46 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. vol. xxx. 



McCoy can not now be located in the collection. The matter i.s of no 

 consequence, however, since a fragment of McCo\\s type specimen, 

 now in the collection of the U. S. National Museum, does not ayree 

 with any of the (^incinnatian bryozoa, and there is thus little doubt that 

 James and James were in error. 



PALESCHARA BEANI (James). 



Cenunopora f hcani .James, Paleontologist, No. 1, 1878, p. 5. 

 Ceramopora f heani .Tames, Jour. Cincinnati Sec. Nat. Hist., VII, 1884, p. 23, 

 fig. 3-36. — James and James, Jour. Cincinnati Soc. Nat. Hist., XI, 1888, p. 37. 

 Paleschara heani Ulrich, American Geologist, I, 1888, p. 186. 



This line species was so detiued and figured by James in LSS-t tluit 

 its recognition is a matter of no difficulty. The very important fea- 

 ture of the species was, however, not mentioned, namel}^, that unlike 

 all other similar Ordovician bryozoa, macula? are absent. Though the 

 zooecia radiate from one or more initial points, the surface of the 

 zoarium presents no indication of the clusters of lai'ger zooecia or 

 of mesopores that invariably mark the surface of otherwise similar 

 Paleozoic bryozoa. In this pecidiarity, as well as in all other features, 

 the species in question is in accord with PaJeHchdvu. As remarked by 

 James, P. heani seems constantly to incrust the shells of OrtJioo ra.s 

 du.seri^ the most abundant cephalopod in the beds containing it. 

 Indeed, this association of the bryozoan and cephalopod is so conunon 

 that Hall and Whitfield" seem to have figured P. hean! as the surface 

 ornamentation of ( hi Jioce /'<(>< dui<er!. 



Occurrence. — Not uncommon in the Waynesville formation -of the 

 Richmond group in Ohio and Indiana. In the original description 

 James erroneously cites the species from Cincinnati. 



PHiENOPORA EXPANSA Hall and Whitfield. 



Phienopora {J'lllniUctyn) expanaa Hall And Whitkieu), Geol. Surv. Ohio, Pal., H, 



1875, p. 114, pi. V, fig. 1. 

 Ph;vno]ior(( c.rjKinxa Foerste, Geol. .Surv. Ohio, VII, 189.5, p. .5i)8, pi. .wix, 



fig. 1. 

 Plilodictya platijplitilld James, Paleontologist, No. 3, 1879, p. 21. 

 Phicnopora plati/plii/Ua A\'eij.er, Geol. Surv. New Jersey, Rept. on Pal., HI, 1903, 



pi. XIX, figs. 5-7. 



The type of .bunes's PfUod'tctii*! phtfyjdii/Ud has recently been fig- 

 ured by Professor Weller,'' whose figures led the writer to suspect 

 that the species was a synon3nn for Ph»nojjora expanm Hall and Whit- 

 field. An examination of the types themselves changed the suspicion 

 to a certainty. 



«Geol. Surv. Ohio, Pal., II, 1875, p. 97, pi. ni, fig. 4. 

 ^Geol. Surv. of New Jersey, Report on Pal., Ill, 1903. 



