﻿576 MR. A. WILMORE ON THE CARBONIFEROUS [Nov. I9IO, 



Y. Notes on the Genus Syeijvgopora. 



The generic name Syringopora was first used by Goldfuss in 

 1826 ; see ' Petrefacta Germanise' vol. i, p. 75, etc. & pi. xxv. 



Four species were defined by him, and the following brief 

 diagnoses given of two of them : — 



8. ramulosa {op. cit. p. 76) : — ' Syringopora tubis subdichotomis, tubulis 

 connectentibus sparsis.' 



8. reticulata : — ' Syrinyopora tubis subflexuosis parallelis vel divergentibus, 

 tubulis connectentibus subalternantibus.' 



These original characters have been more or less departed from, 

 and hence much confusion has arisen. Especially is this the case 

 with S. ramulosa, which has been most variously interpreted by 

 subsequent workers. It would seem desirable that we should 

 revert to the diagnosis of Goldfuss, and remember his specific name 

 ' ramulosa ' and his comprehensive though brief description. ' Tubi 

 subdichotomi ' as well as ' tubuli connectentes sparsi ' are charac- 

 teristic of certain coralla of Syringopora in an unmistakable 

 manner, and to such coralla the name ramulosa should be applied. 

 In the nature of things, much dichotomous branching and the 

 occurrence of few connecting-tubes must accompany each other. 



In 1828 Fischer de Waldheim * described two new ' species ' 

 under the names of ffarmodites clistans and H. parallelus, which 

 have been accepted by many subsequent workers. His species 

 stolonifera and ramosa have generally been merged into one or the 

 other species already recognized. 



Phillips " recognized four species of Syringopora : ramulosa, 

 Goidf. ; reticulata, Goldf. ; and two new species which he in- 

 stituted — geniculata, Phillips, and lacca, Phillips. He gave figures 

 of geniculata and ramulosa. His diagnosis of geniculata reads 

 as follows : — 



' Eadiating, often flexuous, branching, round tubes, united by very numerous 

 small transverse subverticillate tubules.' {Op. cit. p. 201.) 



Most subsequent writers have emphasized 'very numerous' and 

 1 subverticillate ' in the recognition of this species. Phillips's figure 

 (op. cit. pi. ii, fig. 1) is not a very good one. 



His ramulosa is like a specimen, with his name attached, in the 

 British Museum (Natural History), but he did not follow Goldfuss 

 in his characterization of the species. He gave 'parallel or 

 flexuous tubes, irregularly united by the tubuli' (loc. cit.). 



He did not figure reticulata, but he mentioned the small tubes 

 which have been often held by subsequent geologists to be a 

 fundamental character of reticulata. Goldfuss's reticulata was not 

 necessarily a form with small tubes, and I think that it is evident 

 to any one who has worked at abundant material that the size 

 of corallites and of coralla (as Dr. Yaughan has recently pointed 

 out) depends upon environment. 



1 ' Notice sur les Pol. Tubip. Foss.' pp. 19-25. 



2 ' Illustrations of the Geology of Yorkshire, pt. ii : The Mountain Lime- 

 stone District' London, 1836. 





