CLASSIFICATION. 



It will be well to consider briefly the value of the present collection for a rearrange- 

 ment of the Antipatharia. In the past, owing to the lack of information concerning 

 the organisation of the zooids, it has only been possible to make use of skeletal characters, 

 the mode of branching, and the size, shape, and arrangement of the spines in the definition 

 of both species and genera. Even Pourtales, who has figured the zooids of several of the 

 West Indian forms, and recognised two or three distinct types, considered it premature 

 to attempt any rearrangement of the group based on the information at hand. I consider, 

 however, that the information brought forward in the present Report, although, 

 undoubtedly, not sufficient for a complete reorganisation of the group, throws sufficient 

 light on the subject to indicate at any rate the lines on which future classification must 

 be based, and a partial revision has been attempted in consequence. This seems the 

 more justifiable on account of the relatively large number of species of which I have been 

 enabled to make a microscopical examination of the zooids. Including the species now 

 described as new, and supposing the synonymy here adopted to be correct, the list of 

 species referable at present to the Antipatharia may be fixed at 98, and of many of these 

 we have at present only the most meagre information, so that in many cases it is 

 impossible to decide whether the list might not be still further reduced. Previous authors 

 have only given us information concerning the structure of the zooids in three species, 

 viz., Savaglia lanxarcki, Antipathella subpinnata, and Parantipathes larix. G. v. Koch 

 has more recently given us a more detailed account of the structure of Parantipathes 

 larix, including a more accurate description of the number and position of the mesenteries. 

 The other two species have not been examined by subsequent investigators, and Lacaze 

 Duthiers' account of Antipathella subpinnata is very incomplete. Of the 97 species 

 referred to I have been enabled to study the structure of the zooids of 22, viz., 

 16 Challenger species, 4 from the Mediterranean (including Parantipathes larix and 

 Antipathella subpinnata), and 2 in the British Museum collection. An examination 

 of these species, the detailed results of which I hope to publish in due course, has led me ■ 

 to the conclusion that a proper arrangement of the Antipatharia can only be completed 

 when we possess accurate information concerning the morphology of all the species. A 

 marked contrast between the Alcyonaria and the Zoantharia is found in the fact that, 



