On the structure and affinities of the genus Monticulipora and its sub-genera, with critical descriptions of illustrative species . M. frondosa has not been subsequently re-cognised by any who have examined the Monticnliporce of theCincinnati formation. Upon the whole, therefore, and with the above-mentionedreservations, I prefer in the meanwhile to retain for the presentspecies the name of J/, frondosa, DOrb. At the same time,I fully recognise the worthlessness of DOrbignys originaldefinition for purposes of identification, and the impossibilityof entirely reconciling the description given by
On the structure and affinities of the genus Monticulipora and its sub-genera, with critical descriptions of illustrative species . M. frondosa has not been subsequently re-cognised by any who have examined the Monticnliporce of theCincinnati formation. Upon the whole, therefore, and with the above-mentionedreservations, I prefer in the meanwhile to retain for the presentspecies the name of J/, frondosa, DOrb. At the same time,I fully recognise the worthlessness of DOrbignys originaldefinition for purposes of identification, and the impossibilityof entirely reconciling the description given by Milne-Edwardsand Haime with the characters either of this or of any otherfrondescent species of the genus with which I am acquainted,I also fully recognise that the M. decipicns of Rominger is un-doubtedly identical with the form now under this is the case will be sufficiently evident from an exam-ination of the annexed sections (fig. 47) of a typical example SUB-GENUS PERONOFORA. 223 of J/, decipiens, Rominger, without any necessity for my enter-ing into a detailed verbal comparison. The only point worthy.
Size: 1595px × 1566px
Photo credit: © The Reading Room / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookauthornicholso, bookcentury1800, bookdecade1880, bookyear1881
