342 PROCEEDINGS OF THE 



and Ichthydium podura have no popular name. Gosse pro- 

 posed the name of " hairy-backed animalcules." This is entirely 

 unsuitable, since some of the genera are not hairy-backed 

 (Ichthydium, Lepidoderma). Mr. Murray was not able to suggest 

 an appropriate name. The name suggested by the scientific 

 term for the whole group, which embodies almost the only 

 character which they all possess, is unsuitable for popular use. 

 The Gastrotricha are not animals which can be named offhand. 

 The days when we found Chaetonotus lanes and Ichthydium 

 podura, occasionally varied by C. maximus, on all our pond-life 

 excursions are over. There is a host of species which have 

 contributed to the records of C. larus. These species are all 

 alike to a casual glance, but are distinguished by minute 

 characters the possession of small branches by certain of the 

 bristles, the form of the minute scales which bear the bristles, 

 etc. Some of these are so delicate that an oil-immersion lens 

 would be needed for their certain determination. The author 

 expressed his thanks to Messrs. Rousselet, Bryce and Starring 

 for assistance given in the preparation of this paper. The paper 

 then goes on to describe the form and structure of the Gastro- 

 tricha, their haunts and habits, an historical sketch of the 

 genera, their classification, a key to the genera and a list of 

 the eighty-three species which have been described, notes on the 

 identification of species and on some species Mr. Murray had seen, 

 and concludes with a bibliography of seventy-two items. Mr. 

 Scourfield illustrated his remarks and comments by references to 

 a number of sketches he had drawn on the blackboard. 



The President had much appreciated Mr. Scourfield's resume 

 of Mr. Murray's paper. He referred to the " fish-hook " spines 

 and other extraordinary specific characters, which, he thought, 

 could not possibly be explained as due to natural selection. The 

 Club was very much to be congratulated on having such an 

 important paper contributed to the Journal. 



Mr. llousselet said these organisms could be preserved quite 

 well in 5-per-cent. formalin. He remembered Mr. Spencer's 

 paper in 1889 quite well, and had differed from him at the 

 time, and had said fusiformis was not a rotifer, but could 

 not then say what it was. The animal was taken at a Club 

 excursion. 



On the motion of the President a cordial vote of thanks was 



