32 MR. A. W. WATERS OX 



In one small specimen (fig. 18) there is above many zooecia a thick 

 curved bar, somewhat thicker at the base ; but, as the cells are a 

 good deal crushed, I am not sure to what extent the appearance may 

 be due to this. As there is matrix between the zooecia, the drawing 

 is in certain parts a restoration. This small specimen shows a 

 relationship to Sticlio^iorina crassilahris, Koschinsky ; but in other 

 specimens the relationship is not so apparent. 



The dorsal surface shows the base of each zooecium as a much 

 raised rounded area, wdth a few large pores. 



There are two specimens (fig. 17) with rather smaller zooecia, but 

 with a similarly shaped aperture, but slightly smaller ; and, as a 

 rule, there are no avicularia, though zooecia with ovicells have a 

 small avicularium on one or both sides. The ovicell is not very much 

 raised, partly immersed, and is merely an enlargement of the distal 

 end of the zooecium. This might perhaps be called var. minor. 



Zooecia seen laterally, as on the free border of the zooecium, show a 

 contraction about a quarter of the height from the base ; and there 

 are here two rosette plates or pores to each zooecium. 



This is allied to 8. 2:>rotecia and S. crassilahris from Gotzreuth ; 

 and the zooecia resemble those of Kionidella ohliqidseriata, Kosch., 

 02J. Git. pi. vii. fig. 13 h ; and it would seem that the two genera 

 should be united. At first, when I had only examined specimens 

 which were not thoroughly cleaned, I took this for Cupularia hiden- 

 tata, Eeuss, as the avicularia are very prominent. I have not found 

 C. bidentata in either locality, and feel in doubt about it *. 



Log. Gotzreuth (KosgJi.) ; Brendola ; Eonzo ; Pap-Falvi-Patak. 



64. BaTOPORA MULTIKADIATA, EcUSS. 



Batoporamidtiradiata, Eeuss, Bryoz. von Crosaro, p. 265, pi. xxxi. 

 figs. 1-4. 



The zooecia are barrel-shaped, with a semicircular aperture, straight 

 below (about O'l millim. wide), and a recumbent ovicell, which, how- 

 ever, is directed towards the apex of the zoarium. 



In the shape of the zooecia, the aperture, and the ovicell, this is 

 very similar to the Orhitulipora of the Chalk and Lower Oligocene ; 

 and the two genera are clearly closely allied even if separation is 

 necessary. 



In Orhitulipora petiolus (Lonsd.) the ovicell is also directed to- 

 wards the centre of the zoarium. It is difficult to understand how 

 Batopora grew, for it does not seem to start from the large round 

 cell at the apex, as there is a layer of zooecia below that. It appears 



* [A specimen sent me by Dr. Pergens irom Pap-Falvi-Patak as Cupularia 

 hideiitata, Ess., is S. simplex, K. Since this paper was read Mr. E. Kirkpatrick, 

 of the Natural -Hi story Museum, has submitted to me a specimen, from Murray 

 Island (15-20 fath.), of recent Stichoporina, which I should call S. simplex. 

 The aperture is rather wider and rounder than in the fossils, and it may have 

 to be separated as a variety on this account, though the shape of the zooecia , 

 the position of the as'icularium, and the structure of the dorsal surface are the 

 same in both. Mr. Kirkpatrick informs me that he has also had it from the 

 Cape of Good Hope and Malacca ; and we may look for a description from his 

 pen very shortly.— A. W. W., December 24th, 1890.] 



