HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. 25 



though in certain forms such structures are commonly developed. The author's 

 well-known views upon the nature of Gaunopora, Phill., are here repeated, and the 

 conclusion is expressed that " die angebliche Gattung begreift Stromatoporen die 

 von rohrenformigen, gewohnlich zur Gattung Aulopora gehorenden, fremdartigen 

 Korpern durchwachsen sind." The genus Labechia, E. and H., is placed among 

 the Stromatoporoids, where it properly belongs ; and the Stromatopora dentata of 

 von Rosen, from the Silurian Rocks of Oesel, is referred to this genus. Lastly, 

 with regard to the species of Stromatopora described by Prof. Roemer, it will be 

 better to defer any points which may need discussion till a later period. 



In 1883, Herr Eugen Schulz published a very interesting and valuable memoir 

 on the Devonian Limestones of Hillesheim in the Bifel (" Die Eifelkalkmulde von 

 Hillesheim, nebst einem pala3ontologischen Anhang," ' Jahrg. d. konigl. preuss. geol. 

 Landesanstalt fur 1S82 ; ' Berlin, 1883). The author draws attention to the exist- 

 ence of a well-marked horizon in the Bifel Limestone of the Hillesheim basin, 

 which is characterised by the presence of vast quantities of the singular organisms 

 which Phillips described from the Devonian formation of Devonshire under the 

 name of Gaunopora ramosa. Herr Schulz points out that the structure of this 

 fossil, of which he figures thin sections, is quite different to that of Camiopora, 

 whether we regard the latter as a veritable organism or not. He therefore 

 proposes the new genus Amphipora for the reception of this peculiar form. 



In 1884, Mr. Carter published a paper under the title ' Note on the Assumed 

 Relationship of Parkeria to Stromatopora, and on a microscopic section of Stromato- 

 pora mammillata, Fr. Schmidt" (Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 5, vol. xviii, p. 353). 

 In this paper the author supports his previously expressed view that Parheria is a 

 Hydroid, " indirectly connected through Hyd/ractirda with Stromatopora." He 

 also confirms, from an examination of a thin section of Stromatopora maiiiiiiillafa, 

 Fr. Schmidt, the statement of Murie and myself that the skeleton of the Stroma- 

 toporoids is " composed of non-spicular, granular, calcareous matter." 



Dr. Carl Riemann has recently published some observations on some Stroma- 

 toporoids from the Devonian Limestones of Taubenstein, near Wetzlar (" Die 

 Kalke des Taubensteins bei Wetzlar und ihre Fauna ; " ' Neues Jahrb. fiir Min. 

 Geol. und Paheontologie,' Beilage Band, iii, pp. 142—169, Taf. I, 1884). The 

 limestones in question correspond in a general way with the " Stringocephalen- 

 Kalk " of the Eifel, or with the " Brachiopoden-Kalk " of Schulz ; and the author- 

 notes the occurrence in them of Stromatopora concentrica, Goldf., and Diapora 

 laminata, Barg. With regard to the latter, Dr. Riemann supports the views of 

 Bargatzky, and rejects the theory of commensalism put forward by Roemer. The 

 grounds which have led him to take this view are briefly as follows. 



(1) Aulopora does not appear to occur at Taubenstein, although Diapora is 

 present. 



