ANTHOPHYSA. 295 



ANTHOPHYSA Brandt, 1835. 



The history of this genus has been carefully reviewed by Chun ('97b), and 

 by Lens and Van Riemsdijk (:08). My reasons for adding the genus Angela 

 of Lesson to the list of synonyms of Anthophysa given by these authors are 

 noted below (p. 301). A fairly complete knowledge of the general organization 

 of Anthophysa has resulted from the successive studies of Fewkes ('82a, '88b), 

 Haeckel ('88b), Chun ('97b), and Bedot (:04). But owing to the paucity of 

 material as yet examined and to its poor condition, many of the details of the 

 anatomy of the genus demand further study. Especially is this true of the 

 internal structure of the pneumatosaccus, of the septa uniting the latter with 

 the pneumatocodon, of the tentilla, and of the arrangement of the cormidia 

 on the siphosome. Further knowledge would likewise be of service regarding 

 the minor external characters which may be expected to prove of specific import- 

 ance. The "Albatross" collection, for the most part well preserved, and prob- 

 ably more extensive than any examined by earlier students, affords the 

 opportunity to study these questions. Furthermore, I had the opportunity of 

 observing several of the specimens in life. 



The original species of the genus is A. rosea Brandt ('35) from the North 

 Pacific. So far as I am aware this species has not since been recorded. In the 

 Atlantic, one species only can be recognized, A. fonnosa Fewkes, first described 

 ('82) as Athorybia formosa, subsequently recorded by him ('88b) for contracted 

 specimens, as Ploeophysa agassizii, and since described by Haeckel (A. darwinii), 

 Chun ('97b), and Bedot (:04). 



Examination of Lesson's figure ('43, pi. 9, figs. 1-le) of Angela cytherea 

 suggests that it is identical with A . formosa. But since neither his representa- 

 tion nor his description is sufficiently detailed to indicate with certainty anything 

 more than the generic characters, and since even the locality from which the 

 animal came is doubtful, its specific identity can not be determined. 



The only recent record of an Anthophysa from the Indo-Pacific region is 

 by Lens and Van Riemsdijk (:08), who call the "Siboga" specimens A. formosa, 

 though without being able to reach any definite conclusion as to the relationship 

 of A. formosa and A. rosea Brandt. So far as I can judge from Brandt's meagre 

 description, and from the brief account of the fragmentary "Siboga" specimens, 

 there is nothing to separate these, or to differentiate them specifically from the 

 "Albatross" specimens. The localities of capture, too, strongly support my 

 conclusion that all these Pacific records belong to but a single species; for which 

 the old name A. rosea must be employed. 



