82 Mr. A. W. Waters on 



zoa3cia. as well as the ovicell woultl, if considered alone, 

 place Spluerophora fossa with Holupore/la, a geuus which I 

 separateil i'roiu Cellepora. 



A Sjieciiucu of Stichoporina reussi, Stol., from LatdorF, 

 fjiven to me by Dr. Pergens, has a pit as described, and the 

 zocccial openiig as first seen is round or slightly oval, but 

 on looking down the peristonae the lower edge of the oral 

 aperture is fonnd to be nearly straight (0 08 mm.) and this 

 is also the case in Batopora (text-fig. \,f,g). 



Although there are these similarities between S. reussi 

 and Batopora mult'iradiaia, the underside of S. reussi shows 

 tlie zooecial siiape and is not filled in, also the early growth 

 must have been different. In my specimen of reussi the 

 zooecia near the pit are raised, whether because they are 

 larger or because a second layer is commencing cannot be 

 decided from the speciuicn — at any rate, tiie inner raised 

 zooecia are directed towards tite pit, while the outer ones 

 are directed away from it. Canu"^ has united S. reussi and 

 Batopora multiradiata as one species, which does not seem 

 to be the case, nor will they probably remain in the same 

 genus. Canu says " unilamellaire/^ but B. multiradiata is 

 bilamellar. This examination shows that Koschinsky was 

 uot right in uniting his species of Stic/ioporina with 

 Stoliczka's, for none of Koschinsky's have a pit, besides 

 which, the oral aperture of Koschinsky's species is much 

 larger with a distinct contraction at each side, so that 

 S. simplex, S. prote< ta, S. crassilahris, and S. bidentata, Kss., 

 must be phiced elsewhere, and they seem to agree with 

 Maniillopora^ Smitl. 



Neviani t published a paper on Stichoporina, though now 

 most species referred to seem to l)elong to the genus 

 Mumillopora. The reason for separating them from Sticho- 

 porina has been given, and in none other that Neviani 

 mentions is there a pit. Fedora ediv.irdsi, Jull., is a hollow 

 cylinder, as are also Kionidella [Discoflustrellaria) dactylus, 

 d'Orb., and F. e.rcelsa, Kosch., though with a small lumen, 

 and both seem to belong to Mamillopora. 



Canu J, ^iQd^i\vv^o'( Stichoporina reussi, Stol., says '^ances- 

 trule mem'nraiiiporoide," but are we yet correctly acquainted 

 with the ancestrule ? 



The genus Prattia, d^Archiac, I should place under 

 Mamillupora, though Caiiu § has left it as Prattia, and 



* liry. Teit. p. 100. 



t "Nuova 8p. loss, di Stichoporina," Bull. Soc. Rom. per gli Stud. 

 Zool. vol. iv. p. 1 (1895). 



I Bry. Tert. p. 100, pi. xi. fig.<3. 16-18 (1907). 



§ "Bry. du Sud-Ouest de la France," Bull. Soc. Geol. de France, 

 ser. 4, vol. x. p. 854 (1910;. 



