MEMBRANIPORIDiE. 37 



Genus 2. Lepralia, Johnston. 



Polyzoario adnato, incrustante, irregnlariter suborbiculari e puncto central! radiante ; 

 e cellulis urceolatis, calcareis, decumbentibus, contiguis seu conjunctis, unico in strato 

 dispositis coraposito. 



Polyzoariura adnate, encrusting, spreading more or less regularly from a centre in a 

 circular form ; composed of a single layer of urceolate, calcareous, decumbent, contiguous 

 or connected cells. 



EscHAKA (pars), Pallas; Ellis and Solander ; Moll; Linn.; Michelin. 



Cellepora, 0th. Fabric, 1780; Gmelin (pars); Esper (pars); Lamarck, 1801 (pars); 



0/cen (pars); Audouin (sp.); Lamouroux, 1812; Hagenow (pars); Reuss ; 



IfOrhigny, 1852 ; Goldfuss. 

 Flustra (pars), Audouin ; Lamouroux. 



DiscopOiiA, Lamarck ; Gray (pars) ; Roemer, 1845 ; Lamouroux (pars), not Fleming. 

 EscHARiNA, EscHAROXDES, and DiscoPORA, Milne Edwards, 1837; Roemer, 1840; h'Or- 



bigny, ] 839-47 ; Van Beneden. 

 Berenicea (sp.), Fleming, not Lamouroux. 



Lepralia, Johnston ; Gray (sp.); Busk ; S. Wood ;' J. Morris; Hassall; Landsborough, &c. 

 Cribrillina, Herentia, Escharella, Porella, Celleporella (all sp.). Gray. 

 Marginaria (pars), Roemer ; Reuss ; Hagenow. 

 MoLlilA (sp.), Lamouroux ; D'Orbigny. 



The preceding synonymy, which might without difficulty be considerably increased 

 were it worth while, will perhaps be sufficient to show the advisability of the adoption of 

 some terra, which, though of more recent date, would avoid the ambiguity unavoidable 

 in the use of a prior term already very largely employed in various senses. There can 

 be no doubt that the term Cellepora originally proposed by 0. Fabricius for four or five 

 true species of Lepralia, should, so far as priority is concerned, have the preference. But 

 as this term has been employed in the original sense only by two or three writers, and not 

 very strictly even by them, and has by many more been applied to a widely different 

 group of species, it appears very unadvisable that it should be again used in its original 

 signification. 



The term Escharina proposed by M.Edwards, in 1837, and which has been extensively 

 adopted, is liable to the objection, that like other words ending in the same way, it has been 

 employed as expressive of a family or tribe ; nor does it moreover, as used by M. Edwards, 

 include all the forms embraced under Lepralia as here understood. Discopora has some 

 claims to adoption, but as it has never been restricted to the Lepralise proper, and has 

 been applied by Dr. Fleming to a totally distinct genus, its use would now be attended 

 with some confusion. The remaining appellation here adopted was originally proposed by 



