forekommer mig ikke at være dyhere end don. man finder 

 mellem Chn-idne og Boiir/ahirillidac. 



Angaaende Eudcitdrithic^s Særstilling som on selv- 

 stændig Familie kan jeg kun give Srlniridcfs Udtalelser 

 min Tilslutning. Man ser her on Udvikling af Hydran- 

 tlierne i samme Retning, som den fiiides hos Tnbularhlae, 

 og som viser sig ved en sterk Udvikling af Hydranthens 

 in-oximale Del i Forhold til den distalo. 



At Haleciidae maa betragtes som Udgangspunkt for 

 de forskjellige Familier blandt de thecajiliore Hydroider, 

 og at denne Familie atter stammer fra Boui/ahir/11/dae, — 

 dette tindes saa vel begrundet i Schneiders Afhandbng, at 

 det er unodvendigt at udtale sig nærmere derom. 



Indenfor Halec/idav danner Slægten Oiiltiodes Over- 

 gang til Fluiiiidar/dae, medens paa den anden Side ogsaa 

 Cavipanularidae maa soge sin Oprindelse i denne Familie. 



Da Lrr/nscii og Scltiicldcr i de ovenfor omtalte Af- 

 handlingor har samlet og gjennemgaaet den senere Tids 

 Literatur over Hydroiderne, anser jeg det for overtiødigt 

 at gjentage det samme her; jeg skal derfor Ijlot i Korthed_ 

 omtale nogle Arbeider, der specielt liehandler Xorges 

 Hydroidefauna. 



Det er vresentlig Professorerne il/, og (r. 0. Sårs, 

 dor har bidraget til Kundskaben om vort Lands Hydroider; 

 men de har ogsaa undersøgt saagodtsom hele vor Kyst- 

 strækning. og deres Bidrag giver saaledos et samlet Billede 

 af vor Fauna, paa samme Tid som de iudeholdor Beskri- 

 velser af en Mængde nye Former, der tildels har været 

 Representanter for eiendommelige nye Sla»gter. 



Professor il/. Sårs har i sine mange Afhandlinger 

 over dette Thema (98 — 1U5) gi vet detaillerede Beskrivelser 

 over en stor Del af vore athecate Hydroider og ogsaa 

 nogle thecato, og som Regel er disse Beskrivelser saa ind- 

 gaaende og præcise, at der intet er at tilfoie til dem. 

 Hans mange og interessante Bidrag til Læren om Hydroi- 

 dernes Forplantning er saa vol kjendte at jeg ikke omtaler 

 dom hor; kun vil jeg nævne, at allerede han (103) idet 

 han udtaler sig om Principerne for Hydroidernes Syste- 

 matik, protesterer mod at man adskiller Arter, der frem- 

 bringer fri Meduser, fra saadaniie. hvis Gonoforer forbliver 

 sessile 



G. <). Sårs har i sia: ..Bidrag til Kundskaben om 

 Norges Hydroider,'- foruden Beskrivelser af nye Arter, og- 

 saa givet en samlet Fremstilling af alle Norges Hydroider, 

 med Hensyn paa deres Udbrcdelse langs vor Kyst, og i de 

 forskjellige Dybderegionor. Han aabenbarer herunder en 

 tidligere fuldstændig ukjendt Hydroiderfauna fra Havets 

 større Dybder, idet han paa en Reise med Oplodningsskibet 

 ,.Hansteen-' havde iundet en stor Mængde Hydroider paa 

 Dybder mellem 50— oOU Favne, medens man tidligere 

 væsentlic; har fundet Hvdroiderne ovenfor 50 Favnes Dyb. 



rate them do not seem to me to l)e widor tlian those found 

 !)otween Clavidc and Bour/a/nrilluhe. 



With regard to Eiideiidrid(i''s peculiar position as an 

 independent faniily. I can oidy subscril)i' to Sclrne/ders 

 expressed opinions. The development of the hydra nths 

 hore is similar to that in Tnbularidæ, being greater in the 

 proximal ]iart of the hydranth as compared witli the 

 distal jKirt. 



Tlie arguments for regarding HaJedidæ as the starting- 

 point for tlie various families of the thecaphore hydroids, 

 and as lioing doscended in its turn from BougainriUidæ. 

 are so woll-tbundod in Schtieiders treatise, that it is not 

 necessary to say more ou the subject. 



In Haleciidae, the genus Ophiodes forms the transition 

 to Plunudaridæ, while on the other hand, Campamdaridæ 

 must also scok its origin in this familv. 



As Levinsen and Schneider, in the abovo-mentioncd 

 treatises. have brought together and reviowed the hydroid 

 litorature of rocent times. I consider it would be super- 

 Huous to repoat the same thing here; I shall therefore 

 only lu-iofly mention some works which especially troat of 

 tho hydioid fauna of Norway. 



Professors M. and G. 0. Sårs have beon the prin- 

 cipal contributors to the knowledge of the Hydroida of 

 Norway. The have explored almost the entire length of 

 the Norwegian coast. and thus their contributions give a 

 completo representatiou of its fauna, while at the same 

 time they contain descriptions of a nnmbcr of new forms, 

 which have. to some extent, beeu representatives of pecu- 

 liar new genera. 



In his numerous treatises upon this subject, Prof. 

 il/. Sårs (98 — 105) has given detailed descriptions of a 

 large proportion of onr athecate hydroids, and also of some 

 thecate liydroids. As a rule. these descriptions are so 

 minute and exact. that there is nothing to add to them. 

 His numerous and interesting contributions to the tlie(n-y 

 of the propagation of hydroids is so well known that 1 do 

 not mention it here; I will only say that in speaking (103) 

 on the snbject of the principles for the systematic of hyd- 

 roids, he already protests against he separation of spccies 

 that produco froo-swiuiming modusæ, and those whose gono- 

 phoros roniain sossile. 



Prof. G. 0. Sårs, in his ..Bidrag til kundskaben om 

 Norges hydroidta-- (Contribution to tlie Knowledge of the 

 Hvdroids of Norway), in addition to descriptions of now 

 species. has also given a complete account of all tho hyd- 

 roids of Norway, with reference to their distribution along 

 the Norwegian coast, and in the various deptlis. In doing 

 this, he reveals a previously utterly unknown hydroid-fauna 

 from the dceper parts of the ocean, having found, when 

 on a voyage in tlie surveying-steamer ,,Hansteen', a large 

 number of hydroids in depths of from 5() to 300 fathoms. 

 whereas previously hydroids had priucipally been found iu 

 depths of less than 5U fathoms. 



