NORTH AMERICAN LATER TERTIARY AND QUATERNARY BRYOZOA. 53 
1895. Membranipora galeata Neviani, Briozoi neozoici di alcune localita d’Italia, Boilettino della 
Society Romana per gli Studi Zoologici, vol. 4, pt. 2, p. 233 (sep. 9), 1896; vol. 5, pt. 3, 
p. 121 (sep. 20). 
1896. Membranipora galeata Neviani, Briozoi Postpliocenici di Spilinga (Calabria), Atti Acca- 
demia Gioenia di Scienze Naturali in Catania, ser. 4, vol. 9, p. 14. 
1898. Membranipora galeata Neviani, Briozoi neozoici di alcune localita d’ltalia, Boilettino de la 
Societa Romana per gli Studi Zoologici, vol. 7, pt. 4, p. 4; pt. 5, pp. 4, 6, 13 (sep.); 1900, 
pt. 6, p. 66 (sep. 9). 
1898. Chaperia annulus Waters, Observations on Membraniporidae, Journal Linnean Society 
Zoology, vol. 26, p. 673. 
1898. Chaperia annulus, variety bilaminata Waters, Observations on Membraniporidae, Journal 
Linnean Society, Zoology, vol. 26, p. 673, pi. 47, figs. 5. 8, 9. 
1901. Membranipora galeata Neviani, Bryozoi neogenici delle Calabrie, Paleontographia italica, 
vol. 6, p. 152. 
1904. Membranipora galeata Calvet, Bryozoen, Ergebnisse der Hamberger Magalhaensiche Sam- 
melreise, 1892, 1893, vol. 3, p. 10. 
1908. Chaperia galeata Cane, Iconographie des Bryozoaires fossiles de l’Argentine, Pt. I, Analea 
del Museo Nacional de Buenos Aires, vol. 17, p. 262, pi. 3, figs. 13, 14. 
1909. Chaperia galeata Calvet, Bryozoaires, Expedition Antarctique Francaise, Sciences Naturelles, 
p. 17. 
Historical. —Waters cleared up the principal characters of this species; he 
made known its structure and showed its identity with the fossil Membranipora 
annulus Manzoni of the Miocene. The complete bibliography which we give 
above, resulted from his work. 
The name galeata is the oldest, but from the description and figure in the British Museum Catalogue 
identification has not been made, and I should not have recognized it as a synonym without an examina¬ 
tion of the Museum specimen. (Waters, 1908.) 
\ 
However, in 1888 Jullien believed he had rediscovered Busk’s species; he 
gave an excellent figure, but he did not classify it in his genus Chaperia. Jullien 
appeared to be mistaken, since Waters did not cite his work at all in the synonymy. 
On the other hand, Calvet, 1904, who had studied numerous specimens, rectified 
the omission of Waters. The fossil specimens of the Canu collection have never 
the aspect shown in Jullien’s figures. 
Affinities. —The number of spines varies from four to six. The zooecia in a 
circle are the ancestrular zooecia. It is remarkable that the genus Chaperia 
widespread in both hemispheres since the Miocene has emigrated into the Southern 
Hemisphere. 
We do not believe that the entire synonymy adopted above is exact; there 
are certainly many species confounded under this name. Even in Italy under the 
name of Chaperia annulus the authors appear to have confused at least two species. 
Notably our specimens from Farnesina are absolutely distinct from those (and they 
are quite numerous) which we have collected in the Pleistocene of Palermo. But 
all these species are so variable that it is very difficult to find constant characters. 
Occurrence. —Pleistocene: Santa Barbara, California (very rare). Santa Monica 
(Rustic Canyon), California (very rare). 
Geological distribution. —Helvetian of Italy (Seguenza); Zanclean of Italy 
(Seguenza); Entrerrian of Patagonia (Canu); Miocene of Australia (Waters); 
Pliocene of New Zealand (Waters); Plaisancian of Italy (Manzoni, Neviani); 
