Transactions and Proceedings of the Palaeontological Society of Japan New Series No. 81 Palaeontological Society of Japan April 20, 1971 Editor: Takashi HAMADA Associate edito r: Yasuhide IWASAKI Officers for 1971 - 1972 Honorary President : Teiichi KOB AYASHI President: Tokio SHIKAMA Councillors (* Executives): Kiyoshi ASANO*, Kiyotaka CHI NZEI*, Takashi HAMADA*, Tetsuro HA NA I*, Kotora HATAI, Itaru HAYAMI, Koichiro ICHIKAWA, Taro KANAYA, Kametoshi KA NMERA, Tamio KOTAKA, Tatsuro MATSUMOTO*, Hiroshi OZAKI*, Tokio SHIKAMA*, Fuyuji TAKAI *, Yokichi TAKAYANAGI Secretaries: Wataru HASHIMOTO, Saburo KA NNO Executive Committee General Affairs: Tetsuro HANAI, Naoaki AOKI Membership: Kiyotaka CHI NZEI, Toshio KOIKE Finance : Fuyuji T AKAI, Hisayoshi !Go Planning : Hiroshi OzAKI, Kazuo ASAMA Publications Transactions: Takashi HAMADA, Yasuhide IWASA KI Special Papers : Tatsuro MATSUMOTO, Tomowo 0ZA WA " Fossils": Kiyoshi ASANO, Toshiaki T AKAYAMA Fossil on the cover is left lower M2 of Pala eoloxodon naumanni (MAKIYAMA, 1924) from the uppermost part of the Tokyo formation (Upper Pleistocene) at Ikebukuro, Tokyo. All communications relating to this journal should be addressed to the PALAEONTOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF JAPAN c/o Geological Institute, Faculty of Science, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113, Japan Sole agent: University of Tokyo Press, Hongo, Tokyo Trans. Proc. Palaeont. Soc. Japan, N.S., No. 81, pp. 1-10, pl. 1, April 20, 1971 574. J. FLEMING'S SPECIES OF BRITISH LOWER CARBONIFEROUS CORALS MAKOTO KATO Department of Geology and Mineralogy, Hokkaido University 7 v ~ ~ :7'E:Ncil&cv~OOJ11TJVJ:fii!J'Hcl!lllf/1lft:fi: 7 v ~ ~ :7'fi J:l!.:(£:t5::. tJ:b:ll.:·n,, ~rfli45 il;fc <b c. -?v'"C ~OOcv:fii!JHcllffi!Wl~~cli& L-t-::lrHJJcv ?f}cg-cv-A c: <0 ~, ji:WI'fi.:c. ~ ~ ... ~ 71h fC(O :Q::E:l£. 7- ::r 'Y r 7 ~ ft\'{f;,ofil'ijifr)iCV 7 v ~ ~ :7' cv)}j{t;':{:;jqc "?v'"Cfl+-li}fj'f;~ t5;:. tJ: v', <0 :Q <b CVfC"?v'"C fi{~tt);J:ttJI'{:;f~~~/E L., :rlilc~H:: t5;::. tJ:h "* t-:fjUcv;i[.~(\(fCi.l• J.. :Q 15 CVHl fC -? v' -c , .:C tL.lf n .:C cv 51 ~1Ll::. cv t'r. WI: tJ: c:· to::.-? v ' -c iiiitr t.::t-: , 11~ ii~ Ri£ The first description of British Lower MARTIN's species until the International Carboniferous coral was by Eduardi LUIDI Commission of Zoological Nomenclature (LHUYD), a pre-Linnean author, in 1699. officially rejected both of MARTIN's The name Lithostrotion dates back to this works from nomenclatorial purpose publication, although LHUYD's work is (Opinion 231, 1948). MARTIN did not. not available for taxonomic purpose. employ binominal nomenclature, thus his In 1793 William MARTIN described and species became unavailable. figured two Lower Carboniferous corals In 1956 two of MARTIN's species were from Derbyshire. And in 1809 these however, revived and validated by the were redescribed by him together with ICZN Opinion 419, in fixing neotypes of the four other species. them, chosen by SMITH (1916) as offici­ They are as follows: ally recognized. Coralliolithus (Madreporae Caespitosae) Madre­ Now we have Lonsdaleia duplicata parae (MARTIN, 1793) = Erismolithus (Ma­ (MARTIN) and Actinocyathus florijormis dreporae Caespitosae) (MARTIN, 1809). (MARTIN) (KATO, 1966). Coralliolithus (Tubiporae radiatae) tubiporae Yet the rest of "MARTIN's species" tub is (MARTI!\", 1793) = Erismolithus !ubi­ has to be attributed to later authors porites ? (radiatus) (MARTIN, 1809). who first named them according to Erismolithus Madreporites (duplicatus) (MAR­ modern procedure of taxonomy as intro­ TIN, 1809). duced by LINNE. Thus Lithodendron Erismolithus Madreporites (affinis) (MARTI!';, 1809). caespitosa M'COY (1844) is the first name Erismolithus Tubiporites (catenatus) (MAR- for MARTIN's Erimolithus (Madreporae TIN, 1809). caespitosae) ... ]. FLEMING (1828) is avail­ Erismolithus Madreporites (fiorifonnis) (MAR­ able as the author for the British Lower TIN, 1809). Carboniferous corals. These species had long been known as During the course of my study on British Lower Carboniferous corals it Received June 22,1970; read Nov. 24, 1964 became necessary to re-examine FLE­ at Sapporo. MING's collection which is now housed 1 Makoto KATO at the Royal Scottish Museum, Edin­ the ICZN Opinion 117 (1931). burgh, in order to establish and to FLEMING (1828, p. 508) quotes LHUYD's interpret FLEMING's old species. (1699) and PARKINSON's (1808) corals as It is the purpose of this article to synonymous with his Lithostrotion stri­ mention the present status of the FLE­ atum. Both of the latter two materials MING's original material of Lower Car­ are believed to be lost. A single speci­ boniferous corals and to choose and men, RSM 1870. 14. 370 has been regis­ describe lectotypes of some species tered in the FLEMING collection at the whenever possible and desirable. Royal Scottish Museum. But unfortu­ FLEMING, as many other naturalists nately this specimen is not traceable at of his days, did not necessarily possess present. However THOMSON (1887) stud­ all the specimens of his own for the ied FLEMING's original specimen, redes­ species he named, described and ar­ cribed and figured this specimen. It ranged in order. appears quite possible that THOMSON Sometimes he had seen specimens in borrowed FLEMING's specimen which was other collections. Therefore, for the destroyed in the fire of Kilmarnock Mu­ recognition of FLEMING's species all the seum together with all the THOMSON specimens of the forms described by collection. previous authors and were later quoted In the absence of LHUYD's and PAR­ by FLEMING as synonymous with his KINSON's specimens (HILL, 1940, p. 166), species have to be considered as consti­ and being the only specimen it is appro­ tuting syntypes of that species, together priate to select FLEMING's original spe­ with of course his own materials. FLE­ cimen for the lectotype of Lithostrotion MING's collection was at least partially striatum. But we must interpret the re-examined, once by THOMSON (1887), species based on THOMSON's figure (1887, and then by SMITH and LANG (1930). pl. XII, fig.1). PARKINSON gave the name But it is still necessary to study it, for of Madrepora vorticalis to LHUYD's coral, ambiguity exists in some of his species. and this name antedates FLEMING's stri­ In 1960 the author was able to ex­ atum. Also CONYBEARE and PHILLIPS amine FLEMING's collection at the Royal (1822) called the same coral Lithostrotion Scottish Museum. And in connection basaltijorme. LANG, SMITH & THOMAS with the nomenclatorial problem con­ (1940) and HILL (1940) say that Litho­ cerned he also examined David URE strotion striatum should be known as collections of the Hunterian Museum, Lithostrotion vorticalis (PARKINSON). Glasgow, and the coral collection of the However in selecting FLEMING's origi­ British Museum (Natural History), Lon­ nal specimen of Lithostrotion striatum don and the Sedgwick Museum, Cam­ for lectotype, it is not necessarily syno­ bridge. The result is also incorporated nymous with LHUYD's or PARKINSON's in this articles. corals. This holds true to CONYBEARE In the following remarks will be given and PHILLIP's form as well. for each FLEMING's species in original The author thinks best to lapse both order. Madrepora vorticalis PARKINSON and Lithostrotion basaltijonne CONYBEARE Lithostrotion striatum and PHILLIPS because their descriptions This species was officially fixed as the and illustrations are too imperfect to type species of genus Lithostrotion by interpret their species, besides all the 574. FLEMING's Carboniferous Corals 3 type specimens for them are lost. (1845) selected Lithostrotion florijorme as Therefore it is no way possible to fix the type species of the genus Lithostro­ these two species in terms of modern tion, this was invalidated by the ICZN taxonomy. Opinion in 1931. The species florijormis On the other hand, though the actual remains as MARTIN's species (ICZN. specimen is still missing, it is possible Opinion 419, 1956), and the genus Acti­ to recognize Lithostrotion striatum, when nocyathus may be properly applied to we interpret THOMSON's illustration for the species (KA TO, 1966). Lithostrotion striatum. It appears that The neotype of MARTIN's florijormis Lit hostrotion striatum stands morpho­ is the Sedgwick Museum collection A logically in between Lit hostrotion minus 2359, selected by SMITH (1916). The spe­ and Lithostrotion portlocki. Also it may cimen is the type of Strombodes conaxis be still possible that the FLEMING's spe­ M'COY. cimen is turned up if we search closely Four specimens of "Lithostrotion" the THOMSON collection which was re­ florijorme have been registered in the ·covered and gathered from the burnt FLEMING collection at the Royal Scottish down Museum of Kilmarnock, and is Museum. They are : now kept at the Glasgow Museum and Art Gallery. RSM 1870. 14. 124 from Wen lock limestone The name of Lithostrotion vorticalis 329 Derbyshire 373 Colebrookdale (not has not been used for a long time. traceable) Therefore it may be allowed to lapse. " 379 But the name basaltijorme has been often ·employed in both palaeontological and THOMSON (1887) studied one of FLE­ stratigraphical papers. And Lithostro­ MING's specimens (presumably the one tion basaltijorme has been applied to that is not traceable at present), which such Lit hostrotion with cerioid coralla was figured as figure 2 on his plate 12 and relatively large corallites and num­ (erroneously stated as fig. 3 in his ex­ erous septa. Tabulae are dome shaped. planatory text). This form undoubtedly For such Lithostrotion a number of spe­ belongs to Actinocyathus florijormis cies, bristoliense VAUGHAN, aranea M'COY, (MARTIN). Other FLEMING's corals are arachnoides M'COY, septosus M'CoY, all conspecific with that species. The major M'CoY, and ishnon HUDSON were said horizon for one specimen is from proposed. They are all available and theW enlock limestone. This is obviously all the type specimens for these later erroneous.