108 BRITISH FOSSIL CORALS. 
did not deem it necessary to maintain the distinction between the two generical divisions 
thus characterised. In our Monograph of the Astreidee we, therefore, described the typical 
species of Cyathophora under the denomination of Stylina Bourgueti. But since the 
publication of that work we have examined a greater number of specimens of this species 
without ever finding in them any trace of a columella; other species have shown the same 
peculiarity ; we must consequently feel less confident in the justness of our former views 
on the subject, and, till further data be procured, we do not feel authorised to abolish the 
genus Cyathophora. We have provisionally replaced it in our synopsis of the classification 
of corals lately published,’ and we include in it four species: C. Bowrgueti, already men- 
tioned, C. monticularia,’ C. Pratti,s and C. Luciensis.* 
The latter is easily distinguished from the three others by the small size of its calices, 
and its septa being less numerous. 
The genus Cryptocenia, to which M. D’Orbigny refers this fossil, is a subdivision of 
the genus Sfy/ina as delimitated in the system of classification adopted in this Monograph. 
2. CratHorHora Pratti. Tab. XXI, figs. 3, 3a. 
Corallum massive, very convex, and fixed by a broad basis. Calices unequally dis- 
tant, quite circular, and not very prominent. Coste thin, straight, or slightly flexuous 
where they join those of a neighbouring corallite, alternately more or less prominent, 
but all nearly of the same breadth, and closely set. They belong to fourcycla. Calicular 
fossula not very deep. Sepa very thin, broad, slightly granulated, very unequal in size, 
and forming three well developed cycla, besides one rudimentary cyclum. Those of the 
first cyclum do not extend quite to the centre of the calice, where a small vacant space is 
visible in all the corallites that we have examined, and no trace of a styliform columella 
could be discovered. Diameter of the calices two lines or more. 
We have seen only three specimens of this species, and all were im a bad state of 
preservation ; two were communicated to us by Mr. Pratt, and had been found at Comb- 
Down, near Bath; the other forms part of the collection that Mr. Walton has had the 
kindness to place at our disposal for description. 
Cyathophora Pratti differs from C. Luciensis by its calices being much larger and 
multiseptate. In C. monticularia the septa are thicker, and in C. Bourgueti> the septal 
systems, instead of being uniformly developed, are always unequal, the septa of the fourth 
cyclum existing only in four of these groups. 
1 See Milne Edwards and J. Haime, Polyp. Foss. des Terr. Palzeoz., p. 62. 
2 Cyclocenia monticularia, D’Orbigny, Prodr. de Pal., vol. ii, p. 204. 
$3 Tab. xxi, fig. 3. 4 Tab. xxx, fig. 9. 
® Having examined in the Poppelsdorf Museum the typical specimen of the Astrea alveolata of 
Goldfuss, we have ascertained that it is not, as we formerly supposed, specifically identical with C. Bour- 
gueti. The two species are quite distinct; but Astrea alveolata does not differ from the Coral which we 
