84 



PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM 



VOL. 81 



Description. — Shape, massive to encrusting. Size, up to 3 cm thick 

 and more than 3 cm in diameter. Consistency, spongy. Color in 

 life, reddish orange; preserved, very pale drab. Oscules, diameter 

 0.8 to 1.1 mm. Pores, not evident. Surface, superficially smooth 

 with numerous tubercles less than 1 mm high. 



Ectosomal specialization, a dermal membrane; it is exceedingly 

 thin and difficult to detach intact, and it contains tangentially placed 

 tornotes. Endosomal structure, " crumb-of-bread," with spicules in 

 confusion. When collected the numerous embryos were conspicuous 

 by their bright red color; the}' were subspherical and 220/>i to 270/x 

 in diameter. Histological details: The flagellate chambers are sub- 

 spherical, 32/t to 40/>t, in diameter. 



Principal spicules, subtylostyles (fig. 48, B)-^ size, about 11/x by 

 250)Li. Ectosomal spicules, tylotes (fig. 48, J.) ; size, about 8;ut to 

 200/i. Microscleres (?), rhaphides (fig. 48, 6'); size, about 2/.i by 

 180/.. 



PiGDEE 48. — Tedania topsentl de Laubenfels, X 300 



RemarkH. — As compared to the other local Tedania., T. toxicaUs. 

 this form differs markedly in general appearance and color. It 

 has fewer and thicker rhaphides; its endosomal subtylostyles are 

 half again as thick; and the shape of the dermal tornotes of topsenti 

 is quite peculiar. They are notable for the swollen shape of the 

 central part of the shaft. The spicules here called rhaphides are 

 not at all the rhaphides typical of the genus Tedania, but instead 

 are possibly merely very young forms of the two sorts of mega- 

 scleres. The general structure, however, and the spiculation of der- 

 mal tornotes over smooth styles are by definition Tedania. One 

 isochela was found in a boiled-out spicule preparation, but several 

 other similar preparations were made and they and several sections 

 of the sponge itself were studied very carefully without the dis- 

 cover}'^ of any more; it was doubtless foreign, but its occurrence 

 should be recorded in view of the faint suggestion of resemblance 

 to Lissodeiidoryx. One might use KirhpatHchia but for the very 

 distinctive architecture of the one species {K. variolosa) of that 

 genus. 



