British terminology for rugose corals
By: Hill, Dorothy
.
Material type: 
ArticleDescription: 481-518p ; Illustration.Subject(s): Terminology - Rugose corals - Middle ordovician to late permian sea | Tetracorallia or horn coral
In:
Geological magazine : Vol. 72 Iss. 1-12 Year. 1935Summary: Extract
THE terminology used to-day by British writers on Rugose corals is founded on the first competent terminology ever formulated, that of Henri Milne Edwards and Jules Haime, which was published in 1848, and added to during the following twelve years. These eminent French workers evolved a general terminology for corals as a whole and a special one for the sub-order Madreporaria Edwards and Haime. Their researches were more exact than those of their predecessors and called for more exact terms. Dana also realized the need for an exact terminology and introduced one some two months later (1848, p. 723); but it was less complete, less coherent, and less precise than that of Edwards and Haime, and has not been generally adopted by later writers.
| Item type | Current location | Collection | Call number | Status | Date due | Barcode |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Article
|
Library and Information Centre Periodical Section | Bound Journal Collection | Not for loan | 002562_88 | ||
Serials/Scientific Journal
|
Library and Information Centre Periodical Section | Bound Journal Collection | 550 GEO (Browse shelf) | Available | 002562 |
Extract
THE terminology used to-day by British writers on Rugose corals is founded on the first competent terminology ever formulated, that of Henri Milne Edwards and Jules Haime, which was published in 1848, and added to during the following twelve years. These eminent French workers evolved a general terminology for corals as a whole and a special one for the sub-order Madreporaria Edwards and Haime. Their researches were more exact than those of their predecessors and called for more exact terms. Dana also realized the need for an exact terminology and introduced one some two months later (1848, p. 723); but it was less complete, less coherent, and less precise than that of Edwards and Haime, and has not been generally adopted by later writers.
There are no comments for this item.