NOMINA NOVA PROPOSED 



^Fissurina wiesneri nom. nov. for Lagena marginata (Walker and Boys) var. carinata Wiesner 1931, non 



Fissurina carinata Reuss 1863, non Lagena quadrata var. carinata Chapman 1909. (See pi. LIX, 



fig. 23). 

 Frondicularia kiensis nom. nov. for F. hradyi Cushman 1913, non F. bradii (Silvestri 1903), proposed as 



Lingulonodosaria. (See pi. LXV, figs. 16 and 18). 

 Robulus atlanticus nom. nov. for Cristellaria lucida Cushman 1923, non Robulina lucida Silvestri 1880. 



(See pi. LXIX, figs. 10-12). 

 Spiroplectella earlandi nom. nov. for Spiropkctella annectens (Brady 1884), Earland 1934, non Tex- 

 tularia annectens Parker and Jones 1863, a Cretaceous species. (See pi. XLV, figs. 22, 23). 



INTRODUCTION 



The "Report on the Foraminifera dredged by H.M.S. Challenger, during the years 1873-1876," 

 by Henry Bowman Brady, needs no introduction to students of the Foraminifera. It is undoubtedly 

 the most famous of the classic monographs in that branch of science, and has probably been quoted 

 more frequently than any other work. The figures in the atlas, drawn on stone by A. T. HoUick from 

 sketches by Brady and from the specimens themselves, are among the most accurate that have as yet 

 appeared, and have been reproduced and referred to by nearly all subsequent workers. They are es- 

 pecially indispensable to students of Recent foraminiferal faunas, and any efforts which will enhance 

 their utility are regarded as entirely justified. 



Henry Bowman Brady was born in Gateshead-on-Tyne, Durham, England, in 1835, and after a 

 private education became a successful manufacturing pharmacist in Newcastle-on-Tyne. He became a 

 member of the Council and Board of Examiners of the Pharmaceutical Society of Great Britain, being 

 one of the foremost members of his profession. He was early interested in zoology, however, and spent 

 much time dredging marine organisms before becoming primarily interested in the Foraminifera. His 

 fame is based on his researches on that group, on which he published a long series of memoirs, the prin- 

 cipal ones being his "Monograph of Carboniferous and Permian Foraminifera" (Paleontographical So- 

 ciety, 1876) and the "Report on the Foraminifera dredged by H.M.S. Challenger" (2 vols., 1884). He 

 also worked with W.K. Parker and T. R. Jones in papers on nomenclature of the Foraminifera. He was 

 elected a Fellow of the Geological Society in 1864 and of the Royal Society in 1874; he was also a Fellow 

 of the Linnaean and Zoological Societies. An extensive traveller, he visited, among other countries, Fez 

 and the interior of Morocco in 1878. The first part of his Challenger monograph went to the printers in 

 1882 and the concluding part in 1884. 



He belonged to the English school of students of the Foraminifera which included among others 

 W. B. Carpenter, T. R. Jones, F. W. Millett, W. K. Parker and W. C. Williamson. These took a very 

 broad view of foraminiferal species, including many fossil forms, now regarded as distinct species, in 

 synonymy with Recent forms, and vice versa. Brady discusses his views on species in some detail on 

 pages v-viii of the Challenger Report, and stresses the elastic nature of his classification and the great 

 need for revision of generic and specific nomenclature. His view is perhaps best expressed by a quota- 

 tion he gives from Professor Huxley, that we may expect "the progress of knowledge will eventually 

 break down all sharp demarcations and substitute series for divisions." 



In this the English school differed greatly from the great Continental authorites, such as Alcide 

 d'Orbigny, Auguste E. Reuss, Olry Terquem and others, who believed in the most minute differentia- 

 tion of species. In this respect Reuss may be quoted as follows: 



"I am fully aware of the fact that numerous forms are very close to each other and may 

 be regarded as derived from single fundamental types. One might designate them as varia- 

 tions of single morphological units (Formenkreise) or as species; this is immaterial. But they 

 must be distinguished because they are really distinguishable and because may of them be- 

 long to widely different geological periods. Combining them amounts to denying all geological 

 significance of palaeontology. For what is correct for Foraminifera will and must apply with 

 equal justification to the fossil remains of other groups of animals" (A. E. Reuss, Situngsber.k.Ak. 

 Wiss. Wien, Vol. 50 (1864), 1865, p. 447; translation from M. F. Glaessner, Principles of Micro- 

 palaeontology, 1945, p. 4). 



The return in more recent times to the principles of Reuss as cited above has resulted in the splitting 

 of a large number of Brady's "species," their allocation to new genera, and the differentiation of most 



