ON FOSSIL POLTZOA. 167 



flags at Ffairfach. The species is unnamed and it forms one of the 

 specimens of the Wyatt-Edgel collection. The general habit of the 

 specimen is somewhat like Retepora. We have only the reverse of a 

 portion of the zoarinm, but in several places the branches are worn and 

 the cells exposed, but not with sufficient distinctness to make out their 

 actual structure. The fenestra are oval and irregular, and the branches 

 anastomose without dissepiments. A fine large specimen — reverse only 

 — of this type is marked 'Bryozoa,' in case vii. 6/44 of the School of 

 Mines, and as ' Bryozoon ' in the ' Catalogue of Cambrian and Silurian 

 Fossils,' p. 105. All the other specimens are very fragmentary, but in 

 the Devonian series there is a matrix of a very fine species. If better 

 fragments could be found in the Devonian rocks, good facilities for the 

 closer study of this type of Palajozoic Polyzoa would be offered. 



De Koninck refers two specimens, doubtfully, to this genus ' — P. ? 

 Haimeana, De Kon. ; and P. ? crihellum, De Kon. These are amongst the 

 Indian Fossils of Dr. Fleming. In the monograph of Permian Fossils 

 Mr. King refers, and fully describes, P. Ehreiibergi, Geinitz, as belonging 

 to this genus. In his paper on the Permian rocks of South Yorkshire,^ 

 Mr. Kirkby refers fragments of the same species to Ret&pora Ehrenhergi 

 (Phyllopora). The genus is a comparatively rare one, and well-authenti- 

 cated specimens are also rare. To this genus I refer Nicholson's species^ 

 — Plujllopora (Retepora) Trentonensis. It is well described, seeing that his 

 specimens were mere fragments. Salter has already referred to this 

 genus — M'Coy's Retepora (Phyllopora) Hisengeri — in his catalogue of 

 Silurian Fossils. 



1821 ? Bereiiicea, Lamaroux. 



This genus for the present I have allowed to remain with the family 

 Diastoportdce^ — not as Diastopora, but as provisional. So far as the 

 Palaeozoic species are characteristic of the genus we may take M'Coy's 

 description.^ He says, 'the cells resemble Cellepora, but are not piled,' 

 but with more justness, ' They also resemble the cells of Stictopora 

 (Ptilodictya), but are parasitic and confined to one side. They differ from 

 Discopora by each cell being separated by a small space from its neigh- 

 bour.' Bereiiicea irregnlarls, Lonsdale (Silurian Sys.), and B. heterogyra, 

 M'Coy, are distinct types. The Discopora favosa, Lonsd., Wenlock Lime- 

 stone, approach nearer to the Geramopora type of Hall and Nicholson.^ 



1828. Discopora, Flem. ? 



Two types of this genus, as understood by Lonsdale, are found in the 

 Wenlock series of Fossils at the School of Mines. One, D. favosa, 

 Lonsd., is a beautiful little dome-like species with cells very regularly 

 disposed radiating from the centre. The other is much larger and marked 

 Discopora favosa ? Lonsd. Both are good types, and they will ultimately 

 find their proper place in our classification. But as Discopora {Patindla 1 

 and Discoporella of Busk) it will be at present impossible to retain them, 

 unless under very severe limitation, 



1849. Fenestellidj;. King. 



After the three very able papers of Mr. G. W. Shrubsole, it will be 

 useless to dwell at much length upon this family. With the whole of Mr. 



' Qua/rt. Joio-n. Geo. Soc. vol. xix. 1862. ^ Journ. of Geo. Soc. vol. xvii. 1861. 



' Geo. Mag. Jan. 1875, pi, 2, figs. 4-46. ■* Quart. Journ. Geo. Soc. Aug 1880. 



* Palseozoic Fos, • Geo. Mag. 1874-6. 



