Charles Emerson Beecher. 415 



ing into the primary calyx. In regard to the mural pores, he 

 concluded from a study of them in Favosites, Striatopora, Pleu- 

 rodictyicm, and Michelinia, that they " are ineffectual attempts 

 at budding, resulting only in the perforation of the cell walls." 



In his third paper on corals he states that a specimen of 

 Romingeria umoellifera measuring 100x200 mm has approxi- 

 mately 1500 corallites on each zone, or 4500 on the three zones. 

 In 85 per cent of individuals each corallite gives rise to twelve 

 buds, so that if each of the 1500 corallites of the basal zone 

 give rise to twelve buds, there should be on the third zone 

 253,500 corallites. However, as there are only 4500 in the 

 specimen in the three zones, " this shows a suppression of 

 243,000 corallites on two zones." 



Beecher' s first turn from stratigraphic paloentology to pure 

 paleo-biology and correlation had its origin in the brachiopods. 

 While at Albany he became acquainted with Hyatt's principles, 

 although it was not until he had been some years at New 

 Haven that he fully appreciated their application to fossils. 

 Hall had made large collections . of the Silurian fossils at 

 Waldron, Indiana. This collection contained many slabs, and, 

 as much loose clay adhered to them, Beecher saved the wash- 

 ings and out of these he and Clarke obtained about 50,000 

 specimens of young brachiopods. Their results were published 

 in 1889 in a well-illustrated paper entitled u Development of 

 some Silurian Brachiopods." In summing up the developmen- 

 tal changes, they made the following very significant state- 

 ment : " In nearly every species the inceptive state is repre- 

 sented by a shell having a subcircular outline, with valves of 

 slight convexity. This phase usually disappears before the 

 individual reaches a length of l mm , after which the specific 

 characters are assumed." Widely differing species " are alike 

 in form, contour, convexity, beaks, and cardinal area, and the 

 only marked differences are to be found in the faint indications 

 of plications, strige, folds and sinuses." 



From a study of the nature of the pedicle opening they con- 

 cluded that the " phylogenetic development tended in two 

 main channels — one leading through Strophomena, Scenidium, 

 Orthisina, JLeptcena, Chonetes, Productus, and jStrophalosia, 

 and the other in the direction of ' Phynchonella, Spirifer, 



