REPORT ON THE ANTIPATHARIA. 11 



are perhaps similar to the irregular papillary spicules fouud in the bark of Gorgonia, are 

 scattered through the bark of this species of Antipathes, and the axes of its smaller 

 branches are minutely tubular." Gray's observations on the polyp are no advance on 

 the information already supplied by Ellis, excepting that he doubts the existence, in the 

 species studied, of the cup-like oral aperture with a crenate margin figured by that author. 

 I am, however, induced to discuss them at greater length on account of the questionable 

 identity of the species referred to, and also because this form possibly constituted the 

 type of his new genus Leiopathes. 



In his second paper Gray states that the species formerly observed " has been 

 separated from the others of the genus because the surface of the axis is smooth and not 

 covered with a number of minute, uniform cylindrical spines like the true Antipathes, 

 and has been called for that reason Leiopathes" evidently referring to his note of 1842 

 already mentioned. He then goes on to describe the appearance of the " bark " of a long 

 simple-stemmed Antipathes from the Seychelles, which he regarded as a new species 

 allied to Antipathes spiralis, Pallas, " if more than a very fine straight specimen of that 

 species." The ccenenchyma is stated to contain flakes of a substance insoluble in strong 

 hydrochloric acid or caustic potash, and supposed to be siliceous. This paper is illustrated 

 by a plate, from which I have been enabled to identify the specimen now in the British 

 Museum collection. It apparently belongs to Cirrhipathes anguina, Dana, and although 

 dry, shows the same arrangement of polyps (and spines ?) as figured by that author. 

 The identity of the species referred to in the earlier paper is not so certain. Undoubtedly 

 it is not Antipathes dichotoma, Pallas, as Marsigli, from whose work Pallas took his 

 description, not only notes the presence of spines, but figures their arrangement both 

 near the base of the stem and on a more slender pinnule. I have been unable to find 

 any specimen of Antipathes dichotoma, Pallas, in the British Museum collection, but am 

 disposed to think that a specimen of Antipathes glaberrima, Esper, the locality for which 

 is not stated, may be the species referred to by Gray. In this species the axis is perfectly 

 smooth and glossy in the older portions of the colony, and the ccenenchyma has been 

 stated sometimes to contain, or rather have adhering to it, the spicules of various 

 Axifera, sponges, &c. 



Later in the year Gray (40) contributed to the same journal a, Synopsis of Axiferous 

 Zoophytes, in which he included the Antipathidse. He divides the axiferous zoophytes 

 into three suborders, in the third of which, Ceratophyta, the Antipathidse form the first 

 family. He describes three genera, Leiopathes, Antipathes (with a subgenus, Cirrhi- 

 pathes), and Sarcogorgia. Under the genus Leiopathes he includes two species, viz., 

 Antipathes glaberrima, Esper, and Antipathes boscii, Lamouroux. The species of which 

 he described the polyps in 1832 and then named Antipathes dichotoma, Pallas, he 

 evidently now regards as Antipathes glaberrima, Esper, and queries the two as synonymous, 

 and in referring to his original note quotes the name glaberrima instead of dichotoma. 



