30 NEW ZEALAND PALEONTOLOGY. 



species of this fossil in New Zealand^ and that one of them varies 

 much in hahit^ so as in some sj)ecimens to present the features 

 of F. tubipora, and in others those of F. aurantium. There are 

 concentric septa ; but yet these appear to be obliterated^ and the 

 fasciculi anastomose. There are no cerebriform crests at the 

 surface^ but the fasciculi project in rounded prominences^ of all 

 sizes and shapes. The fasciculi have a distinct including sheath, 

 which has occasionally a trumpet-like dilatation at the summit. 

 The whole character of these organisms is peculiar, and we may 

 question the propriety of including them amongst the Bryozoa. 

 The long minute character of the tubes is utterly different from 

 the ordinary cells or zoooecia of the Bryozoan. They differ, too, 

 in a remarkable way from the Hydroids, though there seems to 

 be much more affinity to these than to any other order. Per- 

 haps the living organisms obtained by the " Challenger " may 

 include some whose tissues, when examined, may throw a light 

 on the matter. In the meantime it should be a matter of 

 great interest to naturalists carefully to study the difference 

 between the so-called Bryozoa with tubes instead of cells. 

 The distinction is very great, and has not met the attention it 

 deserves. 



There is a species of Fasciculipmri from New Zealand, noticed 

 by Zittel in the Geological volume of the Reise d. '' No- 

 vara,^' p. 61. Beyond a description of the species I cannot 

 find that he made any observations on its character. His diag- 

 nosis is : " Fasciculi of cells ramose, numerous, narrow, cylin- 

 drical, smooth. Branchlets rising from the centre, divergent, 

 connected by transverse septa placed at irregular distances. 

 Surface of the zooaria globular or mammillate. Fasciculi free or 

 confluent." From this description it would not be easy to say 

 whether the species is distinct from the ones seen by me or not. 

 The figure, however (pi. 11, fig. 8, a, b, c, d), seems to me to 

 decide the question. The branches and septa are quite distinct. 

 They are smaller, branched in a different way, and the septa are 

 different. 



It is somewhat remarkable that Professor Zittel made no 

 observation on the discovery of the fossil he described. The 

 genus has long been looked upon as characteristic of the British 

 Pliocene crag ; and when, in 1859, Professor Busk examined a 

 collection of fossils sent to England from Mount Gambler by 

 me, he remarked on the absence of any such fossils. The 



