5'04 Dr. H. A. Nicholson and Mr. A. H. Foord on 



Mr. John Young, in the paper previously cited, not only 

 pointed out that the so-called Berenicea megastoma of M'Goy 

 is really the young of Fistulipora minor^ M^Coy, but also 

 accepted Mr. Vine's reference of the fossil to the genus Cera- 

 mo'pora^ Hall. In this we are unable to agree with 

 Mr. Young, and we may briefly state the reasons which, in 

 our opinion, render inadmissible the course he has adopted. 

 In the iirst place, supposing it to be proved that the genera 

 named respectively Fistulipora and Ceramopora by their 

 founders were synonymous, it would be the genus Fistulipora^ 

 M'Coy, which would have to be retained, and Ceramopora, 

 Hall, suppressed. This is a mere matter oi^x\ox\ij , Fistulipora, 

 M'Coy, having been founded in 1849, whereas Ceramopora, 

 Hall, was not established until two years later (Pal. N. Y. 

 vol. ii. 1851). Even, therefore, if we were able to accept Mr. 

 Young's views on this point, the species now under consider- 

 ation would still have to be placed under the generic title of 

 Fistulipora. In the second place, we are unable to feel any 

 certainty as to what the genus Ceramopora, Hall, really is 

 supposed to include. The most recent definition of this genus 

 is that given by Mr. E. 0. Ulrich (" American Pal. Bryozoa," 

 Journ. Gin. Soc, Nat. Hist. no. 3, vol. v. 1882), who defines 

 the genus as including types with "angular" cells and oblique 

 apertures, either with no " interstitial cells " or few, generally 

 with " mural pores " and " occasionally " with tabula *. 

 Now F. incrustans, Phill., does not possess " angular " 

 corallites, always has numerous mesopores (" interstitial 

 tubes"), unquestionably has no mural pores, and always 

 possesses a larger or smaller number of tabulae. It is there- 

 fore quite clear that F. incrustans cannot be placed under 

 Ceramopora, Hall, as this genus is understood by Mr. Ulrich. 

 It is also clear from Hall's figures and description of the type 

 species of his genus Ceramopora (viz. C. imhricata, Hall), 

 that, whatever may be the precise structure of this form, it 

 has nothing in common with the coral here in question. 



It need only be added that, supposing it had been shown 

 that the young stages of Fistulipora incrustans, Phill., were 

 identical in appearance with a presumed Polyzoan genus such 



* The genus Ceramopora, as defined by Ulrich, can hardly be regarded 

 as a natural group, seeing that it is said to comprise forms with or with- 

 out " interstitial tubes," with or without mural pores ('' connecting fora- 

 mina"), with or without tabulae (" diaphragms "). The only character 

 as to which no option is given is that the apertures of the tubes are 

 oblique, wilh an arched " lip.'' This character is, however, the principal 

 one given in the diagnosis of the family Ceramoporidae, Ulrich, and it 

 cannot therefore be also used as a generic character of Ceramopora. 



