IO 



Schmidt wrote in 1868 that he had given in his first "Supplement der Spongien des 

 Adriatischen Meeres" (1864), an illustration of a curious form of spicule belonging to a Sponge 

 from Cyprus. Other specimens of it were dredged in Algiers and the Sponge was called Spirastrella 

 ctmctatrix . The spicule under consideration is what we now call a spinispira. Carter at various 

 occasions described other specimens of 6". cunctatrix, which in many respects differ rather from 

 Schmidt's specimen. I have examined several of Carter's specimens in the British Museum. 

 The one registered 86. 12. 15. 250 bears my number B.M. 10 and is illustrated on PI. III, fig. 3; 

 the specimen registered 86. 12. 15. 251 has my number B.M. 13; both are determined by Carter 

 and possibly represent the two specimens Carter described in i886(p. 113 — 114)- Later Carter 

 described two "varieties", roèusta and porcata. The type of the former is registered in the 

 British Museum 86. 12. 15. 352; it corresponds to my number B.M. 16; another specimen 

 (86. 12. 15. 353) is marked B.M. 3- The variety porcata is registered 86. 12. 15. 351 and bears 

 my number B. M. l- These five specimens differ a good deal in external appearance and in 

 the dimensions of the spicules (PI. X, figs. 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7). Whereas the surface of B. M. 13 

 is covered with warty elevations, we see in B.M. 1 "a number of thick rugae'; in B.M. 10 

 both characters are united. Whereas in B. M. 16 the tylostyli are rather slender, they are rather 

 stout in B. M. 3 and B. M. 13. The largest spinispirae of B. M. 3 are very robust, rather thick 

 and short ; some resemble indeed the characteristic spicules of 5". bistellata (PI. X, fig. 7). Schmidt 

 came to the same result with his specimens; he writes (1868 p. 17): "Die Formen (viz. of the 

 spinispirae) mit verkürzter Axe ahneln den Doppelsternen von Suberites bistellatus . . . ." Of 

 course Carter was very well aware of all these differences ; still he did not hesitate in uniting 

 his specimens with Schmidt's .S\ cunctatrix. 



Between Sumbawa and Flores (Stat. 310) the Siboga dredged more than a dozen specimens 

 of a sponge (g2 a-l), which corresponds in almost every respect to the specimens Carter identified 

 with Spirastrella cunctatrix O. S. We saw above that Carter's specimens show considerable 

 differences ; we observe the same variability in the Siboga specimens. B. M. 1 and B. M. 13 

 differ a good deal in external appearance, but they agree pretty well in spiculation (PI. X, 

 figs. 3 and 6 respectively). The sections of B. M. 3 and B. M. 16 look like fine cork ; those 

 of B. M. 10 and B. M. 13 are more fibrous. Similar differences may be observed in the Siboga 

 specimens ; these differences on one side and those of Carter's specimens on the other side 

 are certainly not larger than those of the latter inter se. In addition to the above mentioned 

 specimens the Siboga brought home another one, 426 d, which is doubtless identical with g2 a-l. 

 They all agree in external appearance and in spiculation with Spirastrella cunctatrix O. S. in 

 the enlarged sense Carter took it. 



[Cf. S. papillosa, panis and iusignis]. 



IV. Hymeniacidon angulata. 



1872 Bowerbank p. 632, 6$$, 635; PI. XLIX, fig. 1 — 7. 

 1882 Carter p. 352. 

 1S84 Ridley p. 469. 

 1889 (x) Dendy p. 16. 



