48 J. Shephard : 



decision to reject Anderson's species as distinct from F. 

 coronetta, it appears best to regard it as in agreement with 

 Hudson's variety. Dr. Hudson gives a figure supplied by Mr. 

 Burne Poole, of Adelaide, and this is in close agreement with 

 Victorian specimens, of which a considerable number have been 

 seen. 



Treasury Gardens, Melbourne ; Heidelberg and Cheltenham. 



*F. roniuta. 



"^F. campanulata. 



*F. ornata. 

 F. trilohata, Collins. Cheltenham. 



*F. evansoni. 



*F. atnhigua. 



Stephanoceros. 



>S'. eichornii, Ehrenberg. 



Botanical Gardens, Melbourne, and lagoons along the Yarra 

 valley. 



Family 2. — Melicertadae. 



Melicerta. 



■^j/. ring ens. 



*il/. conifera. 



M. fwhriata (Shephard and Stickland. Victorian Nat., vol. 

 xvi., No. 3, p. 38). 



Mr. Rousselet in his " Third List of New Rotifers since 1889 '' 

 (Jour. Roy. Micr. Soc, 1902, jDp. 149), queries this as synony- 

 mous with M. tubicolaria, Ehrenberg. Regarding this opinion 

 it may be pointed out that the distinction chiefly rests on the 

 observed habit of M. fimhriata of forming a long filament by 

 means of the organ which in J/, ringens serves to form a 

 spherical pellet, and in M. com f era to produce a conical one. 

 The ventral antennae of J/, fimhriata are also shorter. The 

 specific characters of M. tiihicolaria, as given by Hudson and 

 Gosse, are, '' Lobes when extended mo- i than three times the 

 width of the body ; antennae very long ; tube a gelatinous 

 sheath without pellets." J/, fimhriata differs in regard to the 

 last two of these characters. M. tuhicolaria has been known 

 since 1838, and appears to have been closely studied by a 



