48 STOMATOPOEA. 



Unfortunately, in no case can the use of the name S. granulata 

 by zoologists be justified. Either it is a different species from the 

 Cenomanian form (the typical S. granulata l \ in which case it must 

 be renamed, or else it is the same species, when both are synonyms 

 of S. dichotoma. 



The three species are unquestionably closely allied. We are 

 reduced either to making them varieties of one species, or species 

 belonging to the same group in the genus. The latter seems to 

 me the best course. I therefore suggest for the recent species 

 the name Stomatopora trahens (Couch). 2 



Notes on Synonymy. This species is the type of the genus, so 

 there can be no doubt as to the retention of the name. 



S. dichotoma has been generally clearly understood, but there 

 seem to be several forms which should be included with it. The 

 one in regard to which I feel most doubt is S. antiqua, Haime, 

 from the Lower Lias. Haime founded this practically only on 

 variations in the branching of the lines of zocecia. This character 

 is shown by the large series of specimens in the British Museum 

 Collection to be of little value. The peristomes are not so much 

 raised as in the typical form, but in this character likewise there 

 are such variations in the same zoarium that the difference is not 

 sufficiently well marked. Vine's S. dilatans montlivaltiformis goes 

 along with S. antiqua, so also does S. Jiaimei. S. spirata, Walford, 

 appears to be only a single spiral branch, such as that shown in 

 PI. I. Pig. 1. S. porrecta, Walford, is founded, apparently, only 

 on some primitive zocecia. Stomatopora haimei, Terq. and P., 

 agrees exactly with S. antiqua, Haime, and therefore must be 

 included with it among the synonyms of this species. Stomatopora 

 terquemi appears to be only a very crowded, densely growing 

 variety, with the peristomes less raised than in the typical form. 



1 D'Orbigny. Pal. fran^. Terr. cret. Bryozaires, t. v. p. 837, pi. Dcxxviii. 

 figs. 9-11. 



2 E. Q. C. Couch. Zooph. Cornwall: Trans. R. Cornwall Polyt. Soc. 1841, 

 p. 71 ; Cornish Fauna, pt. iii. 1844, p. 105, pi. xix. fig. 5 (non 3). An unfor- 

 tunate series of misprints has led to a misinterpretation of this species. PL xix. 

 fig. 3 is said in the text to be T. trahens, and pi. xix. fig. 5 to be T. deflexa ; 

 on the legend of the plate both figures are given as trahtns. The descriptions 

 of the species, however, leave no doubt that fig. 3 should be deflexa and fig. 5 

 trahens. This has led Hincks to regard this species (Brit. Mar. Polyz. p. 427) 

 as probably a synonym of Proboscina (or, as he puts it, Stomatopora} major 

 (Johnst.). 



