616 
APPENDIX A. (LONSDALE ON CORALS.) 
quence apparently of the difficulty, under some circumstances, of detecting the siphon-like contortion of 
the plates, and possibly also from other internal structures not having been full}' considered at all periods 
of development or under irregularities of growth, doubts have been expressed respecting the necessity of 
retaining Caninia as distinct from Cyathophyllum ’. It is believed, nevertheless, from an examination 
of M. Michelin’s figures of Caninia gigantea (Iconog. Zool. pi. 16. fig. 1), of Mr. Hutching’s excellent de- 
lineation of Siphonophyllia ( Caninia ) cylindrica in Mr. Griffith’s volume (pi. 27. fig. 5), and of specimens 
of that fossil presented to the Geological Society of London by the Earl of Enniskillen, that M. Michelin’s 
genus is perfectly distinct from Cyathophyllum ; and it would possibly not have been considered by Pro- 
fessor Goldfuss as belonging to it, had the coral been brought under his consideration. The true Cya- 
thophylla of that authority, taking Cyathophyllum turbinatum as exhibited in Gothland as well as British 
and Russian specimens, and C'yath. ceratiles, and Cyath. flexuosum (Petref. pi. 17. figs. 2 h, 3 A), as charac- 
teristic of the genus, have internally only two areas, an inner composed of transverse plates or diaphragms, 
and an outer of vertical lamelke connected by inclined or variously arched interstitial laminse. Caninia, 
on the contrary, is composed internally of three well-marked structural divisions: 1st, a central area 
composed of transverse diaphragms having more or less distinct, siphon-like folds, which penetrate ob- 
liquely downwards ; 2ndly, a middle area or zone composed of vertical, persistent bi-plated lamelke, with 
intermediate connecting laminae or interstitial extensions of the diaphragm, arranged horizontally or vari- 
ously inclined, sometimes obliquely downwards; and 3rdly, an outer area composed essentially of vesicular 
or arched plates inclined upwards at considerable angles, and more or less intersected by attenuated 
extensions or ramifications of the lamellae. These three structures are excellently represented in Mr. 
Hutching’s figure already quoted, and though, as there represented, they pass into each, yet each area 
has its peculiar characters, and may easily be defined in either a vertical or a transverse section. The 
three divisions are also truthfully and clearly exhibited in M. Michelin’s figure 1 a, plate 16 of his work. 
It can form no part of these notices to describe the complicated details of the Irish coral ( Siphon . (Can.) 
cylindrica), and they will doubtlessly be fully and far more satisfactorily explained when the original ob- 
servations of the authority by whom the coral was first generically distinguished in Ireland shall be laid 
before the public ; but in preparing the following notice of a Russian Caninia of very similar aspect, it 
was found necessary to refer to the characters exhibited in the Irish specimens belonging to the Geolo- 
gical Society of London, as the fossil under consideration was too imperfect to allow the characters to be 
separately investigated. The specimen was believed to be distinct from Can. gigantea or Can. (Siphon.) 
cylindrica ; but as the structure of no one of the areas was perfectly shown, and could be only alluded to, 
the describer did not feel authorised to propose a specific name. 
Caninia . 
Cylindrical; central area, siphon-like folds indistinct ; middle area, lamella numerous, interstitial lamince 
horizontal; outer area, vesicular lamina : highly inclined, very complicated, intersected by extensions of 
the lamella:. 
The fragment from which the above proofs of generic structure were obtained, was about two inches 
in diameter, but the exterior was in no part preserved, and therefore the actual width was not ascertain- 
able ; the greatest height, measuring from the extremities of the fractured sides, was only two inches and 
a half ; the outline was cylindrical, but slightly bent. 
1 . The central area was apparently about ten lines in diameter, but it was so imperfectly exhibited, that 
its extent could not be clearly defined. In specimens of Can. (Siphonophyllia) cylindrica, the size of which 
1 See M. de Koninck’s remarks on Cyathophyllum, Desc. Anim. Foss. Terr. Houill. &c. de la Belgique, p. 21. 
