MARINE DIATOMS OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS 51 



CAMPYLODISCUS DENTATUS Deby 



(Deby, Campy., pi. 14, fig. 74.) 



The only specimens recorded come from the Philippine Islands. 



CAMPYLODISCUS DIPLOSTICTUS Norman 



(Micro. Journ., 1860, pi. 1, fig. 6; Schmidt, Atlas, pi. 207, fig. 2.) 



The type came from Australia. It is practically the same as C. 

 robertsianus Greville, v hich see. 



CAMPYLODISCUS EMARGINATUS Deby 



(Deby, Campy., p. 65, pi. 14, fig. 73.) 



This is reported living in the Sea of Japan (Rae) and fossil in Japan 

 (Macrae). 



CAMPYLODISCUS EXIMIUS Gregory 



See under C. Jiodgsonii W. Smith. 



CAMPYLODISCUS GREVILLEI Leuduger-Fortmorel 



(Leuduger-Fortmorel, Diat., Ceyl., p. 47, pi. 5, figs. 54-56.) 



As mentioned under C. brightwellii Grunow, it and this form can 

 not be clearly distinguished from each other. De Toni admits their 

 practical unity, but puts Grunow 's name as a synonym under the 

 above, the date of which is 1879. Grunow published his figure and 

 description in 1862. Schmidt's C. Icinkerii (Schmidt, Atlas, pi. 207, 

 fig. 16) is scarcely admissible to the dignity of a variety of this. 



CAMPYLODISCUS HIBERNICUS Ehrenberg 



(Ehrenberg, Mikrogeologie, pi. 15A, fig. 9; Schmidt, Atlas, pi. 55, figs. 9-16; 

 Deby, Campy., pi. 11, fig. 58.) 



Although I here record this among the marine diatoms of the 

 Philippine Islands, it is a strictly fresh-water species. It was doubt- 

 less brought down as river detritus. Between this and G. noricus 

 Ehrenberg, also a fresh-water species, so many intermediate forms 

 occur that a satisfactory boundary line between them is impossible. 



CAMPYLODISCUS HODGSONII W. Smith 



(Smith, Brit. Diat., pi. 6, fig. 53; Schmidt, Atlas, pi. 53, fig. 5; Deby, Campy., 

 pi. 1, fig. 7.) 



CI eve in Schmidt's Atlas (pi. 207, fig. 19) claims that the original 

 specimens of this and C. eximius Gregory, figured by Gregory (Diat. 

 Clyde, pi. 11, fig. 54) are the same species. To this I agree. Note 

 their identical geographic distribution recorded in De Toni (Syl. Alg., 

 pp. 610 and 628). Both De Toni and Deby (Deby, Campy., p. 43) 

 accord to them separate rank. 



