G. WESTERN ON SOME FOREIGN ROTIFERS. 425 



parasita ? It seems to me more like a Sacculus than any of the 

 Proales. I have lately found it in quantity, free swimming, in 

 a pond where there were no signs of Vol vox. 



7. What is the meaning of the development of the posterior 

 spines of Brachionus 2^ala, BracJiionus dorcaSj and Brachionus 

 Baheri ? Has it any connection with the development of the ova ? 

 I had an idea that it has, but have recently seen some B. pala 

 absolutely destitute of spines, and yet carrying ova, which fact 

 rather upsets my theory. 



These several questions 1 would suggest for your attention and 

 solution, should opportunity offer during the present Rotifer season, 

 and I hope that many papers will be forthcoming for our enter- 

 tainment as a result thereof. 



The following species have been met with since the above paper 

 was read : — 



PolychcBtus suhquadratus, Perty (Zur Kentniss Kleinst. Lebensf., 

 Berne, 1852). — I have found this Rotifer in some water sent me 

 by Mr. Hood from the Black Lake, Blairgowrie, Scotland. Carl 

 Ternetz (Rotatorien der Umgebung Basles) has shown that this 

 species is distinct from Dinocharis collinsii, Gosse (Hudson and 

 Gosse, The Rotifera), a matter which was left doubtful by Dr. 

 Hudson. Ternetz also gives good figures and descriptions of both 

 Rotifers, and shows reasons why Polychjetus should be considered 

 a separate genus from Dinocharis. Mr. Hood has apparently 

 been acquainted with this Rotifer for years. 



Floscularia libera^ Zacharias (Forschungsberichte aus der Biol. 

 Station zu Plou, ii., Theil, 1894.) — A small, free swimming 

 floscule with only one lobe to the corona, and no apparent tube, 

 but having a peculiar pear-shaped swelling on the foot ; my speci- 

 men carried an egg. This also occurred in water sent by ]\Ir. 

 Hood, but from another locality in the neighbourhood of Dundee. 



Triophthalmus dorsualiSj Ehrenberg (Hudson and Gosse, The 

 Rotifera). — On the occasion of the last excursion to Staines, I 

 met with a Rotifer which is undoubtedly that drawn by Gosse and 

 described as this species. Dr. Hudson's remarks as to Eckstein's 

 description of the stomach and its glands are certainly correct, but 

 the two eye-spots on the frontal prominences mentioned bv 

 Eckstein, and not seen by Messrs. Hudson and Gosse, were plainly 

 visible in my example. Of the three cervical spots the centre one 

 only is a true pigment or eye-spot, the two outer ones being chalky 



