ZOOLOGICAL AND BOTANICAL ASSOCIATION. 75 



The five forms above briefly described have been always viewed in 

 the light of distinct species, and I am not aware that any naturalist has 

 ever questioned the propriety of so regarding them. But the examina- 

 tion of a form of this genus which I obtained in February of the present 

 year, at Trabulgan, county of Cork, has led me to entertain a different 

 opinion. 



The Lucernaria to which I allude was one-third of an inch in 

 length, and of a delicate pink tint similar to that seen in some specimens 

 of Z. auricula. In shape and general appearance it bore some resemblance 

 to Z. fascicularis, but the form of the body was fuller, and more cup- 

 shaped. It was furnished, like that species, with a long peduncle, but 

 the latter was destitute of corrugations, and dilated at its extremity 

 into an adherent disc, in both characters differing from the peduncle of 

 L. fascicularis. The margin was surrounded by eight tufts of tenta- 

 cular arranged in pairs, but this arrangement was by no means so well 

 marked as in the last-mentioned species — the tufts, at the first view, ap- 

 pearing to be almost equi-distant. Between each of the pairs a margi- 

 nal tubercle occurred. In other respects the oral aspect was not unlike 

 that of Z. campanulata. Foliaceous processes proceeded from the mouth 

 to the spaces between the arms as in that form. The stomach also was 

 provided with peculiar worm-like coecal appendages, in all respects similar 

 to the same organs in Z. campanulata. The writhing movement of de- 

 tached portions of these appendages continued for a considerable time. 

 ( Vide Dr. Johnston' 8 "Brit. Zoophytes," second edition, p. 249). 



It is evident that the Lucernaria here described differs from any 

 other British species, and at the same time exhibits characters which 

 connect it with at least three of these. In colour, and in the pos- 

 session of marginal tubercles, it corresponds with L. auricula, but it 

 differs from that species in the form of its body, and the appearance of 

 its oral aspect. In the first of these characters it is similar to Z. 

 fascicularis, but it differs from that form in its smooth peduncle and 

 adherent disc, as also in its oral aspect. In this last point of view it 

 is akin to Z. campanulata, but from this it differs in possessing marginal 

 tubercles, and in having the tentacular bulbs arranged in pairs. It 

 might, then, be inferred that it was a distinct species ; and if we admit 

 the specific distinctions of Z. auricula, L. campanulata, and L. fascicu- 

 laris, we must also admit that of the form described. But it appears 

 to me to bo far more advisable to regard fttm u I arieties of one and the 





