NORTH AMERICAN LATER TERTIARY AND QUATERNARY BRYOZOA. 



53 



1895. Membranipora gahata Neviani, Briozoi neozoici di alcune localita d'ltaUa, BoUettino della 



Society Romana per gli Studi Zoologici, vol. 4, pt. 2, p. 233 (sep. 9), 1896; vol. 5, pt. 3, 

 p. 121 (sep. 20). 



1896. Membranipora galeata Neviani, Briozoi Postpliocenici di Spilinga (Calabna), Atti Acca- 



demia Gioenia di Scienze Natural! in Catania, ser. 4, vol. 9, p. 14. 

 1898. Membranipora galeata Neviani, Briozoi neozoici di alcune localita d'ltaUa, BoUettino de la 

 . Societa Romana per gli Studi Zoologici, vol. 7, pt. 4, p. 4; pt. 5, pp. 4, 6, 13 (sep.); 1900, 



pt. 6, p. 66 (sep. 9). _ . _ . 



1898. Chaperia annulus Waters, Observations on Membraniporidae, Journal Linnean Society 



Zoology, vol. 26, p. 673. 

 1898. Chaperia annuhis, variety bilaminota Waters, Obser^-ations on Membrampondae, Journal 



Linnean Society, Zoology, vol. 26, p. 673, pi. 47, figs. 5. 8, 9. 

 1901. Membranipora galeata Neviani, Br>-ozoi neogenici delle Calabrie, Paleontographia italica, 



vol. 6, p. 152. . 



1904. Membranipora galeata Calvet, Bryozoen, Ergebnisse der Hamberger Magalhaensiche Sam- 



melreise, 1892, 1893, vol. 3, p. 10. 



1908. Chaperia galeata Cani:, Iconographie des Bryozoaires fossiles de 1' Argentine, Pt. I, Analea 



del Museo Nacional de Buenos Aires, vol. 17, p. 262, pi. 3, figs. 13, 14. 



1909. Chaperia galeata Calvet, Bryozoaires, Expedition Antarctique Francaise, Sciences Naturellea, 



p. 17. 

 Historical.— Waters cleared up the principal characters of this species; he 

 made known its structure and showed its identity with the fossil Membranipora 

 annulus Manzoni of the Miocene. The complete bibliography which we give 

 above, resulted from his work. 



The name galeata is the oldest, but from the description and P.gure in the British Museum Catalogue 

 identification has not been made, and I should not have recognized it as a synonym without an examina- 

 tion of the Museum specimen. (Waters, 1908.) 



However, in 1888 Jullien believed he had rediscovered Busk's species; he 

 gave an exceUent figure, but he did not classify it in his genus Chaperia. Jullien 

 appeared to be mistaken, since Waters did not cite his work at aU in the synonymy. 

 On the other hand, Calvet, 1904, who had studied numerous specimens, rectified 

 the omission of Waters. The fossil specimens of the Canu collection have never 

 the aspect 5hown in Jullien's figures. . 



Ajffinities.— The. number of spines varies from four to six. The zooecia m 

 circle are the ancestrular zooecia. It is remarkable that the genus Chaperia 

 widespread in both hemispheres since the Miocene has emigrated into the Southern 



Hemisphere. 



We do not believe that the entire synonymy adopted above is exact; there 

 are certainly many species confounded under this name. Even in Italy under the 

 name of Chaperia annulus the authors appear to have confused at least two species. 

 Notably our specimens from Farnesina are absolutely distinct from those (and they 

 are quite numerous) which we have collected in the Pleistocene of Palermo. But 

 all these species are so variable that it is very difficult to find constant characters. 



Occurrence.— Pleistocene : Santa Barbara, California (very rare) . Santa Monica 

 (Rustic Canyon), California (very rare). 



Geological distribution.— Uelveti&n of Italy (Seguenza); Zanclean of Italy 

 (Seguenza); Entrerrian of Patagonia (Canu); Miocene of Australia (Waters); 

 Pliocene of New Zealand (Waters) : Plaisancian of Italy (Manzoni, Xeviani) : 



a 



