30 PERMIAN FOSSILS. 
Not being sufficientiy acquainted with the typical species of this genus (Alveolites 
escharovdes, from the environs of Dusseldorf,—query, Carboniferous or Devonian), I am 
not prepared to say how far it agrees with or differs from the apparently allied genus 
Calamopora. Reverting to Alveolites, probably the principal differences between it and 
the last consist in the shortness of the cells, their want of internal transverse plates, 
and their terminal mode of reproduction. These characters, keeping out of view the 
want of transverse plates, also appear to constitute the difference between the present 
genus and Sfenopora. 
Most of the Alveolites are yet only known in a fossil state. (Lamarck.) 
ALVEOLITES BucuiaNna, King. Plate III, figs. 10, 11, and 12. 
Diagnosis.—Tubes or cells adjoining, cylindrical, leaning, concavely arcuate 
ascendingly, alternately overlying each other, and slightly wrinkled more or less 
transversely. Apertures regularly arranged, circular, occasionally polygonal, margined 
by a circle of from twelve to fourteen small, closely-packed tubercles, which generally 
‘fill up the interspaces. 
This pretty Coral, which is dedicated to one of our most profound paleontologists, 
differs from Stenopora columnaris in the more regular arrangement of its apertures, 
in the general absence of interpolated tubes, and in being composed of a single 
tubular layer. The interspaces are generally wide enough to admit of the presence 
of the tubercles belonging to two adjoining apertures (vide Pl. III, fig. 11): when 
wider, an interspace is here and there perceived, containing a small opening, which 
may belong either to additional interpolated tubes, or to old ones which have become 
decrepit. The apertures are regularly arranged, more so than those of Stenopora 
columnaris, and decidedly more uniform in their arrangement than the corresponding 
structures in Calamopora Mackrothii. The tubercles appear to be hollow, and con- 
nected with foramina, which a high magnifying power discloses on the interspaces 
when they (the tubercles) are abraded. 
The only reason why this Coral has been separated generically from the last, is its 
mode of growth, a character which renders it doubtful whether A/veolites is the 
genus to which it really belongs. It seems advisable, however, to retain it in its 
present position, deferring all discussion on the matter until more is known of the 
structure of those paleeozoic Corals which Lamarck placed in his fourth and fifth 
sections— Polypiers a réseau” and “ Polypiers foraminés.’”’ 
Alveolites Buchiana is a scarce fossil, having only occurred to me once in the Shell- 
limestone at Humbleton-hill Quarry. 
