12 Transactions of the Society. 



Plate, L. — Beitrage z. Naturg. d. Kotator. Jen. Zeitsch. f. Naturw., Bd. 19, 



NF. Bd. 12, 1886, p. 23, pi. i. fig. 6. 

 Tessin-Butzow, G. — Eotatorien d. Umgeg. v. Bostock. Arch. 43, d. Frid. 



Naturg. i. Mechlbg., 1886, p. 149, pi. i. fig. 9. 

 Hudson & Gosse.— The Botifera. London, 1889, vol. ii. p. 26, pi. 17, fig. 9 ; 



p. 37, pi. 18, fig. 8; Suppl. p. 20, pi. 31, fig. 7. 

 Thorpe, V. Gunson — New and Foreign Botif. Journ. Boy. Micr. Soc. 



London, 1891, p. 305, pi. 7, fig. 5. 

 Bergendal, D. — Zur Botatorienfauna Gronlands. Lund, 1892, p. 70, pi. 2, 



fig. 18. 

 Bilfinger, L. — Zu Botatorienfauna "Wurttembergs. Zweiter Beitr. Jahresh. 



d. Vereins fur vaterl. Naturk. in Wiirtt., 1894, p. 44. 

 Kertesz, Kalman. — Budapest es Kornyekenek Botat.-Faun. Budapest, 1894, 



p. 30. 

 Lev and er, K. M. — Materialien z. Kenntn. d. Wasserfaxina, etc. Act. Soc. pro 



Fauna et Flora fennica. Helsingfors, 1894, xii. No. 3, p. 43. 

 Scorikow, A. S. — Botat. d. env. d. Kharkow. Kharkow, 1896, p. 86. 

 Stenroos, K. E. — Das Thierl. im Nurmijarve-See. Act. Soc. pro Fauna et 



Flora fennica. Helsingfors, 1898, xvii. No. 1, p. 156. 

 Weber, E. F — Faune Botator. d. Bassin d. Lt'man. Geneve, 1898, p. 545, 



pi. 18, figs 5-7. 



For the above bibliography we are indebted to the last work quoted. 



Spec. Char. — Body round, back highly gibbous, venter flat ; 

 head long on the dorsum in proportion to body ; neck well 

 marked ; face sub-prone ; corona extending obliquely down to the 

 ventral side of neck ; lorica very transparent, normal diaschiza 

 type ; dorsal cleft very wide, especially in front ; lateral cleft also 

 wide ; eye cervical, on the end of the brain ; foot short, scarcely 

 projecting from lorica ; toes about ^ length of rest of body, 

 decurved, slightly outcurved. 



This is the oldest of our genus, having been described by 

 Miiller in 1786. His original description is remarkably good, 

 accurate, and detailed, considering the early date and the poor 

 lenses which he must have had. Strange to say, he did not fall 

 into the error into which several subsequent authors have fallen, 

 viz. that of stating that the jaws protrude. He describes the 

 arrangement of the " lacinulre " or flaps as such that " apertura 

 rosacea appareat." 



Ehrenberg's figure is good, his description inaccurate as to the 

 jaws, and he transfers it to the genus Notommata. 



Gosse retained the generic name Notommata. He fell into the 

 error of supposing that " the tips of the rami were habitually 

 projected from the front." These, as we have already explained in 

 treating of the genus, are really the projecting Uds of the buccal 

 orifice. 



"Weber follows Gosse in this mistake, but adds a note from 

 Mr. C. F. Eousselet, which gives a correct view of the case. He 

 rightly, however, transfers this species to the genus Diaschiza. 



