aff. dispar (d'Orbigny) in Bose, 1928, pp. 212-214, pi. 5, figs. 1-5 (only) Stoliczkaia texana (Cragin) in Adkins, 1928, p. 236; Young, 1959, p. 83, figs. 5-7; Young, 1960, p. 46, figs. 5-7; Young and Powell, in press, pt. 6, figs. 1,16 (?) Stoliczkaia dispar (d'Orbigny) in Collig­non, 1933, p. 60, pi. 6, fig. 1 Holotype-By monotypy, the specimen illustrated by Stoliczka, 1864, pi. 46, figs. 3, 3abc. Specific characters.—Conch with few whorls and with umbilicus increasing in size with increased diameter. The umbilicus is moder­ately narrow in the younger whorls, widen­ing in later whorls, U ranging from 16 to 28 prior to a diameter of 60 mm. and from 23 to 38 at larger diameters. The umbilical wall is steep, meeting the previous flank at right angles. Whorl height is greater than whorl width, H/W probably ranging from around 1.05 to 1.3; however, the upper limits are difficult to judge, because different specimens show a wide range of compaction; height-width ratios exceeding 1.3 probably representcrushed specimens. The intercostal section is suboval at earlier diameters, becoming slightly subquadrate at greater diameters; in slightlycrushed specimens this subquadrate shape, of the body chamber in particular, may be exaggerated. Beyond a diameter of 30 mm. the costal whorl section is nearly always sub­quadrate because of a heightening, and less often thickening, of the ribs ventrolaterally.This ventrolateral development of the ribs varies from specimen to specimen, being greater in the specimen illustrated on plate 3,figures 1 and 2 and on the individual figuredby Stoliczka (1864, pi. 46, figs. 3, 3abc) and not so great on the specimen figured on plate 3, figures 13, 15. Costation is coarse and strong, and on the earlier whorls there is usually one primary rib alternating with one secondary rib, which is intercalated. Near to and on the body chamber all ribs, or nearly all ribs, become primary and the ribs become even stronger. The number of ribs per volution ranges from around 18 to about 30. One specimen has 38, but it is an extreme example. Bifurcations at the umbilicus are rare, and the number of primary ribs exceeds the number of secondary ribs. Ribs cross the venter prominently, and extend over the umbilical shoulder and down the umbilical wall to the umbilical seam. On the outer whorls and on the body chamber the intercostae are one and one-half to two times the width of the costae. On earlier whorls costae and intercostae are about equal in width. No juveniles are small enough to reveal the peripheral tubercles presumed to be present, and the marly matrix of the Del Rio Forma­tion does not allow the excavation of earlier whorls. On no specimens are the body cham­bers complete, and there is no record of mouth edges except on Stoliczka's holotype, where a mouth edge appears to be preserved. Also, because of the marly softness of the Del Rio Formation, the sutures cannot be re­covered. It is assumed from experience in this group of ammonites that the heavier, sparser costation on the adult whorls is either near or on the body chamber. Measurements are shown on page 43. Remarks.— Breistroffer (1947, p. 88) places Stoliczkaia uddeni Bose in synonymy with S. texana (Cragin), even though he had few 42 good illustrations of Stoliczkaia D U H W H/W T P S B 11 texana to go by. Although the Holotype 60.0 30.0 36.5 23 20 23? ?? 50.0 28.0 40.0 type of S. uddeni is more densely WSA-9864 70.0 28.5 44.5 31.5 1.41 24 20 4 costate in the juveniles than is 57.0 23.0 47.5 37.0 1.29 ­ ——— the type of S. texana, specimens 38.0 21.0 50.0 37.0 1.36 UT-30644 57.0 23.0 44.0 35.0 1.26 —— in the collection show a complete —— 40.0 21.5 51.5 35.0 1.47 range between, and even beyond, BEG-21579 45.0 26.5 43.5 33.5 1.30 22 13 5 2 —— — 30.0 23.5 45.0 33.5 1.35 these two extremes, and the type BEG-21573 30.0 20.0 43.5 37.0 1.18 28± 14 14of S. crotaloides falls within 19.0 58.0 45.0 1.30 the range of these specimens in WSA-12478 45.5 43.0 28.5 1.50 — —-— - BEG-35225 69.0 29.0 41.5 18 17 1 these features as well as others. — —-— 60.0 21.5 The whorl height-width ratio BEG 35210 38.0 26.5 39.5 21 16 5 UT-1433 65.0 37.5 37.0 25 16 9 decreases in the adults of S. cro­ 50.0 23.0 44.0 25 14 11taloides, especially on the body 40.0 20.0 47.5 33.5 1.41 chambers. Probably the closest 30.0 20.0 50.0 33.5 1.50 BEG-19731 21 16 5 relative of S. crotaloides is S. UT-17377 60.0 31.5 41.5 20 12 8 - notha (Seeley), but S. notha is 50.0 27.0 40.0 — —-— 40.0 24.0 40.0 much more densicostate in the WSA-1961 60.0 35.0 41.5 32.5 1.28 22 19 3 juveniles than is S. crotaloides, 48.5 19.5 46.5 31.0 1.50 and has many more intercalated UT-30642 61.5 22.0 49.0 30.0 1.62 26 22 4 UT-41281 66.0 32.0 37.0 28.0 1.32 22 11 and bifurcated ribs per whorl in UT-44581 51.5 18.5 43.0 22 the juvenile stages. On the adult UT-41272 48.5 29.0 39.0 33.0 1.19 20 12 8 - - UT-30643 62.0 24.0 40.5 27.5 1.47 28 22 6 whorls S. notha, like S. cro­ WSA-13214-B 46.0 23.0 44.5 25.0 1.78 21 18 2 1taloides, becomes more strongly WSA-13146 51.5 21.5 46.5 36.0 1.28 28 19 1 4 — 34.0 1.29 and sparsely costate. Further- 20.5 53.0 41.5 WSA-9799 54.0 28.0 43.5 31.5 1.38 21 21 more, the whorl sections, par­ WSA-13214-A 52.5 20.0 47.5 42.0 1.14ticularly the intercostal whorl 36.0 16.5 44.5 39.0 1.14 --­ —-—--­ 34.0 51.5 32.5 1.59 28 16 12 sections, of S. notha are more WSA-13145 WSA-13142-B 76.5 21.0 48.5 35.0 1.37 rounded than are those of S. cro- -­ - WSA-12516 42.5 17.5 52.0 35.5 1.42 38 14 24 taloides, and presumably the um-WSA-6036 68.5 22.0 44.0 32.0 1.36 31 19 12 WSA-11048 73.0 25.5 38.5 35.5 1.07 21 18 3 bilical and ventral bullae are --— 56.0 17.0 48.5 40.0 1.20 more pronounced in S. crota-WSA-12514 54.5 39.5 30 20 10 WSA-12496 65.6 23.0 46.5 36.5 1.27 loides. Lasswitz's (1904, pi. 4, figs. 2ab) specimen, (1904, pi. 4, fig. 1) belongs to S. crotaloides, assigned by him to Sto/iczkaia dispar (d'Or-but Lasswitz's illustrations are not always to bigny), has the change in ribbing (e.g., denser be trusted. A specimen which may be closely on the juveniles, coarser on the adults) so related to Stoliczkaia crotaloides is the characteristic of many specimens of S. cro-specimen illustrated by Collignon (1933, pi. taloides, jut the ribs are much straighter, 6, fig. 1) as Stoliczkaia dispar. Kossmat's as in the form assigned by Stoliczka to "Am-(1898, pi. 24, fig. 2) illustration of S. disparmonites" dispar (Stoliczka, 1864, pi. 45, agrees very well with that of Lasswitz men­ = figs. 1, la [ S. davigera Neumayr, 1875]. tioned above, also from India, but is much Lasswitz's specimen, however, does show a less coarsely costate. Of most of the speci­reduction of the body chamber on the outer mens outside of Europe assigned to Stolicz­part, also with decreased strength of ribbing; kaia dispar, Kossmat's and Stoliczka's (1964it is from India. Lasswitz's other specimen pi. 46, figs. 1-2, only) seem to be the only valid assignments. Over 30 specimens of S. crotaloides (Sto­liczka) from the Del Rio, Grayson, and Buda formations are known to the writer. Horizons and localities— One specimen of S. crotaloides (Stoliczka) is known from the top of Main Street Limestone in Bell County, basal Cenomanian. Other specimens are from the Del Rio, Grayson, and Buda formations, ranging from the Red River on the north of Texas south to Monclova, Coahuila, Mexico,and all along the central Texas outcrop of these formations. Interestingly enough, no specimens of this species have been recovered from west Texas, Trans-Pecos Texas, or ad­jacent Chihuahua. S. crotaloides rangesthrough the entire Lower Cenomanian, zones of Graysonites adkinsi, G. iozoi, and Buda­iceras hyatti. STOLICZKAIA (STOLICZKAIA} ADKINSI Bose, 1928 pi. 2, figs. 15-25; pi. 3, figs. 9, 10; text figs. 90, q, 11b Stoliczkaia adkinsi Bose, 1928, pp. 193-198, pi. 18,figs. 9-17; Adkins, 1928, p. 236, pi. 20, fig. 15, pi. 21, fig. 4 Holotype.—The holotype is the specimen illustrated by Bose (1928, pi. 18, figs. 9-13). It is from the Pawpaw Formation in Tarrant County, Texas, and was collected by W. S. Adkins; it is reillustrated in this paper on plate 2, figures 15, 16, 20, 21, and text fig. 9q. It is deposited with the Texas Memo­rial Museum, The University of Texas at Austin. Specific description.—Conch is with few whorls, umbilicus opening rapidly, with um­bilical wails sloping into an umbilicus of moderate width. U ranges from around 11 to about 20 at diameters of less than 30 mm, and from 21 to 30 at greater diameters. The ratio of whorl height to width at diameters of less than 30 mm ranges from about 1.25 to about 1.35, but at greater diameters the whorl height is 1-2/3 to 1-3/4 that of its width, H/W ranging from 1.6 to 1.85. The whorl section is higher than wide, conse­quently, and narrows ventrad; the greatestwidth both costally and intercostally is just ventrad of the umbilicus. The number of ribs per volution ranges from 26 to 34, and the ribs are slightly flexed and faintly projected. PLATE 3 Figs. 1, 2, 4-6, 8, 12, 14, 16, 17—Stoliczkaia crotaloides (Stoliczka); 1, 2, ventral and lateral views of BEG-36225, a cast of the specimen illustrated by Bose (1928, pi. 5, figs. 1-3) as Stoliczkaia aff. dispar d'Orbigny, collected by Emil Bsse. The specimen has been crushed by sedi­mentary load and is from the Del Rio Formation at El Oregano, on the road to San Carlos, District of Jim­ enez, Coahuila, Mexico; 4, 5, lateral and ventral views of UT-1433 (see also text fig. 11c), from the Del Rio Forma­tion, slightly flattened by sedimentary load; F. L. Whit­ney Collection; 6, 12, ventral and lateral views of BEG­-35210, a cast of the specimen figured by 855e(1928, pi. 5, figs. 4, 5) as Stoliczkaia sp. aff. S. dispar (D'Orbigny)fromnearEl Oregano,region ofJimenez,Coahuila, Mexi­co, collected by Emil Bose; specimen is crushed by sedi­mentary load; 8, lateral view of UT-41152, a cast of the specimen illustrated by Bose (1928, pi. 4, figs. 12, 13) as Stoliczkaia uddeni (see also text fig. lie), from the Del Rio Formation, McLennon County, Texas, collected by W. S. Adkins; 14, 17, ventral and lateral views of WSA­-9846, an uncrushed specimen from the Grayson Forma­ tion, near Hemming, Cooke County, Texas; 16, lateral view of a large specimen, WSA-11559, from the Grayson Formation, Little Mineral Creek, Grayson County, Texas, collected by W. S. Adkins. AH X 1. 3, 11, 13—Faraudiella sp. cf. F. rhamnonota (Seeley); 3, 13, ventral views of WSA-1962 (see also text fig. 9i) from the Denton Formation, near Belton, Bell County, Texas,collected by W. S. Adkins; 11, ventral view of UT-1350 (see also pi. 5, figs. 13, 15, & text fig. 11a), from about 5 ms below the top of the Georgetown Limestone, Barrow Branch, Austin, Tx„ collected by S. E. Clabaugh; all, X 1. 9, 10—Stoliczkaia adkinsi Bose; lateral and ventral views of UT-14466 (see also text fig. 9p), from 4.5 ms below the top of the Georgetown Limestone, Pease Park, Shoal Creek, Austin,Texas; collectedby K. Young,X 1. 7, 15-Faraudiella franciscoensis (Kellum and Mintz); lateral and ventral views of WSA-6202, from the nodular (mid­dle) member of the Buda Limestone, at intersection of highway 41 and the road to the Devil's Sink Hole, Ed­wards County, Texas, collected by Roy T. Hazzard; XI. At diameters preceding 20 mm. the ribs are rounded, but may become sharper by the 30 mm. diameter, with the orad flanks steeper than the aborad flanks. No umbilical tubercles can be defined, but there are ventro­lateral tubercles and median tubercles, which are faint on these juveniles, and the larger specimens, such as UT-273 (pi. 2, figs. 23, 24) illustrate the disappearance of the median and ventrolateral tubercles prior to any non-septate stages. The tubercles are distinct, but very small. Since the known specimens of this species are entirely septate, nothing can be said concerning the aperture, and a decent suture has yet to be reproduced, although Bose tried to paint the sutures in on his specimens (1928, pi. 9, figs. 9-17); Bose's specimen shows a narrow ventral lobe, a wide first lobe, and rather reduced elements on the suspensive lobe. Measurements are: DU H WH/WTP —— Bose, pi. 28.0 19.5 45.5 35.5 1.25 —— 8, figs. 19.0 18.5 50.0 37.0 1.36 —— 9-13 13.5 18.5 48.0 37.0 1.36 —— UT-30.0 26.5 51.5 40.0 1.29 14466 25.0 11.0 50.0 38.0 1.32 29 13 UT-17 54.5 21.0 52.5 28.5 1.83 32 15 UT-273 29.5 17.0 45.5 39.0 1.17 26 14 Remarks.—Bose (1928) has discussed in de­tail the relationship of the juveniles of Stolicz­kaia adkinsi to other species known to him. As pointed out above, there is nothing that can be called a true umbilical tubercle; how­ever, Bose put it nicely in saying the primary ribs have a slight radial swelling on the um­bilical border. Bose described the intercala­tion of the ribs in much more detail than can be useful at the specific level. He also described the intercostae as being much wider than the costae, but this appears to depend on how you look at them, and on how the light was reflected from his particular specimens; in the notations I use the costae and inter­costae appear to be about the same width. Bose points out that all of the specimens il­lustrated by Pictet and Campiche (1859) are much more densicostate than S. adkinsi, but that otherwise the smaller whorl of fig­ure 3 of Pictet and Campiche is very similar to his specimen. The Pictet and Campiche il­lustrations do not show the faint swellings at the ventrolateral position that is so typical of S. adkinsi. Bose also suggested that his specimen is close to the original one from India, but that the Indian species is also more densicostate. Presumably Kossmat's (1898, pi. 24, fig. 2) is the Indian example of Stolic­zkaia dispar d'Orbigny to which Bose re­ferred. It is more densicostate than S. adkinsi, and at least in the visible whorls, the ribs are completely rectiradiate and not project­ed. Stoliczkaia argonautiformis (Stoliczka, 1864) is also much more densicostate than either 5“. dispar or S. adkinsi. Ammonites dispar as illustrated in Stoliczka (1894, pi. = 45, figs. 1, la [ Stoliczkaia davi-S P gera Newmayr, 1875] could be some­what closer to 5. adkinsi, but there —— — — is no sign of the median tubercle - at the smallest diameter illustrated —— by Stoliczka, and the ribbing does 16 17 — not seem quite so flexed. Stoliczkaia — — 12 dispar, as illustrated by Scott (1926) - [ S. scotti Breistroffer, 1936b], is likewise much more densicostate and also comes from a younger level. Horizon and localities.-Bose was killed in an automobile accident before his paper on the Cretaceous ammonites (1928) was in proof. In his description of Stoliczkaia ad­kinsi he states that he had one specimen from the Glen Garden Country Club at Fort Worth,Texas; he further said that it was from the Pawpaw clay, and represents the highest Al­bian. However, Bose was in Nuevo Laredo when he wrote the manuscript and apparent­ly he did not have all of the specimens. Ad­kins prepared plate 18 of the University of Texas Bulletin 2748, and Adkins had other specimens of S. adkinsi, which he included 46 on the plate without Bose's knowledge. Although the rapport between Adkins and Bose was good, Bose died without the op­portunity of proofreading either text or plates. Nevertheless, adherence to the written word, insofar as possible, is necessary. Thus, in addition to the Glen Garden Country Club, two other specimens are also illustrated in Bose's paper, both from south of Fort Worth, Tarrant County, Texas, on Sycamore Creek. A further specimen, UT-14466, is from the Drakeoceras drakei zone on Shoal Creek at Pease Park, Austin, Travis County, Texas. This level is approximately five meters below the top of the Georgetown Limestone. A sewer line now passes through this small outcrop and the Drakeoceras drakei zone is no longer exposed at the Pease Park locality; according to Young (1959b) this locality correlates with some part of the lower part of the Pawpaw Formation of north Texas. The horizon should be the highest Albian, as in­dicated by Bose (1928), since it is about 0.3 m. below the base of the zone of Plesio­turri/ites brazoensis at Austin. STOLICZKAIA (STOLICZKAIA) SCOTTI Breistroffer, 1936 pi. 7, fig. 11; pi. 8, figs. 10, 11, 15, 17, 23; pi. 9, figs. 13, 14;text fig. lOde Stoliczkaia dispar (d'Orbigny) in Scott, 1926, p. 141, pi. 3, figs. 3, 4 non d'Orbigny Stoliczkaia aff. dispar (d'Orbigny) in Bose, 1928, pi. 5, figs. 6-8 only Stoliczkaia sp., Adkins, 1928, p. 236 Stoliczkaia dispar (d'Orbigny) scotti Breis­ troffer, 1936b, p. 24 Stoliczkaia scotti Breistroffer, 1947, p. 88 Stoliczkaia scotti Stoyanow, 1949, p. 129, pi. 26, figs. 7, 8 Sto/iczkaia patagonica Stoyanow, 1949, p. 128, 129, pi. 26, figs. 3,4 Stoliczkaia excentrumbilicata Stoyanow, 1949, p. 128, pi. 26, figs. 5-6 Holotype. Breistroffer failed to designate a holotype, but otherwise gave distinguishingfeatures and cited the proper references and figures. The larger of Scott's specimens (1926, pi. 3, fig. 3) is herein designated the lectotype of S. scotti. Stoyanow (1949) did not know of Breistroffer's name, and he accidentally applied the name scotti, also named for Gayle Scott, to the same species. Stoyanow did designate a holotype, but it is my understanding (Stoll, et al., 1961) that the lectotype must come from the original suite. Remarks. -Stoliczkaia scotti is a densely costate species, retaining the costation to adult stages. The Texas specimens have all been flattened by sedimentary load, but the specimens illustrated by Stoyanow (1949) on plate 26, figures 3-8, seem to have re­tained an original shape. If this is correct, then U should be around 12 to 18 and the whorl height-width ratio should run from 1.05 to 1.30. Sutures cannot be recovered, and none of the specimens can be shown to have body chambers. The number of ribs pervolution ranges from 36 to 56. Measurement of several specimens are shown on page 48. It is amazing that two authors should name, independently, the species in same honor of the same person, Gayle Scott. In fact, the resemblance of Scott's (1926, pi. 3, figs. 3, 4) to Stoyanow's specimens indicates that part of the Molly Gibson Formation is Lower Cenomanian. Although the ribbing, and particularly the long umbilical bullae, are reduced in the specimens from the Del Rio and Grayson Formations, it is normal for the ornamentation of fossils from marly formations to have the ornamentation de­ pressed by sedimentation and compaction, whereas the ornamentation is not degraded in many limestones, particularly the sparites. Horizon and IocaIities.—Scott's specimens of Stoliczkaia scotti Breistroffer are from the Grayson Formation on Denton Creek, near Roanoke, Denton County, Texas. Bose's 47 (1928, pi. 5, figs. 6-8) specimens D U H W H/W T P S B are from the Del Rio Formation, UT-47893 21.0 1 6.5 38.0 21.5 1.78 44 ?? ? 4.9 km. from El Oregano, on the WSA-6032 39.0 14.1 46.0 33.5 1.38 36 ?? ? WSA-16205 31.5 28.5 42 ?? ? road to San Carlos, Coahuila, UT-18133 32.5 26.0 42 ??? —— Mexico. Stoyanow's specimens are UT-46879 23.5 12.8 49.0 38 ?? ? from the upper part of the Molly UT-10536 25.5 17.7 47.0 40 ?? UT-47892 25.5 21.5 47.0 23.5 2.00 40 ? ? Gibson Formation, west of the UT-47890 21.5 23.0 49.0 42 ? ? 42.5 Molly Gibson Mine, Patagonia 16.5 24.5 UT-47891 19.0 23.5 44.5 26 1.70 ? ?? Mountains, Arizona. Other spec-UT-47889 25.0 16.0 48.0 24.0 2.00 42 mens are from the uppermost STOYANOW'S SPECIMENS Grayson Formation near Pilot PT-23 53.0 17.0 44.5 22.0 2.00 50 18 32Point and near Roanoke, Denton PT-32 66.0 47.0 27.5 1.72 County, Texas; from the Del Rio PT-51 26.0 47.0 38.5 1.20 PT-01 24.0 18.0 58.4 46.0 1.27 44 12 32Formation north of Round Rock, PT-10 45.0 18.0 42.0 38.0 1.06 56 15 41 Williamson County, Texas; from the buda Limestone (basal) on Onion Creek, Travis Certainly the subgenus is well represented County, Texas; from the Buda Limestone in the Early Cenomanian of the Tethyan, at San Rafael, northern Coahuila, Mexico, especially in Texas, where Stoliczkaia, s. s., and from the Del Rio Formation, Sierra also extends into the later Early Cenomanian. del Carmen, northern Coahuila, Mexico. STOLICZKAIA (FARAUDIELLA) Subgenus FARAUDIELLA Breistroffer, sp. cf. S. (F.) RHAMNONOTA (Seeley, 1865) 1947 pi. 3, figs. 3, 10, 13; pi. 5, figs. 13, 15 Type species; Ammonites blancheti text figs. 9i, 11a Pictet and Campiche (1859), cf. Ammonites rhamnonotus Seeley, by original designation of Breistroffer (1947) 1865, p. 233, pi. XI, fig. 7, and synonymy given by Spath, 1931, p. 333 Remarks. The presumed relations of fa-Ho/otype.—The holotype of Faraudiella raudiella to other late lyellicerid genera is rhamonota (Seeley) is the specimen de­given in fig. 12. Faraudiella is distinguished scribed by Seeley (1965) and figured by from Stoliczkaia, s. s., by the retention of the Spath (1931) as text figure 109c; it is from peripheral tubercles to or onto the body the Upper Albian, and questionably the chamber, and by usually possessing a more dispar zone. acute venter, at least prior to the body cham-Remarks. -The specimens herein illustrat­ber, although this feature is lost in some of ed as Faraudiella sp. cf. F. rhamnonota the late Early Cenomanian species. The pre-(Seeley) could well belong to that species.sumed evolution of American species of Fa-The Texas specimens are not as densicostate raudiella is given in fig. 13. as the specimens illustrated by Spath (1931, F. blanched (Pictet and Campiche) has re-text fig. 9c, pi. 31, figs. 4, 7, 9, 12ab, and duced ribbing on the flanks, much as in Sto-pi. 32, fig. 8); furthermore, the Texas speci­liczkaia dispar, but most species of the sub-mens are generally less densicostate than Fa-genus do not have weak or effaced ribbing raudiella scotti and are higher whorled than on the flanks. The subgenus is usually taken most Texas species of Faraudiella, except as representing the latest Albian in the boreal F. texana (Shattuck). F. texana has straighterprovince, but Breistroffer (1947, p. 89) re-ribs and the ribs are more accented on the cords F. blanched from his late Vraconian. venter, which is less rounded. Measurements of three specimens are: DU H W H/W T P S B WSA-12512 UT-1350 UT-1962 36.0 50.0 40.0 2io 63.0 38.0 26.5 18.0 21.5 12.0 47.0 51.0 62.0 48.0 50.0 30.0 40.5 29.0 30.0 1.57 — 1.53 1.65 1.66 26 23 32 — 9 ? 1 4 ? FIGURE 12 The presumed evolution of late Albian and Lower Cenomanian lyellicerid genera. Horizons and localities. -UT-1350 is from the Drakeoceras drakei zone, from about 4.5 ms. below the top of the Georgetown Lime­stone on Barrow Branch, east side of Bal­cones Drive, about 200 ms. north of 35th Street, Austin, Travis County, Texas. WSA­-12512 is from the Main Street Limestone, probably the Drakeoceras drakei zone at the Love Farm southwest of Salado, Bell County, Texas. WSA-1962 is from the Denton Forma­tion, probably the zone of Mortoniceras wintoni, near Belton, Bell County, Texas. STOLICZKAIA (FARAUDIELLA) TEXANA (Shattuck, 1903) pi. 4, figs. 4-14; pi. 5, figs. 4, 5, 8-10 text figs. 11tuv Barroisiceras texanum Shattuck, 1903, p. 35, 36, pi. 25, figs. 1,2 Schloenbachia frechi Lasswitz, 1904, p. 9, 10, 28, pi. 6, figs. 6ab Schloenbachia frechi var. curvata Lasswitz, 1904, pp. 9,10, 28, pi. 6, fig. 7 Schloenbachia haberfeiineri Lasswitz, 1904, pp. 9, 10, 28-29, pi. 8, fig. 3 (non von Hauer, 1866) Budaiceras texanum (Shattuck); Adkins, 1928, p. 237; Wright, in Arkell, Kummel and Wright, 1957, p. L4lO, figs. 530-sabc, 554-c Budaiceras frechi (Lasswitz); Adkins, 1928, p. 237 Budaiceras frechi var. curvata (Lasswitz); Adkins, 1928, p. 237 Budaiceras sp. Adkins, 1928, p. 237 Holotype.-Jhe holotype is the specimen illustrated by Shattuck (1903, pi. 25, figs. 1 and 2); it is in the United States National Museum, Washington, D. C. Specific characters.-Conch with few whorls and moderately wide umbilicus in later whorls. The umbilicus is moderately narrow on specimens prior to the 20 mm. diameter. U ranges from 14.5 to 28. The umbilicus ex­pands rapidly onto the body chamber and the umbilical wall slopes gradually into the um­bilicus. The venter is fastigate, but the ribs extend across the venter and there is one peripheral tubercle per rib. The whorl sec­tion is higher than wide, H/W ranging from around 1.3 to 1,6; there are higher figures of H/W, but these are probably on individuals that have been flattened by sedimentary load. There is a slight swelling on each rib at the umbilicus, which by some stretch of the imagination might be called a bulla. The great­est intercostal width is at about one fourth to one third of the flank. The whorl section is suboval. Costation is moderate, ranging from 23 or so ribs per volution at a 30 mm. diame­ter to 40 ribs or so per volution at a 65 mm. diameter. However, the average at a 60 mm. diameter might more closely ap­proach 28 to 30. On some specimens as many as half of the ribs are intercalated; on other specimens only a few ribs are intercalated. On a few specimens the ribs do not intercalate completely, but only appear across the venter; on such specimens there may even be a peri­pheral tubercle without a rib, and these speci­mens seem to lead to species of Budaiceras, but no real, complete transitions have ever been collected. Generally there is one ventral tubercle per rib and one ventrolateral tubercle per rib. On several small specimens, on which the juvenile could be observed, the ribs are absent on the first half of the flank prior to a 15 mm. diameter. Ventral tubercles first appear between diameters of 10 and 15 mm., but there are small projected shoulder tuber- FIGURE 13 ThepresumedevolutionofAmerican speciesofFaraudiella. cles at earlier diameters, much as in many species of Mantelliceras and Stoliczkaia. Tuberculation onto the adult then consists of slightly clavate ventral tubercles on the midline and ventrolateral tubercles at the shoulders. The aperture is unknown. The absence of ribs on the inner part of the flank prior to the 15 mm. diameter also shows up on the specimen illustrated by Lasswitz (1904, pi. 6, fig. 7). There are about 100 specimens of Faraudi­ ella texana (Shattuck) that have been ex­amined in the collections at the University of Texas. Several are well preserved, but none possesses an aperture. Overlap is to dorsad of the first one-third of the flank. 50 Measurements are; Remarks.—Faraudiella texana UT-1535 UT-30542 UT-18082 D 123.0 113.5 72.0 86.0 80.0 U 24.5 21.0 24.5 21.5 15.0 H 38.5 41.0 57.0 49.0 49.5 W 20.3 22.0 28.5 28.0 H/W 1.90 1.85 1.72 1.75 T — — — 32 29 P —­— — 25 23 S —­— — 7 6 B — — — — — (Shattuck) has a more rounded venter than the type species of the subgenus, F. rhamnonota (Seeley), but has a less rounded venter than either F. roemeri UT-6264 WSA-6118 UT-8297 UT-10594 WSA-275-D UT-47886 UT-18013 UT-43336 WSA-697-A WSA-10562 101.5 35.5 37,0 79.0 61.0 59.0 57.0 54.5 26.0 51.0 21.5 24.0 20.0 27.0 21.5 22.0 19.5 18.5 23.5 48.0 45.0 49.0 40.5 47.5 47.5 55.5 50.5 52.0 51.0 26.5 29.5 33.5 36.5 31.5 1.52 1.61 1,66 1.42 1.63 30 30 27 32 36 36 28 28 32 30 26 4 — 22 8 — 23 — ? ? ? 26 10 — 28 8 — 18 10 — 24 4 — 111 — — — (Lasswitz) or F. grandidieri (Boule, Lemoine, and Thevenin, 1907). F. texana is higher whorled than F. roemeri, and the umbilicus is slightly more closed, averaging about 21, whereas in F. roemeri the mean of the um­ UT-45713 WSA-6111 UT-16753 UT-18064 WSA-4230 UT-18017-C UT-17382-A UT-9102 UT-43444 UT-8595 WSA-6114 UT-582 UT-18009-A UT-47895 UT-566 63.5 67.0 42.0 66.0 62.5 21.0 63.5 66.0 62.0 43.5 44.0 25.0 34.5 64.8 50.0 17.5 27.5 19.0 21.5 24.0 14.5 26.0 26.0 24.0 22.0 20.5 19.0 27.5 16.0 47.5 44.0 45.5 48.5 45.0 47.5 42.5 47.0 51.0 51.5 50.0 43.5 49.0 50.0 27.5 29.0 28.5 26.5 35.5 31.5 33.0 35.5 34.5 30.5 34.5 31.0 1.71 1.51 1.58 1.70 1.33 1.35 1.42 1.43 1.50 1.43 1.43 1.62 28 27 27 — 30 28 26 _ 30 32 30 26 30 28 — 24 20 20 — 28 ? 21 _ 18 26 18 20 26 15 — 4 7 5 — 2 ? 5 __ 8 6 12 6 4 13 — -~ — 1 — ~ ? — _ 2 — — -­— — -­ bilical width is 22.56 (significant­ly different at the 0.95 confi­dence level). Although the num­ber of ribs per whorl does not seem to be significant, still, the regression lines, when computed, have quite different slopes (figs. 14, 15). From the standpoint of body measurement there seems to be very little difference be­tween F. texana and F. francisco­ WSA-2347 WSA-6115 UT-11262 UT-16742-A UT-16742-B UT-16748 40.0 23.0 35.0 25.0 100.0 68.0 42.0 75.0 60.0 50.0 23.0 20.0 15.0 10.5 24.0 20.0 15.0 30.0 15.0 17.5 21.5 23.0 25.5 27.5 18.5 20.0 21.5 11.5 18.5 17.5 10.0 20.0 50.0 56.5 43.0 48.0 43.0 50.5 47.5 44.5 46.5 49.0 48.0 50.0 53.5 57.5 41.5 45.5 50.0 48.5 31.5 37.0 31.5 34.0 26.5 36.5 38.0 36.0 27.0 27.0 30.0 32.0 29.0 30.0 32.5 35.0 1.60 1.53 1.36 1.41 1.62 1.22 1.22 1.36 1.77 1.85 1.62 1.70 1.47 1.50 1.50 1.38 -­-­-­— -­-­— — 31 19 12 — — — — — 34 34 -­— _____— — — —­-­-­— -­-­— — — -­-­— — — 29 29 — — — -­— — -­-­— — — — — -­25 25 — — — -­— — — — — — 23 12 11 — ensis (Kellum and Mintz, 1962), yet the strongly falcoid ribbingof F. franciscoensis, with one to two intercalated ribs between each primary pair is quite dif­ferent from F. texana. F. archer­ae, n. sp., is a much smaller species than F. texana, and does not retain the acute venter be­yond these smaller diameters. Furthermore, the ribbing of F. archerae is relatively stronger,with more pronounced tubercles 25.0 18.0 46.0 32.0 1.42 -­ — — — or bullae at the umbilicus. UT-16749 UT-16752 UT-16759 UT-16761 20.0 38.0 30.0 48.0 30.0 33.0 30.0 25.0 20.0 30.0 20,0 17.1 15.0 21.0 18.5 18.5 16.0 17.5 16.5 45.0 46.0 50.0 49.0 55.0 48.5 48.0 55.0 48.5 32,5 30.0 31.5 34.5 33.5 33.5 32.0 32.5 31.5 1.38 1.52 1.58 1.42 1.65 1.45 1.50 1.69 1.53 — 26 -­27 -~ 27 -­— 24 — 14 ~­16 — 14 _ -­~­13 -­12 _ 11 -­13 _ — —­11 — — — — -­— _ -­— --­ Horizon and IocaIities. —All specimens of Faraudiella texana from Central Texas are from the zone of Budaiceras hyatti, upper part of the Early Cenomanian. All but one of these specimens are from the lower member of 25.0 20.0 16.0 15.0 44.0 42.5 34.0 30.0 1.30 1.41 -­— — — — — — — (Continued on page 52) the Buda Limestone, but the one is from the lower part of the up­ 51 per member. This distribution may only be the result of far UT-17384 fewer ammonites having been collected from the upper mem­ber than from the lower member UT-18003 UT-32977-A of the Buda Limestone. Faraudi­ella texana is also known from the Buda Limestone (and Buda­iceras hyatti zone) of Brewster, UT-32977-C Jeff Davis, Hudspeth, Upton {?), Kinney, Val Verde, Terrell, Cul­ UT-35445 berson, Uvalde, and Edwards counties, Texas, and from the UT-18007-A Sierra Pilares and El Banquete, just southwest of the Rio Bravo, UT-571 northeastern Chihuahua, Mexico. UT-18008 Bose had collected the species in northern Coahuila. The species UT-18001 has not been recovered from the Budaiceras hyatti zone in UT-17374 the Grayson Formation of North Texas. STOLICZKAIA (FARAUDIELLA) ROEMERI (Lasswitz, 1904) pi. 5,, figs. 1-3, 6-7, 11, 12, 14, 16; pi. 6, figs. 1, 2, 27-30; text figs. 11q-s, bb Schloenbachia roemeri Lasswitz, 1904, p. 27, pi. 6, fig. 3. Budaiceras roemeri (Lasswitz) in Bose, 1928, p. 258; in Adkins, 1928, p. 237 (pro parte, non pi. 23, fig. 4) Holotype.--The holotype is the specimen illustrated by Lasswitz (1904) on plate 6, figure 3, as Schloenbachia roemeri; it is from the Buda Limestone at Austin, Texas, and was at the University of Breslau (now Wroclaw) when Adkins made the cast in the 1920s herein illustrated (WSA-3478, plate 6, figs.27-30). The specimen seems since to have disappeared. Specific description.-Conch with a few rapidly expanding whorls and umbilical walls sloping into a narrow umbilicus. U ranges D U H W H/WTPSB “ —— — 35.0 24.0 45.0 31.0 1.45 30.0 23.5 43.0 30.0 1.45 —“ — — 25.0 22.0 44.0 36.0 1.22 - - — 20.0 17.5 50.0 37.5 1.34 - 25.0 18.0 52.0 36.0 1.44 - 96.0 25.0 46.5 29.0 1.59 29 16 —­ 80.0 24.0 45.5 32.0 1.43 —­ - 70.0 21.5 48.0 32.0 1.49 —~ —— 60.0 20.0 50.0 34.0 1.46 —­ 50.0 19.0 52.0 35.0 1.46 - 79.0 24.5 38.0 26.5 1.43 21 18 - 60.0 21.0 41.5 — — 41.5 24.0 48.0 35.0 1.42 - 63.5 15.8 49.0 34.5 1.41 40 20 20 —~ 50.0 16.0 53.0 36.0 1.47 — 35.0 14.5 54.0 34.5 1.58 23.0 21.5 46.0 30.5 1.50 24 24 — — —­ 20.0 20.0 45.0 32.5 1.38 — — —­ 15.0 16.5 53.5 33.5 1.60 — - 19.0 21.0 50.0 23 23 - 21.5 25.5 44.0 30.0 1.46 — — —­ 16.5 21.0 48.5 33.0 1.46 --——­ 11.5 22.0 48.0 35.0 1.37 - 25.0 16.0 52.0 32.0 1.63 29 29 — --—-­ 20.0 17.5 52.5 30.0 1.67 15.0 16.5 50.0 30.0 1.66 23.0 22.0 45.5 32.5 1.40 26 26 from 17.5 to 35, the larger reading occur­ring on adult individuals on which overlap of the whorl over the preceding flank rapidly decreases. The venter is rounded, with periph­eral tubercles on the ribs that cross the vent­er. The whorl section is higher than wide,H/W ranging from about 1.0to 1.4. The great­est costal and intercostal widths are dorsad of the first one-third of the flank, exceptcostally it is at the umbilical tubercle when that tubercle is present. The whorl section is suboval intercostally and subquadrate costally. Costation is moderate, the number of ribs per whorl ranging from a low of 22 to a high of 34, and there is no relation between size of shell and number of ribs (fig. 15). Costae are straight and rectiradiate and slightly wider than intercostae. Roughly one-third of the costae are intercalated, but this feature varies widely from no intercalations to almost two-thirds intercalations. Bifurcations are rare. There are less intercalated costae on the holo­type than on most other Texas specimens. 52 FIGURE 14 Regression of number of ribs per whorl on the diameter in Faraudiella texana (Shattuck). There are three sets of nodes, the umbili­cal nodes low and strongly bullate, the ven­trolateral just barely clavate, and the periph­eral nodate to barely clavate. There is one peripheral node per rib, and the ribs cross the venter strongly. On some of the younger whorls intercalations are limited to the venter, and on such specimens there may be more peripheral nodes than lateral or flank ribs;however, there is a rib on the venter for each peripheral tubercle, and in this way F. roe­meri differs from all species of Budaiceras. The aperture is unknown, and no specimencontains a complete body chamber, however,the body chamber is as strongly ribbed as the rest of the conch on those specimenswhich contain a part of the body chamber. Overlap is between one-third and one-half of the flank. Good sutures have yet to be recovered from F. roemeri (Lasswitz). Measurements are shown on page 54 Remarks.—Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) is one of the more robust species of Faraudiella. With ventral tubercles on ribs extending clear to the body chamber and even onto the bodychamber, this species comes under the defini­tion of Faraudiella as given by Breistroffer (1947). A comparison of F. roemeri to F. tex­ana (Shattuck) is given under the discussion of F. texana. In overall conformation F. roe­meri is much like F. grandidieri (Boule, Le­moine and Thevenin, 1907), but the latter may have up to twice as many ribs per whorl as F. roemeri. F. archerae, n. sp., is a much smaller species. F. oorachoensis, n. sp., has peripheral nodes at all stages, and the ribs are 53 D U H W H/W T P S B Horizonandlocalities.—Faraudi­ — UT-31578 84.0 22 20 2 ella roemeri (Lasswitz) is known UT-38271 61.5 21.0 49.5 27.0 1.84 26 26 —— UT-18046 54.5 44.0 30 ? only from the zone of Budaiceras ?? — UT-6088 60.5 21.5 51.0 46.5 1.11 28 20 8 hyatti, upper part of the Lower — UT-6592 42.5 26.0 43.5 37.5 1.14 26 18 8 Cenomanian. The species is UT-18006 46.0 32.5 30 20 6 2 known from the Buda Limestone — UT-16757 54.0 23.0 45.5 30.5 1.45 26 21 5 — UT-6115 38.5 23.5 44.0 43.0 1.03 30 18 12 of Trans-Pecos Texas in Jeff UT-18052 26.0 21.0 42.5 42.5 1.00 22 17 3 1 UT-12338 118.0 35.0 39.0 27.0 1.43 23 23 Davis, Terrell, Culberson, and ?? UT-10560 52.5 20.0 38.0 24 ? — — Hudspeth counties. It is known — WSA-252 70.0 23.0 48.5 35.0 1.39 34 22 12 from the Buda Limestone alongUT-270 80.0 18.5 45.0 32.5 1.38 27 22 5 UY-32977-B 52.0 20.0 46.0 30 18 ~6 the central Texas outcrop in — — UT-18093 76.0 19.5 48.0 31.0 1.55 26 20 6 Hays, Travis, and Williamson ? ?? UT-18104 67.0 21.0 45.5 25 counties, and from the southern — UT-18024 56.0 22.5 47.5 32.0 1.47 34 24 10 WSA-2338 61.0 24.0 47.5 38.0 1.26 Edwards Plateau in Uvalde, Val WSA-3478 67.0 24.5 45.0 32.5 1.35 24 17 7 ~ Verde, and Edwards counties. 60.0 23.5 43.5 33.5 1.30 26 16 10 —— 50.0 24.0 46.0 35.0 1.31 — Part of the evidence supporting - —— --— 40.0 25.0 51.0 40.0 1.28 the Buda Limestone equivalency — — —-­ UT-10593 47.0 26.5 44.5 34.0 1.31 of the upper part of the Grayson --—-—-— 40.0 25.0 46.0 35.0 1.31 — --—— 30.0 23.5 45.0 31.5 1.43 Formation (Stephenson, 1944) ~ — — —­ 25.0 20.0 48.0 32.0 1.50 is the occurrence of F. roemeri — UT-15510 108.0 31.5 31.5 31 24 7 — —-­ 90.0 24.5 45.0 34.5 1.30 in the upper part of the Gray­ ---——--­ 80.0 20.0 47.0 34.0 1.37 son Formation at Grayson Bluff, — — —-­ 55.0 19.0 52.5 42.0 1.26 —— — UT-16754 57.0 21.0 40.5 37.0 1.11 Denton County, Texas. —----— UT-16760 50.0 24.0 46.0 37.0 1.24 — —— 40.0 17.5 47.5 40.0 1.19 STOLICZKAIA (FA RA UDIEL­ ----—— 30.0 18.5 51.5 40.0 1.29 LA) BORACHOENS/S, n. sp. UT-18000-L 45.0 24.5 44.5 34.5 1.29 25 11 10 2 ---— 40.0 21.0 42.5 35.0 1.21 pi. 4, figs. 1-3; text fig. 11 g — — —-— 30.0 18.5 48.5 36.5 1.32 UT-19721 110.0 46.5 32 14 10 4 — — —— 75.0 22.5 46.0 Holotype.—UT 14515, from — --—-— 60.0 21.5 49.0 the upper beds of the Kent Sta­ — ---—— 50.0 21.0 46.0 — UT-19723 125.0 29.0 44.0 22 14 8 tion Limestone, bed 9, section — — ---— 115.0 27.0 44.0 2 of grant Moyer (1952), San —----— 100.0 27.0 41.5 30.0 1.28 — ——— 75.0 23.5 43.5 34.0 1.24 Martine Quadrangle, Reeves UT-7205 122.0 24.5 40.0 28 18 10 County, Texas; it is deposited — --—— 91.5 22.0 47.5 27.0 1.77 with the Texas Memorial Mu-completely rectiradiate, whereas F. roemeri seum, The University of Texas at Austin,loses the peripheral nodes on the body cham-Texas. ber and has more falcoid ribs. Specific description.—Conch with a few Approximately 4U specimens ot haraudi-rapidly expanding whorls and with umbilical ella roemeri (Lasswitz) have been identified walls sloping into a narrow umbilicus. The in the collections of the Texas Memorial Mu-venter is rounded intercostally and faintly seum, The University of Texas at Austin, fastigate with shoulders costally. U ranges Texas. No apertures have been seen, although from around 21 to about 29 and slowly ex-a few specimens obviously contain parts of pands with the increasing diameter of thethe body chamber. conch. Height is greater than width, H/W 54 FIGURE 15 Regression of number of ribs per whorl and diameter in Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) ranging from around 1.1 at smaller diameters to something greater, but since the specimens known to me have been distorted by sedi­mentary load at the greater diameters, an interpretation of H/W at greater diameters is difficult. The intercostal section is oval with the greatest width at about one-third of the flank; the costal section is subquadrate, with the greatest costal width at the umbilical oulla. Costation consists of approximately 28 ribs on the holotype, 14 primary and 14 sec­ondary, not alternating directly, but rather unevenly. The ribs are strong, broad, about twice the width of the intercostae, and each rib expands in width peripherally. The ribs are rectiradiate and cross the venter strongly, even on the outermost whorls. Tuberculation consists of low umbilical bullae, ventrolateral nodes that may be faintly clavate, and peripheral nodes, which are strong to a diameter of 60 mm or so, at FIGURE 16 which they begin to weaken, and are weak. The presumed evolution of species of Budaiceras. 55 but present, at greater diameters; they also may be faintly clavate. The umbilicus has expanded so much in the holotype, that part of the body chamber may be represented, but since septa are irrecover­ able on this specimen, the size of the phrag­macone and the body chamber cannot be de­termined. The suture is unknown as is the aperture. Measurements of holotype are: DU HWH/WT PSB — 77.0 20.0 43.0 30.0 1.43 28 14 14 — ——­ 60.0 26.0 41.5 ~ —­ 50.0 22.0 —— ­ 40.0 21.5 36.5 32.5 1.12 Remarks. —Faraudiella borachoensis, n. sp., is compared to F. roemeri under the discus­sion of F. roemeri. F. borachoensis has a less acute venter than F. texana, and the whorl height-whorl width ratio is considerably less. It is a larger species than F. archerae, n, sp., and is much less densicostate than F. francis­coensis (Kellum and Mintz). Horizon and localities.—Faraudiella bora­ choensis, n. sp., is known only from Trans- Pecos Texas; the holotype is from very high in the Kent Station Limestone, San Martine Quadrangle, Pecos County, Texas, and was collected by Grant Moyer; another individual was collected by D. F. Reaser from the east PLATE 4 Figs. 1-3Faraudiella borachoensis, n. sp.; lateral and ven­ tral views of UT-14515, the holotype (see also text fig. 1lg), from near the top of the Kent Station Limestone, San Martine Quadrangle, Reeves County, Texas, collect­ ed by Grant Moyer, X 1. 4-14—Faraudiella texana (Shattuck); 4, lateral view of WSA­ -6115 (see also pi. 5, fig. 10, and text fig. lit), from the nodular (middle) member of the Buda Limestone, near Rock Springs, Edwards County, Texas, collected by R. T. Hazzard; 5, 8, ventral and lateral views of UT­ -31813, a juvenile specimen from the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Manchaca, Travis County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection; 6, 10, lateral and ventral views of UT-16761, a juvenile from the Buda Limestone on flank of the Quitman Mountains, southern Hudspeth County, Texas. It is from the EagleMountain Sandstone, STOLICZKA/A (FARAUDIELLA) ARCHERAE, n. sp pl. 6, figs. 3-9; text fig. Ilk-o Holotype.—The holotype of Faraudiella archerae, n. sp., is UT-16746, from 0.6 m be­low the top of the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Round Rock, Williamson County,Texas, collected by F. L. Whitney. Specific description. -Conch with a few regularly expanding whorls and with steep umbilical walls sloping into a moderately narrow umbilicus, venter rounded in inter­costal section, shouldered and fastigate in costal section, prior to the body chamber, but rounded both costally and intercostally on the body chamber, F. archerae, n. sp., is a small species, with no specimens exceed­ing 50 mm in diameter. U usually ranges around 20.0, but in larger specimens ranges up to 31, and ranges down to as narrow as 10 in juveniles. Undistorted shells have a whorl height-whorl width ratio of around 1.1 to 1.35, the whorl section being higher than wide. The greatest intercostal width is just dorsad of the umbilicus. The greatest costal width is at the umbilical bulla. Whorl sec- Shoal Creek, Austin, Travis County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection; 7, 9, 11, ventral and lateral views of UT­-18001, a juvenile from the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Round Rock, Williamson County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection; 12, lateral view of UT-6269, from the top of the upper member of the Buda Lime­stone, just upstream from the Missouri Pacific Railroad trestle on lower Shoal Creek, Austin, Travis County, Texas, collected by K. Young; 13, ventral view of UT­-16749, a juvenile from 0.6 m below the top of the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Round Rock, William­son County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection; 14, lateral view of UT-32977 (see also text fig. 11s), from the nodu­lar (middle) member of the Buda Limestone, southern Van Horn Mountains, Jeff Davis County, Texas, collect­ed by Page C. Twiss;a//, X 1. 57 tion is oval intercostally to subquadrate to subtrapezoidal prior to the body chamber costally; it is oval costally on the body cham­ber. Ribbing consists of broad, highly round­ed ribs that cross the venter without appre­ciable diminution. The number of ribs per whorl ranges from 22 to 30, and the majority of the ribs are usually primary, but there are also intercalated secondary ribs, and some specimens show some bifurcating pairs. Ribs are usually rectiradiate, except on the body chamber where they become sigmoid, and are slightly reduced near the aperture. Tuberculation consists of umbilical bullae on the primary ribs, ventrolateral nodes on all ribs, and peripheral clavi on all ribs. The umbilical bullae persist throughout the phrag­ macone and onto the body chamber, the last visible rib on the incomplete body chamber having only a slightly diminished bulla. The ventrolateral nodes persist onto the body chamber, but are not present on the last quarter of the last volution. The peripheral clavi just barely persist onto the body cham­ber. The suture is not known, and neither is the aperture, although UT-16746 does seem PLATE 5 Figs. 1-3, 5-7, 9, 11, 12, 14, 16—Faraudiella roemeri (Lass­witz); 1, 6, 11, lateral and ventral views of UT-18017-C (see also text fig. Ilbb), a juvenile specimen from the Buda Limestone, Shoal Creek, Austin, Travis County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection; 2, apertural view of UT-16760 (see also pi. 6, figs. 1, 2, and text fig. 11s), from 0.6 m below the top of the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Round Rock, Williamson County, Tex­as, F. L. Whitney Collection; 3, 7, ventral and lateral views of WSA-6120, from the nodular (middle) member of the Buda Limestone, near Rock Springs, Edwards County, Texas, collected by R. T. Hazzard, 5, 9, ventral and lateral views of WSA-10837, from the Buda Lime­stone, Southern Van Horn Mountains, Jeff Davis County, Texas, collected by R. T. Hazzard; 12, 16, ventral and lateral views of WSA-6088 (see also text fig. 11 g), from the nodular (middle) member of the Buda Limestone, near Rock Springs, Edwards County, Texas, collected by R. T. Hazzard; 14, lateral view of a large specimen. to retain most of a body chamber, since the ribs are beginning to diminish on the last part, as they so often do on the more orad parts of body chambers. Measurements are shown on page 60. Remarks. Faraudie!la archerae, n. sp., is one of those species which, because it already occurs with well developed Mantelliceras, can­not be considered transitional from Sto/icz­kaia to Mantelliceras, but must represent a deadend offshoot of the genus Faraudiella. It may be that some of the juveniles illus­trated on plate 6 (especially figs. 12-26) are juveniles of F. archerae, n. sp. Some of these late Lower Cenomanian species of Faraudi­ella could be derived from Stoliczkaia by the spread of the tubercles back onto the adult whorls of the younger species. However, the phylogeny is not yet sufficiently well known to merit the separation of these species as a distinct lineage at the present time, especiallywhen mostly they represent the end product of an isolate Faraudiella lineage in North America. Faraudiella archerae is a small species, the maximum diameter, with most of the body chamber preserved, not exceeding 45 to 50 UT-15510, from the lower member of the Buda Lime­stone, Bear Creek, Travis County, F, L. Whitney Col­lection; all X 1. 4, 8, 10—Faraudiella texana (Shattuck); 4, lateral view of UT-30542, from the base of the nodular (middle) member of the Buda Limestone, west side of Van Horn Creek, Jeff Davis County, Texas, collected by Philip Braith­waite; 8, ventral view of UT-18082 (see also text fig.11v), from the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Blanco River, Hays County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collec­tion; 10, ventral view of WSA-6115 (see also pi. 4, fig. 4, and text fig. 11 u), from the nodular (middle) member of the Buda Limestone, near Rock Springs, Edwards County, Texas, collected by R. T. Hazzard; all, X 1. 13, 15—Faraudiella sp. cfr. F. rhamnonota (Seeley); lateral and ventral views of UT-1350 (see also pi. 3, fig. 11, and text fig. 11b), from about 5 ms below the top of the Georgetown Limestone, Barrow Branch, Austin, Travis County, Texas, collected by S. E. Clabaugh;X 1. 59 mm. Its broad, almost tabulate D U H W H/W TP SB venter on the adult whorl dif-UT-18034 34.0 28.0 41.0 34.0 1.25 28 28 ferentiates it from other species WSA-6112 39.0 31.0 41.0 31.0 1.35 28 18 24 UT-16746 30.0 20.0 45.0 33.5 1.25 22 5 5 6 of Faraudiella. 25.0 20.0 40.0 36.0 1.12 Horizons and localities.—Fa-20.0 20.0 47.5 40.0 1.19 UT-18017 19.0 21.0 44.5 31.5 1.41 27 19 8 raudiella archerae, n. sp. is — 15.0 10.0 46.5 36.5 1.25 known only from the zone of 10.0 10.0 50.0 40.0 1.20 Budaiceras hyatti, late Early WSA-256 27.5 23.5 45.5 29.0 1.55 30 7 7 8 Cenomanian. It is known from the Buda Limestone of Hays, Travis, and greater than whorl width on all specimens, Williamson counties, Texas, and from the but how much of this is the result of sedi­middle (nodular) member of the Buda Lime-mentary load cannot be estimated. Most of stone of Edwards and Val Verde counties, the specimens are only fragments, and the Texas. body chamber and suture are not known. The falcoid ribs are wider than the interribs, the STOLICZKAIA (FARAUDIELLA) ribs are rounded, projected onto the venter, FRANCISCOENS/Sand cross the venter in a chevron. There are (Kellum and Mintz, 1962) no true shoulder nodes, but the rib weakens pi. 3, figs. 7, 15; pi. 7, fig. 5 between the shoulder and the peripheral clavum, of which there is one per rib. Umbili-Budaiceras franciscoensis Kellum and Mintz, cal bullae are very long and indistinct. The en­1962, pp. 277-278, pi. 5, figs. 1, 2, 5. tire aspect from the side is similar to that of Stoliczkaia scotti Breistroffer, but the ventral Ho/otype.—The University of Michigan, clavi on chevronned ribs projected orad are Museum of Paleontology, no. 44717, from completely different from the rounded venter the Indidura Formation, Sierra de Tlahualilo, of S. scotti. - southern Coahuila, and illustrated by Kellum Horizon and localities. Faraudiella francis­ and Mintz (1962, pi. 5, figs. 1,2, 5). coensis (Kellum and Mintz) is known onlyMeasurements are; from the zone of Budaiceras hyatti. The holo­type is from the Indidura Forma-D U H WH/WTPS B tion of southern Coahuila. One Kellum & 27.* 43.0* 27.5* 1.80 30* 10* 20* specimen lacks information on Mintz WSA-4164 25.0 20.0 50.0 30 16 14 the locality. Five specimens are UT-31506 25.5 23.5 43.0 29.5 1.47 31 16 16 from Travis and Hays counties 20.0 25.0 48.5 30.0 1.62 of central Texas. Another speci­ 14.0 23.0 57.0 UT-43786 28.0 19.5 44.5 --— men is from the Buda Limestone UT-18065 48.0 21.0 45.0 of the Agua Fria Quadrangle, •Figures estimated from illustrated fragment of Kellum & Mintz (1962, Brewster County, Texas, collect-PI. 5, Figs. 1,2,5). ed by C. Gardley Moon; another from the Buda Limestone, middle (nodular Remarks.—A total of nine specimens have member) from near the Devil's Sink Hole, been assigned to Faraudiella franciscoensis Edwards County, collected by R. T. Haz­(Kellum and Mintz). Most of them are frag-zard, and still another from the Buda Lime­ments. It is quite distinct from other species stone, along a trail running up the north wall of the genus because of the very falcoid ribs of Frouthrigh Canyon, west trail to the Frau-with two or more intercalations between each tenza Mine, Sierra del Carmen, Coahuila, two primary ribs. The whorl height is much Mexico, collected by C. L. Baker. Genus BUDAICERAS Bose, 1928 Type species.— The type species of Buda iceras Bose, 1928, is Barroisiceras hyatti 9 Shattuck, 1903 (= Budaiceras mexicanum Bose, 1928, pi. 10, figs. 1-3, pi. 9, figs. 16,17 only, not pi. 9, figs. 18-23). Budaiceras mexicanum was designated the type species ("genotype") by Bose (1928), with his speci­men illustrated on his plate 10, figs. 1-3 the type of the species.Generic characters.—Budaiceras consists of those lyellicerines in which the juvenile,peripheral tubercles of Stoliczkaia persisteither to the body chamber or onto the body-chamber, and in which the ribs are interrupt­ed and do not extend beyond the ventro­lateral node or the position of the ventro­labial node in its absence. In Stoliczkaia, s. s., the ribs cross the venter, and the periph­eral tubercles or nodes do not persist beyondthe juvenile stages. In Faraudieiia the ribs persist across the venter with peripheral tu­bercles persisting onto the adult stages. In Budaiceras the ribs do not cross the venter,and there is a smooth space between the ends of the ribs and the row of peripheral clavi. Furthermore, in Budaiceras there are more peripheral clavi than ribs, whereas in Faraudi­eiia there are the same number of periph­eral tubercles as ribs and each peripheraltubercle is located on a rib. Budaiceras has few whorls, with umbilicus regular until the adult stage in which it ex­pands rapidly. Umbilical walls slope steeplyinto the umbilicus but are not perpendicular to the flank. The intercostal whorl section is oval to suboval; ribs are rectiradiate to prosi­radiate, flexuous to straight, and there may be both peripheral and ventrolateral clavi, or there may be only peripheral clavi; some spe­cies have low umbilical bullae. The periph­eral clavi may extend onto the body chamber or they may stop with the phragmacone. The body chamber is frequently reduced, with increased U and decreased H in the adult chamber; the body chamber is also often smooth or partly smooth, that is, without ornamentation, especially on the last half of the body chamber, as in the type species, B. hyatti (Shattuck). The sutures are reduced, almost pseudoceratitic, with the simple sad­dles described by Breistroffer (1936b) for Salaziceras. Remarks. Seldom does the number of peripheral clavi become as great as twice the number of ribs, as stated by Wright (Arkell, Kummel, and Wright, 1957); only in the adult of B. elegantior (Lasswitz) does this condition exist on some specimens. Unfortunately, there is, as yet, no known superposition in the Buda Limestone to sup­port or negate any ideas of evolution of Budaiceras or Faraudieiia. Whether the Buda fauna evolved in the muddy environments of the underlying Del Rio Clay and the lack of record is from collection failure, or whether it evolved in and migrated from some geographic area as yet uncollected, is not known. Besairie (1936, p. 199) considered Barro­isiceras dentatocarinatum (Rdmer, 1852) a Budaiceras, and Shattuck (1903) classified his species [of Budaiceras,] with Barroisi­ceras. The homoplasy between Budaiceras and Barroisiceras is even more remarkable oetween other species, as for instance Barro­isiceras kayi Benavides (1956), or as Lass­witz (1904) has shown by confusing a species of Budaiceras with Barroisiceras sequens(Grossouvre, 1894), The presumed evolution of species of Budaiceras is depicted in fig. 16. 61 BUDAICERAS HYATTI (Shattuck, 1903) pi. 7, figs. 1-4, 6-10, 12-14 pi. 8, figs. 19-22, 24; text figs. 11 h, j, dd-jj Barroisiceras hyatti Shattuck, 1903, p. 36, pi. 25, figs. 2, 3 Schloenbachia roemeri var. harpax Lasswitz, 1904, p. 27-28, pi. 6, fig. 4 Budaiceras mexicanum Bose, 1928, pp. 259-262, pi. 10, figs. 1-3 and pi. 9, figs. 16, 17; Adkins, 1928, p. 127 (proparte); Adkins and Lozo, 1951, pi. 1, figs. 6-8; Young, 1959, p. 84, figs. 1-6, 9; Young, 1960, p. 47, figs. 1-6, 9; Kellum and Mintz, 1962, pi. 4, fig. 2 Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) in Adkins, 1928, p. 237; Young and Powell (in press, 1978),pi. 6, figs. 5-6, 17. non Budaiceras mexicanum Bose, 1928, pi. 9, figs. 18-23, only. Holotype.-The holotype is the specimen illustrated as Barroisiceras hyatti by Shattuck (1903, pi. 25, figs. 3, 4) by monotypy, since it is the only specimen Shattuck illustrated. This specimen is from the Buda Limestone on Shoal Creek, at Austin, Travis County, Texas, and is on repository at the United States National Museum. PLATE 6 Figs. 1, 2, 27-30—Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz); 1,2, lateral and ventral views of UT-16760 (see also pi. 5, fig. 2, and text fig. lit), from 0.6 m below the top of the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Round Rock, Williamson County, Texas; F. L. Whitney Collection; 27-30, aper­tural, lateral, and ventral views of WSA-3478 (see also text fig. lip), a plaster cast of the holotype illustrated by Lasswitz (1904, pi. 6, fig. 3), from the Buda Lime­stone, Shoal Creek, Austin, Travis County, Texas;a//, XI. 3-9Faraudiella archerae, n. sp.; ventral and lateral views of the holotype, UT-16746 (see also text figs. 11-k-n),from 0.6 m below the top of the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Round Rock, Williamson County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection;3-5, X 2;6-9, X 1. Specific description.—Conch with few whorls; umbilical wall sloping into a narrow, but rapidly expanding umbilicus. U increases with diameter of the shell, and the body chamber is subscaphitoid. In young whorls (diameters of less than 40 mm) U ranges from 17.5 to 26.5; at larger diameters U ranges from 16.0 to 33.0, and those figures greater than 26.0 are probably from adult whorls. Whorl height-whorl width ratios range from 1.1 up, but figures above 1.3 probably rep­resent compaction under sedimentary load. The greatest width is at about one-third of the flank both costally and intercostally, umbili­cal bullae being absent on larger whorls, and with greatest development away from the um­bilicus on younger whorls. Ribbing is some­what sparse, the number of ribs per whorl ranging from 9 to 24; the ribs tend to dis­appear or be only faint on the body chamber. Intercostae and costae are about the same width, and the costae are only very slightly flexed to straight, rectiradiate to very slightly prosiradiate. Some costae may cross over the venter at diameters prior to 30 mm, indicat­ing the stoliczkaiine ancestry, but on most specimens, even prior to the 30 mm diameter and on all specimens subsequent to that oiameter the ribs end with the ventrolateral /0-26—juvenile mantellicerids and/or lyellicerids; these forms do not develop mid-line tubercles as early as do Faraudiella archerae, n. sp., and Budaiceras sp. juv. (pi. 9, figs. 6-8). On the other hand, since species of Man­telliceras are so rare in the Buda Limestone, it is probable that these are juveniles of Faraudiella texana (Shattuck); 10, lateral view of UT-17374 (see also text fig. 11y), from the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Bear Creek, Travis County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection; 11, lat­eral view of UT-18007-B see also text fig. lip), from the lower memberoftheBudaLimestone,BearCreek,Travis County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection; 12-15, 19-23, views of UT-31847-B, and 16-18, 22-26, views of UT­-31847-A, from the lower member of the Buda Lime­stone, Round Rock, Williamson County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection; 10-13, 18, 21, 23, 25, 26, X 2; 14-17, 19. 20. 22.24, XI. clavi until near or on the body chamber. Nodation consists of weak, unpronounced, umbilical bullae and strong, ventrolateral clavi prior to the body chamber, and the lat­ter may be slightly projected. In addition there are peripheral clavi on the midline. The number of peripheral clavi varies, but is al­ways more than the number of ribs, and may range up to twice as many as there are ribs. Overlap is to about two-thirds of the flank, being greater prior to the body chamber, and less on the body chamber. On UT-10755 there are no ribs on the last one-fourth of the body chamber, and the body chamber constitutes about 180' of arc. Ventral clavi die out early on the body chamber. On UT­-18004 there are no ribs on the last half of the steinkern, but the body chamber is in­complete. On UT-18036 the ribs efface near the apperture and are weaker on the last one-half of the body chamber than on the phrag­macone (pi. 7, figs. 8, 10, 13, and pi. 8, fig.22); on this specimen the aperture is at 70 mm diameter, and the last suture is at a 53 mm diameter, resulting in a body chamber, complete, of about 120° of arc. On UT-19836 there are 16 peripheral clavi for nine ribs at a diameter of 39 mm. The suture (text figs. 11h, 11jj) has all elements very much reduced, with simple saddles and a wide first lateral saddle that is at least twice as wide as the first lobe; the ventral lobe is longer than the first lateral lobe, and suspensive lobes are almost un­developed at the 45 mm diameter. Measurements are shown on page 66. Remarks. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) differs from species of Faraudiella in that spe­cies of Faraudiella have ribs continuing across the venter, have only one peripheral clavus per rib, and do not have smooth areas ventral of the ventrolateral nodes. Comparisons of Budaiceras hyatti with B. elegantior (Lass­ witz) are made below under remarks for that species. One would like to derive Budaiceras from some species, such as Neoph/ycticeras brottianum (d'Orbigny), which already has a smooth area just laterad to the peripheral tubercles and ventrad to the ends of the ribs, but no intervening species with this condition are known from the lower part of the Lower Cenomanian. Therefore, one probably needs to evolve Budaiceras from some species of Faraudiella or Stoliczkaia, especially since the juveniles of Budaiceras bear a strong re­semblance to the juveniles of Stoliczkaiain which there is a great weakening of ribs ,be­tween the ventrolateral nodes and the periph­eral nodes. There are over 150 specimens in the col­lections of the Texas Memorial Museum that PLATE 7 Figs. 1-4, 6-10, 12-14—Budaiceras hyatti IShattuck); 1, 9,14, lateral and ventral views of BEG-45248, a plaster cast of the specimen illustrated by Bose (1928, pi. 10, figs. 1-3) as Budaiceras mexicanum, n. sp., from the Buda Limestone, El Remolino, region of Jimenez, Coa­huila, Mexico, collected by Emil Bose ; 2-4, lateral and ventral views of UT-16743 (see also pi. 8, fig. 19 and text fig. 11 ii), from the lower member of the Buda Lime­stone, Shoal Creek, Austin, Travis County, Texas; F. L. Whitney Collection; 6, lateral view of WSA-2345 ftsee also text fig. 11j), from the lower part of the Buda Lime­stone, Gray Hill, Agua Fria Quadrangle, Brewster County,Texas, collected by C. Gardley Moon; 7, 12, ventral and lateral views of UT-6622, from about 3 ms above the base of the Buda Limestone (as float), west flank of Love Anticline, Kelcy Ranch, Hudspeth County, Texas, col­lected by D. F. Reaser; note smooth body chamber; 8, 10, 13, lateral and ventral views of UT-18036 (see also pi. 8, fig. 22, and text figs.11dd-gg,kk), from the Buda Lime­stone, Austin, Travis County, Texas; F. L. Whitney Col­lection; all X 1. 5-Faraudiella franciscoensis (Kellum and Mintz); lateral view of UT-43786, from the Buda Limestone, but no localitydataotherthanTrans-PecosTexas;X 1. 11-Stoliczkaia scotti Breistroffer; lateral view of WSA-6032 (see also pi. 8, fig. 11, and text fig. 10c), from the upper 8 ms of the Grayson Formation, Grayson Point, northeast of Roanoke, Denton County, Texas; collected by Roy T. Hazzard; X 1. 65 UT-43374 WSA-266-A WSA-9687 DU 66.0 23.0 39.5 28.0 H 38.0 47.0 W 35.0 27.0 H/W 1.08 1.75 TP 18 ? 20 14 20 20 SB ? ? 6 -- can be assigned to Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck). Most are in­complete phragmacones, but two or three contain most of the WSA-267-A WSA-11815 UT-38275 WSA-4496 UT-16744 WSA-6704 UT-259 WSA-5717 WSA-2345 UT-19667 UT-36909-A UT-18028 UT-31480 UT-19836-B 54.5 50.0 61.0 84.0 60.0 62.5 58.0 34.0 58.0 68.0 56.0 64.0 73.0 58.0 17.5 19.5 31.0 20.0 24.0 31.0 17.5 26.0 23.5 -18.7 33.0 28.5 46.0 -45.0 39.0 47.0 51.0 47.5 45.5 45.5 45.0 47.5 42.5 43.0 31.0 39.0 38.0 31.0 34.5 32.0 -— 28.0 31.5 26.0 31.0 1.48 — 1.15 1.03 1.52 1.54 1.48 1.60 1.50 1.63 1.38 20 21 20 17 21 17 — 23 24 10 10 13 9 16 17 ? 16 18 14 — 17 10 10 10 8 9 4 4 ? 1 3 3 4 3 - ? 1 1 -­ body chamber. B. hyatti differs from B. alticarinatum, n. sp., primarily in the development of the very high keel in B. alti­carinatum. Comparisons with B. e/egantior (Lasswitz) are given with the description of that species. Horizon and localities.—Buda­iceras hyatti (Shattuck) defines UT-11368 UT-31564 UT-32223 WSA-2838 UT-18035 WSA-12457 UT-18061 41.0 48.0 63.0 63.5 41.5 44.0 59.0 28.0 28.0 17.5 19.0 24.0 21.5 16.0 46.5 47.0 41.5 48.0 43.5 49.0 47.5 — 37.0 34.0 35.5 -1.30 — 1.44 1.34 18 21 26 24 24 20 18 14 20 18 16 20 7 6 6 8 -- the zone carrying that name. Where this fossil occurs in clay formations, as in the upper part of the Del Rio Formation in northeast Chihuahua and in UT-35611 UT-18033 UT-18047 UT-265 UT-10593 UT-32977 UT-42855 UT-38279 WSA-267-A UT-18190 UT-38288 66.0 71.5 81.0 59.0 57.5 63.0 88.0 51.5 88.0 46.0 90.5 19.5 31.0 30.5 16.0 17.5 15.5 26.0 19.5 29.5 17.5 22.0 36.5 38.5 37.5 55.0 35.5 42.5 41.5 48.5 43.0 51.0 43.0 — 31.0 32.0 41.0 26.0 32.5 35.0 39.0 34.0 -1.25 1.17 1.34 1.37 1.31 1.38 1.31 1.30 — — 18 12 21 21 22 21 20 21 19 — 18 12 20 19 21 20 18 19 --­6 1 3 -3 --­- the upper part of the Grayson Formation of north Texas, those occurrences are thought to be equivalent to the Buda Lime­stone of central Texas. There are many specimens from Hays, Travis, and Williamson counties of central Texas. In Trans-Pecos WSA-267-B WSA-267-C UT-19022 WSA-6142 WSA-12447 WSA-2017 UT-10755 UT-16743-A 44.5 51.0 43.0 54.0 42.0 41.5 83.0 75.0 60.0 50.0 22.5 24.5 21.0 26.0 26.5 26.5 26.5 25.0 27.0 47.0 46.0 46.5 43.5 42.0 38.5 39.0 48.0 45.0 — 31.5 -26.5 28.0 31.5 35.0 1.38 1.45 1.38 .1.50 1.28 19 19 20 24 20 24 28 —­— 19 17 19 18 18 16 22 9 -17 2 2 6 4 2 9 2 ---- Texas B. hyatti has been collect­ed in Brewster, Jeff Davis, Val Verde, Terrell, and Hudspeth counties. On the Edwards Pla­teau the species has been col­lected from Val Verde, Edwards, Sutton, and Uvalde counties. In UT-16751 UT-16758 40.0 30.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 50.0 40.0 24.0 20.0 27.0 21.0 18.5 20.0 21.0 46.0 50.0 50.0 46.5 51.5 49.0 47.5 37.5 36.5 36.0 35.0 36.5 40.0 37.5 1.23 1.36 1.39 1.32 1.41 1.22 1.27 — 17 -­~ 18 — 13 — 15 - 4 3 north Texas B. hyatti has been collected from the upper partof the Grayson Formation in Hill County, and from the Mod­lin Limestone Member of the UT-18004 UT-18029 UT-18036 99.0 75.0 60.0 50.0 72.0 47.0 69.0 60.0 28.5 26.5 23.5 24.5 19.5 31.0 30.0 39.0 41.0 46.5 49.0 48.5 52.0 37.0 40.0 27.5 32.0 34.0 34.0 36.0 42.5 27.0 30.0 1.43 1.29 1.37 1.44 1.35 1.22 1.43 1.33 — 18 — 19 20 -— 18 —­11 11 8 9 Grayson Formation in Denton and Grayson counties. Bose col­lected B. hyatti from the Buda Limestone at El Remolino and Tinaja de la Huerfana, Coahuila, and Kellum and Mintz (1962) Continued on page 67 described the species, as Buda­ 66 iceras mexicanum Bose, from the Indidura Formation, Sierra de Tlahualilo, southwestern Coa­huila. The species has also been UT-19836-A collected from the Sierra Pinosa and Sierra Pilares, northeastern UT-19844 Chihuahua. BUDAICERAS ELEGANTIOR (Lasswitz, 1904) UT-31480 pi. 8, figs. 1-9, 12-14, 16, 18; BEG-35248 pi. 9, figs. 3-5,9-12, 16; text figs. 11i, w, z, kk, nn-rr Lasswitz var. ele-PI. 6 Schloenbachia roemeri Fig. 4 gant/'or Lasswitz, 1904, p. 28, pi. 6, fig. 5a Schloenbachia evae Lasswitz, 1904, p. 29, pl. 8, fig. 2 Budaiceras mexicanum Bose, 1928, pro parte, pl. 9, figs. 18-23 only Budaiceras sp. Bose, 1928, pl. 18, fig. 7; Adkins, 1928, p. 236, pl. 23, fig. 1 Budaiceras evae (Lasswitz) in Adkins, 1928, p. 237, pl. 23, fig. 2 Budaiceras roemeri var. elegantior (Lasswitz) in Adkins, 1928, p. 237, pl. 23, fig. 4 Holotype. -The holotype is the specimen figured by Lasswitz (1904, pl. 6, fig. sa) and Adkins (1928, pl. 23, fig. 4); it was from the Buda Limestone at Austin, Travis County, Texas. The specimen was at the University of Breslau (Wroklaw) when Adkins photo­ graphed it prior to 1928. The collection at Breslau now seems to have been either lost or destroyed. As a neolectotype I select UT­ -16750, from the Buda Limestone, Barton Creek, Austin, Travis County, Texas, F. L. Whitney Collection, illustrated on plate 8, figures 1-3. Specific description.—Conch with few whorls; the umbilical walls slope into a nar­ row, rapidly expanding umbilicus. At di­ ameters of less than 60 mm U ranges from 12.5 to 26.5, whereas at greater diameters DU H W H/WTPSB 50.0 29.0 46.0 32.0 1.44 20 12 8 40.0 26.0 46.5 32.5 1.42 20 13 7 —— -­ 30.0 26.5 43.5 33.5 1.30 —­ 25.0 26.0 42.0 39.0 25.5 43.5 31.0 1.43 17 15 1 - — 30.0 25.0 41,5 31.5 1.32 25.0 24.0 44.0 36.0 1.22 - 50.0 27.0 45.0 23 17 6 — —— 40.0 26.0 42.5 —— -­ 30.0 26.5 48.5 ——--­ 20.0 57.5 ——--­ 77.0 33.0 38.5 26.0 1.47 - —— ­ 52.0 28.0 46.0 31.0 1.50 76.5 30.0 37.5 27.5 1.36 20 20 60.0 25.0 45.0 31.5 1.42 20 20 —— 50.0 26.0 50.0 32.0 1.56 — 40.0 23.5 52.5 34.0 1.56 38.5 24.5 41.5 14 14 —----­ 30.0 23.5 41.5 25.0 20.0 46.0 U ranges from 19.0 to 34.5. The higher fig­ures probably represent adult specimens on which the body chamber overlaps less of the flank. Whorl height is greater than whorl width, HAV ranging from 1.2 to 1.5; greater figures in the table probably represent speci­mens that have been flattened by sedimentary load. The whorl section is suboval intercos­ tally and costally, the intercostal appearing slightly tabulate on some specimens, and the costal section appearing more shouldered when ventrolateral clavi are present, and with a peak peripherally where there are periph­eral clavi. Greatest whorl width is just ventrad of the umbilicus, and when umbilical bullae are present the greatest width is at the umbilical bullae, at about one-fifth of the flank, and intercostally at from one-third to one-half of the flank. Costation is sparse to moderate, the num­ber of ribs per volution ranging from 18 to 42. The number of primary ribs ranges from 11 to 28 per volution, and the number of secondary from 2 to 14; ribs are frequently falcoid, and the greater the number of ribs on the whorl, the greater the falcoid shape of those ribs. Umbilical bullae and ventrolateral nodes are small, the latter being slightly pro­jected and clavate. Small, peripheral clavi PLATE 8 Figs. 1-9, 12-14, 16, 18-Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz); 1-3, lateral and ventral views of UT-16750, the neolecto­type, from the Buda Limestone, Bartons Creek, Travis County, Texas; F. L. Whitney Collection; 4-6, lateral and ventral views of UT-14132-B (see also text fig. linn), from the Buda Limestone, Shoal Creek, Travis County, Texas; F. L. Whitney Collection; 7, 8, lateral and ventral views of UT-19829 (see also text fig. Ilqq), from the nodular (middle) member of the Buda Limestone, 1.6 kms east of the junction of highways 41 and US 377, Edwards County, Texas; collected by Bob Lowe; 9, lateral viewofUT-47896(seealsotextfig. 1loo),fromtheBuda Limestone, Shoal Creek, Austin, Travis County, Texas; F. L. Whitney Collection; 12, 14, ventral and lateral views of UT-16755 (see also text fig. 11 z), from the Buda Limestone, Shoal Creek, Austin, Travis County, Texas; F. L. Whitney Collection; 13, lateral view of UT-17386, a higher whorled specimen (see also text figs. 11w, rr), from the Buda Limestone at Manchaca Road and Wil­liamson Creek, Travis County, Texas; collected by W. R. Muehlberger and K. Young; 16, 18, lateral and ventral views of WSA-12335, from the Buda Limestone near Black Gap, Brewster County, Texas; collected by Duncan Wilson; all, X 1. 10, 11, 15, 17, 23—Stoliczkaia scotti Breistroffer; 10, 15, ventral and lateral views of UT-47893 (see also text fig. 10d), from the Del Rio Formation, west side of the Sierra del Carmen, northern Coahuila, Mexico; collected by C. L. Baker; 11, ventral view of WSA 6032 (see also pi. 7, fig. 11, and text fig. 10e) from the upper Bms of the Grayson Formation, Grayson Point, northeast of Roanoke, Denton County, Texas; collected by Roy T. Hazzard; 17, 23, lateral and ventral views of WSA-16205, from the top of the Del Rio Formation, San Rafael, nor­thern Coahuila, Mexico; collected by W. E. Bloxsom; all, X 1. 19-22, 24 -Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck); 19, ventral view of UT-16743 (see also pi. 7, figs. 2-4, and text fig. 11ii), from the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Shoal Creek, Austin, Travis County, Texas; F. L. Whitney Collection; 20, 21, lateral and ventral views of UT-18029 (see also text figs. 11 h, hh), from the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Onion Creek, Hays County, Texas; F. L. Whitney Collection; 22, ventral view of UT-18036 (see also pi. 7, figs. 8, 10, 13, and text figs. Ildd-gg, jjK from the Buda Limestone, Austin, Travis County, Texas; F. L. Whitney Collection; 24, lateral view of WSA-6142, from the nodular (middle) member of the Buda Lime­stone, highway 41, near the junction with the road to the Devils Sink Hole, Edwards County, Texas; collected by Roy T. Hazzard;all, X 1. appear on the venter at all stages. There are many more siphonal (peripheral) clavi than ribs, and it is on specimens assigned to this spe­cies by the writer for which the two-to-one ratio is given by Wright (Arkell, Kummell, and Wright, 1957, p. L410). UT-957, pi. 9, figs. 9, 10, has approximately 13 peripheral clavi per 8 ribs. On WSA-6136 there is one periph­eral clavum per rib to the 22 mm diameter; on this specimen there are no ribs prior to the 20 mm diameter, although there are already peripheral clavi. UT-14132-A shows 21 pe­ripheral clavi per 10 ribs; on the first half of this specimen there are good ventrolateral clavi at the ends of the ribs, but on the latter part of this whorl fragment there are no clavi at the ends of the ribs. This latter area is apparently approaching the body chamber, although this specimen is septate throughout. Another specimen has 14 clavi per 8 ribs (5 pri­mary and 3 secondary). On UT-17383 there are ribs prior to the 10 mm diameter, crossing the venter up to a diameter of 11 mm. UT-18001 is a small specimen assigned to this species, and on this specimen, which has a maximum diameter of 25 mm, there is only one periph­eral clavus per rib; clavi appear at a diameter of 11.5 mm on this specimen. UT-18039, which reaches a diameter of only 42 mm, has only 13 peripheral clavi per 10 ribs. UT­-19837 has sharp shoulder clavi throughout, and there is one siphonal clavus per rib up to the 50 mm diameter, and more siphonal clavi than ribs beyond that diameter. UT-31813, which is probably a juvenile of this species, has a maximum diameter of about 20 mm; there is one peripheral clavus per rib at this diameter, and faint ribs connect the periph­eral clavae to the ventrolateral ends of the ribs at this diameter; the ribs on the flank appear at about the 14 mm diameter, but peripheral clavi appear a little earlier. BEG­-35235, which is a specimen illustrated by86se (1928, pi. 9, figs. 19-20), has 14 periph­eral clavi per 8 ribs, and it is this specimen that is responsible for the statement of Bose 69 (1928, p. 260) and presumably the figures given by Wright (Arkell, Kummel, and Wright,1957, p. L410) that there are twice as many peripheral clavi as ribs. Thus, it is easy to see that beyond the diameter of 40 or 50 mm there are many more peripheral clavi than ribs, but the number of peripheral clavi seems to be independent of the number of ribs and varies greatly from specimen to specimen and from ontogenetic stage to ontogenetic stage. Likewise, there is a variation in the diameter of disappearance of the ventrolateral clavi, some specimens retaining them to near the body chamber, but other specimens losing them much earlier. There is also great varia­tion in the diameters at which ribs and pe- PLATE 9 Figs. 1, 2, 15, 17-19-Budaiceras a/ticarinatum, n. sp.; 1, 15, 19, ventral and lateral views of UT-18018 (see also text fig. 11x), from the Buda Limestone, central Texas; F. L. Whitney Collection; 2, 18, lateral and ventral views of UT-19695, the holotype (see also text fig. lice), from the Buda Limestone on Sink Creek, Hays County, Texas; collected by Kenneth J. DeCook; 17, lateral view of WSA-13669, from the Buda Limestone, Shoal Creek, Austin, Texas;a//, X 1. 3-5, 9-12, 16—Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz); 3, 4, 16, lateral and ventral views of a juvenile, UT-18014-A, from the Buda Limestone, Bear Creek, Travis County, Texas; F. L. Whitney Collection; 5, 11, 12, lateral and ventral views of UT-18002, a sutured specimen (see also text figs. 11 i, pp), from the lower member of the Buda Limestone, Manchaca, Travis County, Texas; F. L. Whit­ ney Collection;9, 10, lateral and ventral views of UT-957 (see also text fig. 11kk), from the Buda Limestone, Blan­co River, Hays County, Texas; F. L. Whitney Collec­ll, 12, X2,4, 5,9, 10,75, X 1. 6-B—Budaiceras sp. juv.; lateral and ventral views of WSA­ -6200 (see also text fig. Ilaa), a specimen showing an unornamented venter, except for peripheral clavi at a very early diameter, from the Buda Limestone, nodular (middle) member, at the intersection of highway 41 and the road to the Devil's Sink Hole, Edwards County, Texas; collected by Roy T. Hazzard; X 2. 13, 14—Stoliczkaia scotti Breistroffer; lateral and ventral views of UT-47890, from the Del Rio Formation, west side of the Sierra del Carmen, northern Coahuila, Mexico; collected by C. L. Baker; X 1. ripheral clavi first appear, but the peripheral clavi almost always appear first. Overlap is to between one-third and one-half of the flank. The body chamber in this species is unknown, as is the aperture. Al­though there are some variations, the suture has a wide first lateral saddle, and the first lateral lobe is narrow and is likely to be as long as or longer than the siphonal lobe. Su­tural elements are generally reduced. Measurements are shown on page 72. Remarks.-Bucaiceras e/egantior (Lasswitz) is well named and constitutes a very pretty little ammonite species. It does not have the more robust ribbing of 3. hyatti (Shattuck). B. e/egantior differs from 3. a/ticarinatum, n. sp., in the development of the high carina, upon which the peripheral clavi are situated, in the latter. Also the suture of B. a/ticari­natum has a narrower saddle than does that of B. e/egantior, based on the rather limited sample of sutures available. Well over 100 specimens from the Texas Memorial Mu­seum's collections, The University of Texas at Austin, have been assigned to Lasswitz's species, B. e/egantior. There is a rather continuous morphological gradation from B. hyatti to B. e/egantior, and one might claim that they do not constitute two separate species, and at the most are sub­species or varieties. Since they can be dif­ferentiated, it seemed convenient to keep the two species separate; one of Bose's species and one of Lasswita's species have been placed in synonymy with B. e/egantior. The usual measurements that are reported for am­monites are at best unsatisfactory, and when there is distortion by sedimentary and dia­genetic processes they become even worse. When one compares U against D for B. ele­gantior and B. hyatti, there is no significantdifference (text figs. 17 and 18). The same statement can be made for comparisons of H versus D and U versus H (text figs. 19-22). However, a comparison of the means of the number of ribs per whorl resulted in a highly UT-19845 D 44.5 U 15.7 H 52.0 WH/WTPSB 30.5 1.70 42 28 14 significant difference (T= 10.32 at 0.95) (text figs. 23, 24), es­ UT-17384 BEG-35235 UT-13372 U T-43364 UT-18014-B UT-14132-A UT-31813 WS A-267-C WS A-266-A UT-6234 WS A-266-B WSA-6136 WSA-12501 WSA-253 UT-45714 UT-40661 WSA-4497 UT-19844 UT-19837-A UT-38273 UT-43373 UT-43365 UT-957 WSA-13685 WS A-18054 WSA-4231 UT-267-D UT-38267 UT-6623 UT-43790 UT-18044 UT-270 WSA-6136 UT-14132-B UT-16744 37.0 46.0 40.5 55.5 51.0 45.5 20.5 47.0 33.5 48.5 32.5 40.0 62.0 61.0 61.0 50.0 63.0 57.0 46.5 56.5 48.0 55.0 68.0 83.5 32.0 73.0 33.0 26.0 24.0 82.0 73.5 43.0 78.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 29.0 23.0 18.0 43.5 30.0 60.0 50.0 24.5 13.5 17.0 17.6 19.7 17.0 25.5 16.5 19.5 23.0 20.0 21.5 26.5 18.0 19.0 17.5 17.0 26.5 21.0 12.5 23.5 21.5 18.5 20.5 21.0 23.0 16.5 24.0 23.0 15.0 29.5 26.0 20.0 28.5 19.0 15.0 14.0 22.0 -20.0 20.0 67.5 49.0 50.5 51.5 41.0 50.5 51.0 44.5 49.5 44.5 44.5 47.5 50.0 51.0 44.5 50.0 47.5 51.0 51.5 47.0 52.0 38.0 41.0 47.0 50.0 48.0 42.5 44.5 53.5 42.0 45.0 37.0 43.0 46.0 45.0 42.5 48.5 50.0 52.5 49.5 50.0 47.0 50.0 28.5 31.5 26.0 29.0 32.5 34.0 34.0 27.5 34.0 35.5 30.5 30.0 33.5 31.5 27.5 19.0 27.0 23.0 34.5 31.0 32.0 27.0 31.0 25.5 31.5 31.0 32.5 32.5 32.5 36.0 32.0 30.0 31.0 36.0 2.34 1.55 1.94 1.76 1.27 1.48 1.50 1.73 1.47 1.44 1.45 1.58 1.52 1.62 1.71 2.00 1.51 2.05 1.45 1.56 1.36 1.65 1.74 1.45 1.37 1.45 -1.31 1.47 1.53 1.46 1.54 1.67 1.51 1.38 24 28 28 32 34 34 34 24 32 26 26 28 34 24 32 25 18 26 28 28 26 34 22 25 28 27 25 — 23 22 24 22 26 ? 26 ? 1 1 ? 21 18 22 24 22 14 ? 16 22 22 -22 20 ? 18 20 27 14 15 15 2 4 6 6 ? 8 ? 2 ? 5 8 6 10 2 10 ? -2 4 6 6 6 ? 4 5 1 13 10 8 2 ? ? -- pecially when it is remembered that the continuum was not split entirely on rib differences alone. Horizonand localities.—Buda­iceras elegantior (Lasswitz) is not known to occur outside of the zone of Budaiceras hy­atti. It was collected from north Texas by Adkins from the up­per part of the Grayson For­mation, 7.2 km east of Denison, Grayson County, Texas. There are specimens from Hays, Trav­is, and Williamson counties,Texas, from the Buda Lime­stone. Across the Edwards Plateau specimens have been collected in Crockett, Ed­wards, Val Verde, and Huds­peth counties. Bose (1928) collected the species at El Remolino, Coahuila, Mexico. All specimens are from the upper part of the Lower Ceno­manian, and, except for the collection by Adkins from the Grayson Formation in Gray­son County, all specimens are from the Buda Limestone. UT-16745 UT-16750 40.0 26.0 45.0 40.0 30.0 40.0 30.0 21.0 19.0 20.0 18.5 16.5 22.5 23.5 50.0 54.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 43.5 46.5 37.5 35.5 35.0 33.5 1.33 1.41 1.43 1.50 -— 26 12 14 BUDAICERAS ALTICAR/NA­TUM, n. sp. pi. 9, figs. 1,2, 15, 17-19; text figs. 11, lice UT-16755 UT-17371 25.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 47.5 30.5 22.0 22.0 20.0 20.0 21.0 44.0 44.0 45.0 46.5 48.5 54.0 29.0 32.5 33.5 30.5 33.0 -1.52 1.38 1.40 1.52. 1.65 25 15 10 Budaiceras sp. Young, 1959, p. 82, fig. 16 and p. 83, fig. 1; Young, 1960, p. 45, fig. 16 and p. 46, fig. 1 UT-17 383 24.5 20.5 45.0 35.0 1.29 UT-18049 UT-19829 1 1.0 42.0 44.5 30.0 25.0 22.5 18.0 54.5 51.5 46.5 44.0 45.5 31.5 1.20 1.64 29 16 13 —­Continued on page 73 Ho/otype.—The holotype is UT-19695, and is float from the Buda Limestone, 30 ms up­ 72 streamfromthecrossingof D U H W H/W T P S B UT-19837 56.5 19.5 50.5 33.5 1.50 Sink Creek at Lime Kiln Road, 40.0 47.5 Hays County, Texas, collected UT-30536 54.0 19.5 50.0 31.5 1.59 32 18 14 40.0 21.5 50.0 32.5 1.55 by Kenneth J. DeCook in 1955. 34.0 17.5 47.0 31.0 1.52 Specific description.—Conch 25.0 48.0 is with few whorls, and the um-UT-31813 20.0 22.5 50.0 32.5 1.54 13.0 21.5 50.0 34.5 43 bilical wall slopes into a shal- Lasswitz 61.0 22.0 47.5low, rapidly expanding um-PI. 8, Fig. 3 50.0 22.0 48.0 ­ bilicus of moderate width. U 40.0 20.0 50.0 32? ? WSA-12335 51.0 17.5 49.0 27.5 1.78 ranges from 18 to 21 at the 50 ? 34.5 19.0 49.0 30.5 1.63 mm diameter and from 20 to UT-16756 53.0 18.0 51.0 36.0 1.42 25 at greater diameters. The UT-30538 30.0 16.5 48.5 28.5 1.71 UT-6622 87.5 34.5 36.5 25.0 1.45whorl section is higher than 51.0 20.5 49.0 27.5 1.79 wide, decreasing in height, rela-WSA-2345 60.0 25.0 41.5 25.0 1.76 24 24 46.5 40.0 25.0 1.61 tive to width, to a diameter of UT-6200 24.5 -12.0 53.0 28.5 1.86 about 75 mm, and thereafter UT-6264 102.0 23.0 47.0 24.5 1.92 31 25 6 increasing again. The first two 69.0 17.5 52.0 30.0 1.75 42.0 21.5 51.0 30.0 1.72 steps of this H/W ontogeny are UT-19852 50.0 19.0 49.0 31.0 1.58 26 20 6 normal to the genus Buda-WS A-4228-A 57.0 28.0 49.0 26 26 iceras, but the third step, of H/W is the ends of regularly and ventrally expanding, result of the rapid rise of the carinate venter club-shaped ribs; nearly all ribs are primary. ventrad of the ribs. H/W ranges from about The aperture is unknown, but the body 1.35 to 1.63. The whorl section is more oval chamber retains the ornamentation of the in the younger whorls, intercostally becoming phragmacone, except that it is not quite so narrower and fastigate in adult whorls. The strong. Whether such ornamentation contin­costal whorl section is similar to the inter-ued to the aperture is not known. Overlap is costal but shouldered very remarkably. Al-to between the first third and half of the though the shoulder is present on the inter-flank. costal section, it is not nearly as strong. The The suture has a very wide siphonal lobe, greatest whorl width ranges from the first apparently to make up for the high and broad third to the first half of the flank, both keel, but surprisingly enough a rather narrow costally and intercostally. Costation is mod-first saddle compared to other species of erate, with 27 more or less ribs per whorl. The Budaiceras. The first lobe is much shorter ribs are straight to slightly sigmoid or flex-and smaller than the ventral lobe; suspensive uous, and rectiradiate to slightly prosiradiate. lobes are foliated and saddles are simple. Tuberculation consists of very long, low Measurements are shown on page 74. Remarks. The immediately most notice­ uullae, at or near the umbilicus, frequently so weak as to be difficult to observe, of fairly able difference between B. aiticarinatum, n. pronounced ventrolateral clavi, and a series sp., and other species of Budaiceras is in the of peripheral clavi that are more numerous development of the high carina that is broad than the ribs, but never twice as numerous as at the base beyond the diameter of about 10 the ribs. On the early whorls the peripheral or so mm. B. aiticarinatum is also distinctive in a preponderance of primary ribs clavi are situated on the midline of the venter, in all and as the keel develops at about the 40 mm specimens. Whether WSA-6200 (pi. 9, figs. 6­ diameter the peripheral clavi are on the raised 8) is a juvenile of B. e/egantior or a juvenile of keel. The ventrolateral clavi are on the ventral B. aiticarinatum cannot yet be determined. 73 Horizon and localities.-Eight specimens of lection. UT-9091 was collected by J. R. Un-Budaiceras aiticarinatum, n. sp., are known. derwood from the Buda Limestone, Eagle One of these, UT-18018, has no locality or Mountains, Hudspeth County, Texas, and UT horizon data. Insofar as is known, B. aiti-19904 was collected by D. L. Amsbury from carinatum does not occur outside of the zone the Buda Limestone, Pinto Canyon Area, of Budaiceras hyatti. The holotype was found Hudspeth County, Texas. Still another speci­as float from the Buda Limestone, Hays Coun-men was collected by Adkins and Twining on ty, central Texas. UT-13669 and UT-18026 Dagger Flat, Big Bend National Park, Brewster are from the Buda Limestone, Shoal Creek, County, Texas and there is an eighth speci- Austin, Travis County, F. L. Whitney Col-men from Hays County, Texas. D U H WH/WTPSP UT-18018 88.5 25.0 45.0 29.5 1.54 — 72.5 20.5 45.5 33.0 1.37 64.5 19.5 48.0 34.0 1.41 49.0 18.5 49.0 WSA-13669 90.0 23.0 46.0 30.0 1.54 23 23 66.0 21.0 53.0 33.5 1.58 - 34.0 56.0 29.5 1.90 UT-19695 75.0 24.5 46.5 33.5 1.40 25 25 — 50.0 21.5 48.5 32.5 1.52 40.0 21.0 47.0 29.0 1.63 FIGURE 17 ScatterplotofUandDforBudaicerashyatti(Shattuck);comparewithfigure 18. 74 FIGURE 18 Scatter plot of U and D for Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz); compare with figure 17. REGISTER OF LOCALITIES This register of localities contains locality descriptions for ail collections of ammonites from the Buda Limestone known to me. The register for other formations includes only lo­calities of collections I have studied and is incomplete. ARIZONA Molly Gibson Formation, west of the Molly Gibson Mine, Patagonia Mountains, Ariz.; Alexander Stoyanow. Stoliczkaia scotti Breistroffer = [S. Scotti Stoyanow, S. arizonica Stoyanow, and S. excent rumbilicata Stoyanow] BELL COUNTY, TEXAS Denton Formation, between 31°00' and 31°05" latitudes N and 97°25' and 97°30' longitudes W, vicinity of Belton, Bell County;W. S. Adkins. Faraudiella sp. cf. F. rhamnonota (Seeley) Main Street Limestone, top; Love Farm, 3.7 kms south of Salado, Bell County; W. S. Adkins. Stoliczkaia crotaloides (Stoliczka) Main Street Limestone, Love Farm, 3.7 kms south of Salado, Bell County; W. S. Ad­kins. Faraudiella sp. cf. F. rhamnonota (Seeley) 75 FIGURE 19 Scatter plot of H and D forBudaiceras hyatti; compare with figure 20. Main Street Limestone, top; south bank of Lampasas River, east of Interstate Hwy. 35 along county road, Bell County; K. Young. Graysonites adkinsi Young BREWSTER COUNTY, TEXAS Buda Limestone; Gray Hill, Agua Fria Quad­rangle, Brewster County; C. Gardley Moon; Bob F. Perkins. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Faraudiella franciscoensis (Kellum and Mintz) 11-14 ms above base; Bob F. Perkins Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone; Hood Springs Quadrangle, Brewster County; Roy Graves. Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone; Dagger Flat, oig Bend Park; W. S. Adkins and John T. Twining. Budaiceras alticarinatum, n. sp. Buda Limestone; north of road and northeast of Black Gap, Black Gap Area, Brewster County, Texas; Roy T. Hazzard. Faraudiellaroemeri (Lasswitz) F. texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) B. elegantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone; Black Gap Area, Brewster County; Roy T. Hazzard; Duncan Wilson, Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) B. elegantior (Lasswitz) 13-15 ms above base Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) 76 FIGURE 20 Scatter plot of H and D for Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz); compare with figure 19 Buda Limestone, San Francisco Creek, Brew­ster County, Bob F. Perkins. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) 22 ms below base of overlying Boquillas Formation; Bob F. Perkins. Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone, 17-18 ms above base, north­west corner of section 60, San Francisco Creek, Brewster County; Bob F. Perkins. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) CHIHUAHUA, MEXICO Del Rio Formation; Rancho la Bamba, north­west side of small hill of Buda Limestone, two-thirds km west of ranch house, west side of the Sierra LSgrima, northeastern Chihuahua; W. T. Haenggi, John Cries, K. Young. Sciponoceras sp. cf. S. baculoides (Mantell)Turrilitesbosquensis (Adkins)T. multipunctatus (Bose) Scaphites bosquensis (Adkins)Otoscaphites subevoiutus (Bose)Eoscaphites sp. cf. E. tenuicostatus Pervinqui§reScaphites sp. cf. S. hugardianusd'OrbignyFicheuria sp. aff. F. pernoni Dubourdieu Prionocycloides sp. cf. P. proratum(Pervinquiere)Graysonites (?) sp. juv. Del Rio Formation [float (?)]; northern Sierra Pilares, Northeastern Chihuahua;Alton Ferrell. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck)Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) 77 FIGURE 21 Scatter plot of U and H for Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck); compare with figure 22. FIGURE 22 Scatter plot of U and H for Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz); compare with figure 21 78 FIGURE 23 Scatter plot of D and number of ribs forBucaicerashyatti(Shattuck);comparewith fig. 24 Buda Limestone, 39 ms from the top; Sierra Pihosa, northeast Chihuahua; J. C. Nichols. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone; El Banquete, Chihuahua, 8 kms west of Ruidosa, Texas; W. T. Haenggi.Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) COAHUILA, MEXICO Salmon Peak Formation, near top; Arroyo del Tule, cliff 2.5 kms from San Lorenzo, 50 kms from Villa Acuna on the road to the headquarters of the San Miguel Ranch, Coahuila; Emil Bose. Graysonites woo/dridgei Young Plesioturrilites brazoensis (R6 mer) Del Rio Formation; west side of the Sierra del Carmen, northern Coahuila; C. L. Bak­er. Sto/iczkaia scotti Breistroffer Del Rio Formation, near base; small hill just south of road to new quarry on south­west flank of Sierra de la Gloria, south of Monclova, Coahuila; F. E. Lozo. Sto/iczkaia crotaloides (Stoliczka) Del Rio Formation; south end of Encantada Valley, about latitude N. 28° 20' by longi­tude W. 102°30', Coahuila; C. L. Baker. Scaphites sp. cf. S. bosquensis (Bose) Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Graysomites sp. juv. 79 FIGURE 24 Scatter plot of D and number of ribs for Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz); compare with fig. 23. Del Rio Formation; 4.9 kms from El Oregano on road to San Carlos, Jimenez Area, Coahuila; Emil Bose. Stoliczkaia crotaloides (Stoliczka) S. scotti Breistroffer "ManteUiceras" brazoense Bose Engonoceras bravoense Bose Del Rio Formation; south of Villa Acuna, Coahuila; Emil Bose. Turrilites bosquensis Adkins Buda Limestone; El Remolino, Jimenez Area, Coahuila; Emil Bose. Euhystrichoceras remolinense Bose Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) B. elegantior (Lasswitz) ManteUiceras sp. cf. M. martimpreyi (Pervinquiere pro partenon Coquand) , Sharpeiceras mexicanum (Bose) Buda Limestone; locality unknown, probably Coahuila; El Aguila Collection; W. R. Fehr no. F 615. Paracalycoceras sp. Buda Limestone 1.6 kms east of Quatro Cienegas on the Monclova hwy., Coahuila; F. E. Lozo, Teodoro Diaz, Bob F. Perkins, and C. I. Smith. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Mantelliceras sp. cf, M. martimpre/i (Pervinquiere pro parte non Coquand) MantelIicerassaxbii, (Sharpe) Buda Limestone; on trail running up north wall of Frouthrigh Canyon, west trail to Frautenza Mine, Sierra del Carmen, Coa­huila; C. L. Baker. Faraudiella franciscoensis (Kellum & Mintz) 80 Indidura Formation, lower; Sierra de Tlahua­lilo, Coahuila; L. B. Kellum. Faraudiella franciscoensis (Kellum & Mintz) Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Sharpeiceras tlahualiloense (Kellum & Mintz) Mantelliceras cantianum (Spath)Graysonites adkinsi Young [ = Graysonites reyno/dsi Kellum & Mintz] Buda Limestone; San Rafael, northern Coa­huila; W. E. Bloxsom. Stoliczkaia scotti Breistroffer COMAL COUNTY, TEXAS Buda Limestone: from outlier three-eighthskm west of Rubbrecher Ranch, Comal County; Victor King. Lewesiceras n. sp. COOKE COUNTY, TEXAS Grayson Formation; Hemming, Cooke Coun­ty. Stoliczkaia crotaloides (Stoliczka) CROCKETT COUNTY, TEXAS Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; Ozona-Sheffield hwy. at tank on north side of highway, 2 kms east of top of Pecos River Valley (top of Lancaster Hill), Crock­ett County; Roy T. Hazzard. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member Powell Field, Crockett County; Bob. F Perkins. Budaiceras eiegantior (Lasswitz) CULBERSON COUNTY, TEXAS Buda Limestone; B-Mesa, near Boracho, Cul berson County. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) DENTON COUNTY, TEXAS Grayson Formation, upper 15 ms; GraysonBluff, Denton County; W. S. Adkins and F. E. Lozo. Stoliczkaia crotaloides (Stoliczka) Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz)Middle (Modlin) limestone member; W. S. Ad­ kins and F. E. Lozo. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) B. eiegantior (Lasswitz) Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) Grayson Formation, upper 9 ms; GraysonPoint, northeast of Roanoke, Denton County; Roy T. Hazzard. Stoliczkaia scotti Breistroffer Grayson Formation, west of Roanoke, bar ranca on the Knight Ranch, Denton Coun ty; W. S. Adkins. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Grayson Formation; 1.2 kms west and 1.6 kms south of B. M. 634, east of Grayson Bluff, Denton County; W. S. Adkins. Stoliczkaia crotaloides (Stoliczka) Grayson Formation; just below contact with Dexter Sandstone, just west of Pilot Point, northeastern Denton County; Roy T. Hazzard. Stoliczkaia scotti Breistroffer S. crotaloides (Stoliczka) Grayson Formation, Denton Creek, near Roanoke, Denton County; Gayle Scott. Stoliczkaia scotti Breistroffer [ = S. dispar Scott, non d'Orbigny] EDWARDS COUNTY, TEXAS Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member Edwards County. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Faraudiella archerae, n. sp. 81 Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; near Rock Springs, Edwards County.Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras e/egantior (Lasswitz) P/esioturri/ites brazoensis (Romer)Graysomites sp. Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; borrow pit south of county road at turnoff to R. H. Cloudt Ranch, about 22 kms northwest of Rock Springs, Edwards Co.; Bob Lowe. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member, 1.1 m above top of Devils River Limestone; entrance to Denman Moody Ranch on co. rd. 11 kms northwest of Rock Springs, Ed­wards Co. Bob Lowe. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; borrow pit north of state hwy. 55, 11 kms northwest of Rock Springs, Edwards Co. Bob Lowe. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) B. elegantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; approximately 12 kms northwest of Rock Springs on the northwest branch of a gravelroad, Edwards Co.; Bob Lowe. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; borrow pit 145 ms west of second cattle guard on co. road, 13.5 kms northwest of Rock Springs, Edwards Co. Bob Lowe. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; about three-eighths km north and 1.1 kms east of Clark Ranch house, the en­trance of which is about 4.8 kms west of Rock Springs on hwy. 377, Edwards Co.; S. B. Hixon. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; 7.5 kms south of Rock Springs, Cowsert Ranch, on hwy. 55, Edwards Co.; Roy T. Hazzard. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member;hwy. 41, at intersection with the road to the Devil's Sink Hole; Edwards Co.; Roy T. Hazzard. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) F. franciscoensis (Kellum & Mintz) Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) B. elegantior (Lasswitz) B. a/ticarinatum, n. sp. Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member;borrow pit south of state hwy. 41, 7.5 kms east of junction of highways 41 and 83, Edwards-Kerr Co. line; Bob Lowe. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member;borrow pit on north side of hwy. 41, 1.6 kms east of junction of hwys. 41 and US 377, Edwards Co.; Bob Lowe. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) B. elegantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member;16 kms. north of junction of hwys. 41 and 83, near Edwards-Kerr Co. line; Bob Lowe. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) B. elegantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member;borrow pit south of hwy. in road cut ap­proximately 14.5 kms east of the junctionof hwys. 41 and US 377, about 26.5 kms northeast of Rock Springs, Edwards Co.;Bob Lowe. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) B. elegantior (Lasswitz) 82 Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; 6.7 kms east of the junction of hwys. 41 and US 377, Edwards Co.; Bob Lowe. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; pit on north side of highway 41, 1.6 kms. east of junction of highways 41 and US 377, Edwards County; Bob Lowe. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; 11 kms northeast of the intersection of hwys. 41 and 55 at Rock Springs, Edwards Co.; Roy T. Hazzard. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; 12 kms east of the junction of hwys. 41 and US 377, Edwards Co.; Bob Lowe. Budaiceras e/egantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; state hwy. 55, 10 kms northwest of Rock Springs, Edwards Co.; Roy T. Hazzard. Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) GRAYSON COUNTY, TEXAS Grayson Marl; 8.7 kms east of Denison, Gray­son Co.; W. S. Adkins. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) B. elegantior (Lasswitz) Grayson Marl; 1.6 kms east and 4.8 kms north of Gordonville, Grayson Co. Stoliczkaia crotaloides (Stoliczka) Grayson Marl; eastern gully in headwaters of Little Mineral Creek, east of Pottsboro, Grayson Co.;W. S. Adkins. Stoliczkaia crotaloides (Stoliczka) Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) HAYS COUNTY, TEXAS Buda Limestone, 5 ms above base of lower member; at cave, 15 ms northeast of Viesta and North streets, San Marcos, Hays Co.; Ken G. Martin. Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz)Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, float; southwest corner of San Marcos Cemetery, Hays Co.; K. J. DeCook. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, float; Sink Creek, upstreamfrom crossing of Lime Kiln Road, HaysCo.; K. J. DeCook. Budaiceras aiticarinatum, n. sp. Buda Limestone, lower member; sink 0.1 km northwest of Wicker house on Kate Leinn­weber Ranch, northwest of San Marcos, Hays Co.;Ken G. Martin. Faraudiella franciscoensis (Kellum & Mintz)Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone; Cowan Ranch, two-thirds km north of Sink Creek, Hays Co.; K. J. DeCook. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone; on the Blanco River about 1.6 kms above the Missouri-Pacific RR bridge, Hays Co.; F. L. Whitney; T. W. Grimshaw; K. J. DeCook. Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) F. texana (Shattuck) F. franciscoensis (Kellum & Mintz) F. archerae, n. sp. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) 8. elegantior (Lasswitz) B. aiticarinatum, n. sp. Ost/ingoceras sp. 83 Buda Limestone, lower member; on the Blan­co River about 1.6 kms above the Mis­ souri-Pacific RR bridge, Hays Co.; F. L. Whitney; Hunter Yarborough. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) B. elegantior (Lasswitz) Stoliczkaia crota/oides (Stoliczka) Sharpeiceras tlahualiloense (Kellum & Mintz) P/esioturri/ites sp. aff. S. brazoensis (Rdmer) Buda Limestone; near Kyle, 2.4 kms north of Blanco River, Hays Co.; F. L. Whitney. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, lower member; near Kyle, 2.4 kms north of the Blanco River, Hays Co.; F. L. Whitney. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, upper member; Onion Creek, at the Missouri-Pacific RR bridge,Hays Co.; F. L. Whitney. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Sharpeiceras tlahualiloense (Kellum & Mintz) 3 ms below top of lower member; F. L. Whitney.MantelIiceras sp. cf. M. martimpreyi (Pervinquiere,pro parte, non Coquand) lower member; F. L. Whitney Stoliczkaia scotti Breistroffer Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) F. texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) B. elegantior (Lasswitz) MantelIiceras sp. cf. M. martimpreyi (Pervinquiere, pro parte, non Coquand) top of Plicatula bed in lower member; F. L. Whitney.Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) F. archerae, n. sp. HILL COUNTY, TEXAS Main Street Limestone, top; near Mt. Zion Church, upper Rock Creek, Hill Co.; W. S. Adkins. Graysonitesadkinsi Young Main Street Limestone, top; Tinner Creek, southwest Hill Co.; W. S. Adkins. Graysonites wooldridgei Young Grayson Marl, basal; Tinner Creek, southwest Hill Co.; W. S. Adkins. Graysonites fountaini Young G. wootdridgei Young Grayson Marl, base; Brazos River, White Rock Crossing, Hill Co.; W. S. Adkins. Graysonites wooldridgei Young Grayson Marl, near the top; Aquilla Creek, Hill Co.; Bernhard Kummel. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Grayson Marl; 3.8 kms west of Aquilla, Hill Co.; Bernhard Kummel. Sciponoceras sp. cf. S. baculoides (Mantell) Otoscaphites subevolutus (Bose) Adkinsia bosquensis (Adkins) Woodbine Formation; about 26 ms above the top of the Grayson Formation, AlligatorCreek, 8.0 kms westnorthwest of West, Hill Co., Texas; W. S. Adkins. Forbesiceras sp. cf. F. brundrettei Young HUDSPETH COUNTY, TEXAS Buda Limestone, lower part; just south of In­dio Pass Road, 1.6 kms south of intersec­tion of Indio Pass Road and the outcrop of the Espy Limestone, Evans and Williamson ranches, Hudspeth Co.; J. R. Underwood. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) 84 Eagle Mountains Sandstone; east flank of the Buda Limestone (30 ms above base as float); Quitman Mountains, southern Hudspeth west flank of Love Anticline, Love Sta-Co.; D. F. Reaser. tion, Hudspeth Co.; D. F. Reaser. Faraudiella borachoensis, n. sp Faraudiella texana(Shattuck) Buda Limestone, lower unit (e.g., lower 14 ms); 1.6 kms south of Indio Pass Road, Eagle Mountains, Hudspeth Co.; J. R. Underwood. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Buda Limestone; Eagle Mountains, Hudspeth Co.; J. R. Underwood. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras a/ticarinatum, n. sp. Buda Limestone, 36 ms above the contact with the Eagle Mountains Sandstone; Carpenter Springs, Hudspeth Co.; expos­ures in creek bed in Carpenter Canyonnorthnortheast of Carpenter Springs on Lock Ranch, Eagle Mountains; Bob F. Per­ kins. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, Speck Ranch, Eagle Moun­tains, Hudspeth Co.; J. R. Underwood. Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone; from lower shelf where road climbs up and over hill, near USBM, south­east of intersection on Speck Road, Eagle Mountains, Hudspeth Co.; J. R. Underood. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, Speck Ranch Road, Eagle Mountains, Hudspeth Co.; J. R. Under­wood. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Buda Limestone; North Cedar Creek, Quit-man Mountains, Hudspeth Co.; Bill Jones Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) float from 42 ms more or less above base; D. F. Reaser. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) 40 ms more or less above base; D. F. Reaser Budaiceras e/egantior (Lasswitz) float from 30 ms more or less above base; D. F. Reaser. Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone; Pinto Canyon Area, Hud­speth Co.; D. L. Amsbury.Budaiceras a/ticarinatum, n. sp. JEFF DAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS Kent Station Limestone, uppermost; 4 kms south and 0.6 km east of Davis Mountain Filling Station, Jeff Davis Co.; Grant Moyer. Faraudiella borachoensis, n. sp Buda Limestone, lowest bed of middle mem­ber; northeast of P. Ranch house and west of Diezyocho Creek, dip slope of Espythrust, Jeff Davis Co.; Philip Braithwaite. Mariella wysogorskii (Lasswitz) Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) F. texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) upper part of middle member; PhilipBraithwaite. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone; southern Van Horn Moun­tains, Jeff Davis Co.; Page C. Twiss; Roy T. Hazzard. Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswtiz) Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) 85 Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; Diezyocho Creek, Jeff Davis Co.; PhilipBraithwaite. Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) lower bed of middle (nodular) member; Philip Braithwaite. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, 15-17 ms above the top of the Eagle Mountains Sandstone; south-cen­tral Van Horn Mountains, Jeff Davis Co.; Bob F. Perkins. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) lower part; Bob F. Perkins. Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone, massive bed below sand­stone member; north side of Cherry Draw,north of Cherry Ranch Road on KC Ranch, northeast flank of Davis Mountains, Jeff Davis Co.; Jess Brundrett. Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone; 5/6 km south of Tank no. 1, Gomez Peak Area, Jeff Davis Co.; Dennis Taylor.Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Buda Limestone; Chispa Summit, Jeff Davis Co.; John A. Wilson. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Boquillas Limestone, basal; first two draws just north of the first large draw south of the Cherry Ranch Road, just north of the east-west fence on the D. Kingston Ranch, NW corner of sec. 33, Block 57, Township 9, Texas and Pacific RR, Jeff Davis Co.; Jess Brundrett. Hypoturrilites youngi Clark Ostlingoceras brandi Young O. davisense Young Forbesiceras brundrettei (Young) Pseudouhligella elgini Young KINNEY COUNTY, TEXAS Buda Limestone; 2.4 kms north of Bracket-ville on state hwy. 674, east side of road, Kinney Co.; S. B. Hixon, Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) MCLENNAN COUNTY, TEXAS Del Rio Formation; 140 ms upstream from the Speegleville road bridge, 9 kms west of Waco, McLennan Co.; W. S. Adkins. Turri/itesbosquensis Adkins Adkinsia bosquensis (Adkins) Del Rio Formation, upper part; northern part of McLennan Co.; W. S. Adkins. Stoliczkaia crotaloides (Stoliczka) Del Rio Formation; east side of Santa Fe RR track; 7.2 kms south of McGregor,McLennan Co.;W. S. Adkins. Tetragonites brazoensis (Bose)Turrilitesbosquensis Adki ns Sciponoceras sp. cf. S. baculoides (Mantell) Otoscaphites subevolutus (Bose) Graysonites (?) wacoense (Bose) Engonoceras bravoense (Bose ) Del Rio Formation; east bank of South Bosque River, 2 miles south of South Bosque, near Bickle no. 2, well, McLennan Co; W. S. Adkins. Sciponoceras sp. cf. S. baculoides (Mantell) Scaphites bosquensis Bose otoscaphites subevolutus (Bose) Adkinsia bosquensis (Adkins) REAL COUNTY, TEXAS Buda Limestone; 4.8 kms. east of the Ed­wards-Real county line, on state highway41, borrow pit on south side of highway, 28.6 kms northeast of Rock Springs;Bob Lowe. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) 86 REEVES COUNTY, TEXAS Buda Limestone, 5.3 kms east of Davis Moun­tain Filling Station, San Martine Quad­rangle, Reeves Co.; Grant Moyer. Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) F. texana (Shattuck) Main Street Limestone, upper 1 m, below transition zone to the Grayson Formation; Calloway (Walker) Branch, 6 kms north­east of intersection of hwy 121 (Grapevine) and hwy 377 (Denton) in Halton City; J. P. Conlin. Graysonites adkinsi Young SCHLEICHER COUNTY, TEXAS Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; southeast of Junction on road to Rock Springs, Schleicher Co.; Roy T. Hazzard. Budaiceras eiegantior (Lasswitz) SUTTON COUNTY, TEXAS Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; 24 kms southeast of Sonora, Sutton Co.; Roy T. Hazzard. Budaiceras eiegantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; near Sonora, Sutton Co.; Bob Lowe. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) B. eiegantior (Lasswitz) TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS Pawpaw Formation; Sycamore Creek, south­east of Fort Worth, Tarrant Co.; W. S. Adkins. Stoliczkaia adkinsi Bose Pawpaw Formation; Glen Garden Country Club, Fort Worth, Tarrant Co.; W. S. Adkins. Stoliczkaia adkinsi Bose Main Street Limestone, upper 2 ms, Wildcat Branch, a tributary to Village Creek, 2.4 kms from the center of the business dis­trict, Tarrant County; J. P. Conlin. Graysonites wooldridgei Young. Grayson Formation; Rock Creek, near Dex­ter; Roy T. Hazzard. Graysonites fountaini Young G. adkinsi Young TERRELL COUNTY, TEXAS Buda Limestone, 1 m below top of middle (nodular) member; 14.5 kms east of San­derson, 2.7 kms west of Dryden, on north side of the Southern Pacific Railroad, hwy 90, on the slope of a low hill opposite the International Boundary Commission core house; Fred L. Stricklin. Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) F. texana (Shattuck) F. archerae, n. sp. Budaiceras eiegantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone; 4.0 kms east of Comstock on hwy 90. Budaiceras eiegantior (Lasswitz) B. hyatti (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone; 1.1 kms west of Dryden on hwy 90; R. T. Hazzard. Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) F. texana (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; about 11.5 ms above base of Buda Lime­stone; 10 kms southeast of Dryden on hwy 90; K. Young. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Sharpeiceras tlahualiloense (Kellum & Mintz) upper member; K. Young. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS Georgetown Limestone, 5 ms below top, zone of Drakeoceras drakei; Pease Park, Shoal Creek, just below 19th St., Austin; K. Young. Stoliczkaia adkinsi Bose Stoliczkaia sp. cf. S, rhamnonota (Seeley) Buda Limestone, upper member; Bear Creek, south of Manchaca; F. L. Whitney.Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) Mantelliceras cantianum Spath lower member; F. L. Whitney; Ken G. Martin. Hypophylloceras sp. cf. H. tanit (Pervinquiere) Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) F. texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) 3. hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, lower member, Gastro­chaena ruperti bed; Manchaca; F. L. Whitney. Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) F. texana (Shattuck) lower member; F. L. Whitney. Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone, lower member; Williamson Creek and Manchaca Road, F. L. Whitney;Hunter Yarborough; W. R. Muhlberger and K. Young; Ken G. Martin; and others. Hypophylloceras sp. cf. H. tanit (Pervinquiere) Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) F. texana (Shattuck) F. franciscoensis (Kellurn & Mintz) Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) B. elegantior (Lasswitz)Sharpeiceras tlahualiloense (Kellurn & Mintz) Top of lower member; F. L. Whitney; Ken G. Martin. Stoliczkaia crotaloides (Stoliczka) Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Pseudohligella sp. indet. base of upper member; W. R. Muhlberger and K. Young.Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) F. texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone; southwest Austin, near the intersection of West Loop (Loop 360) and South Lamar; Billy M. Cobble. Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone, lower member; about 9th St., Lamar Boulevard and Shoal Creek, Austin; Ken G. Martin. Bucaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone; Barton Springs, Austin. Stoliczkaia scotti Breistroffer Buda Limestone, lower member, 4.5 ms above the base; 70 ms south of the inter­section of Lamar Boulevard and Barton Springs Road, Austin; Ken G. Martin. Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) B. hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone; mouth of Barton Creek, Austin; F. L. Whitney; K. Young. Plesioturrilites brazoensis (Romer)? Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) 88 Buda Limestone; Shoal Creek, Austin; F. L. Whitney; R. T. Hill; George Stolley; Ken G. Martin; many others. Marietta wysogorskii (Lasswitz)Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) F. texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) B. hyatti (Shattuck) B. a/ticarinatum, n. sp. Mantelliceras saxbii (Sharpe) [ = Acanthoceras hop/itoides Lasswitz] M. sp. cf. M. martimpreyi (Pervinqui§re,pro parte, non Coquand) lower member; F. L. Whitney; Ken G. Martin. Puzosia sp. cf. P. crebrisulcata Kossmat Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, upper 1 m of upper mem­ber; mouth of Shoal Creek at Colorado River, Austin; Wally Shirah, Jr. MantelIiceras saxbii (Sharpe) Buda Limestone, lower member; Bth St. at Shoal Creek, Austin; F. L. Whitney. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, lower member; 19th St. at Shoal Creek, Austin; F. L. Whitney. Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) B. alticarinatum, n. sp. Buda Limestone; 24th St. and Shoal Creek, Austin; F. L. Whitney.Faraudiella franciscoensis (Kellum & Mintz) Buda Limestone; 27th St. and Shoal Creek, Austin; F. L. Whitney.Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) B. hyatti (Shattuck) B. alticarinatum, n. sp. Buda Limestone; 29th St. and Shoal Creek, Austin, F. L. Whitney. Plesioturrilites brazoensis (R6mer)? Hypophylloceras ? sp. juv. Adkinsia knikerae, n. sp. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) F. archerae, n. sp. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) lower member; F. L. Whitney Hypophylloceras sp. cf. H. tanit (Pervinqui£re) Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone; 30th St., Shoal Creek, Aus­tin; F. L. Whitney Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) B. hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone; 31st St. and Shoal Creek, Austin; F. L. Whitney. Faraudiella archerae, n, sp.Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) lower member; F. L. Whitney. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) F. franciscoensis (Kellum & Mintz) F. archerae, n. sp. Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) B. hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, at top of lower member, within one-eighth m; 32nd St. and Shoal Creek, Austin; K. Young. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone; 34th St. and Shoal Creek, Austin; F. L. Whitney. Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) 89 Buda Limestone, lower member; 38th St. and Shoal Creek, Austin; F. L. Whitney.Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone; Catamount (Hancock) Creek, Austin; F, L. Whitney.Faraudiella texana (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, lower member; about 49th St. and Shoal Creek (Fizet Dam), Austin; F. L. Whitney. P/esioturri/ites brazoensis (Romer)? Ost/ingoceras sp. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone; Shoal Creek at the Oaks, just north of the former site of the Brown Schools, Austin; F. L. Whitney.Stoliczkaia crota/oides (Stoliczka) S. scotti Breistroffer Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) F. texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) B. hyatti (Shattuck) UVALDE COUNTY, TEXAS Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; northern Uvalde Co.; R. T. Hazzard. Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) F. texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) B. hyatti (Shattuck) VAL VERDE COUNTY, TEXAS Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; 27.5 kms southeast of Pandale Store on road to Comstock; K. Young. Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) B. hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; just below U. S. Geol. Survey triangulationstation and BM (Harrison 2145), Dry Devil Quadrangle; John 0. Spice. Faraudiellaroemeri (Lasswitz) F. texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) B. hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, middle (nodular) member; J. L. Nettleton Ranch, 41.5 kms north of Comstock on the Pandale Road; R. T. Haz­zard. Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) B. hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone; Dry Devil Quadrangle;John 0. Spice.Budaiceras e/egantior (Lasswitz) Buda Limestone; near Langtry; S. B. Hixon. Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) WALKER COUNTY, TEXAS Maness Shale; depth of 3747.5 ms, Smithers no. 1, Union Producing Company; F. E. Lozo. Forbesiceras sp. cf. F. brundrettei (Young) WILLIAMSON COUNTY, TEXAS Buda Limestone; Round Rock; Taylor.Budaiceras hyatti (Shattuck) 0.6 m below top of lower member; F. L. Whitney. Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) F. texana (Shattuck) F. archerae, n. sp. 90 lower member; F. L. Whitney. Faraudiella roemeri (Lasswitz) F. texana (Shattuck) Budaiceras elegantior (Lasswitz) B. hyatti (Shattuck) Buda Limestone, float from the lower part; Hawkins Farm, 5 kms north of Round Rock; D. E. Atchison. Stoliczkaia scotti Breistroffer ZACATECAS, MEXICO "Vraconian;" small hill of the railroad be­tween Camacho and the Trinidad Mine, northeastern Zacatecas; Emil Bose (1923). Tetragonites zacatecanus Bsse Turrilites mu/tipunctatus Bsse Anisoceras camachoense Bose 91 REFERENCES ADKINS, W. S., 1920. The Weno and Pawpaw Formations of the Texas Comanchean; Univ. of Texas bull. 1856,172pp., 13figs., 11 pis. ADKINS, W. S., 1928. Handbook of Texas Cretaceous fos­sils; Univ. of Texas bull. 2838, 385 pp., 37 pis. ADKINS, W. S., 1931. Some Upper Cretaceous ammonites in western Texas; Univ. of Texas bull. 3101, pp. 35-72, figs. 7, 8, pis. 2-5. ADKINS, W. S., 1933. The Mesozoic systems in Texas; pp. 239-518, figs. 13-27, in SELLARDS, E. H., W. S. ADKINS, and F. B. PLUMMER, The geology of Texas, vol. 1, stratigraphy; Univ. of Texas bull. 3232, 1007 pp., 54 figs. ADKINS, W. S., and F. E. LOZO, 1951. Stratigraphy of the Woodbine and Eagle Ford, Waco Area, Texas; Southern Methodist Univ. Press, Fondren Sci. Ser. no. 4, pp. 101­161, 26 figs., 6 pis. ADKINS, W. S., and W. M. WINTON, 1920. Paleontologicalcorrelation of the Fredericksburg and Washita forma­tions in north Texas; the Univ. of Texas bull. 1945, 128 pp., 6 figs., 22 pis. ARCHER,KATHERINE, 1936.SomeCephalopodafrom the Buda Limestone; thesis, the Univ. of Texas at Austin,30 pp., 25 figs., 6 pis. ARKELL, W. J., 1950. A classification of the Jurassic am­monites; Jl. Paleont., vol. 24, pp. 354-364, 2 figs. ARKELL, W. J., BERNHARD KUMMEL, & C. W. WRIGHT,1957. Mesozoic Ammonoidea; pp. LBO-L490, figs. 124­558, in MOORE, R. C., Ed., Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, Part L., Mollusca 4, Cephalopoda, Ammo­ noidea; Geol. Soc. Am. and Univ. of Kansas Press. + BARRANDE, JOACHIM, 1867, Pt. 1, xxxvi 712 pp., in SystSme silurien du centre de la Boheme, Premiere Partie: Recherches v. 2, Classe des Mollusques, Ordre des 9 parts plus sup­plement (1865-1877). BAYLE, E., 1879. Fossiles principaux des Terrains; Explica­tion de la Carte G6ol. de la France, vol. 4, pt. 1 (Atlas),158 pis. BENAVIDES-CACERES, VICTOR E. f 1956. Cretaceous System in northern Peru; Am. Mus. Nat. Hist, bull., vol. 108, art. 4, pp. 355-492, 58 figs., pis. 31-66. BESAIRIE, HENRI, 1936. Fossiles de I'Albien terminal ou C6nomanien basal, in Recherches Geologiques a Madagascar, premiere suite. La Geologic du Nord-Oest; M6moires de Malgache, Fascicule 21, pp.199-200, figs. 13-14, pi. 21, figs. 14-16. BISHOP, BOBBY A., 1964. Stratigraphy and sedimentarypetrography of Sierra Picachos and vicinity, Nuevo Leon,Mexico; thesis, Univ. of Texas at Austin, 451 pp., 45 figs., 23 pis., 9 tbls. BOSC, L. A. G., 1801. [see Buffon de Deterville, 1824, Coquilles; vol. 5, 2nd ed., p. 183, pi. 42, fig. 8 (not seen)./. BOSE, EMIL, 1923a. Vestiges of an ancient continent in northeast Mexico; Am. Jl. Sci., ser 5, vol. 6, pp. 127­136, 196-214, 310-337, 4 figs. BOSE, EMIL., 1923b. Algunas faunas Cretacicas de Zaca­ tecas, Durango, y Guerrero; Inst. Geol. de Mexico, bol. 42, 219 + iv pp., 19pis. BOSE, EMIL, 1928. Cretaceous ammonites from Texas and northern Mexico; Univ. of Texas bull. 2748, pp. 143­312, pis. 1-18. BOSE, EMIL, and A. O CAVINS, 1928. The Cretaceous and Tertiary of southern Texas and northern Mexico; Univ. of Texas bull. 2748, pp. 1-142, plus index and pi. 19. BOULE, MARCELLIN, PAUL LEMOINE, and ARMAND THEVENIN, 1906. Cretaces des environs de Di6go-Suarez; Annales de vol. 1, pp. 173­196, 11 figs., 7 pis. BOULE, MARCELLIN, PAUL LEMOINE, and ARMAND THEVENIN, 1907. Cretans des environs de Diego-Suarez; Annales de Paleont., vol. 2, pp. 1-73, figs. 12-28, pis. 1-15. BREISTROFFER, MAURICE, 1936a. Les subdivisions du Vraconien dans le Sud-Est de la France; Soc. G6ol. France, bull., ser. 5, vol. 6, pp. 63-68. BREISTROFFER, MAURICE, 1936b. Sur quelques Ammo­nites rares du Vraconien de France; Compte Rendu Somm. des Stances de la Soc. G6ol. de France, fasc. 1-2, pp. 23-26. BREISTROFFER, MAURICE, 1940. Revision des ammo­nites du Vraconien de Salazac (Card) et considerations generates sur ce sous-§tage Albien; Travaux de Lab. de G6ol. de la Faculty des Sciences de I'Univ. de Grenoble,vol. 22, pp. 71-171. BREISTROFFER, MAURICE, 1947. Sur les zones d'ammo­nites dans I'Albien de France et d'Angleterre; Travaux de Lab. de G6ol. de la Faculte des Sciences de I'Univ. de Grenoble, vol. 25, pp. 18-104. BREISTROFFER, MAURICE, 1951. Sur la position sys­tematique de genre Ptychoceras d'Orb. Travaux de Lab. de G6ol. de la Faculty des Sciences de I'Univ. de Greno­ble, vol. 29, pp. 47-54. BREISTROFFER, MAURICE, 1953. Involution des Turril­ itides albiens et canomaniens; C. R. Acad. Sci., vol. 2.37, pp. 1349-1351. BREISTROFFER, MAURICE, and O. DE VILLOUTREYS,1953. Les ammonites Albiennes de Peille (Alpes-Mari­times); Travaux de Lab. de Gaol. de la Faculty des Sci­ ences de I'Univ. de Grenoble, vol. 30, pp. 69-74. BRONGNIART, A., 1822. In CUVIER, GEORGES, and A. BRONGNIART, Description gaologique des environs de Paris; new ed.: Paris, Edmund d'Ocagne, viii 428 pp., + 26 pis., 2 maps. BURGL, HANS, 1957. Biostratigrafia de la Sabana de Bogo­ta y sus alrededores; Service Geol. Nac. Colombia, 801. Geol., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 113-186, 19 pis., 1 map. CLARK, DAVID L., 1965. Heteromorph ammonoids from the Albian and Cenomanian of Texas and adjacent areas; Geol. Soc. Am., Memoir 95, 99 pp., 22 figs., 1 tbl., 24 pis. COBBAN, W. A., 1951. Scaphitoid cephalopods of the Colo­rado group; U. S. Geol. Survey, Prof. Paper 239, 42 pp.,4 figs., 21 pis., 1 insert. COLLIGNON, MAURICE, 1928, XV.-Les Caphalopodes du Canomanien pyriteux de Diago-Suarez; Annales de Paiaont., vol. 17,pp. 139-160, pis. 1-5,9 figs. COLLIGNON, MAURICE, 1931, XVI.-Le faune du Cano­manien a fossiles pyriteux du Nord de Madagascar; An­nales de Paiaont., vol. 20, pp. 43-64, 26 figs., 5 pis. COLLIGNON, MAURICE, 1932. Les Ammonites pyriteusesde I'Albien Superiaur du Mont Raynaud a Madagascar;Annales Gaol, du Service des Mines, Gouv. Ganaral de MadagascaretDap.,Fasc.2,pp. 1-36,figs.1-33,pis.1-4. COLLIGNON, MAURICE, 1933. Fossiles Canomaniens d'Antsatramahavelona (Province de Analalava, Madagas­car); Annales Gaol, du Service des Mines, Gouv. Ganaral de Madagascar et Dap., Fasc. 3, pp. 53-80, 6 figs., pis.5,6. COLLIGNON, MAURICE, 1937. Ammonites canomaniennes du Sud-Ouest de Madagascar; Annales Gaol, du Service des Mines, Gouv. Ganaral de Madagascar et Dap., Fasc. 8, pp. 32-72, 11 pis. COLLIGNON, MAURICE, 1939. Fossiles canomaniens et turoniens du Menabe; Annales Gaol, du Service des Mines, Gouv. Ganaral de Madagascar et Dap., Fasc. 10 pp. 61-106, figs. A-F, pis. 1-11. COLLIGNON, MAURICE, 1949. Faune naocomienne des couches a Criocares de Belohasifaka, Cercle de Sitam­piky, Madagascar; Annales de Gaol., Service des Mines, Gouv. Ganaral de Madagascar et Dap., Fasc. 15, pp. 53­83, pis. 8-13. COLLIGNON, MAURICE, 1951. L'Albien superior d'An­dranofotsy (Cercle de Manja) avec une notice stratigraph­ique par P. Hirtz; Annales G6ol. du Service des Mines, Gouv. G6n6ral de Madagascar et D6p., Ease. 19, pp. 1-40,16 figs. pis. 1-7. COLLIGNON, MAURICE, 1955. Ammonites N6ocr6tac§es du Menabe (Madagascar), 11. Les Pachydiscidae; An­nales Gaol. du Service des Mines, Haut Comm, de Mada­gascar et Dap., Fasc. 21,98 pp., 21 figs., 28 pis. COLLIGNON, MAURICE, 1956. Ammonites N6ocr6tac6es du Menabe (Madagascar), IV. Les Phylloceratidae, V. Les Gaudryceratidae, VI. Les Tetragonitidae; Annales Gaol. du Service des Mines, Haut. Comm, de Madagascar et Dap., Fasc. 23, 106 pp., 12 figs., 11 pis. COLLIGNON, MAURICE, 1963. Atlas des fossiles caractdr­istiques de Madagascar (Ammonites). Fascicle X (Albien); Tananarive, Service Gaologique, 184 pp., pis. 241-317. COLLIGNON, MAURICE, 1964. Atlas des fossiles caractar­istiques de Madagascar (Ammonites). Fascicule XI (Canomanien); Tananarive, Service Gaol., 152 pp., pis.318-375. COQUAND, H., 1852. Notice sur les richesses paiaontolo­giques de la province de Constantine; Jl. de Conchylio­ logie, vol. 3, pp. 418-438, 2 pis. COQUAND, H., 1854. Description gaologique de la Province de Constantine; Soc. Gaol, de France, Mam., 2nd ser., vol. 5, pt. 1, pp., 1-155,pis. 1-5. COQUAND, H., 1862. Gaologie et paiaontologie de la ragion sud de la Province de Constantine; Marseille, Gaol. Pal. S. Const., 341 pp., 35 pis. [not seen]. COQUAND, H , 1880. Etudes suppiamentaires sur la paiaon­tologie algarienne; Bull. Acad. Hippone, no. 15, 451 pp.,5 pis. CRAGIN, F. W., 1893. A contribution to the Invertebrate Paleontology of the Texas Cretaceous; Geol. Survey of Texas, 4th ann. rpt., pp. i-iv 139-294, pis. 24-46. + DIENER, C., 1925. Ammonoidea Neocretacea; Fossillum Catalogus, 1. Animalia, pt. 29, 244 pp. DOUVILLE, H., 1890. Sur la classification des Ceratites de la Craie; Soc. Gaol. France, bull., ser. 3, vol. 18, pp.275-292. DRUSHCHISH, V. V., 1953. [Daten zur Ontogenie der neuen Ammonitengattung Euphylloceras] Vestn. Mosk. Univ., vol. 9, p. 141 [not seen]. DUBOURDIEU, G., 1953. Ammonites nouvelles des Monts du Meliague; Serv. Carte Gaol. Algar., Paiaont., no. 16, 76 pp., 20 figs., 4 pis. [with M. BREISTROFFER and I. G. E. MAHMOUD]. DUBOURDIEU, G., 1956. Etude Gaologique de la Ragionde I'Ouenza (Confins Algaro-Tunisiens); Service Carte Gaol, de I'Algarie, n. s., bull. 10, 659 pp., 89 figs., 17 tbls. 22 pis. GROSSOUVRE, A. De, 1894. Recherches sur la Craie Su­parieure; Mamoires pour servir a ('explication de Carte Gaologique detailiae de la France, Texte, 264 pp., 89 figs., atlas, 39 pis. 94 HAUG, EMILE, 1898. Rectification de nomenclature; Rev. Critique de Pal6ozoologie, vol. 2, no. 2, p. 78. HAUER, F. VON, 1866. Neue Cephalopoden aus den Gos­augebilden der Alpen; Sitz-Ber, K. Akad. Wiss., Wien, vol. 44, pp. 403-422, 1 pi. [not seen]. HAZZARD, ROY T, 1959. The age of the yellowish marl above the Georgetown in northwestern Val Verde Countyand southwestern Crockett County, a discussion; in Geol­ ogy of the Val Verde Basin and Field Trip Guidebook,West Texas Geol. Soc., pp. 60-63, figs. A, B, and one un­numbered figure. HEBERT, M., and E. C. P. A. MUN IER-CHALMAS, 1875. Fossiles du Bassin d'Uchaux, in HEBERT, M. A., a la description du Terrain Cr6tacee en France; Annales des Sciences vol. 6, pp. 113-132, pis. 4, 5. HEMING, FRANCES, Ed., 1957. Copenhagen decisions on zoological nomenclature; additions to, and modifications of, the R6gles internationales de la nomenclature zoolo­gique; London, International Trust for Zoological Nomen­clature, 135 pp. HERNDON, J. H., 1891. Plea for the life of the Geologicaland Mineralogical Survey of Texas, and review of the charges preferred against Prof. E. T. Dumble, State Geolo­gist, for "Incompetency, plagiarism, and maladministra­tion in office," and the sham trial thereof; privatelyprinted, Austin, Texas, 40 pp. HILL, ROBERT T., 1894. Geology of parts of Texas, Indian Territory, and Arkansas adjacent to the Red River; Geol. Soc. Am., bull., vol. 5, pp. 297-338, pis. 12, 13. HILL, ROBERT T., 1901. Geography and geology of the Black and Grand Prairies, Texas; U, S. Geol. Survey Ann. Rpt., (for 1899-1900), part VII, 666 pp., 80 figs., 71 pis. HYATT, ALPHEUS, 1884. Genera of fossil cephalopods;Boston Soc, Nat. Hist., vol. 22, pp. 253-338. HYATT, ALPHEUS, 1900. Class 5, Cephalopoda; pp. 502­604, figs. 1049-1259, in ZITTEL, KARL A. VON, Text­book of Paleontology; London and New York. HYATT, ALPHEUS, 1903. Pseudoceratites of the Creta­ceous; ed. by T. W. Stanton, U. S. Geol. Survey Mon. 44, 351 pp., 47 pis. JACOB, CHARLES, 1908. Etude sur quelques ammonites du Cr6tac6e moyen; Soc. G6ol. France, M6m., Paleont., vol. 15, no. 38, 64 pp., 9 pis. JONES, THEODORE S., 1938. Geology of Sierra de la Pena and paleontology of the Indidura Formation, Coa­huila, Mexico; Geol. Soc. Am., bull., vol. 49, pp. 69­ISO, 13 pis., 4 figs. JUKES-BROWNE, A. J., 1875. On the relations of the Cam bridge Gault and Greensand; Quart. Jl. Geol. Soc., vol. 31 pp. 256-316, pis. 14, 15. JUKES-BROWNE, A. J., 1877. Supplementary notes on the fauna of the Cambridge Greensand; Quart. Jl. Geol. Soc., vol. 33, pp. 485-504, pi. 21. KELLUM, LEWIS B 1956. Cretaceous invertebrates of the Aurora Limestone;, Papers of the Mich. Acad. Sci. Arts, and Letters, vol. 41, pp. 205-216, 1 fig., 4 tbls., 7 pis. KELLUM, LEWIS 8., and LEIGH W. MINTZ, 1962. Ceno­manian ammonites from the Sierra de Tlahualilo, Coa­huila, Mexico; Contr., Mus. Paleo., Univ. of Mich., vol. 13, no. 10, pp. 267-287, 1 fig., 8 pis. KENNEDY, W. J„ and J. M. HANCOCK, 1971. Mantelli­ ceras saxbii, and the horizon of the martimpreyi zone in the Cenomanianof England; Palaeontology,vol. 14,pt. 3, pp. 437-454, 2 figs., pis. 79-82. KOSSMAT, FRANZ, 1895-1898. Untersuchungen über die sudindische Kreideformation; Beitrage zur Palaontologieund Geologie Osterreich-Ungarnsund des Orients, Band 9, (1895) and Band 12 (1898), pp. 97-203 (Ist part) with plates 1-11; pp. 1-46 (2nd part) with plates 1-8 and 4 text figs.; and pp. 89-152 (3rd part) with plates 14-19. KUMMEL, BERNHARD, 1948. Environmental significance of dwarfed cephalopods; Jl. Sedimentary Petrology, vol. 18, pp. 61-64. - LAMARCK, J. 8., 1801. Syst§me des animaux sans vertbr6s; Paris, the author, 432, pp. LASSWITZ, RUDOLF, 1904. Die Kreide-Ammoniten von Texas; Geol. und Palaeont., Abh., N. F., Band 6, Heft 4, pp. 223-259, 8 figs., 8 pis. LOZO, FRANK E., 1951. Stratigtaphic notes on the Maness (Comanche Cretaceous) shale; in Woodbine and Adjacent Strata; Southern Methodist Univ. Press, Fondren Sci. ser. no. 4, pp. 65-91,8 figs., 2 pis. MANTELL, G. A., 1822. The fossils of the South Downs; London, 320 pp., 43 pis. MARTIN, KEN J., 1961.Washita Groupstratigraphy,south­central Texas; thesis. The Univ. of Texas at Austin,82 pp., 26 figs. MARTIN, KEN J., 1967. Stratigraphy of the Buda Lime­stone, south-central Texas; pp. 287-299, 8 figs., in HEN­DRICKS, LEO, Ed., Comanchean (Lower Cretaceous) stratigraphy and paleontology of Texas; Midland, Texas, Permian Basin Section, Soc. Econ. Paleont. and Mineralo­gists, Publ. 67-8, 410 pp., il. MATSUMOTO, TATSURO, 1938. Zelandites, a genus of Cretaceous ammonites; Contr. to Cretaceous Paleo. of Japan. IV; Jap. Jl. Geol. and Geog., vol. 15, pp. 137-148, 2 figs., 1 pi. MATSUMOTO, TATSURO, 1942a. A note on the Japanese Cretaceous Phylloceratidae; Proc. Imp. Acad. Tokyo, vol. 18, pp. 674-676. 95 MATSUMOTO, TATSURO, 1942b. A note on the Japaneseammonites belonging to the subfamily Desmoceratinae; Imp. Acad. Tokyo, proc.,vol. 18, pp. 24-29. MATSUMOTO, TATSURO, 1959a. Zonation of the UpperCretaceous in Japan; Memoirs of the Faculty of Science, Kyushu Univ., ser. D, Geol., vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 55-92, pis. 6-11. MATSUMOTO, TATSURO, 1959b. Upper Cretaceous ammo­nites of California, part II; Memoirs of the Faculty of Science, Kyushu Univ., Ser. D, Geol., Spec. Vol. I, 172 pp., 80 figs., 41 pis. MATSUMOTO, TATSURO, 1960. On some type ammonites from the Gulf Coast Cretaceous; Sci. Rpts. of the Fac­ulty of Sci., Kyushu Univ., Geol., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 36­ 49, 10 figs. MATSUMOTO, TATSURO, and AKITOSHI INOMA, 1975. Mid-Cretaceous ammonites from the Shumarinai-Soeushi­nai Area, Hokkaido: Part 1. Kyushu Univ., Memoirs of the Faculty of Sci., ser. D, Geology, vol. 23, no. 2, pp.263-293, text-figs. 1-16, pis. 38-42. MATSUMOTO, TATSURO, M. V. A. SASTRY, and S. S. SARKAR, 1966. Notes on some Cretaceous ammonites from southern India; Memoirs of the Faculty of Sci., Kyushu Univ., Ser. D, Geol., vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 295-309,7 figs., pis. 32-33. MEEK, F. 8., 1876. A report on the invertebrate Cretaceous and Tertiary fossils of the upper Missouri Country; in MEEK, F. 8., and F. V. Hayden, U. S. Geol. Geog.Survey Terr., Mon., vol. 9, Ixiv + 629 pp., 44 pis. MOYER, GRANT, 1952. Cretaceous geology of the San Martine Quadrangle, Reeves and Culberson Counties,Texas; thesis, The Univ. of Texas at Austin, 73 pp.,14 figs., 2 pis. MURPHY, MICHAEL A., and PETER U. RODDA, 1959. New ammonites from the Albian of northern California;Jl. Paleont., vol. 33, pp. 103-105, 5 text figs., pi. 20. NEUMAYR, M., 1875. Ammoniten der Kreide und die Sys­matik der Ammonitiden; Zeitschrift der deutschen geo­ logischen Gesellschraft, vol. 27, pp. 854-942. NOWAK, J., 1916. Zur Bedeutung von Scaphites fur die bliederung der Oberkreide; Verh. K. K. Geol. Reichsanst., Wien, no. 3, pp. 55-67 [not seen]. D'ORBIGNY, ALCIDE, 1840-41. Paleontologie Frangaise;Description des Mollusques et Rayonnes Fossiles, Ter­rains Cretans, Tome Premier, Cephalopodes; Librairie Victor Masson, Paris, 662 pp, (text), and 148 pis. (Atlas). PALMER, R. H., 1928. The rudistids of southern Mexico; Calif. Acad. Sci. Occ. Papers no. 14, 137 pp., 8 figs., 18 pis. PAQUIER, L. V., 1900. Recherches dans le Diois et les Baronnies orientales; Theses presentees a la Fac. des Sciences de Paris; Grenoble, 402 pp., il. PARKINSON, J., 1811. The organic remains of a former world; vol. 3, xvi + 479 pp., 22 pis. PARONA, C. F., and GUIDO BONARELLI, Fossili Albiana d'Escragnolles del Nizzardo e della Liguria occidentale; Palaeontogr. Italica, vol. 2 (for 1896), pp. 53-112, pis 10-14. PERKINS, 808 F., 1960. Biostratigraphic studies in the Comanche (Cretaceous) Series of northern Mexico and Texas; Geol. Soc. Am., Mem. 83, 138 pp., 26 figs., 34 pis., 2 tbls. PERKINS, 808 F., and C. C. ALBRITTEN, JR., 1955. The Washita Group in the valley of the Trinity River, Texas; Fondren Science Ser. 5, Southern Methodist Univ. Press, Dallas, 27 pp., 7 figs., 5 pis., map. PERVINQUIERE, L„ 1907. Etudes de Paleontologie Tunisi­enne, 1. des terrains Secondaires; Carte G6ologique de la Tunisie, Director G6n6rale des Travaux + Publics., Regence de Tunis, pp. v 437, text figs. 158, pis. 1-27. PERVINQUIERE, L., 1910. Sur quelques ammonites du Cr6tac 6 tologie,Mem.42,pp. 1-86,38textfigs.,16pis. PICTET, F.-J., and G. CAMPICHE, 1858-1860. Description des fossiles, Seconde Partie, pp. 29-382, 55 pis., in PIC­TET, F.-J., G. CAMPICHE, and G. DE TRIBOLET, De­scription des fossiles du Terrain Cretace des environs de Sainte-Croix; Materiaux pour la Paleontologie Suisse, Seconde Serie; Kessman Georg, Geneve; pp. 21-122, - pis. 1-13 (1858); pp. 123-229, pis. 14-29 (1859); pp. 230-382, pis. 30-43 (1860). PORTHAULT, BERNARD, GERARD THOMEL, and OLIV­IER DE VILLOUTREYS, 1967. Etude biostratigraphiquedu Cenomanien du bassin superieur de I'Esteron (Alpes- Maritimes); Le probleme de la limite Cenomanien-Tu­ronien dans le Sud-Est de la France; Soc. Geol. de France, 7e S6r., vol. 7, pp. 423-439, 2 tbls., pis. 8-11. POWELL, J. DAN, 1963. Canomanian-Turonian (Cretaceous) ammonites from Trans-Pecos Texas and northeastern Chihuahua, Mexico; J. Paleont., vol. 37, pp. 309-322,3 text figs., pis. 31-34. REASER, D. F., 1974. Geology of Cieneguilla Area, Chi­ huahua and Texas; thesis. The Univ. of Texas at Austin, xxii + 340 pp., 26 figs., 8 pis. 10 tbls. REESIDE, JOHN 8., JR., 1927. The Scaphites, an UpperCretaceous ammonite group; U. S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 150, pp. 21-40, pis. 9-11. REYMENT, R. A., 1970. Vertically imbedded caphalopodshells; some factors in the distribution of fossil cephalo­pods 2: Palaeogeogr. Palaeoclimatol. Palaeoecol., v. 7, pp. 103-111, il. ROMAN, FREDERIC, 1938. Les ammonites Jurassiques etcrgtacees, essai de G£n6ra; Masson et Cie., Ed., Paris 554 pp., 496 figs., 53 pis. 96 ROMER, FERDINAND, 1849, Texas, with particular ref-to German immigration and the physical appear­ance of the country; translated by Oswald Mueller; Stan­ erence + dard Printing, San Antonio, 1935 (tr.), xii 301 pp. ROMER, FERDINAND, 1852. Die Kreidebildungen von Texas;AdolphMarcus,Bonn, 100pp.,10pis. ROMER, FERDINAND, 1888. Ueber eine durch die Haufig­keit Hippuritenartiger Chamiden ausgezeichnete Fauna der oberturonen Kreide von Texas; Palaeont. Abh., Heft 4, pp. 281-296, pis. 31-33. ROSE, PETER R., 1972. Edwards Group, surface and sub­ surface, central Texas; Univ. of Texas at Austin, Bur. of Econ. Geol., Report of Invest. 74, 198 pp., 35 figs., 19 pis., 2 tbls. SALFELD, H., 1920. Über die Ausgestaltung der Lobenlinie bei Jura und Kreideammonoideen; Nachr. k. Ges. Wiss. Gottingen (Math. Phys. Kl.), vol. 3, pp. 449-467, 3 pis. [not seen]. SALFELD, H., 1924. Die Bedeutung der Konservativstamme fur die Stammesentwicklung der Ammonoideen; Leipzig, 16 pp., 16 pis. SCHENCK, EDWARD T., and JOHN H. McMASTERS, 1936. Procedure in taxonomy; Stanford Univ. Press, 72 pp. SCHLUTER, CLEMENS, 1871-1876. Cephalopoden der obern Deutschen Kreide; Theodor Fischer, Cassel, 263 pp., 55 pis.; pp. 1-24, pis. 1-8 (1871); pp. 25-120, pis. 9-35 (1872); pp. 121-263, pis. 36-55 (1876). SCHOBEL, JURGEN, 1975. Ammoniten der Familie Vasco­ceratidae aus dem Unteren UnterTuron des Damergou­gebietes, Republique du Niger; Publications from the Palaeont. Inst., Univ. of Uppsala, spec. vol. 3, 135 pp., 17 figs., 6 pis. SCOTT, GAYLE, 1926. Etudes stratigraphiques et logiques sur les terrains Cretans du Texas; These presen­tee a la Faculte des Sciences de Grenoble, Allier Pere et Fils, Imprimeurs de I'Universite, 218 pp., 3 pis. SEELEY, H. G., 1865. On ammonites of the Cambridge Greensand in the Woodwardian Museum; Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., vol. 16, pp. 225-247, pis. 10-11. SHARPE, DANIEL, 1853-1857. Description of the fossil remains of Mollusca found in the Chalk of England; Palaeontographical Soc., Pt. I, pp. 1-26, pis. 1-10, vol. 7 (1853); Pt. 11, pp. 27-35, pis. 11-16, vol. 8 (1854); Pt. 111, pp. 36-68, pis. 17-27, vol. 9 (1857) SHATTUCK, G. 8., 1903. The Mollusca of the Buda Lime­stone; U. S. Geol. Survey bull. 205, pp. 1-36, pis. 1-25. SHIMIZU, S., 1934. Ammoniten; in SHIMIZU and OBATA, Cephalopoda, in IWANAMI (Vorlesungen der Geol. und Palaeont.), 137 pp. [not seen]. SHIMIZU, S., 1935. The Upper Cretaceous cephalopodsof Japan; Jl, Shanghai Inst., vol. 2, sect. 1, pp. 159-226, •f-[not seen] . SOWERBY, J., and J. DE C. SOWERBY, 1812-46. The Min­eral Conchology of Great Britain; 7 vols., pis. 1-383 (1812-22) by J. Sowerby; pis 381-648 (1823-1846) by J. de C. Sowerby. SPATH, L. F., 1921a. On Cretaceous cephalopoda from Zululand; Anns. South African Mus., vol. 12, pp. 217­321, pis. 19-26. SPATH L F., 1921b. On Upper Cretaceous cephalopodafrom Pondoland; Anns. Durban Mus., vol. 3 (2), pp. 39-56, pis. 6-7. SPATH, L. F., 1922. On the Senonian ammonite fauna of Pondoland; Roy. Soc. So. Africa, tr., vol. 10, pp. 113­147, pis. 5-9. SPATH, L. F., 1923a. A monograph of the Ammonoidea of the Gault; pt. 1; Palaeontographical Soc., vol. 75, pp. 1-72,text figs. 1-14,pis. 1-4. SPATH, L. F., 1923b. On the ammonite horizons of the Gault and contiguous deposits; Mem. Geol. Surv., Summ. of progress for 1922,app. 2, pp. 139-149. SPATH, L. F., 1925. On Upper Albian Ammonoidea from Portuguese East Africa, with an appendix on UpperCretaceous ammonites from Maputoland; Annals. Trans­vaal Mus.,vol. 11,pp. 179-200,pis, 28-37. SPATH, L. F., 1926a. On the zones of the Cenomanian and the uppermost Albian; Pr. Geol. Assoc., vol. 37, pp. 420-432, 1 tbl. SPATH, 1926b. On new ammonites from the English Chalk; Geol. Mag., vol. 63, pp. 77-83, tbl. SPATH, L. F., 1931. A monograph of the Ammonoidea of the Gault, pt. 8; Palaeontographical Soc., vol. 83, pp. 313-378, text figs. 103-124, pis. 31-36. SPATH, L. F., 1933. Revision of the Jurassic cephalopod fauna of Kachh (Kutch). Part VI; India Geol. Surv. Mem., Paiaeontologia Indica, n. s., vol. 9, Mem. 2, pp. viii + 659­945, pis. 125-130. SPATH, L. F., 1937a. A monograph of the Ammonoidea of the Gault, pt. 12; Palaeontographical Soc., vol. 90, pp. 497-540, text figs. 174-190, pis. 57-58. SPATH, L. F., 1937b. The nomenclature of some lower Chalk ammonites; Geol. Mag., vol. 74, pp. 277-281, 1 tbl. SPATH, L. F., 1941. On the boundary between the Upper and Lower Cretaceous; Geol. Mag., vol. 78, pp. 309­ 315. SPATH, L. F., 1943. A monograph of the Ammonoidea of the Gault, vol. 2, pt. 16; Palaeontographical Soc., x + 721­787 pp. 97 STANTON, T. W., 1895. Contributions to the Cretaceous palaeontology of the Pacific Coast. The fauna of the Knoxville Beds; U. S. Geol. Surv. bull. 133, 132 pp.,10pis. STEPHENSON, L. W., 1944. Fossils from limestone of Buda age in Denton County, Texas; Am. Assoc. Petroleum Geol., bull., vol. 28, pp. 1538-1541. STOLICZKA, FERDINAND, 1863-65. Order Tetra-branchi­ata (or Tentaculifera). Family Ammonitidae; pp. 41­216, pis. 26-94, in BLANFORD, HENRY F„ and FERDI­NAND STOLICZKA, The fossil Cephalopoda of the Cre­taceous rocks of southern India; Palaeontologia Indica. Memoirs of the Geol. Survey of India, 216 + xii pp., 94 pis. (pp. 41-56, pis. 26-31, 1863; pp. 57-106, pis. 32-54,1864;pp. 107-216,pis. 55-94, 1865). STOLL, N. R., et al., 1961. International code of zoological nomenclature, adopted by the XV International Con­gress of Zoology; London, Internat. Trust for ZoologicalNomenclature, 175 pp. STOYANOW, ALEXANDER, 1949. Lower Cretaceous stratigraphy in southeastern Arizona; Geol. Soc. Am., Mem. 38, 169 pp., 27 pis., 7 tbls. TAFF, J. A., and S. LEVERETT, 1893. Report on the Cre­taceous area north of the Colorado River; Texas Geol. Surv. An. Rpt., vol. 4, pt. 1, pp. 293-354, il. TATUM, J. L., 1931. General geology of northeast Mexico; Am. Assoc. Petrol. Geol., bull., vol. 15, pp. 867-893, 1 fig., 1 tbl. TUCKER, DELOS R., 1962. Subsurface Lower Cretaceous stratigraphy, central Texas; pp. 177-216, 20 figs., in STAPP, W. L., Ed. Contributions to the geology of south Texas; So. Tex. Geol. Soc. (spec, publ.), San Antonio. WHITNEY, F. L., 1911. Fauna of the Buda Limestone; Univ.Texasbull. 184(Sci. Ser. 18),57pp.,13pis. WHITNEY, F. L., 1913. The Fauna of the Buda Limestone; Tex. Acad. Sci., tr., vol. 12, pt. 1, 54 pp. [republicationof Whitney, 1911]. WHITNEY, F. L., 1916. The Echinoidea of the Buda Lime­stone; Bull. Am. Paleontology, vol. 5, no. 26, pp. 85­120, 9 pis. WHITNEY, F. L., 1928. Bibliography and index of North American Mesozoic Invertebrata; Bull. Am. Paleontology,vol. 12, no. 48, 448 pp. WIEDMANN, JOST, 1962a. Die systematische Stellung von Hypophylloceras Salfeld; N. Jb. Geol. Palaont. Abh., vol. 115, pp. 243-262, figs. 2-4, pi. 16, 1 tbl. WIEDMANN, JOST, 1962b. Ammoniten aus der Vascogo­tischen Kreide (Nordspanien), I. Phylloceratina, Lyto­ceratina; Palaeontographica, Band 118, Abt. A. pp. 119­237, 58 text figs. pis. 8-14, WIEDMANN, JOST, 1965. Origin, limits, and systematic position of Scaphites; Palaeontology, vol. 8, pp. 397­453, 16 figs. pis. 53-60. WINTER, JAN, 1961. Stratigraphy of the Lower Cretaceous (subsurface) of South Texas; thesis, Univ. of Texas at Austin, 135 pp., 21 figs., 2 tbls. WINTON, W. M„ and GAYLE SCOTT, 1922. The geology of Johnson County; Univ. of Texas bull. 2229, 68 pp., 4 figs., 4 pis., map. WRIGHT, C. W., 1952. A classification of the Cretaceous ammonites; Jl. Paleont., vol. 26, pp. 213-222. WRIGHT, C. W., 1956. Notes on Cretaceous ammonites.—lll. Utaturiceras, gen. Nov., and the Metococeratinae; Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., ser 12, vol. 9, pp. 391-393. WRIGHT, C. W., 1957. Some Cretaceous ammonites from New Zealand; Roy. Soc. New Zealand, trans., vol. 84, pp. 805-809, pis. 54-55. WRIGHT, C.W„andW.J.KENNEDY, 1978.Theammonite Stoliczkaia from the Cenomanian of England and nor­thern France: Palaeontology, v. 21, pp. 393-409, 4 figs., pis. 36-39. WRIGHT, C. W., and E. V. WRIGHT, 1951. A survey of the fossil CephalopodaoftheChalkofGreatBritain; Palaeon­tographical Soc., vol. 104, 40 pp. YABE, H., 1902. Notes on three upper Cretaceous ammo­nites from Japan, outside Hokkaido; Jl. Geol. Soc. Japan, vol. 9, pp. 1-7, tbl. 1. YOUNG, KEITH, 1958a. Graysonites, a Cretaceous ammo­nite in Texas; Jl. Paleont., vol. 32, pp. 171-182, text figs. 1-2, pis. 27-29. YOUNG, KEITH, 1958b. Cenomanian (Cretaceous) ammo­nites from Trans-Pecos Texas; Jl. Paleont., vol. 32, pp. 286-294, 2 text figs., pis. 39-40. YOUNG, KEITH, 1959a. Index fossils of the Trans-Pecos Area; pp. 79-84, 4 pis., in GREENWOOD, EUGENE, Ed., Geology of the Val Verde Basin and Field Trip Guide­book; West Tex. Geol. Soc., Midland, Texas, 118 pp., il. YOUNG, KEITH, 1959b. Techniques of mollusc zonation in Texas Cretaceous; Am. Jl. Sci., vol. 257, pp. 752­769, 8 figs. YOUNG, KEITH, 1960. Index fossils of the Trans-Pecos Area; pp. 42-47, 4 pis., in VIEAUX, et. al., Eds., Cre­taceous Chittim Arch to Pecos River; Corpus Christi Geol. Soc., guidebook, 47 pp., il. [republication of Young, 1959 a ]. YOUNG, KEITH, 1966. Texas Mosjisovicziinae (Ammo­noidea) and the zonation of the Fredericksburg; Geol. Soc. Am., Mem. 100, 225 pp., 38 pis., 21 figs., 5 tbls. 98 YOUNG, KEITH, 1967a. Comanche Series (Cretaceous), south central Texas; pp. 9-29, 7 tbls., in HENDRICKS, LEO, Ed., Comanchean (Lower Cretaceous) stratigraphy and paleontology of Texas; Permian Basin Section, Soc. Econ. Paleo. and Mineral., publ. 67-8, 410 pp., il. YOUNG, KEITH, 1967b. Ammonite zonations, Texas Co­manchean (Lower Cretaceous); pp. 65-70, 8 tbls. in HENDRICKS, LEO, Ed., Comanchean (Lower Cre­taceous) stratigraphy and paleontology of Texas; Permian Basin Section, Soc. Econ. Paleo. & Mineralogists, 410 pp., il. YOUNG, KEITH, 1972. Cretaceous paleogeography; implica­tions of endemic ammonite faunas; Univ. of Texas at Austin, Bur. Econ. Geol. Geo-circ. 72-2, 13 pp., 4 figs., 3 tbls. YOUNG, KEITH, 1974. Lower Albian and Aptian (Creta­ceous) ammonites of Texas; Geoscience and Man, vol. 8, pp. 175-228, 16 pis., 31 text figs. YOUNG, KEITH, and J. DAN POWELL, 1978 [in press). Late Albian-Turonian correlations in Texas and Mexico. Anns. Mus, Nat. Hist., Nice, France. ZITTEL, KARLS. VON, 1884. Handbuch der Palaeontolo­gie, vol. 1, Abt. 2, Lief. 111, Cephalopoda, pp. 329-522, figs. 467-715. Von R. Oldenburg, Munich and Leipzig. ZITTEL, KARL S. VON, 1895. Grundzuge de Palaeontolo­gie, (Palaezoologie); Munich, and Leipzig, viii + 972 pp. 99 TEXAS MEMORIAL MUSEUM PUBLICATIONS Publications include the Bulletin series, The Pearce-Sellards Series, Notes, Miscellaneous Papers, and Information Circulars. All are issued at irregular intervals, as need arises and as suitable manuscripts become available. A list will be sent upon request. Correspondence concerning purchase or exchange of publications should be addressed to the Editor of Publications. TEXAS MEMORIAL MUSEUM 2400TRINITY STREET AUSTIN, TEXAS 78705 (512) 471-1604 Dr. William G. Reeder, Director