ANIMALS. A7 
Quarry, and Hylton North-Farm, in the Shelly Magnesian Limestone. In consequence 
of Geinitz confounding it with the next Coral, it is difficult to make out its German 
habitats from the ‘ Versteinerungen, but it appears to be widely distributed in the 
Thuringerwald. Schlotheim and Goldfuss mention its occurrence at Gliicksbrunn ; I 
collected it myself at Schlossberg von Konitz, where it occurs rather plentifully. 
Genus Acanthocladia, King, 1849. 
CERATOPHYTES (ANCEPS), Schlotheim. 
GorGoNtA (1D.), Goldfuss. 
RETEPoRA (PLUMA), Phillips. 
GLAUCONOME (BrIeINNATA), Phillips. 
FENESTELLA (ANcEPS), Lonsdale. 
Diagnosis.—“ A Thamniscidia. Stems symmetrically and_ bilaterally branched 
more or less on one plane; rarely bifurcating. Branches short, simple, occasionally 
elongated, and becoming bilaterally branched. Stems and branches celluliferous on the 
side overlooking the imaginary axis of the Coral. Ce//ules imbricated, and arranged 
in longitudinal series. Serves of cellules separated from each other by a dividing ridge. 
(7) Gemmuliferous vesicles on the dividing ridges.”* 
Type, Ceratophytes anceps, Schlotheim. 
The Corals which it is proposed to place in this genus have often been included in 
Goldfuss’s G/auconome, which is typified by a tertiary-like Cellaria-salicornia fossil 
(G. marginata, Munster, ‘ Pet. Germ.,’ p. 100, pl. xxxvi, fig. 5), undoubtedly belonging to 
a genus previously established by Defrance, under the name of Vincularia. In this 
case the name G/auconome becomes obsolete. This, together with the circumstance 
that no genus is known to the writer as available for a number of species represented 
by the Ceratophytes anceps, have induced him to institute the one under consideration. 
Such species as Retepora pluma, Glauconome bipinnata, G. pulcherrima, G. grandis, and 
several others, fall at once into the group, without a doubt beimg raised of their 
congenerism. 
Acanthocladia is readily distinguished from Zhamniscus by its symmetrical and 
bilateral branching, its stems being rarely dichotomous, and the simple form of most 
of its branches. In Acanthocladia branching rarely happens through the stems 
bifurcating : itis due to the development of some of the bilateral offsets: whereas the 
reverse obtains in Ziamniscus,—the branching in this genus being due to the terminal 
forking of the stems. Another important difference consists in the position and 
character of the gemmuliferous structures. Assuming certain prominences observable 
in Ceratophytes anceps to constitute these organs (but it is not of much importance 
whether they do so or not, since their absence in C. dudbius still constitutes a difference), 
' Annals and Magazine of Natural History, 2d series, vol. ili, p. 389, 1849. 
