56 
To avoid this clashing. Schliiter in 1889 proposed Cyathopedium d 
The characters of the genus are those of the type species Calophyllum 
paucitabulatum, as defined by Schliiter, who admitted the presence of 
denticulations on the septal lamellae in three specimens as described by 
Itoemer, hut considered this feature formed no real distinctive character of the 
genus. Experience gained through the study of the Australian Tryplasmcc 
leads me to believe that the observations of Hoemer and Erecli are to he 
relied on, and Cyathopedium will, therefore, become a synonym of Tryplasma. 
Schliiter’s original longitudinal figure 2 of Calophyllum paucitabulatum 
certainly does not exhibit any septal spines ; hut this possibly arises from the 
fact that the section from which the figure in question was prepared did not 
bisect a septal lamella, or pass sufficiently near the wall to show the cut 
‘ ends of the septal spines. Whiteaves suggested that Orthopedium , Schliiter, 
was probably . a synonym of his genus Pycnostylusd Does he refer to 
Cyathopedium, for I cannot find a reference to any genus of the former name 
described by Schliiter? I think it must be so, for Schliiter, on his part, 
places Fycnostylus as a synonym of his Cyathopedium with a note of interro- 
gation. If the last-named stands, and the two are identical, then Whiteaves’ 
name has precedence. 
Mr. James Thomson 4 also made use of the name Calophyllum, Dana, 
but as Calophyllum , according to Eoemer, has no generic stability, the value of 
Thomson’s descriptions as a contribution to the general morphology of this 
supposed genus are completely discounted. At the same time, some very 
curious Carboniferous corals were so named by this Author. They are simple 
cylindro-conical corals with dissepiments and a fossula, into which one or 
more of the primary septal laminae protrude, and at least two of the species 
are described with granular secondary septa. As Tryplasma regularly 
possesses both orders of its septa constantly spined, and neither true 
dissepiments nor a fossula, the Carboniferous corals in question need not 
be mistaken for the former. 
We now come to the all important consideration of Pholidophyllum . 
I have endeavoured, in previous pages, to show, and hope to do so more 
conclusively in those that follow, the close and intimate relation existing 
between the structure of Pholidophyllum and my conception of that of 
1 Schliiter — Abhandl. Geol. Specialkarte Preuss. Thuring. Staaten, 1889, VIII, Heft 4, p. 5 (263). 
2 Schliiter — Verhandl. Nat. Vereines Preuss. Rheinl. Westfalen, 1881, VIII (4), t. ‘2, f. 4. 
3 Whiteaves — Canadian Pal. Foss., 1896, Pt. 2, p. 94. 
4 Thomson— Corals Carb. System Scotland, 1883, p. 63- 
