CAMPTOPLITES 441 



by which time a dozen zooecia with the distal spines in a single series may have been 

 formed. 



Species 4 (Fig. 41 A). Here also the colonies have not developed far enough for specific 

 determination. 



The young colony described by Waters as Bugula reticulata var. spinosa (1904, p. 22, 

 pi. i, fig. 3 a, b) has a similar distribution of spines, and, like one of the specimens of 

 species 4, has no proximal spine on the ancestrula; but it has rootlets like those of 

 species 6. Kluge put Waters 's form doubtfully in the synonymy of his Bugula sp. var. 

 variospinosa (Kluge, 1914, p. 628, pi. xxviii, fig. 4) which I take to be a young colony 

 of Camptoplites areolatus (see p. 465). Waters's figure differs from Kluge's in the zooecia 

 which are more broad and square distally and diverge more from the axis of the colony ; 

 in the opesia which is longer, less definite, and without cryptocyst ; and in the absence 

 of any zooecia with more than one avicularium (see paired scars in Kluge's figure); 

 differences which appear to me to be of specific value. 



Species 5 (Fig. 42 A-C). The colony from St. 181 has developed far enough to show 

 the characteristics of the zooecia and avicularia of C. retiformis. 



Species 6 (Fig. 42 D). The avicularia show that this is C. angustus. The presence of 

 what appears to be a secondary branch, of spines, and of axillary runners fits this 

 conclusion. 



The presence of lateral rootlets springing from the side of the zooecium, and not 

 from the angle between two zooecia, suggests C. tricornis, but rootlets of this kind are 

 apparently found in the young colonies of more than one species, as they are shown by 

 Waters in a young colony which agrees better with species 4 than species 6. 



Species 7 (Fig. 39 A). There are two colonies with ancestrulae of this type. The one 

 shown in the figure consists of the ancestrula and first few zooecia and has not developed 

 far enough for identification. The other, from St. TN 194, is a large and characteristic 

 specimen of C. bicornis var. elatior, and, although a little damaged, the ancestrula and 

 first few zooecia agree so well with those of the other colony as to leave no doubt of the 

 specific identity of the two. 



Key to the species of Camptoplites 



1. Secondary branches usually present, 1 ovicells tilted backwards and more or less shallow, 



their radial sculpture not changing markedly with age 2 



Secondary branches absent, ovicells large, usually radially striated at first and with additional 



sculpture later 2 ... ... ... ... ... ... ••• •■■ ••• ••• 7 



2. Avicularia of various types including small long-headed avicularia with straight beak ... 3 

 Avicularia do not include the small long-headed type ... 5 



3. Main branches biserial, rarely more series at bifurcation, secondary branches not fan- 



shaped (for key to varieties see p. 445) 1. C. bicornis 



Some, at least, of the main branches with more than two series of zooecia, secondary 



branches fan-shaped (i.e. much branched) ... ... ... ... ... ••• 4 



1 Absent in the fragmentary specimens of typical C. bicornis and not reported in C. abysstcolas. 



2 No radial phase known in C. reticulatus. No additional sculpture known in C. lunatus, C. asymmetricus 

 and C. atlanticus. 



