~logy. - The DistTibution and Evolution of the Larger Foraminifera in the Tertiary Sediments. By Prof. H. GERTH. (Communicated by Prof. H. A. BROUWER.)

(Comm'lnicated at I!b.e meetin<l of March 30. 1935.\

In his recently published book (1) "Tertiary Faunas, a Text~Book for Oilfield Palaeontologists and Students of Geology, Vol. 11. The Sequence of Tertiary Faunas", A. MORLEY DAVIES gives us an excellent survey of the tertiary faUIÏÇls and their development in the various areas.

More in particular he draws the attention to the Mollusca, which are represented with such an exceedingly great variety in tertiary sediments. But healso points out the difficulties attendant on drawing age para1lels especially of the Mollusca faunas of distant areas because they differ so much from each other.

Already the older tertiary faunas on either side theAtlantic Ocean have only very few species in common. The larger Foraminifera on the other hand appear to have many forms which are widely spread. Sometimes it also seems as if in widely distant areas a certain grade of develop~ ment of the genera has been reached approximately at the same time. Prom this appears that better than the Mollusca the larger Foraminifera all ow of acomparison and age classification of tertiary sediments of distant areas.

DAVIES is also weIl aware of the importance -of the larger Foraminifera for the stratigraphy of the tertiary but the information he gives reg ar ding their occurrence in the various subdepartments is by no means exhaustive and even misguiding especially as far as the Indian Archipelago is con~ cerned. On page 107 of his above mentioned book we read for instance: "In the East Indies generally the Middle Eocene seems to be wanting or represented by coal bearing sandstones or conglomeratie beds" and on page 120: "Although earlier Eocene faunas areknown from Borneo, nothing prior to Upper Eocene has yet been fully described in Java or Celebes'" whilst as early as 1896 middle eocene nummulite limestone of Java was described in detail by VERBEEK (2), and of late years the Geological Department in Java, the present author and others have given in various publications an almost complete development of the older tertiary in this island' (3-8)

On the annexed table we give once more the classification of the tertiary in Java, published by us already before. lt is established in the first place on the occurrence of the various genera of larger Foraminifera

456

but for the neogene it also avails itself of the age determination of the Mollusca faunas by MARTIN according to the percentage of living species. The pliocene has been left out of consideration, because th ere, also in the East Indies. larger Foraminifera are not found any more. On the table three other standard profil es. all within reach of the Tethys. which in the older tertiary still formed an uninterrupted separation between the conti~ nents of the Northern and Southern hemisphere. have been compared with the tertiary profile of Java. This sea communication was for the larger Fora~ minifera of the greatest importance. as we shall see. In 1924 VAUGHAN (9) has compared the occurrence of the larger Foraminifera in the West Indies with that in Europe but sin ce that time many new data have become known so that a comparison extended to the East Indies and therefore to the whole area of their distribution seems important. You may be of opinion, however. that such a comparing study is altogether impossible or rather not yet possible. in view of the necessity of paralleling the ages in widely distant regions. and that therefore we ought to restrict ourselves to an indication of the subdivisions of the tertiary in the various districts by local nam es or letters (10). But I believe that we should try as best as we can to classify also the tertiary sediments in outlying areas in the system of subdivisions. designed for Europe. otherwise such comprehensive and comparative studies as those of DAVIES are very much impeded. It would seem to me that for the above mentioned area paral~ lelism of the main subdivisions of the older tertiary based on the evolution of the Foraminifera is very weIl possible; the more so if we can in some cases check them by means of Mollusca faunas and other stratigraphic data. For the newer tertiary circumstances are more difficult. because there the larger Foraminifera become fairly scarce in some areas or are failing altogether. For this reason I have restricted myself here to group~ ing the various strata into the more general divisions: lower. middle and upper miocene.

The profile of J a v a is first compared with the development of the tertiary in the W. of B rit i s h In dia. By the investigations of NUTTAL (11). and DAVIES (12) we are equally weIl informed about the Foraminifera~fauna of the eocene sediments as in J a v a. The Foraminifera faunas of the oligocene and the miocene on the contrary are still very incompletely known. For Europe I have chosen the standard profile of the environs of Biarritz in Southern France, which has become known by the excellent investigations of DOUVILLÉ (13) and BOUSSAC (14). The sequence of the Foraminifera in this profile is corroborated by the observations of MENGAUD (15) on the Cantabrian coast, whilst the tertiary sediments in Northern Italy display án identical development of the larger Foraminifera. So there is every reason to consider the profile of Biarritz as a kind of standard profile for Southern Europe. and discoveries deviating therefrom as exceptions for which a special explanation should be found. According to me this holds good also for theForaminifera fauna of Tizi Renif in Algeria recently

457

described by FLANDRIN (16). I think it excluded that we should have to do there with an original population. but rather with a washed together fauna of which the largest quantity of species were derived from other beds. Otherwise the combined occurrence of Camerina lucasi. incrassata and fichteli. of Assilina. Discocyclina. Asterocyclina. Eulepidina and Nephrolepidina in one stratum could not possibly be accounted for. because here is question of forms. which we Eind spread over middle and upper eocene in numerous more complete profiles of the medi~ terranean area. as also over lower and upper oligocene. The Fora~

minifera are found in a limy microbreccia in a marly complex transgressing the substratum. and FLANDRIN himself must admit that all shells have been subject to great corrosion. He was also struck by the fact that all · species are represented only by comparatively sm all individuals. So of the middle eocene Nummulites and of the Assilinas only the small megalo~ spheric forms have been found. This can easily be accounted for when we assume that during the washing ashore a separation took place accord~ ing to the sizes as we of ten find with fossils in beachdeposits. IE FLANDRIN wishes to maintain his assertion th at we have here to do with an original and natural population. he will first have to account for the occurring . gether in one stratum of the species found spread over four large depart~ ments of the tertiary in all more complete profiles.

As to We st In d i a DOUVILLÉ (17) was the first to give for Trinidad a stratigraphic division of the older tertiary which was based on the Fora~ minifera material submitted to him. The association of genera so deviat~ ing from Europe was very soon confirmed by the investigations of CUSH~ MAN (18) and VAUGHAN (19) whilst also comprehensive Foraminifera material from West~Venezuela. recently described bij v. D. VLERK and GORTER ·(20) yielded similar results. Thus it is possible to fix also for West India by combination of the various localities a kind of standard profile which gives us an exact idea of the occurrence of the Foraminifera in this territory.

What now does a comparison of the four standard profiles teach us about the evolution of the larger Foraminifera during the tertiary? Let us examine the spreading of the principal genera in the four areas. At the beginning of the tertiary Camerina BRUG. appears to have been represented in each of the four areas. In the Tethys area proper. so West India excepted. the genus reaches its zenith of development in the middle Eocene. not only as for the magnitude and the number of the individuals but also as regards the variety of the species. As early as the end of the lower eocene pustulate and undulate forms develop. which prevail in the middle eocene. At the end of the eocene the reticulate forms show themselves for the first time. besides smaller striate forms they remain alone in the oligocene and are therefore very characteristic for this period. In West India on the con~ trary the genus Camerina is only slightly developed. In many territories the genus remains · represented only by small striate species throughout the

458

whole ol der tertiary. In the eocene and oligocene a little larger and moré diHerentiated species have developed locally only. whilst they deviate dis~ tinctly from the European ones. It is important that also in West India on the border betweeil eocene and oligocene the reticulate type develops as is proved by the Camerina striatoreticulata (RUTT.) from the Seroe di Cueba limestone of Curaçao and the Camerina chawneri PALMER from the upper oligocene Coiimar formation of Cuba (21. 22).

In contradistinction to the Camerina the genus Ass.ilina D'ORB. is not at all known . ftom West India. whilst in Europe and the East Indies it is very characteristic for the older eocene. It reaches the zenith of its development at the beg inning of the middle eocene but from some profiles (Biarritz. Egypt (23). Java) it appears that in the upper"Lutetian it had already quite disappeared. whilst in other regions (British India) it can be pursued up to the end of this subdivisibn. The inequable disappearance makes the genus unfit for dividing the eocene into two divisions viz. (a) with. and (h) without Assilina. as has been done by VAN DER VLERK and UMB~ GROVE (24).

Discocyclina GÜMB. was present in the Eastern part of the Tethys area already in the paleocene. Also of this genus exceedingly large forms appear in the middle eocene. but it reaches the zenith of its development not until the upper eocene wh en the Nummulites began already to decline. Besides the ordinary we see also the radially built forms appear. which have been'separated as Actinocyclina and Asterocyclina. Especially in Europe they are weIl developed. in the Indies. however. mtich rarer. Also in West India the zenith of the evolution of the genus lies in the upper eocene; it even seems as if the radially built forms here prevail upon the ordinary. but just as with the Nummulites exceedingly large forms fail. such as we know especially from the far East. The Discocyclinas seem to have disappeared everywhere. at the beginning of the oligocene.

Even mor.e distinct the difference between East and West is displayed by the other Orbitoids. It had been known already a long time that the genus Lepidocyclina GÜMB. appears earlier in West India than in Europe. There it is foundalready in the upper eocene. hence still together with the Discocyclinas. developed in various characteristic subgenera. Of these Helicolepidina TOBL. is perhaps to be considered as the most primitive form. In the mediterranean territories it is found in the normal and com~ plete profiles only in the oligocene. the subgenus Eulepidina first. together with the last Camerilias. In British India we unfortunately do not yet possess a stratigraphic detail profile of the oligocene Nari~series which displays the division of the larger ForamiIiifera. But in the Archipelago it has been established by the investigations of KOOLHOVEN (8) in Sou th Bantam in Java. that there. just as in Europe. in the oligocene two sub~ divisions canbe distinguished: an older without. and a younger with Lepidocyclinas (Eulepidina and Pliolepidina). Hence. also as far as the appearance of the genus Lepidocyclina is concerned. we have a far reaching

459

l'esemblance between the far East and Europe, whereas America is again quite deviating. Also the development of the subgenera is quite different. In the whole Tethys area we see the Lepidocyclinas start with Eulepidine forms, in West India, however, it are the Isolepidine species which are pre~ dominant in the upper eocene, whilst Eulepidina is for the first time met with in the 10wer oligocene. Nephrolepidina. which in the Tethys area remains restricted to the miocene appears iIi the West already in the upper oligocene. But even more divergent than the appearance is the disappear~ ance of the Lepidocyclinas. In West India we see only the subgenus Nephrolepidina still appeal' in sediments which by some are ranged under the oligocene, by ,others already under the Iiliocene and which can be. parallel with the Aquitanian in Europe. In the mediterranean areaNephro~ lepidina and Eulepidina are still found in the Aquitanian, Nephrolepidina alone also in the Burdigalianstill. But in the far East thegenus does not reach the summit of its develoPIDent until the miocene. Besides the sub genus Nephrolepidina with an exceedingly large variety of forms also the subgenera Eulepidina. Plio,lepidin,a and Isolepidina are present in the older miocene. Though the genus does decline largely already in the latet miocene, it can be pursued till the end of the formation. T'hus with the genus Lepidocyclina we see very distinctly a gradual shifting of the evolu~ tion from West to East.

Something similar the genus Spiroclypeus Douv. displays which in West India and ' in Europe occurs already" ip: the upper eocene, but does' not appeal' in the far East until the beginning of the miocene (Aquitanian) when there is a very generally spread trànsgression. In this territory it reaches its chief development in the ol der miocene when in Europe and West India it had apparantly disappeared a long time a~ready.

Cycloclypeus CARP, appears to be restricted entirely to the Indo Pacific area, even from British India th is genus .has not yet been signalled. In the Archipelago it develops during the oligocene, as T AN, in his mono~ graph. (25) of th is genus has shown, with forms which might be callea transition forms between Hetel'ostegina and Cycloclypeus; It remains strongly developed throughout the miocene and as we know is found in the Pacific area still living.

Stratigraphically important is also the genus Miogypsina SACCO. This genus too appears earlier in the West than in the East. In West India it is for the first time found in the upper oligocene. In Europe just as in the Indian Archipelago it is with certainty known not befor~ the miocene and here dt is particularly characteristic for the older part of this formation, when in the latter area ft reaches the zenith of its development.

The genera Pellatispira Bouss., Dictyocc;>nus BLANCKH, Dictyoconoides NUTT, Miscellanea (Siderolites) PFEND. (26) are only known from the eocene; some of them have a certain stratigraphical importance. So Miscel~ lanea was found only in the paleocene, whilst Dictyoconus and Dictyo~ conoides apparentlyoccur no longel' in the llPper eocene.

460

In contradistinction to ,the Nummulitidae and Orbitidae the Alveo~ linellidae seem to be less generally spread in the tertiary sediments. Their appearance is evidently more dependent on certain conditions of living. The genus Borelis (Alveolina) MONTF. is in Europe only of importance in the ol der miocene and it is interesting that VAUGHAN (27) could show its presence also in the middle eocene of West India. M uch more im~ portant for the tertiary of the Indian Archipelago are the Alveolinellidae because here they display still a dis tin ct further development during the miocene. In the Indies thegenus Borelis is spread not only in the eocene hut also through the oligocene till the oldest miocene; then Flosculinella SCHUB. develops and out of it in the younger miocene the genus Alveoli~ nella Douv .• now still living. develops.

This survey of the appearance and the evolution of the larger Fora~ minifera in the tertiary clearly sets oH the great difference existing between West India and the other part of the area of their spreading. While the three profil es of the T ethys proper display a far reaching similarity as regards the appearance of the genera and the zenith of their development. West India is altogether deviating therefrom. The essential point of this diHerence might shortly be comprised in the following manner: the cent re of the development of the Nummulites. Alveolines and presumably also of the Discocyclines lies in the old Tethys area. The Lepidocyclines on the other hand. as also Spiroclypeus and Mio~ gypsina appear for the first time in West India; at the end of the older tertiary the centre of the development of these genera shifts to the far East. This phenomenon will have to be taken into account both with palaeographical deductions and with phylogenetical investigations into the ancestors of the tertiary larger Foraminifera.

LITERATUUR.

1. DAVlES. A. MORLEY. Tertiary faunas. a text-book for oiJfleld palaeontologists and students of geology. Vol. n. The sequence of tertiary faunas. Thomas MUl'by & Co .. London 1934.

2. VERBEEK, R. en FENNEMA. R. Geologie van Java en Madoera. 1896. 3. Excursion Guides. Fourth Pacific Science Congress Java, 1929;

BOTHÉ, A. CH. Djiwo Hi1Is and Southem Range. OPPENOORTH, W. F. F.-GERTH, H. The upper eocene Nanggoelan boos.

4. GERTH, H. The stratigraphical distribution ofthe larger foraminifera in the tertiary of Java. Proceed. Fourtlh. Pac. Sc. Coogr. Java, 1929.

5. GERTH, H. Der geologische Bau Javas. Geolog. Rundsch., 1931. 6. GERTH, H. De geolog'isohe bouw van Java ... Geologie en Mijnbouw" 1931. 7. DOORNINK, H. W. Bijdrage tot de kennis van de tertiaire Nummulitldae van Java. 8. KOOLHOVEN, W. C. B. Toeliohtlngen bij blad 14 (Bojah). Geologiseihe kaart

van Java, Bandoeng 1933. 9. VAUGHAN, T. W. American and european tertiary la1'ger foramlnifera. Bull.

Geolog. Soc. Amer .• 35, 1924. 10. LEUPOLD, W. en VLERK. J. M. VAN DER. De palaeontologle en stratigraphie

van Nederlandsch Oost-Indië. Tertiary. Leidsche Geolog. Mededeel., 5. 1931.

<IJ C <IJ U o ~

<IJ C <IJ U o .:!' Ö

Uppcr

Middle

Lower

Upper

Lower

Priabonian

Auversian

Upper

Lutetian

Lower

Ypresian

I I *

e

d

c

b

Malayan Archipelago (Java)

Tjidamar (Bontang) serie, S. Priangan. CoraUi:mestones from Tjankangiran, Proepoek, Tji Sande.

Tji Lanang-, Tji Odeng-, Tji Longan-beds, Priangan.

Njalindoeng beds, 18 % rec. Mollusca.

Cycloclypeus annulatus-beds. Rembang beds, 18 % rec. Mollusca. Corallimestone from the Southern range. Progo-beds, 8 % rec. Mollusca.

Tjimapag-beds, S. Bantam. Serajoe-Progo-tuff-marl-series. Spiroclypeus Iimestone, W. Priangan.

Upper Tjidjengkol-beds in Southern Bantam.

Lower Tjidjengkol-beds in Southern Bantam and Western Pr.jangan

Discocyclina-tuffs from Nanggoelan. Djokja. Discocyclina-marls from the Djiwo hills.

NanggoeLan-beds with rich Mollusca fauna.

Nummulites--Alveolina-limestones from Kali Goeha, Loh Oelo.

34 % recent Mollusca Cycloclypeus carpenteri BRAOY Cycloclypeus comunnis MART., neglectus MART. Lepidocyclina gigantea MART.

32-33 % rec. Mollusca Trybliolepidina rutteni V. O. VLERK

Trybliolepidina orientalis V. O. VLERK Alveolinella boscii DEFR.

CYcloclypeus annulatus MART. Cycloclypeus transiens TAN Miogypsina polymorpha-thecideaeformis RUTT. Nephrolepidina sumatrensis BRAOY Nephrolepidina ferreroi PROVo Lepidocyclina papulifera Douv. Ploscu/inella bontangensis RUTT., globulosa RUTT.

Cyc1Pclypeus eidae TAN Spiroclypeus tjidoengancnsis V. O. VLERK Miogypsina dehaartii V. O. VLERK Eulepidina formosa SCHLUMB. Bore/is pygmaea HANZ.

Cycloclypeus oppenoorthi TAN Nephrolepidina isolepinoidcs V. O. VLERK Eulepidina spec. Camerina intermedia (O'ARCH.)-fichteli (MICH.)

Cycloclypeus koolhoveni TAN Camef'Ïna absurda DOORN. Camerina intermedia (O'ARCH.)-fichteli (MICH.) Bore/is spec.

Discocyclina omphala (FRITSCH) Discocyclina javana (VERB.) Discocyclina dispansa (SOW.) Camerina pengaronensis-nanggoe/ani (VERB.) Camerina variolaria (LMK.) Pellatispira spec.

Camerina vredenburgi (PREV.)-djokjakartae (MART.) I Camerina variolaria (LMK.)

Discocyclina dispansa (SOW.) Discocyclina javana (VERB.)

Camerina gizehensis (FORSK.) Camerina perlorata (MONTF.)-obtusa (SOW.) Discocyclina javana (VERB.) Pellatispira orbitoidea PROVo Bore/is javana (VERB.)

Western British India (Sind)

Mecran-serie: No larger Foraminifera recorded.

Gay-serie: Lepidocyclina blanfordi NUTT.

Nari-serie: Eulepidina di/atata (MICH.) Camerina intermedia (O'ARCH.)-fichte/i (MICH.) Camerina clipeus-subclipeus NUTT.

unknown

Middle and upper Kirthar serie: Camerina gizehensis (FORSK.) Camerina laevigata BRUG. Assilina spira DE ROISSY Discocyclina sowubyi (NUTT.) Bore/is el/iptica SOW.

---------------------------------------�-----------------------------------�-----------------------------------1

a Nummulites limestone from G. Woengkalk, Djiwo hills.

Camerina perforata (MONTF.)-obtusa (SOW.) Assilina granulosa-leymeri (o·ARCH.) Discocyclina sowerbyi NUTT.

Lower Kirthar serie: Camerina perforata (MONTF.)-obtusa Camerina atacica (LEYM.) Assi/ina exponens SOW.

(Sow.)

Laki serie:Camcrina atacica (LEYM.) Camerina mamml'lla (FICHT. et MOLL.) Assilina granulosa (O'ARCH.) Borelis subpyrenaica (LEYM.)

Southwestern France (Biarritz)

No more larger Foraminifera.

"Faluns de St. Paul de Dax": Nephrolepidina morgani LEM. et Douv. Nephrolepidina tournoueri LEM. et Douv. Miogypsina irregularis M1CH.

Marls from Peyrère: Eulepidina dilatata (MICH.) Eulepidina roulini (LEM. et LEYM.)

Beds from Tue de Saumon: Camerina intermedia (o'ARCH.)-fichteli (MICH.) Eulepidina di/atata (MICH.)

Beds from the lighthouse, Biarritz: Camerina intermedia (o'ARCH.)-lichteli (MICH.) Camerina vasca (JOL. et LEYM.)

Marls from Miramar: Camerina labiani-bouillei (DE LA HARPE) Asterocyclina radians (0' ARCH.) Discocyclina pratti (MICH.) Spiroclypeus granulosus Bouss.

Pentacrinus marl from the "Cöte des Basques": Camerina contorta-striata BRUG. Camerina variolaria (LMK.) Asterocyclina stelIata (O'ARCH.)-radians (o'ARCH.) Discocyclina pratti (MICH.)

Nummulites limestone ' from Peyre blanque: Camerina laevigata BRUG. Camerina brougniarti (O'ARCH. et HAIME.) Camerl'na perforata (MONTF.)-obtusa (Sow.) Discocyclina pratti (o'ARCH.) Asterocyclina radians (O'ARCH.)

Nummulites Iimestone from St. Barthèlemy: Camerina laevigata BRUG. Camerina complanata (LMK.) Camerina murchisoni (BRUN.) Assilina granulosa-leymerei O'ARCH. Assilina spira DE ROISSY Discocyclina BTchiaci (SCHLUMB.)

Glauconitic Iimestone from St. Sevère: Camerina planulata (LMK.) Bore/is oblonga (O'ORB.)

Western India (Trinidad, Venezuela, Jamaica)

No more larger FOTaminifera.

Agua Clara serie W. Venezuela: Miogypsina spec.

San Louis serie, W. Venezuela: Nephrolepidina marginata MICH. Miogypsina sp.

Erin Point beds, Trinidad; Montpellier white lime­stone Jamaica; Meson fonnation, Mexico:

Miogypsina complanata SCHLUMB. Nephrolepidina marginata (MICH.) Eulepidina undosa CUSHM.

Morne Diablo limestone, Trinidad; Moneague formation, Jamaica:

Nephrolepidina praemarginata Douv. Eulepidina undosa CUSHM., gigas CUSHM. Isolepdina canellei LEM. et Douv. Camerina cf. vasca (JOL. et LEYM.)

San Fernando beds, Pt. Bontour, Trinidad; Menegrande beds, W. Venezuela:

Pliolepidina tobleri Douv. Isolepidina trinidatis Douv. Helicolepidina spiralis TOBL. Asterocyclina georgiana CUSHM. Discocyclina flintensis CUSHM. Camerina sp. Spiroclypeus sp.

Lower beds from Pt. Bontour, Trinidad; Discocyclina archiaci (SCHLUMB.) Camerina cf. striata BRUG. cf. irregularis DESH.

"Yellow limestone" of Jamaica: Camerina matleyi VAUGH. Dictyoconus codon WOOOR. Borelis matleyi VAUGH.

No larger Foraminifera recorded.

Lowermost beds of Soldado Rock, Trinidad with Venericardia, Cucullaea Calyptraphorus

----~------------ -----I---------------------------------------·--------------------------------------__ ~ __ I-----------------------------------------I-----------------------------------------I-----------____________________________ __

Paleocene ? Corallimestone from G. Gamping near Djokja.

.) Divisions used by VAN DER VLERK.

Camerina gerthi DOORN. Pellatispira crassicolumnata UMBGR. Discocyclina spec.

Ranicot series: Camerina planulata (LMK.) Camerina globulus (LEYM.) var. indica DAV. Assilina ranicotti NUTT. Discocyclina ranicotensis DAV. Borelis oblonga O'ORB. Miscellanea miscella (o'ARCH.)

461

11. NUTIAL, W. L. F. The zonal distributionoftihe larger foramlnlfera of the eocene of Western India. Geolog. Magaz., 1926.

12. DAVlES, L. M. The Ranikot beds at ThaI. (Northwest frontier provinces of India) Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. 83, 1927.

13. DoUVILLÉ, H. Sur Ie terrain nummulitique du bassin de I'Adour. Bull. Soc. Géol. de France 1904.

14. BOUSSAC, J. Études stratigraphiques et paléontologiques sur Ie nummulitique de Biamtz. Ann. Hébert 5, Paris 1911.

15. MENGAUD, L. Recherches géologlques dans la région cantabrique. Toulouse 1920. 16. FLANDRIN, J. La faune de Tlzi Remt près Drael Mizan (Algérie) Bull. Soc.

GooI. de France, 1934. 17. DOUVILLÉ, H. Révision des Lépidocyclines. Mém. Soc. Géol. de France,

n. s. 1. 1924. 18. CUSHMAN, J. A. The American species of Orthophragmlna and Lepidocyc1lna

U. S. Geol. Surv. Prof. Pap. 125. D. 1920. 19. VAUGHAN, T. W. Species of large arenaceous and oroitoidal foramlnifera from

the tertiary deposits of Jamaica. Joum. of Pal., I, 1928. 20. GORTER, E. N. and VLERK, J. M. VAN DER. Larger foraminikra from Central

Falcon. (Venezuela) Leidsche Geol. Mededeel.. 4, 1932. 21. RUTTEN, L. On tertiary Foramlnifera from Curaçao. Proc. Kon. Mad. v.

Wetensch. Amsterdam 1928. 22. PALMER, K. Some larger fossil Foramlnifera from Cuba. Mem. Soc. Cubana Hist.

Nat., 8, 1934.

23. CUVILLlER, M. J. Révision du nummulitlque égyptien. Mém. Inst. d'Égypte 16, Le Caire 1930.

24. VLERK, J. M. VAN DER en UMBOROVE, J. H. F. Tertiaire gids foraminiferen van Nederlandsch Oost-Indië. Wetensoh. Mededeel., 6, 1927.

25. T AN SIN HOK. On Ilhe genus Cyc10clypeus Carpenter. Part. I, Wetensch. Mededeel., 19, Batavia 1932.

26. PFENDER, J. A propos du Siderolites Vidal·i Douv. et de quelques autres. Bul. Soc. GooI. de France 1934.

27. VAUGHAN, T. W. Additional new species of tertlary larger Foraminifera from Jamaica. Joum. of Pal., 3, 1929.