1889.] NATURAL SCIENCES OF PHILADELPHIA. 123 



tology of the zoanthidse is not yet sufficiently advanced to enable us 

 to ascertain what features are of systematic importance and what 

 are liable to extensive individual variation. 



The sphincter muscle resembles closely that of Hertwig's G.lutea. 

 It is imbedded in the mesoglcea and is single, consisting of a single 

 row of cavities which are entirely confined to the portion of the 

 column which is invaginated during contraction. All the cavities 

 contain muscle cells and there are none of the empty spaces with 

 clearly defined walls such as occur in G. fiava. 



The mesenteries are arranged in the microtypus, and in the speci- 

 mens examined there were about eighteen pairs only. The mesoglcea 

 is delicate, and is not dilated towards the base as in C. oeellata, and 

 in consequence, the basal canal is elongated. Notwithstanding that 

 the specimens were very much macerated it was possible to perceive 

 that a digestive area, similar to that described as occurring in Z.jios- 

 marinm was present, just below the stomatodseum. No reproductive 

 organs were present. 



The stomatodseum presented the pyriform, truncated shape which 

 lias been described for other members of the genus. 



It seems not improbable that the form described by Hertwig as 

 C. luted may be identical with this. Alcoholic specimens of C. 

 glareola show no trace of the coloration of the living forms, but are 

 of a universal sandy color. In the very slight prominence of the 

 polyps above the ccenenchyme, in the structure of the sphincter 

 muscle, and in the slenderness of the mesenteries there is agreement 

 between the two, and these are points which will probably prove to 

 be of systematic importance. On the other hand there is dissim- 

 ilarity in the extent of the incrustation by foreign bodies, in the pig- 

 mentation of the endoderm which is wanting in C. glareola, and ap- 

 parently in the extent of the development of the longitudinal muscles 

 of the mesenteries, which cannot be said to be well developed in G. 

 glareola. This last character is probably of importance, but the 

 first two are probably subject to variation depending upon the con- 

 ditions of life and the food. 



The evidence then, seems to be in favor of the identity of the two 

 forms, in which case the name here used has the priority. It seems 

 to me very doubtful indeed if Hertwig's identification of the Ber- 

 muda form with Quoy and Gaimard's G. Itdea from the Fiji islands 

 is correct. The only point of correspondence, judging from the 



