No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Type specimens of the brachiopod Dalmanella? winchelli Cooper, 1956
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 May 2016
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Paleontological Notes
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Paleontological Society
References
Cooper, G. A. 1956. Chazyan and related brachiopods. Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections, 127(I):1–1024; (II): 1025–1245.Google Scholar
Hall, J., and Clarke, J. M. 1892. An introduction to the study of the genera of Paleozoic Brachiopoda. Paleontology of New York, 8(1), 367 p.Google Scholar
Havlíček, V. 1950. Ramenonožci Českého Ordoviku [Bohemian Ordovician Brachiopods]. Ústředni Ústav Geologický, Rozpravy, 13:1–72.Google Scholar
Rice, W. F. 1987. The systematics and biostratigraphy of the Brachiopoda of the Decorah Shale at St. Paul, Minnesota, p. 136–166. In Sloan, R. E. (ed.), Middle and Late Ordovician Lithostratigraphy and Biostratigraphy of the Upper Mississippi Valley. Minnesota Geological Survey Report of Investigations No. 35.Google Scholar
Schuchert, C. 1913. Brachiopoda, p. 355–420. In von Zittel, K. A. (translated and edited by Eastman, C. R.), Textbook of Paleontology, Vol. 1, 2nd ed.Macmillan and Company, London.Google Scholar
Schuchert, C., and Cooper, G. A. 1932. Brachiopod genera of the suborders Orthoidea and Pentameroidea. Peabody Museum of Natural History Memoirs, 4(1), 270 p.Google Scholar
Waagen, W. H. 1884. Salt Range fossils, Part 4 (2) Brachiopoda. India Geological Survey Memoirs: Paleontologia Indica, Ser. 13, Vol. 1, fasc. 3, p. 547–610.Google Scholar
Walker, L. G. 1982. The brachiopod genera Hebertella, Dalmanella, and Heterorthina from the Ordovician of Kentucky. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1066-M, p. M1–M17.Google Scholar
Winchell, N. H., and Schuchert, C. 1895. The Lower Silurian Brachiopoda of Minnesota. Minnesota Geological and Natural History Survey, Final Report, Vol. 3, Pt. 1, p. 333–474.Google Scholar