ON THE CARBONIFEROUS rOLTZOA. 83 



1875. Hyphasmopora, R. Btheridge, Jun.' 



The generic and specific characters of this new provisional genus are 

 well described by Mr. Etheridgo in the paper referred to. There is only 

 one species — H. Bushii, and I am glad that after submitting the specimens 

 to Mr. Busk, Mr. Etheridge followed his own judgment and established a 

 new genus, rather than acting upon the indiscreet reference of Mr. Busk, 

 who says, ' that the above resembled the genus Vincularia, Defranc ' — 

 adding afterwards, ' it is j^robably the type of a new genus, perhaps allied 

 to the latter.' This beautifnl species is found in several localities of 

 Scotland, but I have found it in Yorkshire, and also in N. Wales. It 

 cannot, however, be considered a common form anywhere. 



1850. Sulcoretepora, D'Orbigny. 



This genus has been accepted by Morris (Catal.) and by the Messrs. 

 Young of Glasgow, for certain species of Carb. Polyzoa. Morris gives 

 the above date, but the Messrs. Young in their paper - say ' The genus 

 Sulcoretepora was formed by D'Orbigny in 1847, with the following defi- 

 nition : — Cells in furrows on one side of simple depressed branches.' 



All the Carboniferous species that have been referred to this genus 

 have cells on both sides, and, as I have already referred one of the accepted 

 species to another genus, I will deal now with the Sulcoretepora Eobert- 

 soni, Y. and Y. As there are characters in this species altogether different 

 from any known species of Ptilodicta the same reference for this as 

 appears feasible for Fhistra ? parallela, Phill. is altogether out of the 

 question. The S. Sohertsoni has none of the characters in common with 

 Phill. sp., and I should strongly recommend the Messrs. Young to con- 

 struct for this typical species a new genus, especially so as ' Between 

 each pair of cells in a longitudinal series, 1 to 3 pores occur, normally 

 above each cell-aperture, and in well-preserved specimens tubercles sur- 

 round each cell-area more or less completely. ' ^ The faciei of the species 

 of Phill. and the sp. of the Messrs. Young may at first sight appear 

 identical, but the forms described by the later authors are destitute of the 

 non-poriferous, rugose, and striated margins of Flustra ? parallela. It is 

 upon the presence of this particularly constant character that I refer 

 Phillips' species to Ptilodicta. 



Arehceopora nexilis, De Koninck. 



This genus and species, classified as it is with tlie Polyzoa is a most 

 peculiar one. I have not by me De Koninck's work for refei-ence, and 

 the remarks that I may offer upon the species — for I shall accept the 

 genus without discussion — are the results of original investigation. The 

 species is tolerably common in a few localities of Scotland. I have no 

 record of it in this country except in doubtful fragments in Wales — and 

 my type specimen was presented to me by Mr. John Young, and I believe 

 I may safely conclude that this, with other specimens, was seen and 

 approved of by De Koninck when he visited the Hunterian Museum of 

 Glasgow. 



Sp. Char. — Polyzoary adherent to stems of encrinites, shells, frag- 

 ments of Bhahdo meson, Ceriopora interporosa, spines of Mollusca, &c., 



' Provisional Genus of Polyzoa, ibid. vol. xv. IS?.". 

 -' Proceedings of Nat. Hixt. Soc. Gh.i. 1877. 

 ■^ Ibid. p. 1G7. 



g2 



