368 DISCOVERY REPORTS 



Busk (1884, p. 29) reinstated the various forms that he had in 1852 merged in C. boryi 

 (see p. 373), he identified the Cumberland Island specimen with C. darwinii, and it thus 

 seems unlikely that it was true C. boryi. Its identity must remain uncertain, but it may 

 well have been C. helicina, for C. darwinii is not at present known from the Queensland 

 coast, whereas C. helicina is known from Broughton Island and has hitherto been 

 confused with C. darwinii. 



The material from Madeira (Busk, i860, p. 281; 99.7.1.844, 845) is characteristic 

 C. boryi, though fragmentary. Specimens from Glenelg (99.5.1.380) and Singapore 

 (99.5.1.376), labelled C. boryi in the Hincks collection (see Hincks, 1880, p. 63), are 

 both distinct from true C. boryi. The one from Glenelg is pluriserial, somewhat re- 

 sembling C. lata. The material from Singapore is very fragmentary. It is biserial but 

 shows none of the essential characteristics of C. boryi. Marcus found that Kirchen- 

 pauer's specimens were not true C. boryi (see p. 374 below). The identity of C. boryi 

 Hutton (1873, p. 91) is also uncertain (see p. 374). 



Dr O'Donoghue has kindly lent me material from Vancouver recorded by him (1923, 

 p. 161 ; 1926, p. 87) as C. boryi Audouin. It differs from true C. boryi in the complete 

 absence of scutum and oral bar, in the rarity and extremely small size of the frontal 

 avicularia, and in the shape and larger size of the zooecia. It appears to be closely 

 related to C. ellisii Fleming, which was also recorded from the Vancouver region by 

 O'Donoghue. The zooecia and ovicells closely resemble those of C. ellisii in size, shape, 

 form of cryptocyst, number of spines and absence of scutum. They differ in the small size 

 of the vibracular chambers (a character in which they resemble C. boryi), and in the rarity 

 of the frontal avicularia which are extremely small and only present on the median 

 zooecium at the bifurcation. Except for these median zooecia, the specimens are biserial. 



A specimen from Puget Sound (Busk Coll. 99.7. 1 .871), agreeing very closely with 

 O'Donoghue's material, was identified by Busk with C. ellisii. One branch is triserial, 

 and a few frontal avicularia are present on other zooecia than the median ones, but they 

 are small and very rare. In other respects, including the small size of the vibracular 

 chambers, the agreement with O'Donoghue's material is very exact. The reference to 

 Hincks under C. boryi in O'Donoghue's paper (1923) is a slip. Hincks recorded 

 C. ellisii, not C. boryi, from Queen Charlotte Island. 



Fig. 19 B, drawn from a specimen from Ghardaqa, Red Sea (1937.9.28.6), shows 

 the characteristic relations of the scutum and oral bar. The ancestrula of this specimen 

 is closely similar in size and shape to that of C. helicina (Fig. 19 C). 



2. Caberea helicina sp.n. Figs. 19 C, D, 20 A. 



Caberea darwinii MacGillivray, 1886, p. 129; 1887a, p. 141, pi. cxxxvii, figs. 1, 1 a-d, 5 (not 

 Caberea darwinii Busk). 



? not Caberea darwinii MacGillivray, 1895, p. 25, pi. iii, fig. 10. 

 Station distribution. New Zealand: St. 934. 



Geographical distribution. Victoria (MacGillivray); Port Phillip, Victoria (87.12.10.20; 

 97.5.1.235; 35.3.8.1); Sydney (81 . 10.21 .355); Broughton Island (86. 12.31 .9); Tasmania 

 (1937.6. 10. 1); New Zealand (Discovery; St. TN 91). 



Holotype. Port Phillip Heads. Bracebridge Wilson Collection, 97.5.1.235. 



