REPORT ON UPPER PALEOZOIC FOSSILS FROM CHINA. 313 
At first sight one might well feel somewhat doubtful where to place this species, 
whether in Favosites or Michelinia, the unusually small size of the corallites certainly 
suggesting the former genus, as well as the mural pores, which appear to be rather 
rare. Some support might also be found in the character of the tabule, which, if 
they are somewhat too convex, too irregular, and too confluent for Favosites, possess 
these features in too slight a degree for typical Michelinia. On the other hand, the 
somewhat fluted condition of the median plate, which may be connected with the 
development of pseudosepta, together with the apparent presence of well-developed 
pseudosepta themselves, seem to distinguish it structurally from Favosites. The 
range of the latter genus, furthermore, appears to terminate with horizons early in 
the Mississippian, while the present form is of much later occurrence. Muichelinia, 
on the other hand, is already known in Upper Carboniferous and Permian (?) 
terrains. On this account it has seemed that the form under consideration should 
be denied to Favosites and placed with Michelinia. 
Kayser figures an unidentified species of Michelinia from China which differs 
from the present one in the much greater size of the corallites. By the same char- 
acter Michelinia favositoides may be distinguished from other members of the genus 
known to me, even from the small-celled Russian species M/. concinna Lonsdale. 
Locality and Horizon.—Pennsylvanian (Wu-shan limestone) ; near Ta-ning-hién, 
East Ssi-ch’uan (station 3). 
Syringopora sp. 
In our collection this species is represented by a single specimen, which is 
distinguished from other members of the genus known to me by the very small size 
of the corallites. These average only about 1 mm. in diameter and many are 
somewhat smaller. In their relation to one another the corallites vary in distance 
from being almost in contact to standing three or four times their own diameter 
apart, or even farther. They show the peculiar stolonal growth characteristic of 
Syringopora, and there can be little doubt that they belong to that genus. Unfortu- 
nately, the internal structures have been lost. Where cut in cross-section some 
examples show only a hollow tube and others are filled by calcite. On this account 
I do not feel at liberty to introduce a new name for what is probably an undescribed 
species. 
Locality and Horizon.—Pennsylvanian (Wu-shan limestone) ; near Ta-ning-hién, 
East Ssi-ch’uan (station 2). 
Carnegiea bassleri Girty. 
Plate 27, Figures 4, 5. 
Carnegia bassleri Grrty, 1907, Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. xxxulI, p. 40. 
This name is introduced for what appears to be a new genus of stromatoporoid 
corals. Until Waagen and Wentzel described some forms from the Salt Range of 
India the known occurrence of this group would have warranted the statement that 
it passed out of existence before the commencement of Carboniferous time. The 
discovery of a different but related type in an area so close geographically and in 
strata of such similar age as are those of India and China, is thus deprived of most 
of its surprise. The Chinese form possesses characters which forbid joining it with 
any of the established genera whose descriptions have been before me, and it repre- 
sents with little doubt a new genus. On the other hand, as but a single specimen 
is known, and as in this group more than in many others, the difficulty is great of 
distinguishing between specific and generic characters without the comparisons 
