ii4 



Smitt, for adnate or foliaceous forms in which the zooecia are to a large extent immersed, 

 formino- a continuous sheet, and in which the peristomes are relatively little developed. The 

 ovicells differ in the various species, sometimes being but little expanded, and not nnlike those 

 of Crisia, and sometimes being considerably broadened in a transverse direction, so as to form 

 conspicuous inrlations on the surface of the colony. It appears to be characteristic of this Family 

 that zooecia with functional polypides are restricted to the periphery of the colony, the more 

 centrally placed zooecia becoming occluded by a calcareous covering, the form of which may 

 serve to distinguish the species. By many authors the Diastoporidae are regarded as falling 

 within the Tubuliporidae. 



Berenicea Lamx. 



Berenicea Lamouroux, 1821, "Exp. Méthod.", p. 80. 



Berenicea Lamouroux, 1824, "Encycl. Méthod.", "Zooph.", p. 140. 



Berenicea Gray, 1848, "List Brit. An. Brit. Mus.", I, p. 142. 



Berenicea Reuss, 1867, "Bry. Braunen Jura Balin", Denkschr. K. Ak. Wiss. W'ien, math.- 



naturw. Cl. XXVII, I Abth., p. 4. 

 Berenicea Novak, 1877, "Bry. Böhm. Kreideform.", Ibid., XXXVII, II Abth., p. 96. 

 Berenicea Gregory, 1896, "Cat. Foss. Bry. Brit. Mus.'', "Jurassic Bry.", p. 76. 

 Diastopora Waters, 1914, "Mar. Fauna Brit. E. Africa", "Bry. Cycl.", Proc. Zool. Soc, p- 835. 

 Diastopora auctt. (nee Lamouroux, 1821, p. 42). 



By most writers on recent Polyzoa the genus Berenicea has been suppressed in favour 

 of Diastopora. Lamouroux used the former for encrusting species, and the latter for foliaceous 

 forms. The history of the genera was explained by Reuss (1867), who pointed out that the 

 distinction between them was somewhat arbitrary. Gregory (1896) argues in favour of retaining 

 the distinction made by Lamouroux, on the ground of convenience. Canu l ) considered that 

 Berenicea was inseparable from Diastopora, placing the species described by him in Diastopora. 

 In a later paper-) he uses Berenicea in preference to the other generic name. Normax 3 ) maintained 

 that Berenicea prominens Lamx was really identical with the Cheilostome Chorizopora brong- 

 niartii Aud. ; although in a later paper 4 ) he stated that B. prominens was mentioned by him 

 in error, and that B. annulata was the species he intended to refer to. I am in agreement 

 with Waters 5 ) in thinking that Lamouroux' Berenicea probably referred to the Cyclostomatous 

 species which have been placed in it by other authors, and not to Chorizopora. 



1. Berenicea sarniensis Norman. (PI. XI, figs 4, 5). 



Diastopora sarniensis Norman, 1S64, "Undescr. Brit. Hydr. Act. Pol.", Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. 



(3) XIII, p. 89, PI. XI, figs 4—6 (Guernsey & Jersey). 

 Diastopora sarniensis Busk, 1875, "Cat. Mar. Pol. Brit. Mus.", III, PI. XXXIV, fig. 5. 

 Diastopora sarniensis Hincks, 1880, "Hist. Brit. Mar. Pol.", p. 463, text-fig. on p. 461, 



PI. LXVI, figs 7—9. 



1) Canu, F., 189S, "Ét. OviceUes Bry. Bathonien", Buil. Soc. Géol. France, (3) XXVI, p. 265. 



2) Ibid., 1913, "Conti-. Ét. Bry. Foss.", Ibid., (4) XIII, pp. 268—. 



3) NORMAN, A. M., 1903, "Notes Nat. Hist. E. Finmark", Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (7) XI, p. 569. 

 (i [bid., 1909, "Pol. Madeira", J. I.inn. Soc, Zool., XXX, p. 299, note. 



5j Waters, A. W., 1904, "Bry. Fr.-Josef Land", II, Ibid., XXIX, p. 172. 



114 



