278 BULLETIN 100, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 



Ancorella Lenclenfeld (1906, p. 247). 



Pacamphilla Lenclenfeld (1906, p. 251). (See Hentschel, 1912, p. 



308.) 

 Calthropella Sollas (1888, p. 107). Assigned to Pachastrellidae by 



Sollas and by Lendenfeld (1903); by Topsent (1902) to Stellet- 



tidae and merged in Corticella Sollas; by Lendenfeld (1906, p. 



301) to his new family Calthropellidae, a family of doubtful 



value, which I prefer not to use. Genus, I believe, is best assigned 



to the Stellettidae. 

 Chelotropella Lendenfeld (1906, p. 302). Likewise best assigned 



to the Stellettidae, if, indeed, the genus is to be used. 

 Pachastrissa Lendenfeld (1903, p. 80). Genus of doubtful value. 

 Scutastra Hernandez (1912, p. 12; 1914, p. 8). Assignable to 



Geodiidae. 



Genus THENEA Gray (1867). 



Thenea Gray, 1867, p. 541. 

 Of more or less symmetrical shape ; with one or more conspicuous 

 oscula and with specialized lateral pore areas in addition to scat- 

 tered pores. With rootlets. The characteristic megascleres are 

 dichotriaenes, arranged with other megascleres (triaene forms and 

 oxeas) radially. 



THENEA GRAYI Sollas. 



Plate 45, figs. 1 and 2. 



Thenea grain Sollas, 1888, p. 65. 



Three small specimens, one each from stations 5127, 5424, and 

 5425, are referable to this species, and indeed to the typical form 

 T. grayi grayi (Lendenfeld, 1903). They range in diameter from 

 12 to 15 mm. As in Sollas' type (1888, p. 65, pi. 6, figs. 21, 22), the 

 upper surface is flattened and without, an osculum. The under 

 surface is rounded or somewhat conical and bears several bundles 

 of root spicules, the longest 20 mm. in length. As in the type there 

 are two large, lateral, depressed, fringed aquiferous areas opposite 

 one another; the fringes much longer along the upper margin, pro- 

 jecting here 10-13 mm. The upper surface of the sponge is more 

 or less hirsute with spicules that project about 2 mm. 



Sollas interprets one of the aquiferous arras as oscular, the other 

 as inhalent. This interpretation is supported by my specimens, in 

 which there is a constant anatomical difference between the two 

 areas. Both are shallow, cloacalike spaces into which open numer- 

 ous canals. But whereas the exhalent space is covered in with a 

 coarsely fenestrated membrane the inhalent space is covered in 

 with a much finer fenestrated membrane, the apertures in the lat- 

 ter ranging from about 150 to 250 \i in diameter. Nevertheless, the 

 inhalent membrane may include a few larger apertures, which seem 



