40 Prof. Allman on Carduella cyathiformis. 



42-82. The Fichtelian species. Comparing the list of the 

 Foraminifera figured in the Tabl. Encyc. Meth. with those cata- 

 logued and briefly described in the Hist. Anim. s. Vert. vol. vii., 

 we find that Lamarck had considered and reconsidered their 

 relations to each other and to the rest of the minute shells which 

 he thought to be microscopic Cephalopods, and that consequently 

 he had laboured to arrange them in a systematic form. That 

 he failed in doing so is not to be wondered at, having no light 

 as to their real relationships. Some of the terms applied by 

 Lamarck to the Fichtelian species and varieties are serviceable, 

 although his notions of the generic groupings were wrong. He 

 did not advance beyond Fichtel and Moll in the definition of 

 the species ; indeed at first he retrograded in that respect, giving 

 specific names to several varieties of C. Cassis in the Tabl. Enc. 

 Meth. In publishing his Hist. Anim. s. Vert., however, he 

 appears to have recognized the propriety of giving wider limits 

 to the specific groups. 



63, 64, 65. Nothing need be said of N. Fascia, Linn., N. Ra- 

 phanistrum, Linn., and N. obliqua, Linn., catalogued in the 

 Hist. An. s. Vert. vol. vii. p. 594. 



66. " Nodosaria Siphunculus " is a Serpula. See Ann. Nat. 

 Hist. 3 ser. vol. iii. p. 480, where the Linnsean species and va- 

 rieties of Nodosaria are treated of (pp. 477-479). 



IX. — Note on Carduella cyathiformis. By Professor Allman. 



To the Editors of the Annals and Magazine of Natural History. 

 Gentlemen, 



My attention has been directed to a communication " On the 

 Lucernaria cyathiformis of Sars," by Mr. Gosse, in last month's 

 Number of the ' Annals/ The following passage occurs in it : 

 "In the 'Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science ' for this 

 month, Professor Allman has described and figured what he 

 considers to be the Lucernaria cyathiformis of Sars, instituting 

 for it a new genus, under the name of Carduella. I feel sure 

 he was not aware that I had already separated it from Lucer- 

 naria, under the generic name of Depastrum, in the ' Annals ! 

 for June 1858, p. 419." 



The paragraph here referred to, in which Mr. Gosse institutes 

 his genus Depastrum, occurs in his excellent " Synopsis of the 

 British Actiniae 'f and I confess that it had entirely escaped my 

 memory, until the remark above quoted caused me again to 

 refer to the paper which contains it. I find the genus Depas- 

 trum there defined as follows : — 



" Depastrum (Gosse). Corpus repente contractum, et supra et 



