3S 3 DISCOVERY REPORTS 



This may be Brettia longa Waters (1904, p. 26, pi. i, fig. zb, not za; Kluge, 1914, 

 p. 642). The "disks" described by Waters are evidently the "oval areas" (see p. 339 

 above) and are to be seen in these specimens, but the small frontal pores are absent and 

 the distal spine though present in the uniserial zooecia of typical Notoplites tenuis is 

 absent in the variety. The chief discrepancy is in the bifurcation. Waters's figure is 

 difficult to interpret, but it can hardly represent the arrangement in var. uniserialis 

 where the proximal segments of the daughter zooecia are in contact on the basal surface 

 of the parent zooecium, one being slightly more proximal in origin than the other. The 

 relation of the two daughter zooecia with the parent zooecium is, in fact, closely similar 

 to that of zooecia F and G (Harmer's lettering) with zooecium E in the bifurcations of 

 N. tenuis. The zooecia in Kluge 's specimens of Brettia longa had a small spine at each 

 distal corner. Lateral buds were formed. Waters's fig. 2 a is discussed on p. 470. 



9. Notoplites klugei (Hasenbank). Fig. 13 B. 

 Menipea klugei Hasenbank, 1932, p. 369, text-fig. 33. 

 Scrupocellaria simplex Kluge, 1914, p. 607, pi. xxvii, fig. 1. 

 Notoplites simplex Harmer, 1923, p. 353. 

 Station distribution. Not represented in the Discovery collections. 



Geographical distribution. Bouvet Island (Hasenbank) ; Wilhelm II Land (Kluge) ; Ross Sea 

 (National Antarctic Expedition). 



This species, which is represented by one small piece, differs from Notoplites tenuis 

 in its larger opesia and shorter zooecia ; in the more nearly oval outline of the aperture, 

 which in N. tenuis tends to have a rather straight distal border ; in the absence of spines 

 and scuta ; in the occasional presence of a small marginal avicularium ; and in the less 

 complete development of joints. Kluge and Hasenbank both refer to the apparently 

 primitive state of the joints. Kluge correctly describes the joints as being, when 

 present, no more than breaks in the calcareous wall without special chitinous tubes, 

 thus corresponding to the early stages in the formation of more highly developed joints. 

 From what has been said above about the variation in the degree of granulation of the 

 cryptocyst in N. tenuis, it will be seen that the smooth cryptocyst of iV. klugei does not 

 afford a distinguishing character. There is a small chamber projecting from the proximal 

 wall of each zooecium. In the few zooecia mounted they are very variable in size and 

 shape. The smallest and simplest is figured (Fig. 13 B). As far as one can tell from very 

 scanty material these chambers are a constant feature of this species. I have not seen 

 them in the much more abundant material of the other species of Notoplites, though they 

 are described in other genera of this family by Levinsen (1916, pp. 436, 438) and Harmer 

 (1923, p. 347), who both regarded them as pore-chambers. 



The method of bifurcation, including the position of the joint when present, shows 

 that Harmer was right in tentatively associating this species (as Scrupocellaria simplex 

 Kluge) with Notoplites. Hasenbank transferred it to Menipea, and, as the name Menipea 

 simplex was preoccupied by M. simplex nom.nud. Kirchenpauer (1889, p. 288), he 

 introduced the name M. klugei for Kluge's species. According to Article 36 of the 



