REPORT ON THE HEXACTINELLIDA. 185 



that he had been convinced of the correctness of Max Schultze's opinion by finding 

 two large specimens of Ilyalonema with sponge bodies but without the polype crust. 



The sponges which Semper described in 1867^ and in 1868," under the designa- 

 tion of Hyalonema schultzei, I shall discuss when considering the genus Semperella. 



In 186S Gray made several communications on Hyalmiema ; ^ in the first of 

 these he added to his Carteria jaiwnica a second species, Carteria lusitanica 

 { = Hyalonema lusitanicum, Bocage). In the second he combated Max Schultze's con- 

 ception of Hyalonema, and in the third he expressed the opinion that the sponge 

 described a short time previously by Loven as Hyalonema boreale * in no way belonged 

 to the genus Hyalonema, Gray (or Carteria, Gray), but was from the form of its 

 simple spindle-shaped spicules to be referred to the Halichondridse, in close relation to 

 Halichondria Jicus, Johnston {Ficidina, Gray). In his later memoir published in 

 English,'* Loven described a North Sea sponge, with a club-shaped body and a slender 

 stalk fixed in the sand by means of root-like processes, and bearing a certain external 

 resemblance to Hyalonema sieholdii. Loven conjectured that the Japanese and Portugese 

 HyalonenKita were, like his Hyalonema horeale, rooted in mud by means of their long 

 tuft-like spreading spicules, and that accordingly the broad cylindrical sponge body of 

 these forms did not represent the base, but was fixed as an upward projecting mass upon 

 the root-tuft. 



In the meantime Barboza du Bocage had also discovered, off the coast of Portugal, some 

 sponges which resembled the Hyalonema horeale. In his report on these forms," which 

 he had been at first inclined to regard as young specimens of Hyalonema lusitanicum, 

 he expresses his conviction that these, along with the Hyalonema horeale of Loven, 

 should be placed in a special new genus " Lovenia." 



Gray now announced^ that the Japanese collectors, who sometimes found the 

 diverging extremity of the glassy spicular tuft covered with mud, affirmed that this free 

 tufted extremity was embedded in the mud or sand of the sea-bottom. He was 

 himself inclined to regard this view as correct, and figures * a Hyalonema placed 

 in this position. It is noteworthy that Gray now returned to the name Hyalonema 

 sieholdii, which he first applied in 1835 to the supposed polypes, and thus abandoned 

 the designation Hyalonema mirabile, which had been used for a longer period. 

 For the Hyalonema lusitanicum described by Barboza du Bocage, he adheres to a 

 generic name which had already been used in 1867, viz., Hyalothrix, and he names 

 the specimen in question Hyalothrix lusitanica. Both in the case of Hyalonema 

 sieholdii and of Hyalothrix lusitanica, he admits varieties with and without the adhering 

 sponges. 



' Archivf. Natiirgesch., Bd. xxxix. p. 84. 2 Verhandl. d. phys.-med. Gesellsch. TViirxhurg, 1868. 



3 Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 4, vol. i. p. 161, &c. ■" Ofversigt k. Vetensk.-Akad. Forhandl, 1868, p. 105. 



» Ann. and Mag. Nut. Hist., ser. 4, vol. ii. p. 81, 1868. ' Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 4, vol. ii. p. 36, 1868. 



7 Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 4, vol. ii. p. 271, 1868. ^ Loc. cit., p. 275. 



(ZOOL. CHALL. EXP. — PART LIII. 1887.) Ggg 2-1 



