48 
investigation. Messrs. Waagcn and Wentzel, the descril^ers of tlic genus\ 
appear to rely for the separation of it hy the absence of “ the strong periodical 
thickenings of the walls of the corallites, so very conspicuous in Stenopora,” 
and l)y “ transverse wrinkles which are chiefly conspicuous on the internal 
casts.” If I correctly understand these authors, this separation seems to me 
a very artificial one, and for two simple reasons : — 1st. Periodical thickenings 
are absent in at least one presumed species of Stenopora, viz., S. Leiclihardli, 
so far as we at present know its structure, the formation of the walls in this 
particular coinciding completely with that of their Geinitzclla ; they arc 
confluent in the peripheral region of S. tasmaniensis, and frequently approach 
this condition in S. ovata. 2nd. A transverse wrinkling is present on the 
internal surface of most species of Stenopora, and has been referred to more 
than once in preceding pages ; and, unless I wholly misunderstand Messrs. 
W aagen and Wentzel’s meaning, it is conspicuous in their own figures of 
Stenopora. 
"With regard to the range of the genus in time and space, if wo 
(diminate S. Ilowsel as referable to TahuUpora, and accept Geinitzelta, 
Stenopora is found only in Australia, Tasmania, and India. On the other 
hand, hy retaining the first-named species in the genus, the range of the 
latter is extended to the Carboniferous rocks of Great Britaiii ; and if 
Geinitzella cannot he satisfactorily separated from Stenopora, then its appear- 
ance in the Russian Permian rocks is assured. If Geinitzella be considered 
distinct, the geographical range cannot he extended to Europe. In the two 
first-named countries it is restricted to the Marine Series of the Permo- 
Carboniferous, whilst in India Stenopora is characteristic of the Productus- 
Limestones of the Salt Range Series. Geinitzella is confined to the latter 
horizon and the Permian. Whichever of the above views be ultimately 
adopted, Stenopora must he regarded as a genus having strong Permian 
affinities, and is one of those organisms relied on for establishing the 
close relation believed to exist between that formation and the uppermost 
Paltcozoic marine beds of Eastern Australia and Tasmania. 
Some confusion appears to exist in connection with the species believed 
to exist in New South Wales. I am acquainted with three which have been 
described hy former Writers — S. ovata, S. tasmaniensis, and S. erinita — hut I 
have failed to identify Stenopora graeilis, P)ana.“ Prof. I)e Koninek described 
* ]’al. Indica, Salt Range Fossils, 1880, vol. I, Part 0, p. 880. 
^ Chcetefes, Wilkes’ U. S. Explor. Exped., 1849, Vol. X, Geology, p. 712, Atlas, t. 11, f. 10. 
