512 Notices of Ilemoirs — G. B. Vine on Fossil Poh/zoa. 



the Corniferous Limestone of Ontario." As I have already placed 

 Goldfuss's B. prisca with the Fenestellid^, I cannot do otherwise 

 with this one. 



In addition to these species, Nicholson founds two new genera for 

 Devonian Fenestella : — 



1874. Cryptopora, Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist., Feb. 1874. 

 ,, Carinopora „ „ ,, 



Two species — Cryptopora mirabilis, Nich., and Carinopora Hindei 

 — Nicholson places to these new genera. With all due respect for 

 Professor Nicholson and his work, I raust take his admission that 

 these are apparently FenesteUidcs, and as such there was, I am 

 inclined to think, no need for founding new genera for their recep- 

 tion. The author refers to Hemitrypa, and, in one sense, compares 

 his genera with the genus of M'Coy. Unfortunately for the fate of 

 all three genera, we have only true Fenestella encrusted by a coral, 

 and the diagnosis of the species given by both authors is encumbered 

 with partly corallite and partly polyzoal structures. All the illus- 

 trations which Professor Nicholson gives are structures found in 

 typical Fenestella,'^ with the exception of fig. 2 g, p. 81. Here the 

 " carina," or keels, are apparently united by " stolons," which may 

 be sections of the tabulae only of the encrusting coral. Fig. / is 

 without this " stoloniferous " connexion, but both are sections of 

 branches cut through perpendicular to the surface, and showing the 

 largely developed keel, with the transverse section of the cells. 

 Fig. i is one of these, isolated. It would be better to view the 

 structures reversed. Figs, d and e are evidently ordinary Fenestella, 

 and the sections above described are portions of the same frond.- 

 The development of the keel is remarkable, and speaking of C. 

 Hindei Nicholson says, "The thickness of the frond, measured at 

 right angles to its plane of growth, is one line or a little more, nearly 

 two-thirds of this being accounted for by the great internal keels." 

 This is equalled by the species F. Lyelli, Dawson, which is figured 

 and partly described in "Acadian Geology."^ 



1826-33. Glauconome disticJia, Goldf., Petr. Germ. 



1874-5. Bamipora, Toula, Permo-Carbon. Fossilien.* 



? 1878. „ Hochstetteri, Toula, Bigsby, Devon. Carbon. 



„ „ var. carinata, R. Etheridge, 



jun., Geol. Mag. 1879. 



I arrange these genera and species, not because"' they are allies, 

 but because they are the reverse of that. The genera are as distinct 

 as genera can be, yet they have been confounded by authors. The 

 G. disticha of Goldfuss is, I think, distinctly an Upper Silurian type. 

 The Bala type of Glauconome f is a difi"erent genus ; and Bamipora, 

 as described by Toula, has five or six rows of irregular pores. The 

 genus Bamipora is a Permo-Carboniferous type, and although having 



1 See the illustration in the Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. Feh. 1874. 



^ I wish the reader to refer to Nicholson's paper as given above. 



^ Garb. Limestone, pp. 288-9. 



* See Arctic Pal. Polyzoa, E. Etheridge, jun , 1878, Journ. Geol. Society. 



