21 
figure Id shows the coenenchyme with “costse” cut across; Plate 38, figures 
Ic, Id, probably var, anticostiensis ; Plate 39, figures la-b, and Plate 40, 
figures la-b, forma arctica, 
“ Calapoecia Javositoidea ” Savage 1913, 64-5, Plate 3, figures 1-3 
Savage’s figures and descriptions of this species immediately suggest 
a Favosites, not a Calapoecia. The variable number of septa (tw^elve to 
twenty-four), their spiniform appearance, and the presence of a true wall 
all remove this species from the genus under consideration. It has been 
pointed out how the pores in Calapoecia arise in virtue of the septal ele- 
ments fusing at periodic levels; thus they are bound to lie on vertical and 
horizontal rows. Savage’s figure 2, Plate 3, could not be, therefore, the 
longitudinal section of a Calapoecia. 
A specimen sent to the writer as a topotype of this species by the 
United States National Museum proves to be a Paleofavosites, most prob- 
ably P. asper (d’Orb.) (Twenhofel 1914, 24, and 1928, 126; and Smith 1930, 
318). This came from the Edgewood limestone (Noix oolite), Upper 
Medinan 3 miles west of Louisiana, Mo., and is now in the Sedgwdck 
Museum collection (A6409). Since the pores of this specimen are placed 
principally in the angles of the corallites, it is difficult to reconcile it with 
Savage’s figure 2, which is a longitudinal section apparently showing the 
face of a wall replete with pores. I wrote to Dr. Bassler on finding this 
and he was good enough to reply as follows (Dec. 8, 1934) ; 
" I feel very certain that the specimen sent to you was correctly identified, in 
fact, that it was a topotype, and I agree with your identification of it. I am quite 
sure that Savage’s interpretation is incorrect, namely, that his figure 2 of Plate 3, 
instead of representing pores between corallites as in Calapoecm, really are nothing 
but the spines as seen cut in this section. His figure 3 shows that there is no room 
between the corallites for such pores and that a thin section through the fiat side of 
the wall of the corallite would appear just as shown in figure 2.”i 
Calapoecia javositoidea Savage must, then, be excluded from the genus 
Calapoecia. 
CONSIDERATION OF VARIATIONS IN CALAPOECIA 
The simplest form of Calapoecia, C. canadensis, is characterized by 
having corallites bounded by septal elements alone. These fuse periodi- 
cally to give a continuous “ wall ” and consequently the corallite boundary 
must be considered as a cribriform stereozone equivalent to the pseudotheca 
of Ogilvie 1896, 248, and Heide; this distinguishes it from the true wall of 
such tabulate corals as Favosites. No epitheca is present and the stereo- 
zones of juxtaposed corallites are contiguous, growing practically as one 
meshwork, with septal ridges growing back tn back. 
The variation from this condition to give var. anticostiensis is here re- 
garded as a parting of the stereozones of neighbouring corallites. The inter- 
stereozonal spaces are filled by a lengthening of the septa the greater length 
of which, the “ costse,” lies outside the stereozone. There is no doubt at all 
that the “ costse ” are continuous with the septa. This can be seen in 
later communication (February, 1935) tells me that Dr. Savage agrees with this 
interpretation. 
