BY E. J. GODDARD AND 11. I. JKNSEN. 317 



Howchin's " Census of the Fossil Foraminifera of Australia,"'*' 

 and our own previously published notes, as well as with the 

 Challenger Report and Flint's " Recent Foraminifera." 



We are also indebted to Mr. F. Chapman for pointing out to one 

 of us that Miliolina hucculenta in this and in our previous 

 papers should read Planispirina hucculetita, Biloculina sphoira 

 d'Orbigny, should likewise read Planispirina sphmra; and Plani- 

 spirina sigmoidea should read Sigmoilina sigmoidea. We retain 

 the commoner names for the sake of consistency and because we 

 have not had access to the papers in which the proposed 

 changes and the reasons for them are given. 



In his " Notes on Prosobranchiata No. i.,"t discussing Aus- 

 tralian fossil species of the geuus Lotorium, Mr. H. L. Kesteven 

 remarks: — '' Lotoriuin pai'kijisoniayium is the recent representa- 

 tive of L. radiale, abbotti, textile, woodsii, and torti7'ost7'is." A 

 glance at Dennant's " Catalogue of the Described Species of 

 Fossils," I show^s that three of these species, namely, Lotorium 

 (Lampusia) abbotti, ivoodsii, and tortirostris occur at Table Cape. 



On p. 455 of the same paper Mr. Kesteven goes on to say : — 

 " Thus, if we compare this genus (Lotorium) as it occurs in the 

 Lower Australian strata with European Miocene representatives, 

 we are presented with two entirely different types of the genus. 

 The predominating feature of the Australian section — that of the 

 extinct Antarctic group — finds expression in only one European 

 fossil ( L. tarbellianum). Again, if the two groups be compared 

 with the recent representatives it w^ill be seen that the European 

 section has the general facies of recent species, whilst the Aus- 

 tralian fossils can, with one exception, be only compared inter se. 

 These facts .... assuredly point to the 

 greater antiquity of the Australian fossils." 



From the large number of specimens which had their apices 

 complete (over 70 per cent.) Mr. Kesteven infers (op. cit. p. 465) 

 that the beds were deposited below the tidal limit. 



* Report Aust. Assoc. Adv. Sc. Vol. v. Adelaide, 1893. 

 t Proc. Linn. Soc. N.S.Wales, 1902, p. 454. 

 Z Records Geol. Surv. Victoria, Vol. i, Part 2, p. 107. 

 23 



