58 THE VOYAGE OF H.M.S. CHALLENGEE. 



The species is distiuguislied from Trachytedania sjiinata, Ridley, the only species 

 hitherto known, by the superior dimensions of all the spicules, by the distribution of the 

 spines practically all over the stylote spicules, and by the fine spination of most of the 

 rh aphides. 



Localities.— ^taXion 308, January 5, 1876 ; lat. 50° 8' 30" S., long. 74° 41' 0" W. ; 

 ofi" the south-west coast of Patagonia; dcj^th, 175 fathoms; bottom, blue mud. One 

 small specimen. 



Station 308 (?) or 311 (1), off the south-west coast of Patagonia. The larger specimen. 



Subfamily 4. Desmacellin^. 



1886. Desmacellina, Kidley and Dendy, Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist., ser. 5, vol. xviii. p. 336. 



Megasclera all monactiual, stylote to tylostylote. Microsclera sigmata or toxa or 

 both. 



Genus Desmacella, Schmidt. 



1870. Desmacella, Schmidt, Spong. Atlant. Gebiet., p. 53. 

 1870. ? Desmacodes, Schmidt, Spong. Atlant. Gebiet., p. 54. 



This being the sole genus of the subfamily the diagnosis is the same. 



Schmidt's original diagnosis {Joe. cit.) runs thus: — " Spongien, welcher ausser den 

 gestreckten cinfachen Nadeln nur Bogen oder Spangen besitzen. Die Nadeln entweder 

 in iindeutlichen Ztlgen oder faserig geschichtet." With regard to Desmacodes he states 

 (loc. cit.) of Desmacodes subereus, the type of the genus, that it unites the habit of 

 Papillina suherea with the spicules of Desmacella, and describes the spicules as " Spin- 

 deluadeln," " Stifte," " Stecknadeln " and " Spangen," but his description is very scanty. 



Vosma3r ^ limits the name Desmacella to species with diancistra or " trenchant 

 biliamate" spicules {Vomerida of this Report, &c.), but subsequently" places these 

 under Hamacantlia, Gray, stating that Desmacella pumilio and Desmacella vagabunda 

 of Schmidt, the types of the genus Desmacella, could easily be referred to Desmacodes 

 (although he proceeds inconsistently to place Desmacella vagahunda under Gellius 

 directly afterwards). But the name Desmacella has the advantage of priority over 

 Desmacodes ; and therefore, while we agree with Vosmser in keeping this little group of 

 species distinct from Gellius and its allies on the one hand and Vomerida and its allies 

 on the other, we retain the name originally conferred upon them. 



Desmacella are not commonly met with. A species is described by Carter in the 

 " Porcupine " Report as Desmacella pumilio of Schmidt, but as yet very little is known 

 about the group. 



1 The Family of the Desmacidinida^, Notes from the Leyden Museum, vol. ii. p. 109. 



2 Sponges of the " Willem Barents " Expedition, 1880-81, p. 28. 



