'fames on M onticulipora . 391 
abeiTant member of the class?) As a resemblance it is stated 
that both in Hetero^oi-a and in certain ramose species of Monti- 
culifora^ the corallum is "composed of slender fasciculate tubes, 
which are nearly vertical in the axial region of the branches, 
and then curve outward more or less abrujotly to reach the sur- 
face." (p. 144-5.) -'- would point out, however, that in the 
sub-genus Fistulipora^ we have the corallites in one ramose 
form [yenusta') springing from a "wrinkled, dermatic crust" 
direct to the outer surface without bending. In other species, 
both discoid and frondose of the proper genus, AlonticuUpora^ 
the corallites spring upward from a germinal plate also without 
bending (e. g. frondosa, whiteavesi^ fetasiforjuls^ &c.,) so that 
this difference between the axial and peripheral region does not 
always hold good. Neither is it by any means universal, if, in 
deed, the rule, in Polyzoa. 
Second, the dimorphic condition of the corallum in both 
Ueteropora and Monticulipora is made a point of resemblance; 
as is also the presence of tabulce in the large tubes, the smaller 
ones in Heteropora lacking these. But it should also be re- 
membered that there are certain species of Jilonticulifora (r. g, 
Jiliosa, irregului-is^ discoidea^ brlarea^ delicatiila^ septosa, ken- 
tuckiensis^ xvortheni etc.,) which have no interestitial cells: 
others which have a few, and still others in which they are 
numerous. vSo this resemblance can not hold. It is also to be 
noted that in the various species tabulae may be few or numerous; 
and it has already been pointed out that these in themselves 
cannot be considered as of very great value in classification. 
Third; in regard to the structure of the walls of the corallites 
it is stated that the discovery of a few mural, pores in one por- 
tion of one specimen of a single species of Monticnlifora is in 
accord with the condition of Heteropora^ while, on the other 
hand, some species of the latter genus are without these pores. 
It is sufficient to note that in the Favositidie and other members 
of the Perforata of Zoantharia, these pores are very numerous, 
and there can be no denial of the fact that the Monticuliporidce 
are eminently imperforate. 
Fourth; the joossession of certain radiating spines in Ifcter- 
op'ora and their absence in Monticulipora is commented upon, 
but Mr. Ulrich does not attach any weight to their absence in 
