LINDSEY—ON GYPSINA PLANA CARTER, AND THE RELATIONS OF THE GENUS 51 
With the exception of the above-mentioned gradual increase in the size of the 
chambers, there is very little difference of zoological importance on which to base the 
species, and, indeed, by some all are grouped under the one species of G. globulus, and 
even in those cases where the genus is sub-divided, the distinction lies mainly in the form 
and habit and not in any real difference of structure. 
The name Gypsina globulus is then used in the restricted sense in which Reuss first 
used it—for the spherical forms, the subconical or convex forms constitute the species 
“vesicularis "—the original type species of Carter (formerly Tinoporus vesicularis), while 
the most usual encrusting forms of small size and fairly regular contour are grouped 
under the name “ inheerens.” 
But although these species are very artificial, it is perhaps the better way to let them 
stand as being the most convenient way of describing the form and habit of any particular 
specimen, and into this scheme of things Gypsina plana fits quite conveniently as being 
the encrusting forms of far greater size than are covered by the designation Gypsina 
imherens. 
I am indebted to Prof. S. J. Hickson, F.R.S., for allowing me to examine this 
material, and to him and Dr Hickling for assistance during that examination ; also to the 
Manchester Museum for the use of the books and specimens of the Halkyard Collection. 
‘LITERATURE. 
BraDy, H. B. Foraminifera. Challenger Reports, Vol. ix. 1884. 
CARPENTER, W. B., and Jones, Rupert. Introduction to the study of Foraminifera. Ray Soc. 1862. 
Carter, H. J. On Polytrema. Annals and Mag. Nat. Hist. Ser. 4, Vol. xvi. 1876. 
— On a Foraminifera with a Melobesia-like form of growth. Annals and Mag. Nat. Hist. Vol. xx. 
1877. 
Hickson, S. J. On Polytrema and allied Genera. Trans. Linn. Soc. Ser. 2, Zool. Vol. xiv. (1911), 
pp. 443—462, pl. 30—32. 
