BY E. F. KALLMANN. 431 



APPENDIX. 



H E M I T E D A N I A , gen.llOV. 



Tedaniinse in which the skeleton is a reticulation of spiculo- 

 spongin fibre, and the only niegascleres are smooth oxea or 

 tornota. The raphides are spinulous, and are typically provided, 

 near one extremity, with a bulbous dilatation. 



The raphides of Amorphiiia anotiyma, I find, exhibit characters 

 which render it certain that the species is closely allied to Teda- 

 nia, and particularly to such species as T. pectinicola and 7\ 

 fuegieiisis Thiele(42); and as its possession of well-defined spon- 

 ginous fibres is additional reason against the inclusion of this 

 species in the genus Rhaphisia, to which Dendy referred it (and 

 which, by the way, Lundbeck(31) with some justification regards 

 as a synonym of Gellius), I accordingly propose for its reception 

 a new genus, Ilemitedania. 



Spinulous raphides — or onychetse, as Topsent(48) has termed 

 them— peculiar in having a subterminal bulb, occur also in two 

 undescribed species (represented by specimens in the Australian 

 Museum) in which the megascleres are styli and strongyla, and 

 which, in skeletal structure, differ markedly both from typical 

 species of Tedama and from each other. One of these species, 

 for which a new genus will certainly be required, is remarkable 

 in possessing peculiar acanthostyle-like spicules, which undoubt- 

 edly are derivatives of onychetse, but attain a size of 115 by 6 /*; 

 they have a slightly roughened surface, a subfusiform shape, and 

 an abruptly truncated base provided with a central mucro and a 

 circumferential whorl of minute spines. Another species, which 

 I consider to be related to Tedania, and for which a new genus 

 is probably necessary, is that described by Kirkpatrick(24) under 

 the name Oceanapia tantula. 



Concerning the systematic position of Tedania and its allies, 

 there is not yet agreement of opinion, though generally they are 

 placed along with the genera formerly included in the subfamily 

 Dendoricinae; Dendy, however, has always favoured the recogni- 

 tion of a subfamily Tedaniinse which he would include in the 

 Hajtloscleridce. In view of the ditticulty in classification occa- 

 sioned by the genus Hemitedania, it seems to me advisable, if 



