The cephalopods described in this volume are divided into the orders Ellesmero-cerida, Endocerida, Intejocerida, Actino-cerida, Orthocerida, Ascocerida, Disco-sorida, Oncocerida, Tarphycerida, Bar-randeocerida, and Nautilida. Descriptions of them are followed by that of the Bactri-tida, the taxonomic status and affinities of which are unsettled. The named orders include all the cephalopods which from the middle of the 19th century until comparatively recently were assigned to a single taxon “Nautiloidea,” first recognized and named by de Blainville in 1825 and generally regarded as a suprafamilial category, being classified by different authors as suborder, order, superorder, or subclass. This taxon was long contrasted with the Am-monoidea (Treatise, Part L), and considered to be equal in rank with this assemblage. <...>

Современные цефалоподы отличаются сравнительно быстрым ростом (Jaeckel, 1958) и достигают своего максимального размера обычно в течение двух — четырех лет.
Темп роста цефалопод на разных стадиях онтогенеза не постоянный — прирост тела у многих кальмаров и сепий наиболее выражен в первые полгода их жизни и заметно замедляется с наступлением половозрелости (Акимушкпп, 1963). Неравномерность роста головоногих моллюсков, как правило, связана и со сменой сезонов года (Wells and Wells, 1970), влияющей на режим их питания и размножения <...>

The 3rd Workshop of the Working Group on Lower Cretaceous Cephalopods gave us the opportunity to meet again some old friends and particularly to compare with them the Lower Cretaceous ammonite biostratigraphy of Umbria-Marche Apennines with the successions described in other countries.
The meeting was organized in the Apennines, close to the outcrops, in a small, peaceful town of the Marche region where we forgot the typical "stress" of the big cities (noise, traffic jams, pollution). This pleasant atmosphere aroused a stimulating and productive workshop.

Матеріаломъ къ данной работѣ послужили ископаемыя, принадлежащія верхнему каменноугольному известняку, яруса со Spirifer mosquensis; всѣ они найдены, главнымъ образомъ С. Н. Никитинымъ и мною въ окрестностяхъ города Подольска, близъ деревни Девятовой, частью же въ извѣстныхъ каменоломняхъ Мячкова, Карапчеева и Гжели. Коллекціи эти въ настоящее время составляютъ собственность Геологическаго Комитета. Кромѣ того описано нѣсколько формъ съ Маткозерскаго канала, любезно предоставленныхъ мнѣ для опредѣленія проф. А. А. Иностранцевымъ изъ коллекціи Спб. Университета.

Though the rocks below the Red Chalk of Lincolnshire are of peculiar interest, the absence of exposures along the coast, together with the rarity and transitory character of inland excavations, have made it exceedingly difficult to build up a body of information that approaches, even approximately, that standard of detail and accuracy which characterizes modern stratigraphy. Any information that can be culled ; from borings is, therefore of especial value. <...>

Since the Jurassic deposits of Kachh have yielded only very few pre. 'Callovian Cephalopods, it is unnecessary to deal in detail with the early members of the present super-family. The Stephanoceratidae* in the restricted sense, although typically Bajocian, with genera like Polyplectites (= group of Amm. linguiferus d'Orbigny and 'Stephanoceras' daubenyi, Gemmellaro) undoubtedly persisted to the Middle and even Upper Bathonian (Siemiradzkian and Oxyceritan). No forms of this family, or of Sphaeroceratidae and of Tulitidae, descendants of Stephanoceratidae s.s., have yet been found in Kachh. <...>

When describing, two years ago, the Blake Collection of Ammonites 'from Kachh (Cutch), the writer (1924, p. 1) regretted that owing to the fact that he had not been able to re-examine "\Vaagcn's types, the affinitiefi of some of the oft-quoted Kachh species would have to remain 1mcertain· The kind offer, soon after, by Dr. E. H. Pascoc, the Director of the Geological Survey of India, to unde1take the revision of the Ammonite fauna of Kachh, was therefore eagerly accepted by the writer. l\lr. Oldham's anticiJlation of 1873 that Waagen's work would turn out to be one of the most important contributions to the Cephalopod palreontology of the Upper Jumssic formations ever issued, was completely realised, and the writer feels deeply grateful to Dr. Pascoe for entrusting him with the revision of so important a fauna.  <...>

Описаніе огромнаго палеонтологическаго матеріала, собраннаго въ огложеніяхъ Донецкой юры, авторъ начинаетъ со сравнительно немногочисленеой группы голово- ногихъ моллюсковъ. Играя, вообще, въ геологичесвомъ смыслѣ, первенствующую роль, въ данномъ случаѣ эта группа почти исключительео только и имѣетъ геологическое значеніе, такъ какъ, при плохомъ сохраненіи большинства формъ, незначителыюсти и разрозненности матеріала, она не представляетъ (за исключеніемъ двухъ-трехъ формъ) сколько-нибудь серьезнаго палеонтологическаго интереса. <...>

В книге отражены результаты комплексного стратиграфо-палеонтологического излучения пограничных отложений нижнего и среднего карбона Южного Урала и Среднего Тянь-Шаня. По фораминиферам, остракодам, конодонтам в конкретных разрезах выделяются межрегиональные, региональные и местные биостратиграфические подразделения, установлено их соотношение с зонами цефалопод. Рассмотрен рубеж в основании зоны Homoceras. Систематически описаны преимущественно новые виды. Проведена межрегиональная корреляци