Title The Natural History Museum Fossil Porifera Collection

Authors Sendino, Consuelo

Date Submitted 2021-02-09 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

The Natural History Museum Fossil Porifera Collection

Journal: Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

Manuscript ID Draft

Manuscript Type: Original Manuscript

Date Submitted by the n/a Author: Complete List of Authors:ForSendino, Peer Consuelo; ReviewNatural History Museum, Earth Sciences Museum < Type < Collections, Case Study, Digitizing < Activities < Collections, Data Evaluation < Case Study, Documentation < Case Keywords: Study, Metadata < Case Study, Natural history < Museum < Type < Collections, Curator < Profession, Cultural Heritage < Research and Topics, History of collections < Research and Topics

This is the status update on the Porifera Collection at The Natural History Museum, London. There is still very little information available regarding fossil sponge digitisation or any similar initiative, with molluscs being the main goal of digitisation worldwide. This paper covers the type and figured specimens and drawer label content data of the Porifera Collection and also describes the collection and its research potential. Abstract: With approximately 71,000 specimens at the NHM, of which more than 60 % are Mesozoic, this is the best Mesozoic sponge collection in the world and one of the most important. It covers all stratigraphic periods and all taxonomic groups and includes almost 3000 cited and figured specimens including types. Although most of the specimens come from the British Isles, there are also worldwide samples, with abundant specimens from other Commonwealth countries and from Antarctica.

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 1 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

1 2 The Natural History Museum Fossil Porifera Collection 3 4 5 CONSUELO SENDINO 6 7 8 9 10 11 Department of Earth Sciences, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, SW7 5BD London, UK; c.sendino- 12 [email protected] 13 14 15 16 17 18 KEY WORDS: The Natural History Museum, digitisation, Porifera Collection, worldwide, British 19 20 Isles, Mesozoic. 21 For Peer Review 22 23 ABSTRACT - This is the status update on the Porifera Collection at The Natural History 24 25 Museum, London. There is still very little information available regarding fossil sponge 26 27 digitisation or any similar initiative, with molluscs being the main goal of digitisation worldwide. 28 29 This paper covers the type and figured specimens and drawer label content data of the Porifera 30 31 Collection and also describes the collection and its research potential. With approximately 32 33 71,000 specimens at the NHM, of which more than 60 % are Mesozoic, this is the best 34 35 Mesozoic sponge collection in the world and one of the most important. It covers all 36 37 stratigraphic periods and all taxonomic groups and includes almost 3000 cited and figured 38 39 40 specimens including types. Although most of the specimens come from the British Isles, there 41 42 are also worldwide samples, with abundant specimens from other Commonwealth countries 43 44 and from Antarctica. 45 46 47 48 49 INTRODUCTION 50 51 52 Historically sponges were studied by their external form and growth habit, until this method was 53 54 proved to be unreliable. Hinde, a leading authority on fossil sponges in the 19th century, 55 56 published in 1883 the catalogue of fossil sponges of the Geological Department of the British 57 58 Museum (Natural History), now the Natural History Museum (NHM), classifying sponges 59 60 according to their microscopic structure, this collection being one of the first to be studied in this

way. This allowed Hinde to confirm the indisputable resemblance between fossil calcareous https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 2 of 49 sponges and living ones. Hinde’s catalogue condensed descriptions of mainly fossil British 1 2 species and also new species from France, Switzerland, and Germany, all accompanied with 3 4 figures. 185 specimens (with types) of all groups were described and figured in this monograph, 5 6 including his own Hinde Collection and other collections such as those of William Smith, "The 7 8 Father of English Geology," Toulmin Smith, Mantell, Phillips, Miss Benett, Bowerbank, and 9 10 Cunnington. 11 12 13 The Hinde Collection includes the vast slide collection that Hinde prepared to describe sponge 14 15 species. This collection was transferred to the NHM in several batches (1878, 1892, 1903, 16 17 1918) by Hinde and after his death by his widow. Other specimens come from other 18 19 researchers such as the zoologist Tomes who in 1894 presented the calcisponges that Hinde 20 21 (1893) described from theFor English Peer Inferior Oolite. Review 22 23 24 Other important fossil sponges were presented to the NHM by Benett, from the Upper 25 26 Greensand of Warminster, and by William Smith whose collection of British fossil sponges 27 28 illustrated in his Strata Identified by Organized Fossils was purchased by the NHM in 1816. 29 30 Benett (1831) listed forty-seven species and ‘varieties’ of sponges, all without descriptions but 31 32 33 with good illustrations and also using taxonomic names which were respected by Hinde (1883). 34 35 Phillips (1829, 1835), in Illustrations of the Geology of Yorkshire, listed sixteen species of 36 37 sponges from the White Chalk (Senonian) of Danes Dyke in Yorkshire that Hinde (1883) 38 39 grouped into ten species. Although Phillips did not describe these species and gave poor quality 40 41 illustrations, Hinde (1883) had the opportunity to study the types, described them and credited 42 43 Phillips as the species author as he did with Benett. Other sponges in the NHM Collection are 44 45 those of the geologist Lee from the Yorkshire Chalk which were presented to the Museum in 46 47 1885, sponges with which Lee described eight new species in 1839. 48 49 50 Additional sponges were figured by Parkinson in his Organic Remains of a Former World 51 52 (1808); some of them came to the Museum from other collections and form part of the Porifera 53 54 Collection, such as the iconic specimen that Parkinson (1808) figured on the frontispiece of the 55 56 second volume, Chenendopora michelini; he identified the specimen as Alcyonium. Mantell was 57 58 one of the fossil collectors who attended the Parkinson sale of 1827 and presumably bought 59 60 some of the Parkinson sponges (Cleevely, 1983). The Mantell Collection arrived in two batches

(1839, 1853) with the sponges published and mostly figured in 1815, 1822, 1848 and 1854 (see https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 3 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Table 1 and references). In his publications, he already recognised that external form was not 1 2 reliable for sponge identification. The Toulmin Smith Porifera Collection was also housed at the 3 4 NHM from 1869; these are the British Cretaceous specimens that Toulmin Smith described in 5 6 1847 (a-b) and 1848(a-e). Toulmin Smith advanced the knowledge of sponges and wrote noting 7 8 differences in the tissues and network meshes under the microscope, but he did not use these 9 10 differences for taxonomic identification. Later, the British geologist Sollas described the fossil 11 12 sponges collected on the Challenger Expedition (Sollas, 1888) through their microstructure with 13 14 the use of thin sections and also described the British Jurassic and Cretaceous sponges 15 16 (Sollas, 1877, 1883). The former specimens, from the Challenger Expedition, are kept in the 17 18 19 Department of Life Sciences at the NHM. 20 21 Treacher presented part Forof his collection Peer from Reviewthe Faringdon Sponge Gravels and other British 22 23 Cretaceous localities between 1907 and 1921 and Pulfrey presented his collection of sponge 24 25 26 spicules from the Lower Palaeozoic of North Wales in 1933. 27 28 Minor collections, in terms of number of sponge specimens, are those of Bowerbank, which was 29 30 acquired at a sale in 1865, after his retirement, and the Morris Collection which was acquired in 31 32 33 two batches (1863, 1867). There are also sponges collected by the Welsh naturalist Thomas 34 35 Pennant. 36 37 Regarding their shapes and dimensions, this NHM Fossil Collection presents a great diversity, 38 39 40 with forms such as cups, funnels, vases, cylindrical, club-shaped, fan-shaped, and branching 41 42 examples. One of the smallest specimens belongs to the calcareous Peronella which measures 43 44 5.5 mm in length by 4 mm in width, whilst the largest is a demospongea, belonging to 45 46 Chenendopora, with 400 mm long and 200 mm wide. 47 48 49 The NHM Porifera Collection contains almost 3000 referenced individuals as hand specimens 50 51 and thin sections. From these, more than 2000 are figured and the rest are cited in more than 52 53 140 bibliographic references (see Fig. 1 and Appendix). 54 55 56FIGURE 1 57 58 59 Very few specimens of this Collection have been fully digitised (less than 2%) on our NHM 60 collection management system, but a Microsoft Excel database of 752 entries has been

populated, with drawer label content that has been used to help write this article. The data https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 4 of 49 recorded includes taxa, geographic site and stratigraphic locations of the specimens, with some 1 2 labels also showing the donor collection. Most of the specimens have been assigned stub 3 4 records in the NHM collection management system, Emu (blinded, 2009), that are linked to 5 6 images from the catalogue books where the specimen registration number is recorded with 7 8 taxon, geographic and stratigraphic information and acquisition details. The results shown here 9 10 are based on the drawer label data concerning hand specimen and slide cabinets. In order to 11 12 estimate the most accurate proportions, the specimen size has been considered. The number 13 14 of specimens has been determined by counting how many specimens a drawer contains and 15 16 this figure was multiplied by the entire number of drawers for each Porifera class (for hand 17 18 19 specimen and slide cabinets). Drawers containing larger than standard-sized specimens were 20 21 counted separately. TotalFor data and Peer percentages Review were estimated using Microsoft Excel. This is 22 23 the first time that the drawer label content has been used to show the collection rough data and 24 25 also that a complete museum fossil sponge database has been shown. This is a useful starting 26 27 point for collections still not completely digitised and a good method to allow online accessibility 28 29 of what museums keep in their collection. It helps with gathering taxonomic, geographic and 30 31 stratigraphic data of the collection that can be used in research and curation fields such as 32 33 biogeography and also highlights gaps in the collections for each group. This is a good basis for 34 35 a more comprehensive database as an important source for understanding Porifera biodiversity. 36 37 38 FOSSIL PORIFERA COLLECTIONS ELSEWHERE 39 40 41 Although Hinde (1887, 1888) studied the British and German Palaeozoic sponges, many of 42 43 those specimens kept at the NHM, there are other historically important German Palaeozoic 44 45 collections which could compete with the NHM Collection. Among these are those studied by 46 47 Hermann Rauff at the Göttingen Geoscience Museum and at the Naturkunde, Rudolf Kolb at 48 49 the Palaeontological Museum of Munich, and Schrammen mainly at the Roemer Museum in 50 51 Hildesheim and also at the American Museum of Natural History in New York. It is also 52 53 54 important to cite the Bohemian Palaeozoic sponges studied by the zoologists and 55 56 palaeontologists Antonín Jan Frič (who also published as Anton Fritsch) and Filip Počta (also 57 58 published as Phillip Počta) in Bohemia. 59 60 With regards to Mesozoic sponges there is no collection that can compete with that of the NHM.

Frič, Počta, Kolb and Schrammen created and described Mesozoic collections (O'Connell, https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 5 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals 1919), and some of these were purchased by the NHM, such as the Cretaceous Porifera 1 2 Collection from both Počta (Počta, 1907) in 1909 and Schrammen in 1920 (Cleevely, 1983). 3 4 Therefore, these collections are surpassed by the NHM Fossil Porifera Collection which is also 5 6 cited by these authors. The NHM keeps numerous types and figured specimens that are key to 7 8 taxonomic identification, including not only hand specimens, but also thin sections and cavity 9 10 slides (see some of the most striking NHM fossil sponges of this Collection in Fig. 2). The thin 11 12 sections make the NHM Fossil Porifera Collection unique as they come from historical 13 14 specimens, for which justification for destructive sampling for preparation of specimens would 15 16 now be difficult, and in the specific case of the siliceous samples would be expensive to prepare 17 18 19 as well as problematic. 20 21FIGURE 2 For Peer Review 22 23 24 SPECIMEN PRESERVATION METHOD 25 26 This NHM Collection constitutes mainly fossil specimens that are kept as hand specimens 27 28 (88%) and thin sections (12%). The Recent specimens (0.2%) are preserved as dried 29 30 specimens. The sponges are stored within the collection cabinets. Each cabinet holds drawers 31 32 33 that store individual specimens from the same family, geographic location (region or country) 34 35 and stratum. 36 37 There are almost 8000 thin sections, of which more than half are of stromatoporoids, and the 38 39 40 rest are represented in the same proportions as the hand specimens. Therefore, the taxonomic 41 42 representation of these thin sections in descending order is as follows: demosponges, 43 44 hexactinellids, calcareous sponges and archaeocyaths. Most of these are historical specimens, 45 46 prepared by Nicholson and Hinde. These thin sections are fundamental for viewing morphology 47 48 and the internal microstructures required to meet criteria for taxonomic identification. 49 50 51 TAXONOMIC COVERAGE 52 53 The NHM Fossil Porifera Collection covers most of the Porifera groups such as demosponges, 54 55 56 hexactinellids, calcareous sponges, archaeocyaths and stromatoporoids. The class 57 58 Demospongea is the most represented in the NHM Collection, including the polyphyletic lithistid 59 60 group of massive skeletons which are easily preserved in the geological record. These reached

their greatest dominance during the Cretaceous. The NHM has the most important collection of

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 6 of 49 Cretaceous sponges in the world, with hundreds of non-lithistid demosponges and more than 1 2 10,000 lithistids, mostly from Europe and North America. These are useful in unveiling the 3 4 diverging silicification levels over time. This class is represented from the Palaeozoic to 5 6 Cenozoic eras (Fig. 3) and includes almost half of the total number of the sponges in the 7 8 Collection. 9 10 11FIGURE 3 12 13 14 Hexactinellids are siliceous sponges that also range in time, as do the demosponges, from the 15 16 Cambrian to Recent. They have been found living in both cold deep and warm shallow waters 17 18 and have been defined as the oldest lineage of animals alive on earth today. The NHM Porifera 19 20 Collection has almost a quarter of fossils of this group (Fig. 3), mainly from the Mesozoic of 21 For Peer Review 22 Europe. 23 24 25 Calcareous sponges have skeletons with spicules of calcium carbonate and have persisted, as 26 27 the previous groups, from Cambrian to Recent times, having their greatest diversification during 28 29 the Cretaceous. Their Mesozoic representation stands out in the NHM Porifera Collection and 30 31 represents the third biggest group of sponges. Most of them are from Europe, but there are 32 33 representatives from Asia, South America and the Middle East as well. The calcareous sponges 34 35 represent 10 % of specimens of the entire Collection (Fig. 3). 36 37 38 The other classes are hypercalcified sponges, the stromatoporoids and the archaeocyaths. The 39 40 Stromatoporoidea, an extinct class of non-spiculate poriferans, are very well represented (Fig. 41 42 3). They appeared for first time in the Middle Ordovician and became abundant and widespread 43 44 through the Silurian and Devonian, until finally disappearing in the Cretaceous. The NHM 45 46 47 Porifera Collection has more than 15000 specimens, including thin sections, and contains the 48 49 most outstanding Silurian specimens such as the historical Nicholson Collection (1885-1892) of 50 51 British stromatoporoids. Archaeocyaths characterize the first substantial diversification of the 52 53 phylum Porifera, to which they are now generally assigned as a distinct class. They flourished in 54 55 carbonate shelf and reef environments of the early Cambrian and a depauperate stock 56 57 persisted into the late Cambrian. The Archaeocytha Collection at the NHM contains more than 58 59 700 specimens, mainly from Antarctica, Australia, Canada, Morocco, Sardinia, Siberia, Spain 60 and USA. This is one of the most important Archaeocyatha Collections in the world, including a

mixture of over 100 cavity slides and thin sections. About a hundred type and figured https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 7 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals specimens are present among these specimens (such as in Hill, 1965 and Debrenne, 1969). 1 2 They represent 1% of the Collection (Fig. 3). 3 4 More than 4% of the NHM Collection, 3000 individuals, have been cited and figured, including 5 6 7 types that are key to taxonomic identification studies and should be the main goal of digitisation 8 9 regarding marine palaeofauna. 10 11 12 13 14 STRATIGRAPHIC COVERAGE 15 16 17 Stratigraphically, the NHM Fossil Porifera Collection is represented by specimens from the 18 19 Cambrian to Pleistocene, but is particularly rich in Mesozoic and Palaeozoic (Fig. 3) sponges. 20 21 The reason for this is explainedFor by Peer the localities Review from where they were collected, a large 22 23 proportion originating from the British Isles. 24 25 26 The fossil demosponges are mainly Mesozoic specimens (79%), followed by Palaeozoic (20%) 27 28 and Ceinozoic (1%). Fossil calcareous specimens are represented by Mesozoic (86%), 29 30 Cainozoic (9%), Recent (3%) and Palaeozoic (2%). Fossil hexactinellids are mostly Mesozoic 31 32 (98%) and a small proportion Palaeozoic. 33 34 35 As noted above, archaeocyaths are Cambrian (100%), therefore Palaeozoic. Stromatoporoids 36 37 are mainly Palaeozoic (77%) and in less proportion Mesozoic (23%). 38 39 40 41 42 43 GEOGRAPHIC COVERAGE 44 45 46 Although the distribution of this Collection is worldwide, it is mainly European (80%). There is 47 48 the same trend in most of the groups, with the exception of archaeocyaths. The majority of the 49 50 collection is from the British Isles (61%) followed by European continental (18%). There are also 51 52 abundant specimens from the Commonwealth countries (9%) and Antarctica (less than 1%). 53 54 55 If we study geographic origin by class, most of the demosponges are from the British Isles 56 57 (62%), the European continent (25%) and in much less proportion from North America, the 58 59 Arctic, Oceania, Middle East, Russia, Africa, Caribbean, Asia and South America (Fig. 4). 60 FIGURE 4

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 8 of 49 The hexactinellids are also mainly from the British Isles (66%), followed by European 1 2 continental (24%) and North America, Oceania, Middle East, Russia, Africa Caribbean, and 3 4 Asia. 5 6 7 The NHM fossil calcareous sponges follow similar proportions: British Isles (70%), European 8 9 continental (12%), Asia (4%) and the other regions have similar number of specimens (North 10 11 America, South America, Oceania, Middle East, Russia, Africa and Caribbean). 12 13 14 In the case of the stromatoporoids are also mainly from the British Isles (63%) followed, this 15 16 time, by Middle East specimens (12%), Europe non-British (10%), North America (6%) and the 17 18 rest from Oceania, Russia, Africa and Oceania. The archaeocyaths are mainly from Oceania 19 20 (63%), Antarctica (25%) and in much less proportion from Europe, North America, Russia and 21 For Peer Review 22 Africa. 23 24 25 POTENTIAL RESEARCH PROJECTS 26 27 28 Sponges are the oldest known metazoan group with an outstanding importance as both a living 29 30 fossil and the closest related to the hypothetical ancestor of all metazoans, the Urmetazoa 31 32 (Thakur & Müller, 2004). Currently their importance is also economic, being used for treating 33 34 skin conditions and diseases, with, for instance, some compounds derived from Spongilla 35 36 species. The three living fossil sponge classes, Hexactinellida, Demospongiae and Calcaera, 37 38 are currently being used in molecular biological studies and this data could be extrapolated to 39 40 fossil taxa by molecular clock technique. This Collection keeps approximately 8000 thin 41 42 sections and cavity slides that will save time in preparing the specimens for taxonomic studies, 43 44 as well as for climate change research and functional morphology studies. Some of the samples 45 46 47 come from sites that are currently difficult to access, such as in the Middle East. They will also 48 49 be useful in revealing the biodiversity of fossil sponges and their role as reef builders in 50 51 Palaeozoic and Mesozoic times. 52 53 The study of this comprehensive collection will help to fill the gaps in our knowledge of the 54 55 56 evolution of fossil faunas and for study of their phylogenetics. In the case of lithistids, a better 57 58 understanding is needed of the diagnostic biological characters that are potentially best 59 60 preserved to separate apomorphies and synapomorphies in order to distinguish subgroups and

integrate them in phylogenetic studies.

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 9 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Additionally, the study of the rocks associated with the specimens will disclose the 1 2 paleoenvironmental conditions that favoured silicification and calcification processes. These 3 4 conditions are considered to be very different from those of extant taxa (Pisera, 2004), with 5 6 fossil lithistids and hexactinellids with fused siliceous skeletons inhabiting shallower waters. 7 8 Current fossil sponge silica research opens a door to better understanding the evolution of the 9 10 group and their relevance to climate change. 11 12 13 Finally, new resources and tools such as 3-D reconstructions (Luo & Reitner, 2014), CT 14 15 Scanning and Big Data are revolutionizing sponge biology as sponge microstructure did in 16 17 Victorian times with taxonomic studies of Porifera. 18 19 20 CONCLUSION 21 For Peer Review 22 23 This large NHM Mesozoic Porifera Collection has approximately 71000 individuals and 4% of 24 25 the collection cited and figured in bibliographical references. It is key to Porifera taxonomic 26 27 identification and having historical thin sections associated with the hand specimens makes this 28 29 Collection unique. This article is a first step in the digitization of this Collection and is an 30 31 example of how the data populated from the drawer label content can be used to show the 32 33 collection’s content. The data recorded includes taxa, geographic site and strata where the 34 35 specimens come from and some of the labels also named the donor collection. This is also the 36 37 first time that a museum fossil sponge database has been shown. 38 39 40 41 42 43 REFERENCES 44 45 46 Anonymous. (1948). Flints. The Blue Circle. House Journal of the Blue Circle Cement 47 48 Organization, 2: 10-13. 49 50 51 Bedford, R. & Bedford, J. (1937). Further notes on Archaeos (Pleospongia) from the lower 52 53 Cambrian of South Australia. Memoirs of the Kyancutta Museum, 4: 27-38. 54 55 Bedford, R. & Bedford, J. (1939). Development and Classification of Archaeos 56 57 58 (Pleospongia). Memoirs of the Kyancutta Museum, 6: 67-82. 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 10 of 49 Bedford, R. & Bedford, W.R. (1934). New Species of Archaeocyathinae and other 1 2 organisms from the Lower Cambrian of Beltana, South Australia. Memoirs of the Kyancutta 3 4 Museum, 1: 7 pp. 5 6 7 Benett, E. (1831). A Catalogue of Organic Remains of the County of Wiltshire. iv, 9 pp. J. L. 8 9 Vardy, Warminster. 10 11 Bowerbank, J.S. (1841). On the siliceous bodies of the Chalk, Greensands and Oolites. 12 13 14 Transactions of the Geological Society, 7: 181-194. 15 16 Bowerbank, J.S. (1842). On the spongeous origin of Moss Agaetes and other siliceous 17 18 bodies. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, 10, 9-18, 84-91. 19 20 21 Bowerbank, J.S. (1849).For On aPeer Siliceous Zoophyte,Review Alcyonites parasiticum. Quarterly 22 23 Journal of the Geological Society of London, 5: 319-328. 24 25 26 Bowerbank, J.S. (1869). A monograph of the siliceo-fibrous sponges. Proceedings of the 27 28 Zoological Society of London, 1869: 66-100, 323-351. 29 30 31 Bowerbank, J.S. (1870). Organic remains from Queensland, 235-242. In Moore, C. 32 33 Australian Mesozoic Geology and Palaeontology. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of 34 35 London, 26: 226-261. 36 37 38 Bowerbank, J.S. (1876). Contributions to a General History of the Spongiadae. Part 8. 39 40 Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 1876: 768-775. 41 42 43 Cleevely, R.J. (1983). World Palaeontological Collections. 365 pp. British Museum (Natural 44 45 History). Mansell Publishing Limited. London. 46 47 48 Cunnington, W. (1849). On a peculiarity in the structure of one of the fossils sponges of the 49 50 Chalk, Choanites Koenigi, Mantell. Report of the British Association for the Advancement of 51 52 Science, 18, p. 67. 53 54 55 Debrenne, F. (1969). Lower Cambrian Archaeocyatha from the Ajax Mine, Beltana, 56 57 South Australia. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Geology, 17: 295-376. 58 59 60 Hill, D. (1965). Archaeocyatha from Antarctica and a review of the phylum. Scientific Reports. Trans-Antarctic Expedition, 10: 151 pp.

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 11 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Hinde, G.J. (1880). Fossil sponge spicules from the Upper Chalk. Found in the interior of a 1 2 single flint-stone from Horstead in Norfolk. 83 pp. Munich. 3 4 Hinde, G.J. (1882). Notes on Fossil Calcispongiae, with Descriptions of New Species. 5 6 7 Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 5, 10: 185-206. 8 9 Hinde, G.J. (1883). Catalogue of the fossil sponges in the Geological Department of the 10 11 British Museum (Natural History), with descriptions of new and little-known species (illustrated 12 13 14 by 38 lithographic plates). 248 pp. London. 15 16 Hinde, G.J. (1884). On some fossil calcisponges from the well-boring at Richmond, Surrey. 17 18 Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 40: 778-783. 19 20 21 Hinde, G.J. (1884a).For On the StructurePeer and Review Affinities of the Family of the Receptaculitidae, 22 23 including therein the Genera Ischadites, Murchison (= Tetragonis, Eichwald); Sphaerospongia, 24 25 Pengelly; Acanthochonia, gen.nov.; and Receptaculites, Defrance. Quarterly Journal of the 26 27 28 Geological Society of London, 40: 795-849. 29 30 Hinde, G.J. (1886). On beds of sponge-remains in the Lower and Upper Greensand of the 31 32 South of England. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 176 (for 1885): 33 34 35 403-453. 36 37 Hinde, G.J. (1887). On the Genus Hindia, Duncan, and the Name of its typical species. 38 39 Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 5, 19: 67-79. 40 41 42 Hinde, G.J. (1888). On the Chert and Siliceous Schists of the Permo-Carboniferous Strata 43 44 of Spitzbergen, and on the Characters of the sponges therefrom, which have been described by 45 46 Dr. E. Dunikowski. Geological Magazine, Series 3, 5: 241-251. 47 48 49 Hinde, G.J. (1887-1912). A monograph of the British Fossil Sponges. Vol 1. Sponges of the 50 51 Palaeozoic and Jurassic Strata. Palaeontographical Society Monograph, 1-92 (1887); 93-188 52 53 (1888); 189-254 (1893); 255-264 (1912). London. 54 55 56 Hinde, G.J. (1889a). On Archaeocyathus Billings, and other Genera, allied to or associated 57 58 with it, from the Cambrian Strata of North America, Spain, Sardinia, and Scotland. Quarterly 59 60 Journal of the Geological Society of London, 45: 125-148.

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 12 of 49 Hinde, G.J. (1889b). On a true Leuconid Calcisponge from the Middle Lias of 1 2 Nottinghamshire. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 6, 4: 352-357. 3 4 Hinde, G.J. (1889c). Detached calcisponge spicules in the Upper Chalk of Surrey. Annals 5 6 7 and Magazine of Natural History, Series 6, 4: 357. 8 9 Hinde, G.J. (1890a). On a new genus of siliceous sponges from the Lower Calcareous Grit 10 11 of Yorkshire. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 46: 54-61. 12 13 14 Hinde, G.J. (1890b). Appendice. On the nature of some fragments of siliceous rock from 15 16 the Boulderclay of the “Roode Klif ” (Red Cliff) on the southern border of the province of 17 18 Friesland. Bulletin de la Société Belge de Géologie, de Paléontologie et de Hydrologie, 19 20 Bruxelles, 3: 254-258. 21 For Peer Review 22 23 Hinde, G.J. (1891a). Notes on a New Fossil Sponge from the Utica Shale Formation 24 25 (Ordovician) at Ottawa, Canada. Geological Magazine, Series 3, 8: 22-24. 26 27 28 Hinde, G.J. (1891b). Note on specimens of Cherty Siliceous Rock from South Australia. 29 30 Geological Magazine, Series 3, 8: 115-116. 31 32 33 Hinde, G.J. (1892). Class Spongida, 436-439. In Jack, R.L. & Etheridge, R. The geology & 34 35 palaeontology of Queensland and New Guinea (&c). 2 vols: xxxi + 768 pp. Brisbane and 36 37 London. 38 39 40 Hinde, G.J. (1900). On some remarkable Calcisponges from the Eocene strata of Victoria 41 42 (Australia). Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 56: 50-66. 43 44 45 Hinde, G.J. (1904). On the structure and affinities of the genus Porosphaera, Steinmann. 46 47 Journal of the Royal Microscopical Society of London, 1904: 1-25. 48 49 50 Hinde, G.J. (1905). Description of some fossils from a Croydon garden. Proceedings and 51 52 Transactions of the Croydon Natural History and Scientific Society, 5: 87-94. 53 54 55 Hinde, G.J. (1908). On a new sponge from the Chalk at Goring-on-Thames. Proceedings 56 57 of the Geologists’ Association, 20: 420-421. 58 59 60 Hinde, G.J. (1910). On the Fossil sponge spicules in a Rock from the Deep Lead (?) at Princess Royal Township, Norseman District, Western Australia. Bulletin of Geological Survey.

Western Australia, 36: 7-24. https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 13 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Hinde, G.J. & Holmes, W.M. (1892). On the sponge-remains in the Lower Tertiary strata 1 2 near Oamaru, Otago, New Zealand. Journal of the Linnean Society of London, Series Zoology, 3 4 24: 177-262. 5 6 7 Lee, John Edward. (1839). Notice of Undescribed Zoophytes from the Yorkshire Chalk. 8 9 Magazine of Natural History, new series, 3: 10-17. 10 11 Luo, C. & Reitner, J. (2014). First report of fossil “keratose” demosponges in Phanerozoic 12 13 14 carbonates: preservation and 3-D reconstruction. Naturwissenschaften, 101:467–477. 15 16 Mantell, G.A. (1815). Description of a Fossil Alcyonium, from the Chalk Strata near Lewes 17 18 (&c). Transactions of the Linnaean Society of London, 11: 401-407. 19 20 21 Mantell, G.A. (1822).For The Fossils Peer of the South Review Downs; or illustrations of the geology of 22 23 Sussex. 327 pp. London. 24 25 26 Mantell, G.A. (1848). The Wonders of Geology; or, a familiar exposition of Geological 27 28 Phenomena. (6th ed.), 2 vols., 938 pp. London. 29 30 31 Mantell, G.A. (1854). The Medals of Creation, or, First Lessons in Geology, and the Study 32 33 of Organic Remains. (2nd edition), 2 vols, 930 pp. London. 34 35 36 Morris, J. (1851). Palaeontological Notes [new or little-known organisms of the chalk]. 37 38 Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 2, 8: 85-90. 39 40 41 Morris, J. (1854). A Catalogue of British Fossils: comprising the Genera and Species 42 43 hitherto described (&c). 2nd ed., 372 pp. London. 44 45 46 Nicholson, H.A. 1886-92. A monograph of the British stromatoporoids. Description of 47 48 species. Palaeontographical Society Monograph, 39, 42, 44, 46: 1-234. 49 50 51 O'Connell, M. (1919). The Schrammen collection of Cretaceous silicispongiae in the 52 53 American Museum of Natural History with notes on the structure, classification, geological and 54 55 geographical distribution, and synonymy of the silicispongiae. Bulletin of The American Museum 56 57 of Natural History, 49: 1-261. 58 59 60 Parkinson, J. (1808). Organic remains of a former world and examination of the mineralized remains of the vegetables and animals of the antediluvian world; generally termed extraneous

fossils. 2nd volume. The fossil zoophytes.https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx 286 pp. Nornaville and Fell, London. Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 14 of 49 Pennant, T. (ca. 1757). [Manuscript Catalogue of T. Pennant's Geological and 1 2 Mineralogical collection.]. Vol. 3 is entitled "Reliquiae Diluvianæ, or a Catalogue of such bodies 3 4 which were deposited in the Earth by the Deluge", 475 pp. 5 6 7 Phillips, J. (1829). Illustrations of the Geology of Yorkshire or, a description of the strata 8 9 and organic remains of the Yorkshire coast: accompanied by a geological map, sections, and 10 11 plates of the fossil plants and animals. Part. 1. The Yorkshire Coast. 192 pp. York. 12 13 14 Phillips, J. (1835). Illustrations of the Geology of Yorkshire or, a description of the strata 15 16 and organic remains of the Yorkshire coast: accompanied by a geological map, sections, and 17 18 plates of the fossil plants and animals. Part. 1. The Yorkshire Coast. 184 pp. London. 19 20 21 Pisera, A. (2004). WhatFor can wePeer learn about Review siliceous sponges from palaeontology? 22 23 Bollettino dei Musei e degli Istituti Biologici dell'Universita di Genova, 68: 55–60. 24 25 26 Počta, P. (1907). Sur quelques éponges du Sénonien de Nice. Bulletin de la Société 27 28 Géologique de la France, Series 4, 7: 163-173. 29 30 Pulfrey, W. (1933). Note on the occurrence of sponge-spicules associated with the Iron- 31 32 33 ores of North Wales. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 10, 11: 67-76. 34 35 Schrammen, A. (1899). Beitrag zur Kenntniss der obersenonen Tetractinelliden. 36 37 Mitteilungen aus dem Roemer-Museum, 10: 1-9. 38 39 40 Schrammen, A. (1901). Neue Kieselschwämme aus der oberen Kreide der Umgebung von 41 42 Hannover und von Hildesheim. Mitteilungen aus dem Roemer-Museum, 14: 1-26. 43 44 45 Schrammen, A. (1902). Neue Hexactinelliden aus der oberen Kreide. Mitteilungen aus dem 46 47 Roemer-Museum, 15: 1-26. 48 49 50 Schrammen, A. (1910). Die Kieselspongien der oberen Kreide von Nordwestdeutschland. I. 51 52 Teil. Tetraxonia, Monaxonia und Silicea incert. sedis. Palaeontographica, Supplement 5: 1-175. 53 54 55 Schrammen, A. (1912). Die Kieselspongien der oberen Kreide von Nordwestdeutschland. 56 57 II. Teil. Triaxonia (Hexactinellida). Palaeontographica, Supplement 5: 176-385. 58 59 60 Schrammen, A. (1924). Die Kieselspongien der oberen Kreide von Nordwestdeutschland.

III. und letzter Teil. Monographien zur Geologie und Palaeontologie, Serie 1, 2: 159 pp.

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 15 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Schrammen, A. (1924a). Zur Revision der Jura-Spongian von Süddeutschland. 1 2 Jahresbericht und Mitteilungen des Oberrheinischen Geologischen Vereins, New series, 13: 3 4 125-154. 5 6 7 Schrammen, A. (1936). Die Kieselspongian der oberen Jura von Süddeutschland. A. 8 9 Vorwort und Allgemeiner Teil. Palaeontographica, Serie A, 84: 149-194. 10 11 Schrammen, A. (1936a). Die Kieselspongian der oberen Jura von Süddeutschland. B. 12 13 14 Besonderer Teil, Palaeontographica, Serie A, 85: 1-114. 15 16 Sendino, M.C. (2009). KE EMu and the Future for Natural History Collections. Collections: 17 18 A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals,5: 149‑158. 19 20 21 https://doi.org/10.1177/155019060900500204For Peer Review 22 23 Smith, J.T. (1847). On the Ventriculitidae of the Chalk; including the description of 24 25 peculiar characters of Structure observed in their Tissues. Annals and Magazine of Natural 26 27 28 History, Series 1, 20: 73-97, 176-191. 29 30 Smith, J.T. (1848a). On the Ventriculitidae of the Chalk; their classification. Annals and 31 32 Magazine of Natural History, Series 2, 1: 36-48, 203-220, 279-295, 352-372. 33 34 35 Smith, J.T. (1848b). The Ventriculitidae of the Chalk: their microscopic structure, 36 37 affinities, and classification; including figures and descriptions of every species. 108 pp. Taylor, 38 39 London. 40 41 42 Smith, W. (1816). Strata identified by organized fossils, containing prints on colored 43 44 paper of the most characteristic specimens in each stratum. 1&2, 16 pp. Printed by W. Arding, 45 46 London. 47 48 49 Sollas, W.J. (1877). On the Structure and Affinities of the Genus Siphonia. Quarterly 50 51 Journal of the Geological Society, 33: 790-835. 52 53 54 1Sollas, W.J. (1883). Descriptions of Fossil Sponges from the Inferior Oolite, with a Notice 55 56 of some from the Great Oolite. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society, 39: 541-554. 57 58 59 Sollas, W.J. (1888). Report on the Tetractinellida collected by H.M.S. Challenger, during 60 the years 1873-1876. Report on the scientific results of the voyage of H.M.S. Challenger during

the years 1873-76. Zoology, 25, 166 pp., 458 pp. London. https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 16 of 49 Thakur, N.L. & Müller, W.E.G. (2004). Biotechnological potential of marine sponges. 1 2 Current Science, 86: 1506-1512. 3 4 Treacher, L. & Young, G.W. (1907) Excursion to Faringdon. Proceedings of the Geologists' 5 6 7 Association, 20: 115-121. 8 9 10 11 FIGURES & CAPTIONS 12 13 14 15 16 17 Figure 1. Number of bibliographic references by year group regarding the NHM 18 19 sponges kept in the Department of Earth Sciences. 20 21 For Peer Review 22 60 23 24 50 25 26 40 27 28 30 29 30 20 31 10 32 33 0 34 35 36 1751-1775 1776-1800 1801-1825 1826-1850 1851-1875 1876-1900 1901-1925 1926-1950 1951-1975 1976-2000 37 38 39 40 41 42 Figure 2. A. NHMUK PI H3062. Actinostroma stellulatum Nicholson, 1889. 43 44 HOLOTYPE. Middle Devonian. Newton Abbot, England. B. NHMUK PI S7856. 45 46 47 Sporadoscinia Pomel, 1872. Chalk Group. Foreshore, Dover, England. C. NHMUK 48 49 PI P5877. Stromatopora hupschii (Bargatzky, 1881). Middle Devonian. Dartington, 50 51 England. D. NHMUK PI P1240. Stachyspongia spica (Roemer, 1864). Late 52 53 Cretaceous, Cenomanian. Chalk Group. Dover, England, Kent. E. NHMUK PI PO 54 55 56 12121 (or ZN7). Lerouxia digitata Pisera, 2000. HOLOTYPE. Oligocene. Ukraine. 57 58 F. NHMUK PI S4566. Siphonia koenigi (Mantell, 1822). Chalk Group. Seaford Head, 59 60 Sussex, England. G. NHMUK PI S4549. Verruculina reussii (M'Coy, 1848). Chalk

Group. Flamborough, Yorkshire, England. H. NHMUK PI S4730 and NHMUK PI S https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 17 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals 4731. a. Loculicyathellus floreus (Bedford & Bedford, 1934). PARATYPE. b. 1 2 Diplocyathellus retezona (Taylor, 1910). Cambrian, Terreneuvian. Flinders Range, 3 4 South Australia. I. NHMUK PI S2659. Theneopsis steinmanni (Zittel, 1879). Late 5 6 7 Cretaceous (Senonian). Misburg, Region Hanover, Germany. A. Schrammen 8 9 Collection (1920). J. NHMUK PI P7965a. Necklace made with Porosphaera 10 11 globularis (Phillips, 1829). Chalk Group. France? K. NHMUK PI P3280. 12 13 Tremacystia anastomans Mantell, 1848. Lower Greensand Group. Faringdon, 14 15 16 England. L. NHMUK PI P3185. Pharetrospongia strahani Sollas, 1877. Chalk 17 18 Group. Kent, England. M. NHMUK PI OR48174. Hallirhoa costata Lamouroux, 19 20 1821. Selborne Group, Upper Greensand Formation. Warminster, Wiltshire, 21 For Peer Review 22 23 England. N. NHMUK PI P3227. Exanthesis labrosus (Smith, 1848). Selborne 24 25 Group, Upper Greensand Formation. France. O. NHMUK PI S3115. Exanthesis 26 27 labrosus (Smith, 1848). Chalk Group. Hanover, Germany. Original skeleton of 28 29 30 opaline silica replaced by pyrites (iron sulphide) which has subsequently 31 32 recrystallized. P. NHMUK PI P3444a. Diaplectia helvelloides (Lamouroux, 1821). 33 34 Bathonian. Great Oolite Group. Ranville, Basse-Normandie, Calvados, France. Q. 35 36 NHMUK PI S4599. Coeloptychium agaricoides Goldfuss, 1826. Late Cretaceous, 37 38 39 Senonian. Coesfeld, Westfalia, Germany. R. NHMUK PI S4599. Coeloptychium 40 41 agaricoides Goldfuss, 1826. Late Cretaceous, Senonian. Coesfeld, Westfalia, 42 43 Germany. S. NHMUK PI P1370a. Siphonia tulipa Zittel, 1878. Late Cretaceous, 44 45 46 Cenomanian. Selborne Group, Upper Greensand Formation. Blackdown, Devon, 47 48 England. T. NHMUK PI P3066. Pachastrella convoluta Hinde, 1883. SYNTYPE. 49 50 Chalk Group. Flamborough, Yorkshire, England. U. NHMUK PI S2140. 51 52 53 Cyclostigma meandrina Schramen, 1912. HEAUTOTYPE. Late Cretaceous, 54 55 Campanian. Oberg, Hanover, Germany. V. NHMUK PI P4116. Elasmostoma 56 57 scitulum Hinde, 1883. Chalk Group. Charing, Kent, England. W. NHMUK PI P1829. 58 59 Hydnoceras tuberosum Conrad, 1842. Devonian. Chemung Group. Cohocton, 60 New York, United States.

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 18 of 49

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 For Peer Review 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 Figure 3. Number of specimens per stratigraphic era and Porifera classes present 42 43 in the Earth Sciences Department at the NHM. 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 19 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Figure 4. Geographic distribution of the NHM fossil sponges and abundance of 19 20 specimens. 21 For Peer Review 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 Table 1. Most important Collection contributors (by alphabetical surname order) 49 50 to the NHM Fossil Porifera Collection and publications. 51 52 53 Collection contributor Publications 54 55 Armstrong, Henry Edward (1848 -1937) Anonymous, 1948 56 57 58 Bedford, Robert (1874-1951) Bedford & Bedford, 1934, 1936, 1937, 1939 59 60 Benett, Etheldred (1776–1845) Benet, 1831 Hinde, 1883

Bowerbank, James Scott (1797-1877) Bowerbank, 1841, 1842, 1849, 1869, 1876, 1870 https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 20 of 49

1 Cunnington, William (1813-1906) Cunnington, 1849 2 3 Harford, Frederick (1820–1895) 4 5 Hinde, George Jennings (1839-1918) Hinde, 1880, 1882, 1883, 1884a, 1884b, 1886, 1887- 6 1912, 1888, 1889a, 1889b, 1889b, 1890,a 1890b, 7 1891a, 1891b, 1892, 1900, 1904, 1905, 1908, 1910, 8 Hinde & Holmes, 1892 9 10 Lee, John Edward (1808-1887) Lee, 1839 11 12 Mantell, Gideon Algernon (1790-1852) Mantell, 1815, 1822, 1848, 1854 13 14 15 Morris, John (1810-1886) Morris, 1851, 1854 16 Hinde, 1883 17 18 Muir-Wood, Helen M. (1895-1968) 19 20 21 Parkinson, James (1755–1824)For Peer Parkinson,Review 1808 22 23 Pennant, Thomas (1726-1798) Pennant, [1757] 24 25 Phillips, John (1800-1874) Hinde, 1883 Phillips, 1829, 1835 26 27 Filip Počta (1859-1924) Počta, 1907 28 29 30 Pulfrey, William (f. 1936-1960) Pulfrey, 1933 31 32 Rowe, Arthur Walter (1858-1926) 33 34 Schrammen, Anton (1869–1953) Schrammen, 1899, 1901, 1902, 1910, 1912, 1924a, 35 1924b, 1936a, 1936b 36 37 Simmons, Jeremiah 38 39 Smith, William (1769–1839) Smith, 1816 40 41 Smith, Joshua Toulmin (1816-1869) Smith, 1847a, 1847b, 1848a, 1848b, 1848c, 1848d, 42 1848e 43 44 Sollas, William Johnson (1849-1936) Sollas, 1877, 1883 45 46 Tesson (-d.?1864) Hinde, 1883 47 48 Tomes, Robert Fisher (1823-1904) Hinde, 1883, 1911 49 50 Treacher, Llewellyn (1859-1943) Treacher & Young, 1907 51 52 Vicary, William (1811-1903) Nicholson, 1889 53 Sollas, 1877 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 21 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 For Peer Review 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 CONSUELO SENDINO 27 28 Department of Earth Sciences, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, SW7 5BD London, UK; 29 [email protected] 30 31 170x102mm (300 x 300 DPI) 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 22 of 49

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 For Peer Review 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 Figure 2. A. NHMUK PI H3062. Actinostroma stellulatum Nicholson, 1889. HOLOTYPE. Middle Devonian. 46 Newton Abbot, England. B. NHMUK PI S7856. Sporadoscinia Pomel, 1872. Chalk Group. Foreshore, Dover, 47 England. C. NHMUK PI P5877. Stromatopora hupschii (Bargatzky, 1881). Middle Devonian. Dartington, England. D. NHMUK PI P1240. Stachyspongia spica (Roemer, 1864). Late Cretaceous, Cenomanian. Chalk 48 Group. Dover, England, Kent. E. NHMUK PI PO 12121 (or ZN7). Lerouxia digitata Pisera, 2000. HOLOTYPE. 49 Oligocene. Ukraine. F. NHMUK PI S4566. Siphonia koenigi (Mantell, 1822). Chalk Group. Seaford Head, 50 Sussex, England. G. NHMUK PI S4549. Verruculina reussii (M'Coy, 1848). Chalk Group. Flamborough, 51 Yorkshire, England. H. NHMUK PI S4730 and NHMUK PI S 4731. a. Loculicyathellus floreus (Bedford & 52 Bedford, 1934). PARATYPE. b. Diplocyathellus retezona (Taylor, 1910). Cambrian, Terreneuvian. Flinders 53 Range, South Australia. I. NHMUK PI S2659. Theneopsis steinmanni (Zittel, 1879). Late Cretaceous (Senonian). Misburg, Region Hanover, Germany. A. Schrammen Collection (1920). J. NHMUK PI P7965a. 54 Necklace made with Porosphaera globularis (Phillips, 1829). Chalk Group. France? K. NHMUK PI P3280. 55 Tremacystia anastomans Mantell, 1848. Lower Greensand Group. Faringdon, England. L. NHMUK PI P3185. 56 Pharetrospongia strahani Sollas, 1877. Chalk Group. Kent, England. M. NHMUK PI OR48174. Hallirhoa 57 58 59 60 https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 23 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

1 2 3 costata Lamouroux, 1821. Selborne Group, Upper Greensand Formation. Warminster, Wiltshire, England. N. 4 NHMUK PI P3227. Exanthesis labrosus (Smith, 1848). Selborne Group, Upper Greensand Formation. France. 5 O. NHMUK PI S3115. Exanthesis labrosus (Smith, 1848). Chalk Group. Hanover, Germany. Original skeleton 6 of opaline silica replaced by pyrites (iron sulphide) which has subsequently recrystallized. P. NHMUK PI 7 P3444a. Diaplectia helvelloides (Lamouroux, 1821). Bathonian. Great Oolite Group. Ranville, Basse- Normandie, Calvados, France. Q. NHMUK PI S4599. Coeloptychium agaricoides Goldfuss, 1826. Late 8 Cretaceous, Senonian. Coesfeld, Westfalia, Germany. R. NHMUK PI S4599. Coeloptychium agaricoides 9 Goldfuss, 1826. Late Cretaceous, Senonian. Coesfeld, Westfalia, Germany. S. NHMUK PI P1370a. Siphonia 10 tulipa Zittel, 1878. Late Cretaceous, Cenomanian. Selborne Group, Upper Greensand Formation. Blackdown, 11 Devon, England. T. NHMUK PI P3066. Pachastrella convoluta Hinde, 1883. SYNTYPE. Chalk Group. 12 Flamborough, Yorkshire, England. U. NHMUK PI S2140. Cyclostigma meandrina Schramen, 1912. 13 HEAUTOTYPE. Late Cretaceous, Campanian. Oberg, Hanover, Germany. V. NHMUK PI P4116. Elasmostoma scitulum Hinde, 1883. Chalk Group. Charing, Kent, England. W. NHMUK PI P1829. Hydnoceras tuberosum 14 Conrad, 1842. Devonian. Chemung Group. Cohocton, New York, United States. 15 16 170x244mm (300 x 300 DPI) 17 18 19 For Peer Review 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 24 of 49

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 For Peer Review 20 21 22 Figure 3. Number of specimens per stratigraphic era and Porifera classes present in the Earth Sciences 23 Department at the NHM. 24 170x78mm (300 x 300 DPI) 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 25 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 For Peer Review 20 21 22 23 Figure 4. Geographic distribution of the NHM fossil sponges and abundance of specimens. 24 25 169x84mm (300 x 300 DPI) 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 26 of 49

1 2 3 Table 1. Most important Collection contributors (by alphabetical surname order) to the NHM Fossil 4 Porifera Collection and publications. 5 6 Collection contributor Publications 7 8 Armstrong, Henry Edward (1848 -1937) Anonymous, 1948 9 10 11 Bedford, Robert (1874-1951) Bedford & Bedford, 1934, 1936, 1937, 1939 12 13 Benett, Etheldred (1776–1845) Benet, 1831 14 Hinde, 1883 15 16 Bowerbank, James Scott (1797-1877) Bowerbank, 1841, 1842, 1849, 1869, 1876, 1870 17 18 Cunnington, William (1813-1906) Cunnington, 1849 19 20 Harford, Frederick (1820–1895) 21 For Peer Review 22 Hinde, George Jennings (1839-1918) Hinde, 1880, 1882, 1883, 1884, 1884a, 1886, 1887- 23 1912, 1887a, 1888, 1889, 1889a, 1889b, 1890, 24 1890a, 1891, 1891a, 1892, 1900, 1904, 1905, 1908, 25 26 1910, Hinde & Holmes, 1892 27 28 Lee, John Edward (1808-1887) Lee, 1839 29 30 Mantell, Gideon Algernon (1790-1852) Mantell, 1815, 1822, 1848, 1854 31 32 Morris, John (1810-1886) Morris, 1851, 1854 33 Hinde, 1883 34 35 Muir-Wood, Helen M. (1895-1968) 36 37 38 Parkinson, James (1755–1824) Parkinson, 1808 39 40 41 Pennant, Thomas (1726-1798) Pennant (ca. 1757) 42 43 Phillips, John (1800-1874) Hinde, 1883 Phillips, 1829, 1835 44 45 Filip Počta (1859-1924) Počta, 1907 46 47 Pulfrey, William (f. 1936-1960) Pulfrey, 1933 48 49 Rowe, Arthur Walter (1858-1926) 50 51 Schrammen, Anton (1869–1953) Schrammen, 1899, 1901, 1902, 1910, 1912, 1924, 52 1924a, 1936, 1936a 53 54 55 Simmons, Jeremiah 56 57 Smith, William (1769–1839) Smith, 1816 58 59 Smith, Joshua Toulmin (1816-1869) T. Smith, 1847, 1848a, 1848b 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 27 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

1 2 3 Sollas, William Johnson (1849-1936) Sollas, 1877, 1883 4 5 Tesson (-d.?1864) Hinde, 1883 6 7 8 Tomes, Robert Fisher (1823-1904) Hinde, 1883, 1912 9 10 Treacher, Llewellyn (1859-1943) Treacher & Young, 1907 11 12 Vicary, William (1811-1903) Nicholson, 1886-92 13 Sollas, 1877 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 For Peer Review 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 28 of 49

1 2 3 APPENDIX 4 5 6 References of NHM fossil sponges referred in the bibliography: 7 8 9 Adams, C.G. & Kirk, H.J.C. (1962). The Madai-Baturong Limestone Member of the 10 11 Chert-Spilite Formation, North Borneo. Geological Magazine, 99: 289-303. 12 13 14 Anonymous. (1948). Flints. The Blue Circle. House Journal of the Blue Circle Cement 15 16 Organization, 2: 10-13. 17 18 19 Avnimelech, M. (1943). Notes on Palestinian fossil sponges. Annals and Magazine of 20 21 Natural History, Series 11,For 10: 475-486. Peer Review 22 23 Barrois, C. (1884). Sur les Dictyospongidae des Psammites de Condros. Annales de 24 25 26 la Société Géologique du Nord, 11: 80-86. 27 28 Bassler, R.S. (1927). A new early Ordovician sponge fauna. Journal of the 29 30 Washington Academy of Sciences, 17: 390-394. 31 32 33 Bassler, R.S. (1941). The Nevada early Ordovician (Pogonip) sponge fauna. 34 35 Proceedings of the United States National Museum, 91: 91-102. 36 37 38 Bather, F.A. (1907). A guide to the fossil invertebrate animals in the Department of 39 40 Geology and Palaeontology in the British Museum (Natural History), Cromwell Road, 41 42 London, SW. London182 pp. London. 43 44 45 Bedford, R. & Bedford, J. (1937). Further notes on Archaeos (Pleospongia) from the 46 47 lower Cambrian of South Australia. Memoirs of the Kyancutta Museum, 4: 27-38. 48 49 50 Bedford, R. & Bedford, J. (1939). Development and Classification of Archaeos 51 52 (Pleospongia). Memoirs of the Kyancutta Museum, 6: 67-82. 53 54 55 Bedford, R. & Bedford, W.R. (1934). New Species of Archaeocyathinae and other 56 57 organisms from the Lower Cambrian of Beltana, South Australia. Memoirs of the Kyancutta 58 59 Museum, 1: 7 pp. 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 29 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

1 2 3 Bedford, R. & Bedford, W.R. (1936). Further notes on Archaeocyathi 4 5 (Cyathospongia) and other organisms from the Lower Cambrian of Beltana, South Australia. 6 7 Memoirs of the Kyancutta Museum, 2: 9-20. 8 9 10 Benett, E. (1831). A catalogue of the organic remains of the county of Wilts. iv + 9 11 12 pp. Warminster. 13 14 15 Billings, E. (1859). Fossils of the Calciferous Sandrock, including those of a deposit 16 17 of white limestone at Mingan, supposed to belong to the formation. Canadian Naturalist & 18 19 Geologist, Montreal, 4: 345-367. 20 21 For Peer Review 22 Billings, E. (1861-1865). Palaeozoic fossils 1. Geological Survey of Canada. 426 pp., 23 24 401 text figs. Montreal. (1st edition of parts 1-4, 1861-1865; 2nd editions and 1st edition of last 25 26 part 1865). 27 28 29 Böhm, J. (1927). Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Senonfauna der Bithynischen Halbinsel. 30 31 Palaeontographica, 69: 187-222. 32 33 34 Bowerbank, J.S. (1841). On the siliceous bodies of the Chalk, Greensands and 35 36 Oolites. Transactions of the Geological Society, 7: 181-194. 37 38 39 Bowerbank, J.S. (1842). On the spongeous origin of Moss Agaetes and other 40 41 siliceous bodies. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, 10, 9-18, 84-91. 42 43 44 Bowerbank, J.S. (1849). On a Siliceous Zoophyte, Alcyonites parasiticum. Quarterly 45 46 Journal of the Geological Society of London, 5: 319-328. 47 48 49 Bowerbank, J.S. (1869). A monograph of the siliceo-fibrous sponges. Proceedings of 50 51 the Zoological Society of London, 1869: 66-100, 323-351. 52 53 Bowerbank, J.S. (1870). Organic remains from Queensland, 235-242. In Moore, C. 54 55 56 Australian Mesozoic Geology and Palaeontology. Quarterly Journal of the Geological 57 58 Society of London, 26: 226-261. 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 30 of 49

1 2 3 Bowerbank, J.S. (1876). Contributions to a General History of the Spongiadae. Part 4 5 8. Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 1876: 768-775. 6 7 8 Carter, H.J. (1877). On the close Relationships of Hydractinia, Parkeria and 9 10 Stromatopora; with Descriptions of new Species of the former, both Recent and Fossil. 11 12 Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 4, 19: 44-76. 13 14 15 Carter, H.J. (1878a). Emendatory description of Purisiphonia Clarkei, Bk., a 16 17 hexactinellid fossil sponge from N.W. Australia. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, 18 19 Series 5, 1: 376-379. 20 21 For Peer Review 22 Carter, H.J. (1878b). On new species of Hydractiniidae, Recent and Fossil, and on 23 24 the Identity in Structure of Millepora alcicornis with Stromatopora. Annals and Magazine of 25 26 Natural History, Series 5, 1: 298-311. 27 28 29 Carter, H.J. (1880). On Fossil Sponge-spicules from the Carboniferous Strata of Ben 30 31 Bulben, near Sligo. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 5, 6: 209-214. 32 33 34 Castell, C.P. (ed.) (1962). British Mesozoic Fossils (1st ed.). v + 205 pp. British 35 36 Museum (Natural History), London. 37 38 39 Castell, C.P. (ed.) (1964). British Palaeozoic Fossils (1st ed.). vi + 208 pp. British 40 41 Museum (Natural History), London. 42 43 44 Chapman, F. (1905). New or little-known Victorian Fossils in the National Museum, 45 46 Melbourne. Part V - On the Genus Receptaculites. With a Note on R. australis from 47 48 Queensland. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Victoria, n.s., 18: 5-15. 49 50 51 Charlesworth, E. (1855). On the Mineral Condition and general affinities of the 52 53 Zoophytes of the Chalk at Flamborough and Bridlington. Proceedings of the Yorkshire 54 55 Philosophical Society, 1: 73-76. 56 57 58 Chatwin, C.P. & Withers, T.H. (1908). The zones of the Chalk in the Thames Valley 59 60 between Goring and Shiplake. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 20: 390-419.

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 31 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

1 2 3 Crawley, M. (1988). Catalogue of the Type and Figured Specimens of Macrofossil 4 5 Algae in the British Museum (Natural History). 52 pp. BM(NH), London. 6 7 8 Cunnington, W. (1849). On a peculiarity in the structure of one of the fossils sponges 9 10 of the Chalk, Choanites Koenigi, Mantell. Report of the British Association for the 11 12 Advancement of Science, 18, p. 67. 13 14 15 Debrenne, F. (1964). Archaeocyatha. Contribution à l’étude des faunes 16 17 Cambriennes du Maroc, de Sardaigne et de France. Notes et Mémoires. Service des Mines 18 19 et de la Carte Géologique du Maroc, Rabat, 179: 1-265. 20 21 For Peer Review 22 Debrenne, F. (1969). Lower Cambrian Archaeocyatha from the Ajax Mine, Beltana, 23 24 South Australia. Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Geology, 17: 295-376. 25 26 27 Debrenne, F. (1974). Anatomie et systématique des Archéocyathes réguliers sans 28 29 plancher d’Ajax Mine. (Cambrien inférieur, Australie du Sud). Géobios, 7: 91-138. 30 31 32 Debrenne, F. & Lafuste, J. (1972). Microstructure du squelette de quelques 33 34 Sphinctozoaires (Exemples pris dans le Permien du Jbel Tebaga et le Cretace d'Angleterre). 35 36 Bulletin de la Société Géologique de la France, 7, 14: 325-330. 37 38 39 Debrenne, F., Zhuravlev, A.Y. & Kruse, P.D. (2002). Class Archaeocyatha 40 41 Bornemann, 1884. Bibliography of Class Archaeocyatha. In Hooper, J.N.A. & van Soest, 42 43 R.W.M. (eds), Systema Porifera. A Guide to the Classification of Sponges, vol. 2. 1539– 44 45 1699, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. New York. 46 47 48 Dixon, F. (1850). The geology and fossils of the Tertiary and Cretaceous formations 49 50 of Sussex. 423 + xvi pp. London. 51 52 53 Döderlein, L. (1892). “Demonstrationen”. Verhandlungen der Deutschen 54 55 Zoologischen Gesellschaft, 2: 143-146. 56 57 58 Döderlein, L. (1897). Ueber die Lithonina, eine neue Gruppe von Kalkschwämmen. 59 60 Zoologische Jahrbücher, 10: 15-32.

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 32 of 49

1 2 3 Donovan, S.K. (2000). Fossils explained 31: Sponges 1. Geology Today, 16: 194- 4 5 198. 6 7 8 Duncan, P.M. (1879). On some spheroidal lithistid Spongida from the Upper Silurian 9 10 Formation of New Brunswick. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 5, 4:84-91. 11 12 13 Duncan, P.M. (1886). On the Genus Hindia and its Species. Annals and Magazine of 14 15 Natural History, Series 5, 18:226-228. 16 17 18 Dunikowski, E. von (1884). Ueber Permo-Carbon-Schwämme von Spitzbergen. 19 20 Kungliga Svenska Vetenskapsakademiens Handlingar, n.f., 21: 1-18. 21 For Peer Review 22 23 Earland, A. (1899). Foraminifera of the Tochi Valley. Science Gossip, n.s., 6: 164- 24 25 165. 26 27 28 Elliott, G.F. (1963). Problematical microfossils from the Cretaceous and Palaeocene 29 30 of the Middle East. Palaeontology, 6: 293-300. 31 32 Elliott, G.F. (1973). A Palaeoecological Study of a Cotswold Great Oolite Fossil-bed 33 34 35 (English Jurassic). Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 84: 43-51. 36 37 Engeser, T.S. & Taylor, P.D. (1989). Supposed Triassic bryozoans in the Klipstein 38 39 Collection from the Italian Dolomites redescribed as calcified demosponges. Bulletin of the 40 41 42 British Museum (Natural History), Geology, 45: 39-45. 43 44 Etheridge, R. (Jr.) (1876). Note on the Fossils from the Glacial Deposits of the North- 45 46 west Coast of the Island of Lewis, Outer Hebrides. Geological Magazine, Series 2, 3: 552- 47 48 49 555. 50 51 Gaster, C.T.A. (1924). The Chalk of the Worthing District, Sussex. Proceedings of 52 53 the Geologists’ Association, 35: 89-110. 54 55 56 Gaster, C.T.A. (1929). Chalk Zones in the neighbourhood of Shoreham, Brighton and 57 58 Newhaven, Sussex. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 40: 328-340. 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 33 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

1 2 3 Gordon, W.T. (1920a). Scottish National Antarctic Expedition, 1902-1904: Cambrian 4 5 Organic Remains from a dredging in the Weddell Sea. Scottish National Antarctic 6 7 Expedition, 8:209-242. 8 9 10 Gordon, W.T. (1920b). Scottish National Antarctic Expedition, 1902-1904: Cambrian 11 12 Organic Remains from a dredging in the Weddell Sea. Transactions of the Royal Society of 13 14 Edinburgh, 52: 681-714. 15 16 17 Green, U. & Sherborn, C.D. (1906). Lists of Wenlockian fossils from Porthluney, 18 19 Cornwall; Ludlowian fossils from Porthalla; and Taunusian fossils from Polyne Quarry, near 20 21 Looe, Cornwall. GeologicalFor Magazine Peer, Series Review5, 3: 33-35. 22 23 24 Guettard, M. (1751). Mémoire sur quelques corps fossiles peu connus. Mémoires de 25 26 l’Academie Royale des Sciences, 1751: 239-267. 27 28 29 Hampton, J.S. (1957). The Sponge genus Retispinopora in the English Chalk. 30 31 Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 68: 53-56. 32 33 34 Harrison, J.V. (1943). The geology of the central Andes in part of the province of 35 36 Junin, Peru. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 99: 1-36. 37 38 39 Hartley, J.J. & Harper, J.C. (1937). A recently-discovered Ordovician inlier in County 40 41 down, with note on a new species of Pyritonema. Irish Naturalists’ Journal, 6: 253-255. 42 43 44 Hartman, W.D. (1980). Systematics of the Porifera. In Hartman, W.D., Wendt, J.W. & 45 46 Wiedenmayer, F., Living and Fossil Sponges. Sedimenta, 8: 24-51. 47 48 49 Hicks, H. (1869). Notes on a species of Eophyton(?) from the Lower Arenig Rocks of 50 51 St. David’s. Geological Magazine, Series 1, 6: 534-535. 52 53 Hill, D. (1965). Archaeocyatha from Antarctica and a review of the phylum. Scientific 54 55 56 Reports. Trans-Antarctic Expedition, 10: 1-151. 57 58 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 34 of 49

1 2 3 Hill, D. (1972). Archaeocytha. In Teichert, C. (ed.) Treatise on Invertebrate 4 5 Paleontology E (1) (2nd edition). 158 pp. Lawrence, Kansas. 6 7 8 Hinde, G.J. (1880). Fossil sponge spicules from the Upper Chalk. Found in the 9 10 interior of a single flint-stone from Horstead in Norfolk. 83 pp. Munich. 11 12 13 Hinde, G.J. (1882). Notes on Fossil Calcispongiae, with Descriptions of New 14 15 Species. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 5, 10: 185-206. 16 17 18 Hinde, G.J. (1883). Catalogue of the Fossil Sponges in the Geological Department of 19 20 the British Museum (Natural History). With descriptions of new and little-known species. 21 For Peer Review 22 BM(NH), 248 pp. London. 23 24 25 Hinde, G.J. (1884a). On some fossil calcisponges from the well-boring at Richmond, 26 27 Surrey. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 40: 778-783. 28 29 30 Hinde, G.J. (1884b). On the Structure and Affinities of the Family of the 31 32 Receptaculitidae, including therein the Genera Ischadites, Murchison (= Tetragonis, 33 34 Eichwald); Sphaerospongia, Pengelly; Acanthochonia, gen.nov.; and Receptaculites, 35 36 Defrance. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 40: 795-849. 37 38 39 Hinde, G.J. (1886). On beds of sponge-remains in the Lower and Upper Greensand 40 41 of the South of England. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 176 (for 42 43 1885): 403-453. 44 45 46 Hinde, G.J. (1887-1912). A monograph of the British Fossil Sponges. Vol 1. Sponges 47 48 of the Palaeozoic and Jurassic Strata. Palaeontographical Society Monograph, 1-92 (1887); 49 50 93-188 (1888); 189-254 (1893); 255-264 (1912). London. 51 52 53 Hinde, G.J. (1887). On the Genus Hindia, Duncan, and the Name of its typical 54 55 species. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 5, 19: 67-79. 56 57 58 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 35 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

1 2 3 Hinde, G.J. (1888). On the Chert and Siliceous Schists of the Permo-Carboniferous 4 5 Strata of Spitzbergen, and on the Characters of the sponges therefrom, which have been 6 7 described by Dr. E. Dunikowski. Geological Magazine, Series 3, 5: 241-251. 8 9 10 Hinde, G.J. (1889a). On Archaeocyathus Billings, and other Genera, allied to or 11 12 associated with it, from the Cambrian Strata of North America, Spain, Sardinia, and 13 14 Scotland. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 45: 125-148. 15 16 17 Hinde, G.J. (1889b). On a true Leuconid Calcisponge from the Middle Lias of 18 19 Nottinghamshire. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 6, 4: 352-357. 20 21 For Peer Review 22 Hinde, G.J. (1889c). Detached calcisponge spicules in the Upper Chalk of Surrey. 23 24 Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 6, 4: 357. 25 26 27 Hinde, G.J. (1890a). On a new genus of siliceous sponges from the Lower 28 29 Calcareous Grit of Yorkshire. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 46: 54- 30 31 61. 32 33 34 Hinde, G.J. (1890b). Appendice. On the nature of some fragments of siliceous rock 35 36 from the Boulderclay of the “Roode Klif ” (Red Cliff) on the southern border of the province of 37 38 Friesland. Bulletin de la Société Belge de Géologie, de Paléontologie et de Hydrologie, 39 40 Bruxelles, 3: 254-258. 41 42 43 Hinde, G.J. (1891a). Notes on a New Fossil Sponge from the Utica Shale Formation 44 45 (Ordovician) at Ottawa, Canada. Geological Magazine, Series 3, 8: 22-24. 46 47 48 Hinde, G.J. (1891b). Note on specimens of Cherty Siliceous Rock from South 49 50 Australia. Geological Magazine, Series 3, 8: 115-116. 51 52 53 Hinde, G.J. (1892). Class Spongida, 436-439. In Jack, R.L. & Etheridge, R. The 54 55 geology & palaeontology of Queensland and New Guinea (&c). 2 vols: xxxi + 768 pp. 56 57 Brisbane and London. 58 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 36 of 49

1 2 3 Hinde, G.J. (1900). On some remarkable Calcisponges from the Eocene strata of 4 5 Victoria (Australia). Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 56: 50-66. 6 7 8 Hinde, G.J. (1904). On the structure and affinities of the genus Porosphaera, 9 10 Steinmann. Journal of the Royal Microscopical Society of London, 1904: 1-25. 11 12 13 Hinde, G.J. (1905). Description of some fossils from a Croydon garden. Proceedings 14 15 and Transactions of the Croydon Natural History and Scientific Society, 5: 87-94. 16 17 18 Hinde, G.J. (1908). On a new sponge from the Chalk at Goring-on-Thames. 19 20 Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 20: 420-421. 21 For Peer Review 22 23 Hinde, G.J. (1910). On the Fossil sponge spicules in a Rock from the Deep Lead (?) 24 25 at Princess Royal Township, Norseman District, Western Australia. Bulletin of Geological 26 27 Survey. Western Australia, 36: 7-24. 28 29 30 Hinde, G.J. & Holmes, W.M. (1892). On the sponge-remains in the Lower Tertiary 31 32 strata near Oamaru, Otago, New Zealand. Journal of the Linnean Society of London, Series 33 34 Zoology, 24: 177-262. 35 36 37 Hudson, R.G.S. (1929). A Carboniferous lagoon deposit with sponges. Proceedings 38 39 of the Yorkshire Geological Society, 21: 181-195. 40 41 42 Jack, R.L. & Etheridge, R., (Jr) (1892). The geology & palaeontology of Queensland 43 44 and New Guinea (&c). 2 vols: xxxi + 768 pp. Brisbane and London. 45 46 Jell, J.S.; Cook, A.G.; Jell, P.A. (2011). Australian Cretaceous Cnidaria and Porifera. 47 48 49 Alcheringa: An Australasian Journal of Palaeontology, 35: 241-284. 50 51 Jukes, J. BEETE (1847). Notes on the Palaeozoic Formations of New South Wales 52 53 and van Dieman’s Land. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 3: 241-249. 54 55 56 Keeping, W. (1883). The fossils and palaeontological affinities of the Neocomian 57 58 deposits of Upware and Brickhill. 167 pp. Cambridge. 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 37 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

1 2 3 King, R.H. (1932). A Pennsylvanian sponge fauna from Wise County, Texas. 4 5 University of Texas Bulletin, 3201: 75-85. 6 7 8 Kirkpatrick, R. (1908). On two new genera of Recent pharetronid sponges. Annals 9 10 and Magazine of Natural History, Series 8, 2: 503–514. 11 12 13 Kirkpatrick, R. (1916). The Ocean floor, or Benthoplankton. In The Nummulosphere, 14 15 volume 3. 319 pp. London. 16 17 18 Klipstein, A. von (1843-1883). Beiträge zur geologischen [und topographischen] 19 20 Kenntniss der östlichen Alpen. 1: 1-144 (1843); 1: 145-311 (1845); 2: 1-64 (1871); 2: 1-83 21 For Peer Review 22 (1875); 2: 1-101 (1883). Giessen. 23 24 25 Lamont, A. (1935). The Drummick Group, Girvan; A Stratigraphical Revision, with 26 27 Descriptions of New Fossils from the Lower Part of the Group. Transactions of the 28 29 Geological Society of Glasgow, 19: 288-332. 30 31 32 La Touche, J.D. (1884). A Handbook of (to) the Geology of Shropshire. 91 pp. 33 34 London & Shewsbury. 35 36 37 Laubenfels. M.W. de (1955a). Porifera. In Moore, R.C. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate 38 39 Palaeontology, E: E21-E122. Lawrence, Kansas. 40 41 42 Laubenfels. M.W. de (1955b). Family Receptaculitidae Eichwald, 1860. In Okulitch, 43 44 V.J. & Laubenfels, M.W. de, Archaeocyatha and Porifera. In Moore, R.C. (ed.), Treatise on 45 46 Invertebrate Palaeontology, E: E108-E110. Lawrence, Kansas. 47 48 49 Lee, J.E. (1839). Notice of undescribed zoophytes from the Yorkshire Chalk. 50 51 Magazine of Natural History, New Series, 3: 10-17. 52 53 Lewis, C. (2017). The Enlightened Mr. Parkinson: The Pioneering Life of a Forgotten 54 55 56 English Surgeon. 320 pp. Icon Books, London. 57 58 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 38 of 49

1 2 3 Lewis, D.N. (2000). Fossils Explained 30: Macrofossils in flint. Geology Today, 16: 4 5 153-158. 6 7 8 Lewis, H.P. (1940). The Microfossils of the Upper Caradocian Phosphate Deposits of 9 10 Montgomeryshire, North Wales. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 11, 5: 1-39. 11 12 13 Long, S.L., Taylor, P.D., Baker, S. & Cooper, J. (2003). Some early collectors and 14 15 collections of fossil sponges represented in The Natural History Museum, London. The 16 17 Geological Curator, 7: 353-362. 18 19 20 Lonsdale, W. (1848). Notes on fossil Zoophytes found in the Deposits described by 21 For Peer Review 22 Dr. Fitton in his Memoir entitled “A Stratigraphical Account of the Section from Atherfield to 23 24 Rocken End”. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 5: 55-103. 25 26 27 Mantell, G.A. (1815). Description of a Fossil Alcyonium, from the Chalk Strata near 28 29 Lewes (&c). Transactions of the Linnean Society of London, 11: 401-407. 30 31 32 Mantell, G.A. (1822). The Fossils of the South Downs; or illustrations of the geology 33 34 of Sussex. 327 pp. London. 35 36 37 Mantell, G.A. (1848). The Wonders of Geology; or, a familiar exposition of Geological 38 39 Phenomena. (6th ed.), 2 vols., 938 pp. London. 40 41 42 Mantell, G.A. (1854). The Medals of Creation, or, First Lessons in Geology, and the 43 nd 44 Study of Organic Remains (2 ed.). 2 vols, 930 pp. London. 45 46 Moore, H.B. & Moore, D.M. (1946). Preglacial history of Bermuda. Bulletin of the 47 48 49 Geological Society of America, 57: 207-222. 50 51 Morris, A.D. (1969). The Reverend Joseph Townsend, MA, MGS, (1739-1816), 52 53 Physician and Geologist - “Colossus of Roads”. (Abridged). Proceedings of the Royal 54 55 56 Society of Medicine, 62: 471-477. London. 57 58 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 39 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

1 2 3 Morris, J. (1851). Palaeontological Notes [new or little-known organisms of the chalk]. 4 5 Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 2, 8: 85-90. 6 7 8 Morris, J. (1854). A Catalogue of British Fossils: comprising the Genera and Species 9 10 hitherto described (&c). 2nd ed., 372 pp. London. 11 12 13 Nestor, H. (2015). Clathrodictyida: systematic descriptions. p755-768. In Selden, P.A. 14 15 (ed). Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. Part E (Revised), Porifera, vol 4-5, liii +1223 pp. 16 17 The University of Kansas Paleontological Institute, Lawrence, Kansas. 18 19 20 Newton, R.B. (1897). On a Jurassic Lamellibranch and some other associated 21 For Peer Review 22 Fossils from the Sarawak River Limestones of Borneo; with a Sketch of the Mesozoic Fauna 23 24 of that Island. Geological Magazine, Series 4, 4: 407-415. 25 26 27 Newton, R.B. (1909). Cretaceous Gastropods and Pelecypoda from Zululand. 28 29 Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa, 1: 1-106. 30 31 32 Newton, R.B. (1916). On the conchological features of the Lenham Sandstones of 33 34 Kent and their stratigraphical importance. Journal of Conchology, 15: 56-64. 35 36 37 Newton, R.B. (1921). On a Marine Jurassic Fauna from Central Arabia. Annals and 38 39 Magazine of Natural History, Series 9, 7: 389-403. 40 41 42 Nicholson, H.A. 1886-92. A monograph of the British stromatoporoids. Description of 43 44 species. Palaeontographical Society Monograph, 39, 42, 44, 46: 1-234. 45 46 Oakley, K.P. (1937). Cretaceous sponges: some biological and geological 47 48 49 considerations. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 48: 330-348. 50 51 Oakley, K.P. (1938). Some facts about Cretaceous sponges. South-Eastern 52 53 Naturalist and Antiquary, 43: 58-61. 54 55 56 Oakley, K.P. (1940). The Organic Content of Recent Rhyolitic Ashes in Malaya. 57 58 Geological Magazine, 77: 289-294. 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 40 of 49

1 2 3 Oakley, K.P. (1941). Evidence for the age of the Mount Everest Limestone. In Muir 4 5 Wood, H.M. & Oakley, K.P., Upper Palaeozoic faunas of north Sikkim. Memoirs of the 6 7 Geological Survey of India. Palaeontologia Indica, New series, 31: 69-70. 8 9 10 Oakley, K.P. (1942). Flexible sponges of Oligocene age from Ukraine. Proceedings 11 12 of the Geologists’ Association, 53: 106-107. 13 14 15 Oakley, K.P. (1965). Folklore of Fossils. Antiquity, 39: 9-16, 117-125. 16 17 18 Oakley, K.P. (1974). Folklore of Fossils. New York Paleontological Society Notes, 5: 19 20 1-20. 21 For Peer Review 22 23 Oakley, K.P. & Thomas, H.D. (1937). Lower Jurassic Sponges and Stromatoporoids. 24 25 Proceedings of the Cotteswold Naturalists’ Field Club, 26: 106. 26 27 28 Okulitch, V.J. (1937). Some changes in nomenclature of Archaeocyathi 29 30 (Cyathospongia). Journal of Paleontology, 11: 251-252. 31 32 Olszewska-Nejbert, D., & Świerczewska-Gładysz, E., 2013. Cenomanian (Late 33 34 35 Cretaceous) siliceous sponges from Nezvys’ ko and Rakovets'(Pokuttian Podillia, western 36 37 Ukraine). Cretaceous Research, 43: 116-144. 38 39 Parkinson, J. (1808). Organic Remains of a Former World. An examination of the 40 41 42 mineralized remains of the Vegetables and Animals of the antediluvian world, generally 43 44 termed extraneous fossils. Volume 2, 286 pp. London. 45 46 Parkinson, J. (1822). Outlines of Oryctology. An introduction to the study of Fossil 47 48 st 49 Organic Remains, especially of those found in the British Strata (&c). 1 ed., 346 pp. London 50 51 Pengelly, W. (1861). On the Devonian age of the World. Geologist, 4: 332-347. 52 53 54 Pennant, T. (ca. 1757). [Manuscript Catalogue of T. Pennant's Geological and 55 56 Mineralogical collection.]. Vol. 3 is entitled "Reliquiae Diluvianæ, or a Catalogue of such 57 58 59 bodies which were deposited in the Earth by the Deluge", 475 pp. 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 41 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

1 2 3 Pickett, J.W. (1983). An annotated bibliography and review of Australian fossil 4 5 sponges. Memoirs of Australasian Palaeontology, 1: 93-120. 6 7 8 Phillips, J. (1829). Illustrations of the Geology of Yorkshire or, a description of the 9 10 strata and organic remains of the Yorkshire coast: accompanied by a geological map, 11 12 sections, and plates of the fossil plants and animals. Part. 1. The Yorkshire Coast. 192 pp. 13 14 York. 15 16 17 Phillips, J. (1835). Illustrations of the Geology of Yorkshire or, a description of the 18 19 strata and organic remains of the Yorkshire coast: accompanied by a geological map, 20 21 sections, and plates of theFor fossil plantsPeer and animals. Review Part. 1. The Yorkshire Coast. 184 pp. 22 23 24 London. 25 26 Pisera, A. (2000). New species of lithistid sponges from the Paleogene of the 27 28 Ukraine. Zoosystema, 22: 285-298. 29 30 31 Počta, P. (1907). Sur quelques éponges du Sénonien de Nice. Bulletin de la Société 32 33 Géologique de la France, Series 4, 7: 163-173. 34 35 36 Pulfrey, W. (1933). Note on the occurrence of sponge-spicules associated with the 37 38 Iron-ores of North Wales. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 10, 11: 67-76. 39 40 41 Reed, F.R.C. (1908). Sedgwick Museum Notes: New Fossils from Girvan. Geological 42 43 Magazine, Series 5, 5: 291-296. 44 45 46 Reid, R.E.H. (1958-1964). A monograph of the Upper Cretaceous Hexactinellida of 47 48 Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Palaeontographical Society Monograph, 1: i-xlvi (1958); 49 50 2: xlvii-xlviii, 1-26 (1958); 3: 27-48 (1961); 4: xlix-cliv (1964). 51 52 53 Reid, R.E.H. (1962). Notes on Hexactinellid Sponges - IV. Nine Cretaceous 54 55 Lychniscosa. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, Series 13, 5: 33-45. 56 57 58 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 42 of 49

1 2 3 Reitner, J. (1990). Polyphyletic Origin of the Sphinctozoans, 33-42. In Rützler, K. 4 5 (ed.), New Perspectives in Sponge Biology, 3rd International Sponge Conference 1985. 6 7 Washington & London. 8 9 10 Reitner, J. & Engeser, T. (1983). Contributions to the systematics and the 11 12 palaeoecology of the Family Acanthochaetetidae Fischer, 1970 (Order Tabulospongida, 13 14 Class Sclerospongiae). Géobios, 16: 773-779. 15 16 17 Reitner, J. & Engeser, T. (1985). Revision der Demospongier mit einem Thalamiden, 18 19 aragonitischen Basalskelett und trabekulärer Internstruktur (“Sphinctozoa” pars). Berliner 20 21 geowissenschaftliche AbhandlungenFor Peer. Reihe A,Review 60: 151-193. 22 23 24 Reitner, J. & Engeser, T. (1989). Chaetosclera klipsteini n.gen. n.sp. (Halichondriida, 25 26 Demospongiae) aus dem Untercarn der Cassianer-Schichten (Dolomiten, Italien). 27 28 Mitteilungen aus dem Geologisch-Paläontologischen Institut der Universität Hamburg, 58: 29 30 159-165. 31 32 33 Richardson, L. (1904). A handbook to the Geology of Cheltenham and 34 35 neighbourhood. 1st ed., 305 pp. 36 37 38 Richardson, L. & Thacker, A.G. (1920). On the stratigraphical and geographical 39 40 distribution of the sponges of the Inferior Oolite of the West of England. Proceedings of the 41 42 Geologists’ Association, 31: 161-186. 43 44 45 Rietschel, S. (1969). Die Receptaculiten. Senckenbergiana Lethaea, 50, 465-517. 46 47 48 Rigaud, S., d’Errico, F., Vanhaeren, M. & Neumann, C. (2009). Critical reassessment 49 50 of putative Acheulean Porosphera globularis beads. Journal of Archaeological Science, 36: 51 52 25-34. 53 54 55 Roemer, F. (1880-1897). Lethaea geognostica (&c). 1, Lethaea palaeozoica, 688 pp. 56 57 Stuttgart. 58 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 43 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

1 2 3 Roemer, F. (1885). Lethaea erratica, oder Aufzählung und Beschreibung der in der 4 5 norddeutschen Ebene vorkommenden Diluvial-Geschiebe nordischer Sedimentär-Gesteine. 6 7 Paläontologische Abhandlungen, 2: 248-420. 8 9 10 Römer, A. (1864). Die Spongitarien des norddeutschen Kreidegebirges. 11 12 Palaeontographica, 13: 1-64. 13 14 15 Rowe, A.W. (1900). The zones of the White Chalk of the English Coast. I. Kent & 16 17 Sussex. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 16: 289-368. 18 19 20 Rowe, A.W. (1901). The zones of the White Chalk of the English Coast. II. Dorset, 21 For Peer Review 22 Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 17: 1-76. 23 24 25 Rowe, A.W. (1903). The zones of the White Chalk of the English Coast. III. Devon, 26 27 Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 18: 1-51. 28 29 30 Rowe, A.W. (1904). The zones of the White Chalk of the English Coast. IV. 31 32 Yorkshire. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 18: 193-296. 33 34 35 Rowe, A.W. (1908). The zones of the White Chalk of the English Coast. V. The Isle 36 37 of Wight. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 20: 209-352. 38 39 Ruddy, T. (1885). List of Caradoc or Bala Fossils found in the Neighbourhood of 40 41 42 Bala, Corwen, and Glyn Ceiriog. Proceedings of the Chester Society of Natural Science, 3: 43 44 113-124. 45 46 Rushton, A.W.A. (1973). Cambrian Fossils from the Hazira Shale, Pakistan. Nature 47 48 49 Physical Sciences, 243: 142. 50 51 Salter, J.W. (1860). Note on the fossils from Spitzbergen. In Lamont, J., Notes about 52 53 Spitzbergen in 1859 (with Appendix). Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 54 55 56 16: 439-442. 57 58 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 44 of 49

1 2 3 Salter, J.W. (1864). On some New Fossils from the Lingula-flags of Wales. Quarterly 4 5 Journal of the Geological Society of London, 20: 233-241. 6 7 8 Salter, J.W. & Blanford, H.F. (1865). Palaeontology of Niti in the northern Himalaya: 9 10 being descriptions and figures of the Palaeozoic and Secondary fossils collected by Colonel 11 12 Richard Strachey. 112 pp. R.E. Calcutta. 13 14 15 Schlüter, C. (1879). Coelotrochium Decheni, eine Foraminifere aus dem Mitteldevon. 16 17 Zeitschrift der Deutschen Geologischen Gesellschaft, 31: 668-675. 18 19 20 Schrammen, A. (1899). Beitrag zur Kenntniss der obersenonen Tetractinelliden. 21 For Peer Review 22 Mitteilungen aus dem Roemer-Museum, 10: 1-9. 23 24 25 Schrammen, A. (1901). Neue Kieselschwämme aus der oberen Kreide der 26 27 Umgebung von Hannover und von Hildesheim. Mitteilungen aus dem Roemer-Museum, 14: 28 29 1-26. 30 31 32 Schrammen, A. (1902). Neue Hexactinelliden aus der oberen Kreide. Mitteilungen 33 34 aus dem Roemer-Museum, 15: 1-26. 35 36 37 Schrammen, A. (1910). Die Kieselspongien der oberen Kreide von 38 39 Nordwestdeutschland. I. Teil. Tetraxonia, Monaxonia und Silicea incert. sedis. 40 41 Palaeontographica, Supplement 5: 1-175. 42 43 44 Schrammen, A. (1912). Die Kieselspongien der oberen Kreide von 45 46 Nordwestdeutschland. II. Teil. Triaxonia (Hexactinellida). Palaeontographica, Supplement 5: 47 48 176-385. 49 50 51 Schrammen, A. (1924a). Die Kieselspongien der oberen Kreide von 52 53 Nordwestdeutschland. III. und letzter Teil. Monographien zur Geologie und Palaeontologie, 54 55 Serie 1, 2: 159 pp. 56 57 58 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 45 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

1 2 3 Schrammen, A. (1924b). Zur Revision der Jura-Spongian von Süddeutschland. 4 5 Jahresbericht und Mitteilungen des Oberrheinischen Geologischen Vereins, New series, 13: 6 7 125-154. 8 9 10 Schrammen, A. (1936a). Die Kieselspongian der oberen Jura von Süddeutschland. 11 12 A. Vorwort und Allgemeiner Teil. Palaeontographica, Serie A, 84: 149-194. 13 14 15 Schrammen, A. (1936b). Die Kieselspongian der oberen Jura von Süddeutschland. 16 17 B. Besonderer Teil, Palaeontographica, Serie A, 85: 1-114. 18 19 20 Scrivenor, J.B. (1943). A further examination of Organic Remains in Rhyolite-Ash in 21 For Peer Review 22 Malaya. Geological Magazine, 80: 1-14. 23 24 25 Skeats, E.W. (1916). Part XII. Report on the petrology of some limestones from the 26 27 Antarctic, 189-200. In Contributions to the palaeontology and petrology of South Victoria 28 29 Land. Reports on the scientific investigations. British Antarctic Expedition 1907-9, Geology, 30 31 vol. 2. Expedition by William Heinemann, London. 32 33 34 Smith, J.T. (1847). On the Ventriculitidae of the Chalk; including the description of 35 36 peculiar characters of Structure observed in their Tissues. Annals and Magazine of Natural 37 38 History, Series 1, 20: 73-97, 176-191. 39 40 41 Smith, J.T. (1848a). On the Ventriculitidae of the Chalk; their classification. Annals 42 43 and Magazine of Natural History, Series 2, 1: 36-48, 203-220, 279-295, 352-272. 44 45 46 Smith, J.T. (1848b). The Ventriculitidae of the Chalk: their microscopic structure, 47 48 affinities, and classification; including figures and descriptions of every species. 108 pp. 49 50 Taylor, London. 51 52 53 Smith, S. (1911). The faunal succession of the Upper Bernician. Transactions of the 54 55 Natural History Society of Northumberland, Durham & Newcastle upon Tyne, New series, 3: 56 57 571-645. 58 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 46 of 49

1 2 3 Smith, W. (1816-1819). Strata identified by Organized Fossils, containing prints on 4 5 cloured paper of the most characteristic specimens in each Stratum. London, 32 pp. 6 7 8 Smith, W. (1817). Stratigraphical system of organized Fossils. With reference to the 9 10 specimens of the original geological collection in the British Museum, explaining their state of 11 12 preservation and their use in identifying the British Strata. xi + 118 + [3] pp. London. 13 14 15 Sollas, W.J. (1877). On the structure and affinities of the genus Siphonia. Quarterly 16 17 Journal of the Geological Society of London, 33: 790-834. 18 19 20 Sollas, W.J. (1883). Descriptions of Fossil Sponges from the Inferior Oolite, with a 21 For Peer Review 22 notice of some from the Great Oolite. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 23 24 39: 541-554. 25 26 27 Sollas, W.J. (1885a). On an hexactinellid sponge from the Gault and a lithistid from 28 29 the Lias of England. Journal of the Royal Geological Society of Ireland, 17: 57-60. 30 31 32 Sollas, W.J. (1885b). On an hexactinellid sponge from the Gault and a lithistid from 33 34 the Lias of England. Scientific Proceedings of the Royal Dublin Society, New series, 4: 443- 35 36 446. 37 38 39 Solms-Laubach, H.G. zu, (1891). Fossil Botany, being an introduction to 40 41 palaeophytology (&c). 401pp, Oxford. 42 43 44 Spjeldnaes, N. (1955). Coelosphaeridium (Chlorophyta Dasycladaceae) from the 45 46 Caradocian beds of N. Wales. Norsk Geologisk Tidsskrift, 35: 151-153. 47 48 49 Stock, C.W. (2015). Actinostromatida: systematic descriptions, 769-779. In Selden, 50 51 P.A. (ed.) Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. Part E (Revised), Porifera, vol 4-5, liii + 52 53 1223 pp, The University of Kansas Paleontological Institute, Lawrence, Kansas. 54 55 56 Stearn, C. W. (2015). Stromatoporellida, Stromatoporida, Syringostromatida, 57 58 Amphiporida, and genera with uncertain affinities; systematic descriptions, 781-836. 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 47 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

1 2 3 In Selden, P.A. (ed.), Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. Part E (Revised), Porifera, vol 4 5 4-5, liii + 1223 pp. The University of Kansas Paleontological Institute, Lawrence, Kansas. 6 7 8 Sujkowski, Z.L. (1951). Appendix. A pebble with Radiolaria from the 100-ft terrace at 9 10 Swanscombe, Kent. Geological Magazine, 88: 354-356. 11 12 13 Sweeting, G.S. & Himus, G.W. (1946). Easter Field Meeting, 1946. Ashover District, 14 15 Derbyshire. Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 57: 137-152. 16 17 18 Tate, R. (1865). On the correlation of the Cretaceous formations of the north-east of 19 20 Ireland. Quarterly Journal of the Geological Society of London, 21: 15-44. 21 For Peer Review 22 23 Taylor, M.E. (1966). Precambrian Mollusc-like Fossils from Inyo County, California. 24 25 Science, Washington, 153: 198-201. 26 27 28 Taylor, P.D. (1990a). Eyewitness Guides. Fossil. London, 64 pp. 29 30 Taylor, P.D. (1990b). Preservation of soft-bodied and other organisms by 31 32 bioimmuration - a review. Palaeontology, 33: 1-17. 33 34 35 Taylor, T.G. (1908). Preliminary note on Archaeocyathinae from the Cambrian “Coral 36 37 Reefs” of South Australia. Report of the Australasian Association for the Advancement of 38 39 Science, 11: 423-437. 40 41 42 Taylor, T.G. (1910). The Archaeocyathinae from the Cambrian of South Australia, 43 44 with an account of the morphology and affinities of the whole class. Memoirs of the Royal 45 46 Society of South Australia, 2: vi, 55-188. 47 48 49 Thomas, H.D. (1930). On a new sponge from the Inferior Oolite of Gloucestershire. 50 51 Proceedings of the Cotteswold Naturalists’ Field Club, 23: 265-267. 52 53 54 Thomas, H.D. (1935). On some sponges and a coral of Upper Cretaceous age from 55 56 Toco Bay, Trinidad. Geological Magazine, 72: 175-179. 57 58 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 48 of 49

1 2 3 Thomas, H.D. (1948). A new genus of sponges from the English Jurassic. 4 5 Proceedings of the Geologists’ Association, 59: 88-90. 6 7 8 Toms, H.S. (1932). An Early Bead Necklace found at Higham, Kent. Rochester 9 10 Naturalist, May 1932: 125-132. 11 12 13 Townsend, J. (1813). The Character of Moses established for veracity as an 14 15 historian, recording events subsequent to the Deluge. 1. 448 pp. Bath. 16 17 18 Treacher, L. & Young, G.W. (1907) Excursion to Faringdon. Proceedings of the 19 20 Geologists' Association, 20: 115-121 21 For Peer Review 22 23 Trechmann, C.T. (1942). Borings in the Permian and Coal measures around 24 25 Hartlepool. Proceedings of the Yorkshire Geological Society, 24: 313-327. 26 27 28 Ussher, W.E.A. (1907). The Geology of the Country around Plymouth & Liskeard. 29 30 Memoirs of the Geological Survey of the United Kingdom. Explanation of Sheet 348. 156 pp. 31 32 London. 33 34 35 Walford, E.A. (1887). Notes on some Polyzoa from the Lias. Quarterly Journal of the 36 37 Geological Society of London, 43: 632-636. 38 39 Walker, C. & Ward, D. (1992). Fossils (Eyewitness Handbook). London, Dorling 40 41 42 Kindersley, 320 pp. 43 44 Webby, B. D. (2015). Labechiida: systematic descriptions, 709-754. In Selden, P.A. 45 46 (ed.). Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. Part E (Revised), Porifera, vol 4-5, liii + 1223 47 48 49 pp, The University of Kansas Paleontological Institute, Lawrence, Kansas. 50 51 Wetherell, J.W. (1874). On some fossils from the Margate Chalk. Proceedings of the 52 53 Geologists’ Association, 3: 192-197. 54 55 56 Wetherell, N.T. (1852). Note on a new species of Clionites. Annals and Magazine of 57 58 Natural History, Series 2, 10: 354-355. 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Page 49 of 49 Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals

1 2 3 Whitaker, W. (1872). The Geology of the London Basin. Part I. The Chalk and the 4 5 Eocene beds of the Southern and Western tracts. Memoirs of the Geological Survey of 6 7 England and Wales. Volume IV, xi + 619 pp. London. 8 9 10 Whitaker, W. (1889). The Geology of the London Basin and of part of the Thames 11 12 Valley (Explanation of Sheets 1, 2, and 7). Memoirs of the Geological Survey. England and 13 14 Wales. Volume II, Appendices, iii + 352 pp. London. 15 16 17 Wood, R.A. (1988). Fossils of the Chalk. In Owen E & Smith, A. (eds), Field Guide to 18 19 Fossils. 306 pp. The Palaeontological Association, London. 20 21 For Peer Review 22 Wood, R.A. & Reitner, J. (1988). The Upper Cretaceous “chaetetid” demosponge 23 24 Stromatoaxinella irregularis n.g. (Michelin) and its systematic implications. Neues Jahrbuch 25 26 für Geologie und Paläontologie, Abhandlungen, 177: 213-224. 27 28 29 Woodward, H.B. (1906). Excursion to Lyme Regis, Easter, 1906. Proceedings of the 30 31 Geologists’ Association, 19: 320-340. 32 33 34 Woodward, S.P. (1864). On the Nature and Origin of Banded Flints. Geological 35 36 Magazine, Series 1, 1: 145-149. 37 38 39 Wrigley, A. (1931). In White, E.I. The Vertebrate Faunas of the English Eocene. Vol. 40 41 I. From the Thanet Sands to the Basement Bed of the London Clay. With Appendices on the 42 43 Otoliths by G.A. Frost, and on the Mollusca, by Arthur Wrigley. British Museum (Natural 44 45 History), London. 46 47 48 Wright, J. (1922). Notes on the occurrence of Crinoids in the Carboniferous 49 50 Limestones in Scotland. Transactions of the Edinburgh Geological Society, 11: 275-299. 51 52 53 Young, J.T. (1878). On the Occurrence of a Freshwater Sponge in the Purbeck 54 55 Limestone. Geological Magazine, Series 2, 5: 220-221. 56 57 58 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals Page 50 of 49

1 2 3 Zhuravlev, A.Y. (1987). Radiocyathids, 35-44. In Hoffman, A. & Nitecki, M.H. (eds), 4 5 Problematic Fossil Taxa. Oxford Monographs on Geology and Geophysics No. 5, i-xi., 267 6 7 pp. Clarendon Press, Oxford. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 For Peer Review 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/cjx