48 G. LINDSTRÖM, HELIOUTIDiE. 



In the uppermost strata, sigiied /, (/, A, from Manuagårda in Lye, Lill Rone in Lye, 

 Sandarfve kulle /' — h, Lindeklint, Mallgåvdsklint, Klinteberg, Luniineluuds kanal, Follingbo, 

 Hörsne, Bara hill, Siuiunde in Bara, Gotheras hammar, the limestone between Bäl and 

 Slite, Tjelders in Boge, the hills of Slite, Enholmen, Klints and Sarasugn in Othera, Bunge 

 and Fårösund. 



In the other silurian sti-ata of Sweden it has been found only in the province of 

 Jetntland in the coi-alline limestone of Norderön, 



Some remarks on Heliolites decipiens. Mag Coy. 

 Pl. II figs. 3—22. 



I cannot have the least doubt that Mac Coy's Fistulipora decipiens^ is identic with 

 a -greath number of Gotland specimens, which I have temporarilj' named Heliolites deci- 

 piens or Hel. interstinctus-decipiens, the more so, since through the kindness of Pro- 

 fessor Th. Mac Kenny Hughes I have received a cast of Mac Coy's original speciraen, 

 preserved in the Woodwardian Museum at Cambridge. It has been partially figured plate ii 

 tigs. 21, 22, and may be coinpared with the Gotland specimens figured on the same plate. 

 Mac Coy himself says about liis specimen: »So exactly does this resemble the Palaeopora 

 interstincta that I have little doubt it has often been confounded with it . . . I have seen 

 this coral also in large masses in the LTpper Silurian limestone of Gothland. Chief cha- 

 racter wabes smooth within, perfectly destitute of lamellaj». Also Milne Edwards & 

 Haime, who had examined M'Coy's specimen, say" that it much resembles a Heliolites 

 and »the coenenchyma does not present the vesicular tissue, which is characteristic of the 

 genus Fistulipora». Neither these authors nor anybody else seera ever to have reexamined 

 the original or typical specimens of M'Coy's first described^ species of Fistulipora, which 

 occur in the Carboniferous formation of England and which ought to have been a leading 

 norm for introducing new species into that genus. These type species, to judge by the 

 descriptions and figures, widely differ from the same author's Fistulipora decipiens. Sub- 

 sequent authors continued lo join with these the most heterogenous forms. Assuming a 

 certain similarity with Fist. decipiens, Billings in 1857 described a new species, named 

 Fistulipora canadensis.* But already in 1862 Rominger^ had found its real nature as 

 being a true Favosites, which he in his last work** called Fav. canadensis and still låter 

 NiCHOLSON^ has confirraed this conclusion. I have been able to examine several specimens 



1 Ann. & Mag. Nat. Hist. 2'^ Series vul. 6, 1850, p. 285. 



2 Brit. Foss. Corals p. 298. 



ä Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. 2'^ Ser. vol. III, p. 130. 1849. 



■' Geol. Survey of Canada, Report 1857 p. 165, and Canadian Naturalist and Geologist vol. III p. 420, 

 also »Fossil Corals of Canada Westv in Canadian Journal 1859, p. 98 fig. 1. 



'" Ou Calanioporte in gravel deposits near Ann Arbor. Silliin. Journal 2'' Ser. vol. 34, p. 397 as Cala- 

 mopora canadensis. 



^ Geol. Survey of Michigan, vol. III, purt II, p. 30, pl. vili lig. 4. 



' Structure and Aftinities of the Genus Monticulipora 1881, p. 94. 



