REVISION OF FRESHWATER SPONGES OF SPONGILLIDAE 23 



more closely related to Stratospongilla Annandale and Corvospongilla 

 Annandale than to any other known genus, some species (e.g., E. 

 sinensis) displaying features which must be considered transitory to 

 the former genus. At present it seems impossible to distinguish 

 between clear-cut groups of Eunapius species, and additional compara- 

 tive studies are urgently needed. In most species the gemmules adhere 

 to the substratum, although free gemmules, single or in coated groups, 

 are often also present, and in a few species pavement layers of gem- 

 mules are still unknown. However, it is possible that gemmular 

 pavements are restricted to species with a very shallow mode of 

 growth (e.g., E. fragilis, E. igloviformis, and E. crassissimus) and 

 absent from such typically lobose species as E. carteri and others. 

 Nevertheless, until additional comparative information on gemmular 

 morphology within this genus becomes available, it is better to ignore 

 the gemmular pavement formation as a generic criterion, and instead 

 emphasize the characteristic polygonal or columnar air spaces of the 

 gemmular pneumatic coat. 



Eunapius carteri (Bowerbank, 186^?) 



Plate 2, figures 1, 2; Plate 3, figure 2 



Sponrjilla carteri Bowerbank, 1863, p. 469. — Carter, 1881a, p. 86. — Weltner, 1895, 

 p. 117; 1913, p. 475.— Girod, 1899, p. 108.— Annandale, 1906b, p. 187; 1907c, 

 p. 24; 1908b, p. 157; 1911c, p. 87; 1912c, p. 137; 1914, p. 245; 1919c, p. 87.— 

 Kirkpatrick, 1906, p. 218.— Willey, 1907, p. 184.— Cunnington, 1920, p. 

 507.— Rezvoj, 1926a, p. 108; 1928, p. 219.— Vorstman, 1927, p. 184.— 

 Grimailowskaja, 1928, p. 215.— Gee, 1929d, p. 297; 1930a, p. 70; 1931e, p. 43; 

 1932g, p. 302; 1932h, p. 185; 1932f, p. 507; 1932d, p. 53; 1932c, p. 36.— 

 Burton, 1929, p. 157.— Arndt, 1932c, p. 552; 1936, p. 14.— Topsent, 1932a, 

 p. 568.— Simm, 1935, p. 194.— De Laubenfels, 1936. p. 36.— Schroder, 1942, 

 p. 247.— Suvatti, 1950, p. 3.— Jewell, 1952, p. 448.— Penney, 1960, p. 14. 



Eunapius carteri Gray, 1867, p. 552. 



Spongilla carteri var. cava Annandale, 1911c, p. 88. — Gee, 1931e, p. 35; 1932h, 

 p. 188. 



Spongilla carteri var. lobosa Annandale, 1911c, p. 89; 1918a, p. 211. — Gee, 1931e, 

 p. 41; 1932h, p. 188. 



Spongilla carteri var. mollis Annandale, 1911c, p. 88; 1918a, p. 211. — Gee, 1931e, 

 p. 43; 1932h, p. 187. 



Spongilla carferi var. balatonensis Arndt, 1923, p. 79; 1926, p. 342. — Gee, 1931e, 

 p. 33; 1932h, p. 189. 



Spongilla carteri var. melli Arndt, 1923, p. 80. — Gee, 1926c, p. 110; 1927a, p. 1; 

 1927c, p. 184; 1928, p. 221; 1930e, p. 27; 1931e, p. 42; 1932h, p. 189. 



f Spongilla aetheriae Annandale, 1913b, p. 237. 



? Spongilla rotundacuta Rezvoj, 1925, p. 567. — Arndt, 1926, p. 342. 



f Spongilla carteri var. rotundacuta Gee, 1931e, p. 48; 1932h, p. 193. 



Spongilla friahilis Carter, 1849, p. 83 (not T.amarck, 1816, p. 100). 



Material. — Material and slides of type and syntypes of S. carteri 

 and its "varieties"; type slide of S. aetheriae (IM no. ZEV 6034/7), 



