26 BULLETIN 100, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM 



of the valve, where one or two pairs form a V-shaped figure; a hyaline 

 line bisects all the costae; traversing the entire length of the valve. 



Length, 0.195; width, 0.023; lines, 4.1 in 0.01 mm. 



The nearest known forms are in Schmidt's Atlas, plate 28, figure 

 17, and plate 39, figure 27, both unnamed. 



Type.—C&t. No. 43578, U.S.N.M. 



AMPHORA PECTEN Br6bisson 



(Brun, Espec. Nouv., pi. 12, fig. 4.) 



AMPHORA PERMAGNA Pantocsek 



(Pantocsek, Hung. Diat., vol. 2, pi. 6, fig. 113.) 



AMPHORA POLYGONATA Castracane 



(Castracane, Chall. Exp., pi. 27, fig. 8.) 



This form can not be admitted to be a variety of Castracane's A. 

 polygonata (figured in Chall. Exp., pi. 27, fig. 8) if that author's 

 descriptions and figures are to be trusted; in which case, this form 

 agreeing with his figure 8 should have a new name. 



AMPHORA PRAEVALIDA Janisch 



(Janisch, Gaz. Exp., pi. 20, fig. 21.) 



Cleve (Nav. Diat., vol. 2, p. 110) places this under A. pecten Brun, 

 a very much coarser and altogether different diatom (figured and 

 described in Brun, Espec. Nouv., p. 9, pi. 12, fig. 4). I have both from 

 the Philippine Islands and their union is impossible. This species is 

 much closer to A. scalaris Castracane (Chall. Exp., p. 18, pi. 27, fig. 

 19) from which it differs only by the heavy border on the ventral 

 side of the latter. 



AMPHORA PRISMA TICA cleve 



(Cleve, Nav. Diat., vol. 2, pi. 4, fig. 26.) 



AMPHORA PROTEUS Gregory 



(Gregory, Diat., Clyde, p. 518. pi. 13, fig. 81; Schmidt, Atlas, pi. 27, figs. 2-3, 

 5-6.) 



AMPHORA PULCHRA Greville 



Plate 5, fig. 1 



(Greville, So. Pac. Diat., p. 575, pi. 4, fig. 2; Cleve, Nav. Diat., vol. 1, p. 20, 

 pi. 2, fig. 23.) 



This diatom is placed erroneously in the genus Auricula by Cleve 

 in the above reference. This error is doubtless due to not studying 

 the face view, of which there seems to be no illustration, and for 

 which one is here supplied. It will be seen at once that this belongs 

 where Greville placed it, in the genus Amphora. Indeed, the girdle 

 view looks more like AmpMprora than like Auricula. 



