SCYPHOMEDUSAE 389 



Although in all three specimens there is nothing to be seen of the star-like design 

 with radial rays on the exumbrella and the vivid colours of the mouth arms and gonads, 

 so typical of this species, the colour being uniformly yellowish brown, I think them to be 

 identical with Ch.fulgida, Reynaud, which is very common in the neighbourhood of 

 the Cape of Good Hope. Vanhoeffen (1903, p. 38) found some fragments of a quite 

 similar medusa in Algoa Bay. 



Very probably Mayer (19 10) is right in believing this form to be identical with 

 hysoscella, Eschscholtz. 



Family CYANEIDAE, L. Agassiz, 1862 

 Genus Desmonema, L. Agassiz, 1862 



The question whether the species gaudichaudi, Lesson, and chierchiana, Vanhoeffen, 

 can be maintained as separate, or represent only local varieties of one and the same 

 species, is not yet settled. The reason is that too few specimens have been studied. In 

 the Discovery material there are only two specimens which belong to this genus. If 

 I identify them under different names I do so because the two, although more or less 

 damaged on the mouth arms and gonads, show obvious differences. 



According to Vanhoeffen (1888, p. 18) D. chierchiana differs irom gaudichaudi hy the 

 shorter mouth arms, and the form of the tentacular lappets and gonads. According to 

 Maas (1908) both differ in the form of the tentacular lobes (divided or not) and the 

 number of tentacles. Browne (1908) and Mayer (1910) point out that there are important 

 differences in the shape, number and arrangement of the tentacles. The distribution is 

 different zho: gaudichaudi is Antarctic and chierchiatia sub- Antarctic. I may add that 

 the form and size of tentacles, the number and shape of the vessels in the tentacular 

 lappets and the relative width of the lappet zone, are different in both forms. 



I am therefore inclined to keep the species separate. 



Desmonema gaudichaudi, Lesson (Fig. 10) 



St. 150. 16. i. 27. OS South Georgia, i m. tow-net, 0-5 m. 



One very badly damaged specimen without stomach or mouth arms, and most tentacles torn 

 away; lappet zone only partially preserved. Diameter of the bell 120 mm. with lappets turned 

 outwards. 



The jelly of the umbrella is very thin and fragile. The surface of the exumbrella on the 

 lappets is perfectly smooth, and free of warts or clusters of nematocysts. The tentacular 

 lobes are ± 23 mm. in length, 25-27 mm. broad ; their distal margin is without any in- 

 cision or cleft, and almost evenly rounded. The rhopalar lobes are about 20 mm. long 

 and 12 mm. broad. They are separated by deep incisions from the tentacular ones and 

 are much more pointed than those of chierchiana. The whole marginal zone is relatively 

 broad in comparison with the length of the broad and short stomach pouches, and much 

 broader than in chierchiana (compare fig. i, pi. i of Maas, 1908, of D. gaudichaudi, with 

 Browne's (1910) fig. 2, pi. ii, oi chierchiana). 



